There is something I dont get. So if I subscribe my saves are moved, not copied to the cloud? and then if I unsubscribe my saves are deleted and no local copy exists? Or are my saves ALWAYS available locally and its only the cloud based backup copy that goes away if I unsubscribe? If its the first that is terrible. If its the second, I dont see the big deal.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Nintendo NA: We are unable to guarantee cloud saves will be retained after canceling
- Thread starter Gradon
- Start date
These are two of the biggest games on the Switch.
Just because they didn't have a way to back up saves before doesn't mean they shouldn't have them now.
Stop cheaters? Which game are you talking about? Locking saves isn't going to stop cheating in Pokémon.
It is a big deal. You arent making a convincing argument. I will anyway? How do you know this? Not everyone is willing to throw money at Nintendo for no reason like you are.
ThTs not a solution in the slightest. They still offer no local backup functionality that every single other console in the market has. That's some scummy fucking shit.
It's not a big deal.
Its normal with Pokemon to stop cheaters from trading rare Pokemon and reverting to an older save with that Pokemon. Splatoon is also clearly to stop cheaters from rolling back their saves.
Don''t subscribe if you cannot handle it. I think thats the best thingI could tell you.
If you lose or break your Switch, I'm sorry. Life will go on without those two saves.
I don't need to convince you of anything. 99% of consumers don't care and won't spend days complaining about something that is in place to stop cheaters.
this thread just seems like the same 10 people re-hashing their argument trying to get others to somehow not subscribe? Whatever, I'm out. I'll be enjoying the service next week and playing NES games.
If its not a big deal for people, why is there still so much arguing and defending? Its not like it'll effect you negatively if they decide to retain the cloud saves.
Its like Cross-play on the PS4, I wasnt going to defend Sony even if I never felt the need for the feature.
Switch owners have been making a LOT of noise about the lack of local save game backups every since the Switch was launched. Nothing has been done to resolve that matter, the only option is to:
a) subscribe to Nintendo's feeble online service for cloud based save game backups (note: most games will support that, but not all)
or:
b) Hack your Switch (which can, if you're not careful, cause it to be banned by Nintendo)
What is this joke of a reply. Still no discussion about who it will affect negatively if they do retain cloud saves fully. The pokemon comment honestly paints why you are defending this so hard.
Seriously, who does it hurt if they let cloud saves be retained? Your pride?
First companies became people. Now their religions.
Imagine being so brainwashed you think you have to protect some multibillion megacorps honor online.
Get counseling please.
Imagine being so brainwashed you think you have to protect some multibillion megacorps honor online.
Get counseling please.
Does Sony actually enforce the 6 month limit? My brother has come back after a year or more, and his cloud based data is still there when he resubs to Plus.
What's so hard to get about it? It's an issue.
I had to cancel my credit card, due to it been exposed by a security flaw on Uber, and because of that all my subscriptions went down. My site, GitHub, npm, everything... But the moment I renewed with them, it was like nothing has happened. I kept my private repositories and packages and my droplet was there with everything.
The solution is not on the consumers end. The consumer is paying for it. It was shown multiple times that other services do it better. It's just a change of policies.
I had to cancel my credit card, due to it been exposed by a security flaw on Uber, and because of that all my subscriptions went down. My site, GitHub, npm, everything... But the moment I renewed with them, it was like nothing has happened. I kept my private repositories and packages and my droplet was there with everything.
The solution is not on the consumers end. The consumer is paying for it. It was shown multiple times that other services do it better. It's just a change of policies.
It's not a 6 month limit, it's a 6 month guarantee.
They can't guarantee anything after 6 months, but they'll 100% not delete before then. Many people find they keep it for longer.
Yes.
So millions of people come Tuesday are going to be "tools". Many members of this forum. You realize you just called them all "tools", right?
This post makes no sense. People have been complaining extensively the whole time and cloud saves were promised a lot sooner before the service was delayed. And its impossible to think that folks were waiting to purchase a switch until they saw how the online service panned out?
