By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Aeolus451 on 17 September 2017
Edit Thread
flashfire926 said:
Wyrdness said:

The break down of the Switch shows the is no space in the device, you've offered no alternative way to increase storage with out significantly increasing costs yet still harp on about they can do it. Here's a news flash for you they've given owners an option for more storage it's called micro SD cards and they're cheaper than adding internal flash storage to the point you can buy one and the Switch for cheaper than if the Switch had more internal flash storage.

Fact is it's not being against more storage it's realizing the trade off for it you've refused to answer whether you'd pay 100-110 quid more for a Switch because you know you and most consumers wouldn't as it would be at an obscene price.

What do you mean "no space in the device"?

Micro SD fit ridiculous amounts of gigabytes, now approaching 512 gb, and you say the Switch flash storage can't be 64gb because of "no space"? And there is no way it adds more than $50 to the cost. Heck, by next year they can phase out 32 gb and sell 64 gb for $300. 

And unlike us, Nintendo mass buys the flash storage, so they get it at a much lower cost than us. Same goes for many other electronics companies.

All I was saying that 32 gb of storage wasn't enough hd space for playing even 7th gen 3rd party games without needing to buy a micro SD card to even play a game and that nintendo needs to offer SKUs with better storage then some of them started to get defensive over common sense saying they don't better SKUs.