By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Wii U external hard drive required to download Lego City Undercover, Nintendo says

BaldrSkies on 17 March 2013
DieAppleDie said:
^^its a matter of servers, the hw has nothing to do with that


I don't know what games you play, but I'm pretty sure servers have nothing to do with install speed. Download speed sure, we can be optimistic and blame the servers, but not the post-download install.

And when was the last game you played that took 9 hours to patch?



Around the Network
S.Peelman on 17 March 2013
Mad55 said:
wow 22 gigs is huge. thats crazy.

I know. It'll last me this entire generation!



adriane23 on 17 March 2013

Even if Nintendo wanted to keep the footprint of their console small, an internal HDD that you could switch out with a bigger drive would've been better.



I am the Playstation Avenger.

   

Cobretti2 on 17 March 2013
pezus said:
RolStoppable said:
pezus said:

That's wrong. Digital games can be easily deleted from the system and then redownloaded when you want to play again. This here, though, doesn't even fit one game so it's impossible for you to download it unless you buy an external HDD.

@3DS: I have no idea how large 3DS games are and didn't even know they shipped them with 2GB SD cards. Handhelds are a different ball game though, and definitely are not as competitive as the console market. Standards have been set and Nintendo refuse to follow them. But here's the thing: Vita doesn't include a memory card. Vita not including memory cards gets complained about...A LOT, and not only by Vita owners or potential Vita owners either. Both moves are equally idiotic imo.

Deleting digital games and redownloading them to play again is not a valid or reasonable stance though.

Vita is worse, because you have virtually no choice but to buy an overpriced proprietary memory card. The Wii U's 32GB storage is hardly a problem (if at all), if you buy boxed games. But for the sake of argument, let's assume that somebody absolutely has to extend the storage of the system. On the Wii U, 1TB costs you less than 32GB on the Vita. You say that's equally idiotic in your opinion? It's more like you try to cover up a bad argument by using the Vita as a scapegoat.


The hell? Yes, it is, because that's what people do. You don't just go out and buy a new HDD if you can easily make room by deleting a few games you don't play anymore. 


Room is all relative to haing to redownload the game again. If you have datacaps and shit internet liek msot the world does, then having to redownload something again is a pain in the arse.  I personally would much rather upgrade a hdd and tne transfer my files over to a bigger one that have to download again.



 

 

Player2 on 18 March 2013
pezus said:
walsufnir said:
Fake-Ticker:

"The digital version of Ni no Kuni requires you to have a new hard drive for your Playstation 3 Super Slim 12 Gb , Sony has cautioned."

/Fake-Ticker

http://www.amazon.com/Computer-Entertainment-Ascension-Legacy-Playstation-3/dp/B00B8J0PDE/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1363438622&sr=8-3&keywords=ps3+500gb

That's why I think Nintendo should've made the Basic one without a HDD and a Premium one that is actually premium.

The 500GB PS3 is a bad deal in so many ways that it's hilarious. It's Sony trying to take advantage of those that don't know any better, just like the 65 Euros 250 GB PS3 HDD or the 9 Euros HDD caddy. If I go to an european store (for the games and bundles I'll use one that is consistently expensive, and always the same store to avoid anything suspicious) to avoid to pay taxes for importing such an expensive product:

http://www.game.es/Product/Default.aspx?SKU=090910 God of War 500 GB bundle: 295 Euros.

http://www.game.es/Product/Default.aspx?SKU=088555 Skylanders Giants 12GB bundle: 220 Euros (there's no 12GB God of War bundle so I'll use this).

Now add this:

http://www.amazon.es/Western-Digital-Elements-SE-externo/dp/B005A97A86/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1363603262&sr=8-1-fkmr0 500GB for 50 Euros.

That's 25 Euros cheaper, plus Skylanders starter pack is more expensive than God of War: Ascension.

 

And on top of it there are reports that the 500GB HDD PS3 has perfomance issues while gaming:

http://community.eu.playstation.com/t5/PlayStation-3-Technical-Help/New-PS3-Super-Slim-loading-and-lagging-issues/td-p/17245332

In this forums as well:

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=150416&page=1



Around the Network
Kasz216 on 18 March 2013

That's just a huge failure on Nintendo's part in my opinion.

They really should of went with a much bigger harddrive if there was going to be full DDL games.



teigaga on 18 March 2013
oniyide said:
wvelting said:
Otakumegane said:
Well.