Every time I see threads like this and get baffled by the defense force, I remind myself that in the old forum (and I think this one?) there were people defending not wiping after taking a shit. In the old forum there were some ISIS defenders (before they got banned) as well. Then some of the posters here somehow become less baffling.
Regarding the having to check once a week for NES games. The NES Classics is a service and it isn't a virtual console. You don't own anything like you don't own Netflix titles that you download for offline viewing you are just given a license. Think of it like Netflix which people also pay for and it makes sense. Titles licenses on Netflix downloads for offline watching expire in less than a week. It is just how it works. On some titles on Netflix, titles expire in just two days.
If I was a person who bought a large amount of VC titles I would be angry too (I wouldn't be throwing a tantrum but I would be clear about my feelings) but I didn't so I'm not but that doesn't invalidate their bitterness. But everything... I repeat everything is going towards a service model in the next years, it already has. Whether that is good or bad is a different conversation. These are businesses they aren't your friends. People defending Nintendo like they are their friends and looking out for their best interests always are misguided and in some cases ignorant to an understanding of value. I hate the "but it's twenty bucks" rhetoric and wish it would stop because it doesn't help people who want to be reasonable with Nintendo and be solution oriented instead of toxic. I think I might have thought "it's just 20 bucks" it in my head or even said it out loud because I do have a disposable income but ultimately it is not helpful and it misses the point.
This is a very fair point. The fact that Nintendo doesn't allow people to back up saves to an external source is scummy and the best I can figure is to push people toward Cloud Saving and the paywall. I don't think everything Nintendo is doing with this service is malignant but this bit is definitely anti-consumer.
If I was a person who bought a large amount of VC titles I would be angry too (I wouldn't be throwing a tantrum but I would be clear about my feelings) but I didn't so I'm not but that doesn't invalidate their bitterness. But everything... I repeat everything is going towards a service model in the next years, it already has. Whether that is good or bad is a different conversation. These are businesses they aren't your friends. People defending Nintendo like they are their friends and looking out for their best interests always are misguided and in some cases ignorant to an understanding of value. I hate the "but it's twenty bucks" rhetoric and wish it would stop because it doesn't help people who want to be reasonable with Nintendo and be solution oriented instead of toxic. I think I might have thought "it's just 20 bucks" it in my head or even said it out loud because I do have a disposable income but ultimately it is not helpful and it misses the point.
This is a very fair point. The fact that Nintendo doesn't allow people to back up saves to an external source is scummy and the best I can figure is to push people toward Cloud Saving and the paywall. I don't think everything Nintendo is doing with this service is malignant but this bit is definitely anti-consumer.
So you're completely oblivious to changes companies make when consumers voice their opinions?
You missed the whole loot box uproar huh?
It's a Nintendo device. They all might as well be offline gaming devices. And no, I won't be subscribing. There's no upside whatsoever to it.
I'm pretty sure if you go through the thread, I am the loudest person "complaining" by a fairly large margin.
Here's my Switch
But sure, pretend that the people posting the problems with this are just people who don't have an interest in Nintendo and are using it to score points.
Meanwhile, I'll be arguing that Nintendo could be improving the experience of many owners rather than taking away the few features we should already have and charging for it.
They're not taking anything away. They told you before you bought your Switch that they would be putting in a paid online service. You knew this was going to happen and you bought your Switch anyway, and now they are doing exactly what they said they were doing.
Honestly, the entire Nintendo online service thing seems like some sort of social experiment to create the shittest online paid service ever to see who defends it so they can be added to a government watch list for people who are dangerously insane or deluded.
Guess what Nintendo, I have had the pleasure of being able to use in game voice chat not tied to some stupid app since 2002. It's 2018. Also i've been able to load up a cloud saved from an Xbox 360 from 10 years ago and have it still be available to use. This is not difficult stuff and it's been figured out literally years ago. This is a conscious decision to be lazy and anti-consumer and i'm still surprised when people are ok with this. Do some people just not have any sense of self respect or something?
