K, here is the main issue I can see the NS having. If we assume the NS is launching with 32gb of internal storage with no additional micro-sd card, the problem will be third party games. (When is it not am I right?)

Nintendo games have always been small in file size and don't usually require massive day 1 patches. We have seen so far that third party games being 50gb+ in storage size and having 10gb day 1 patches. Now the storage size won't be an issue as far as carts are concerned but for both Digital and Patches, it is an issue.

Now one could say, oh but you could get a micro-sd card and bam, that will solve the issue. But the problem with that is that developers don't like that. Developers always develop games with baseline specs in mind because that is the only way they know for sure what every customer has.

So lets say that I am a developer making a hentai game for the NX. And it is 50gb cause of all the breast physics. Now with cartridges, that's fine but when I am considering it for digital, I have to think hmm... 28gb (cause -4gb for OS lets just say), + what = 50?

28 + 8gb = 36 so those customers probably wont buy it, 28 + 16gb = 44 so those customers probably won't buy it, 28 + 32gb = 60gb so those customers might buy it. And of course, that is assuming that they are willing to use all that storage for my game alone and I don't have to release a 11 gb day 1 patch. Or I can make games for ps4/x1/pc which all have a baseline of 500gb and I can even add in the realistic booty DLC without cares.

I think it is the reason why PS4/X1 does not have flash storage internally. Cause space is more important than speed to third party developers (within reason). It would be great to have both but they Sony/MS will be paying more per console so they went with which ever one is better.

Reminds me of the n64 vs ps1 days loll

I can't tell if this is a joke or not. 

If everything goes well, you might not need to. SDDs are eventually going to kill HDDs for good in the mainstream market. And some say it will happen sooner than later. Here's a nice read on Samsungs opinion on the matter. http://www.tomshardware.com/news/samsung-ssd-hdd-sata-nvme,32762.html It might seem long so you can just scroll down to the HDD part :)

Captain_Yuri, Your above statements made me realize how inferior third party companies are when it comes to optimizing game code. Third party companies love to waste space apparently.

My main concern is that SD cards in the market are not reliable.
Good SD cards are, but, many are low quality, low speed.

It should force you to get a minimal speed from an sd card or (worse) use a proprietary card like Vita to guarantee realiability.

or this https://news.samsung.com/global/samsung-introduces-worlds-first-universal-flash-storage-ufs-removable-memory-card-line-up-offering-up-to-256-gigabyte-gb-capacity

Yea but the issue will still be this:

"Samsung predicts that the price of a 256GB SSD will sink beneath 1TB HDDs in mid-2017, and 512GB will follow in 2020."

If a 512 gb ssd takes until 2020 in order to go below the price of a 1TB hard drive. I think it will take 5-6 years at a minimum until we see SSDs replacing most hard drives. Because most causals that I have delt with look at the space and the cost and go with that. They don't understand that SSDs are faster, they just think, oh I can store more movies into this one and it is cheaper.

So I think when the NX2 comes around, it might be viable.

With that bolded area you see the point.  The only situation where I feel the SD card part is better than the HD part is in one specific instance that is rather unlikely.

I've been thinking. The Switch main hardware piece is essentially a portable device. So, my question is... could we expect games to be lighter in size than the more powerful consoles? Like... Xenoblade Chronicles. In the Wii it was a 6,5 GB game, while in the 3DS it was 3,5 GB. The Vita was similar. Games like Need for Speed, Mortal Kombat and other ports from home consoles were about half their original size on PS Vita.

I think the same could be applied to Nintendo Switch. If Skyrim Remastered is like 12GB on PC, an hypothetical Switch version could potentially be like 6 or 7 GB. If all games worked like that, a 128 GB card would be enough. You may need to delete a game from time to time if you buy lots of digital games, but you have to do that too on PS4/One.

I know, maybe I'm wrong and games won't be lighter. Is just my thoughts xD

It's less what you describe, and more the types of games Nintendo make, and how they make them. They often benefit on this front from working on lower-spec hardware (where assets can be smaller), frequently skipping on voice acting, and many of their games working in limited environments. When they make games that utilise a similar technical design philosophy to many PS4/X1/PC titles, such as XCX, the files sizes can grow rapidly (in XCX's case 22.7GB for the base game, and another 10GB in optional patches).

Don't get me wrong, Nintendo are better at space management than many developers (they have to be), and some developers do occasionally make some odd decisions (like giving everyone uncompressed audio; i can understand the sentiment, but that should really be optional), but they aren't doing anything spectacular. At least not on the memory front :p

It's a handheld. Why compare it to true home consoles under any aspect?