Nintendo why you make so many bad decisions.


Will someone please explain why Nintendo keeps getting picked on for this.  MS makes a 4GB 360 and Sony makes a 12GB PS3, both of which would have to be upgraded to download a game like this.  Nintendo decided to let people use external HD's instead for expanded storage which workes just fine and is far cheaper than a hard drive pgrade for the 360 and for the most part no more than an upgrade for the PS3.  So...what's your problem with it?

 

Most people don't download full games anyways.  Why should everyone have to pay for a built in hard drive if most people would never use most of the space anyways.  To me, Nintendo's decision on this was a good one.  Also for me, we have 4 different external hard drives in my house, so it saved me money.

The thing is, those consoles have been around much longer and they have other OPTIONS, its not like those are the only ones you can get. ANd you have to look at price, the 4gig 360 is 100 bucks less than the basic wii U model that has only twice the space...most of which is going to be used to set up the OS anyway. (yes i know the cost is coming from the controller, but most wont care). PS3 has all kinds of options. Hell, for the same amount of money you can get a 500GB ps3 WITH a damn game. THe basic you get nothing,  and thats just one of there like 4 options. ANd the only other Wii U option is the more expensive deluxe set which is still the most expensive and only has 32 gigs. 

I get where people are coming from with the whole external harddrives and thats cool. But to the average consumer, it looks like a worst deal than the other two. Lets be real, Wii U is competing against PS360

Thank you!

I am one of the consumers that...

1: likes convienience.

2: Does not want an external hadddrive hanging off my console. 

It saddens me that Nintendo has not provided any such option that I would be fully happy with.



teigaga on 18 March 2013
KungKras said:
The following should be thrown in the face of every person complaining about the SSD drive:

The PS1, Gamecube, PS2, and to a certain degree the N64 ALL used memory cards and had NO internal storage. You HAD to buy them to even be able to save your games. What a bunch of inconvenient, horrible consoles those were. Especially considering how ridiculus the price/space ratio was. Fuck Nintendo for giving consumers the freedom to go and buy the cheapest, most cost efficient storage option.

This is what I hate about what consoles and console gamers have become. They don't recognise a proper console anymore. Everything is supposed to be a dumbed down PC.


Are you really comparing 2001 standards to that of 2013? Stop it!



Mad55 on 18 March 2013
S.Peelman said:
Mad55 said:
wow 22 gigs is huge. thats crazy.

I know. It'll last me this entire generation!


Lol I meant the size of Lego not the wiiu. 



oniyide on 18 March 2013
teigaga said:
oniyide said:
wvelting said:
Otakumegane said:
Well.

Nintendo why you make so many bad decisions.


Will someone please explain why Nintendo keeps getting picked on for this.  MS makes a 4GB 360 and Sony makes a 12GB PS3, both of which would have to be upgraded to download a game like this.  Nintendo decided to let people use external HD's instead for expanded storage which workes just fine and is far cheaper than a hard drive pgrade for the 360 and for the most part no more than an upgrade for the PS3.  So...what's your problem with it?

 

Most people don't download full games anyways.  Why should everyone have to pay for a built in hard drive if most people would never use most of the space anyways.  To me, Nintendo's decision on this was a good one.  Also for me, we have 4 different external hard drives in my house, so it saved me money.

The thing is, those consoles have been around much longer and they have other OPTIONS, its not like those are the only ones you can get. ANd you have to look at price, the 4gig 360 is 100 bucks less than the basic wii U model that has only twice the space...most of which is going to be used to set up the OS anyway. (yes i know the cost is coming from the controller, but most wont care). PS3 has all kinds of options. Hell, for the same amount of money you can get a 500GB ps3 WITH a damn game. THe basic you get nothing,  and thats just one of there like 4 options. ANd the only other Wii U option is the more expensive deluxe set which is still the most expensive and only has 32 gigs. 

I get where people are coming from with the whole external harddrives and thats cool. But to the average consumer, it looks like a worst deal than the other two. Lets be real, Wii U is competing against PS360

Thank you!

I am one of the consumers that...

1: likes convienience.

2: Does not want an external hadddrive hanging off my console. 

It saddens me that Nintendo has not provided any such option that I would be fully happy with.


I imagine most people are like this, only these forum dwellers say otherwise, which could be one of the reasons why the WIi U is getting its ass handled by consoles that have been on the market for years.