Guess what Nintendo, I have had the pleasure of being able to use in game voice chat not tied to some stupid app since 2002. It's 2018. Also i've been able to load up a cloud saved from an Xbox 360 from 10 years ago and have it still be available to use. This is not difficult stuff and it's been figured out literally years ago. This is a conscious decision to be lazy and anti-consumer and i'm still surprised when people are ok with this. Do some people just not have any sense of self respect or something?
What on earth is anti consumer about it? If you pay for their service they will back up your saves. If you stop and come back, they may not still be there. Why would you expect Nintendo to keep providing you a service after you stop paying them? If you buy something on layaway and stop paying them, they don't hold onto your stuff, it's gone. But you know, when you come back you can reback your games up and they will be protected again.
The Switch is the only console I'm aware of since the 16 bit era to not have a method of local backups, and Nintendo have stated that they will not be introducing them in the future.
There is no reason for this, and people are forced to use their awful paid service if they want any backups at all. This is the very definition of taking away features and putting them behind a paywall.
And yes, they did announce their online at the start. I mistakenly thought they wouldn't make it as much of a laughable mess as it actually is. I also didn't predict that we would be a year and a half after console release and all first party games would still use P2P connections.
You know, like many other parts of the service they didn't announce at the start. You talk as if we had perfect information back then. We are now 1 week from launch and the communication is still garbage.
Nothing wrong with implementing paid online. But also nothing wrong talking about how they could make it better.
It seems like everything around this service has people champing at the bit to lash out, and often rightly so. But in this case it feels like the "issue" is far overblown. Nintendo's service has issues, and they need to be raised - but this isn't a major one.
Splatoon, one of Nintendo's best selling Switch games, falls so far short of the standard in modern online competitive gaming. The online service being launched is only making the situation worse by adding a cost to playing, and giving back nothing
Doubling down on the app despite a resounding hatred of it is another issue. Nintendo must have visibility to usage metrics, and I can't imagine they're pretty. Maybe it's Japan that's single handedly keeping this app in focus? I'm not sure if I've seen anybody comment on it's utilization over there
Yeah, there goes my interest. Was hoping to get a year sub and sell my switch with the intent of replacing it in the future, but considering Nintendo can't even maintain parity with competitors free services, i guess ill say goodbye to my Puyo Puyo Tetris save and use the money to grab a PC copy when the time comes.
Nothing should be exempt from a backup service that the user is paying for. Also, LGPE being exempt implies that any future Pokémon games on the system would be the same. A title like Pokémon not having backup support is huge deal because Pokémon games tend to have the hugest sales among the consoles they release on, and the nature of the games create a need for having a safety in case the console is lost or becomes inoperable. It's a series of long RPGs with a huge competitive community and the ability to contain captured monsters from legacy titles as far back as 2002. It's the series where backup support would easily be the most useful for, and it isn't supported? It's nonsense.
That's not even taking into account Splatoon's userbase, or the Dark Souls' exclusion from support implying that games that have backup support on other platforms can be excluded on Switch. Once again, this is a service that you need to pay in order to access, there is no local backup support at all, you need the sub first.
I'd just like to make one thing clear - I might be posting heavily in this thread about problems I have with Nintendo's cloud save implementation, but it doesn't mean I don't believe these are not problems. They are very much issues as well. There are a lot of problems with this service.
Have they said this? The FAQ for this includes the following;
FAQ said:
Obviously that's not ideal, but it's not saying that they'll never do it.
Every single other service does. And every other single current console allows you to make local backups. Stop defending shit that is worse than everything else on the market
In this sense, I kind of agree. It definitely is a bit overblown but there are people on here defending it so heavily like it would affect them in some way if Nintendo made a policy change that would be good for everyone. I dont think cloud saves is a major issue too, but there is merit in bringing up. I just cant see an arguement against retaining cloud saves after cancelling.
I'm not saying I agree with this argument, but: I'm sure they see/will position Pokémon Bank as more or less a solution that covers Pokémon games. It's not backing up, but it handles containing all your old captured Pokemon, etc. as long as you don't download literally everything to the latest game you're playing.
Is that realistic for how people actually play the games and use that service, though? Probably not.
Deleted member 18807
Guest
If there's one game I'd be pissed to lose hours of grinding chunks and perfect gear is Splatoon. Don't try to sound all smart when they're explicitly not offering support for the two most expected games to have it. No one cares about losing Zelda progress or Mario Kart data because people mostly finished the former and single player progress barely matters for the latter. You're just making yourself look dumb if you think it's okay to downplay that people will be alright losing their perfect IV Pokemons, their Pokemon GO-migrated monsters or their perfect Splatoon gear if something bad happens during their subscription deadline in which they either can't pay another round or are downright mentally or physically incapacitated of doing so. This IS cruel and anti-consumer, no questions asked.
Something you guys might be missing is that if you back up Cloud Saves at least once, then your subscription ends and your Switch breaks, even if you pay Online again you won't get your save data back because it'll be explicitly deleted, not just locked down.
And there's absolutely no way to "enjoy offline play" with Splatoon, stop the bs.
No shocker Nintendo comes with the worst online service. They've only been 20 years behind everyone else when it comes to online.
I'm actually willing to pay more for a system that's a little more robust but I don't think Nintendo has the capability to do anythjng much better. It's a shame really as I really enjoyed Splatoon 2 but this service is not worth paying for.
I'm actually willing to pay more for a system that's a little more robust but I don't think Nintendo has the capability to do anythjng much better. It's a shame really as I really enjoyed Splatoon 2 but this service is not worth paying for.
Why would being a year and a half after the release of the console be a bad thing? That seems like a good thing.
I agree that it sucks that there's no way to back up your saves, but the way Sony does it, there might as well not be. I can't imagine more than a tiny handful of people regularly back up their saves on playstation. I know I never have and I don't have plus.
But it's not the first time you couldn't back up saves on a Nintendo system, you can't back saves for retail games up on the 3ds. If you lost your 3ds you were sol. In that way, the Switch is a big improvement from the 3DS because for the people who choose to subscribe we will have cloud saves.
This reasoning has been posted and debunked countless times. Wish more people would read the thread before rushing to defend Nintendo.
What are you talking about? On the PS4 it's as easy as transferring it into a thumbdrive/external storage via USB.
Not true at all about the Sony part. I flat out refuse to pay for online so no cloud saves for me. Bought a spidey ps4 pro and put all of my saves on a 3$ flash drive and transferred them from my previous ps4 to the new one.
Xbox does not. you are mixing up local with free with allow. you are losing it bruh
WAT.
This statement make no sense in the context of what is being discussed here.
But let's move the goalpost.
When the food in the fridge is in danger because of no electricity i can still take the food of the fridge to :
-Put in into another place that still has electricity
-Cook it
In this case nintendo doesn't offer a basic save management . Again , every service that i use , STEAM , PSN , Dropbox ( to name a few ) has clear rules regarding their could services , something nintendo still hasn't clarified.
EDIT: it was a joke ? Didn't felt like it considering what i've read yesterday but ..ok .
It'd be less of an issue if there was another way to back up your saves. If they gave you cloud saves as part of the service but let you back up saves offline on a MicroSD or USB I don't think people would care as much. I also don't think their retention policy is 0 days - they probably will still retain cloud saves for a small period of time after you unsubscribe.
XB1 and PS4 have no problem with backing up saves, and at no cost to the user. Only Nintendo Switch users will have this problem, and will have to pay $20/year to partially solve it. They can thank their supposedly "pro-consumer" Nintendo for this.
An XB1 or PS4 owner never has to worry about losing a save file. A Switch owner does. That's the bottom line.
Last edited: