Tell me the truth - you just looked at the typical prices for USB drives when bought individually, cut the cost a little, and assumed that was the amount it would cost for any sort of flash media. Right?

Even a cursory investigation indicates that a common wholesale price for hundreds of sd cards is $5 a card. What happens when you're ordering millions, in a contract rather than through a "retail" wholesaler? What happens when you're partnering with a hardware company to build a factory specifically for manufacturing your cards?

And here's why it would be a smart move - the same technology, the same basic cards, would be usable in both console and handheld. They could simply have the handheld ones be smaller (because you don't need as much storage space), and thus it works for both at once.

But hey, why bother investigating properly, when you can just jump to a conclusion on the basis of the retail price of USB sticks on Amazon?

No, increase costs compared to PS4/XBO bluray discs. That's literally the only comparison that matters. Why would Activision want to pay more to port the same version of Call of Duty 2016 onto the NX? They either sell it for $60 and profit less than they would on competing platforms or sell it for $60+ and profit less because no one is going to pay more money to buy the NX version of the same game they can play cheaper on other hardware that will likely still be more powerful than the NX.

Of course it proves something. From what I've read, the optical drive mention is an external add on, not a reference for a new system entirely. The system would still be digital. They are just leaving themselves open for a "disc slot expansion" if need be. Which will likely never come to light, for obvious reasons.

Here's why it's a dumb move. An all digital platform does "usable on both plaforms" undebatably better while, instead of costing devs significantly more for an identical port with absolutely no benefits to merit, allowing developers to profit more from an identical port and have the game perform better than a game running from either discs OR carts.

*gasp* :O

Once again, the actual patent document describes it as an EXAMPLE of how the data might be distributed. It's not intended as covering all circumstances. The patent is focused on digital download, so obviously they're not going to show games being loaded via memory card in the patent.

As for the optical drive, the wording actually implies a DIFFERENT but equivalent console having an optical drive: " The same interface as that of the optical disk drive mounted on another compatible game apparatus is employed for the interface of the internal HDD 13 in the game apparatus 1 according to the present example embodiment"

So it's likely that they mean two versions of the same system, and not just a way to plug in a disk drive. But either way, the point we've established is that they clearly aren't forsaking retail. The patent specifically discusses the case of optical drives, and the patent includes a specific discussion of running "programs" from a memory card, something that the Wii U doesn't do (except in Wii mode). Even as a "basic program", the point is made. And since the patent isn't about running software from a memory card, they just needed a scenario to talk about, not all possible scenarios. Hence why they also didn't talk about what the hardware would look like with the optical drive attached.

As people have been saying, over and over again, in this thread, every single poll ever done has indicated that people want retail options. The few times that digital-only has been attempted on a dedicated gaming system, it has flopped massively. The only way that digital-only works is when it's on hardware that also enables a broad variety of other uses... in other words, PC, phones and tablets. And have you noticed that the AAA games are released on PC as an afterthought in most cases?

Do you know how they can do retail and digital in a way that makes a solid balance? It's really simple - the cost of the disc/card/etc are added to the retail price, with the understanding that the upside to paying the extra cost (other than not needing the hdd, not having to use up internet quotas, etc) is that you can share games (since the card/disc can be removed from one system and taken to another one).

If the cost of cards is such an issue, the 3DS would have been in big trouble, since they do cost more per GB than discs.

You can assert that all-digital would be smart, but I've yet to hear any person actually address any of the above. The ONLY benefits to digital are easy access (no need to switch out discs or cards) for the consumer and increased publisher margin per sale.

But the downsides are plentiful - reduced accessibility*, inability to share, issues with retail hardware support and used games**, diminished impulse purchasing***, lower market activity, fewer ways to obtain products resulting in reduced competition, the potential drowning out of indies, difficulties around games that require specific or special peripherals, the inability to physically give games as gifts for birthdays/christmas, no way to do proper special editions, a difficulty distinguishing between game and DLC, reduced free-advertising (another benefit of retail stores)... I can continue, if you'd like.

Incidentally, flash memory is faster than typical HDDs - that's why SSDs exist, after all. What slows optical disc drives down is the need to physically move the read head to the location of the next bit of data, so unless the data is all sequential, it's slowed down. HDDs suffer the same problem, albeit to a slightly lesser degree. Solid state technology, including flash memory and SSDs, don't have this issue.

*not everyone has easy access to internet of sufficient speed and a sufficiently large quota.

**Gamestop doesn't want to sell only hardware, they want to sell software, it's where they make their money - but the hardware makers need to actually sell their hardware somehow.

***people are far more likely to impulse buy at stores, whereas they can always wait a few hours, a few days, a few weeks when they're at home.

Although there are advantages to using memory cards, I think it would completely destroy the chance of 3rd party retail games being on the system. It would be way too much of a hassle and perhaps wouldn't be worth it.

A change like this should only come when the advantages fully out-weigh the disadvantages, like Disk vs Cartridge.

I would prefer them to use flash cards,I love the near zero loading time they offer because some game load like garbage even today on all consoles.

And as I've said and have only needed to say once, polls mean shit when it comes to innovation and progress. People don't know what they want until they have it. The few times digital only has been attempted on consoles, they've been executed terribly. A bad product doesn't mean a bad idea. It just means a bad product. AAA isn't an after thought on PC because its digital if that's what you're trying to imply, so that's irrevent. Your point about digitally only working only when the product is multimedia is also wrong. The ipod wasn't. The Kindle isn't.

No offense, but no one will buy that excuse. No one is going to sit and happily pay more money for the same game for a luxury that doesn't cost more on any other digital plaform. That's not a solid balance, that's an artificial tax to supplement an antiquated idea.

The 3DS isn't sharing multiplats. That's the issue. The 3DS exists in a market where only carts exists. There is nothing to compare costs to because carts are the standard in handheld games right now. Also, 3DS carts are WAY cheaper than NX carts would be because they're much smaller in size. The NX would exist in a market where only discs exist. Discs are the standard in console games, so to try to come in with a more expensive form of media and expect literally anyone to jump in and eat the costs is stupid.

Those downsides are imaginary or insignificant. You can share with digital through streaming with family share, so that's false. There would be higher market activity, as proven by literally every other digital medium, so also false. It doesn't matter that there are fewer options because the one digital option is more direct and proven to get users to spend more, so false. The most popular platforms for indies are the PC and mobile, both digital only platforms, for that's ludicrously false. You could literally just buy the game on someone elses account. Or buy them a points card. Or buy them a digital code for the game. Hilariously, borderline sarcastically false. Special editions would be 100% uneffected, because a special edition doesn't hinge on your copy being physical, so false. If you can't tell the difference between a digital game and DLC, you shouldn't be playing games. False. Mobile games ape average console games in profit with that "reduced free advertizing," so that's a non-issue.

*Hasn't stop digital from dominating every other entertainment medium, including PC gaming. Won't stop the NX. It's a non-issue.

**Frankly, Gamestop will just have to deal with it. But I've said before that I think Nintendo plans on using NFC download code cards to tackle this "issue."

***That's flat out untrue. Home is way more immediate. You compare the standard Steam library to the standard physical game library. They aren't even comparable.

There's nothing to keep going. Claims against digital are laughably absurd.

Some type of cards would be great. I miss them. They could do creative things with the physical media, too, like the gold NES Zelda Carts, etc. They could also be potentially faster, update-able and could hold save data too.

As far as the impact on Nintendo and NX goes, it's only positive. Some points:

-They could have one media for both a console and a handheld.

-They could have anti-piracy measures.

-Capacity could be increased as technology allows.

-The DS to 3DS increase in capacity of carts is 15X. It's not a stretch to say NX carts could affordably hold 125 gig.

-It was commented that even an extra $1 in media costs per unit would dissuade 3rd parties. This is not true at all. The savings of not having an optical drive could be very substantial for Nintendo. Some have stated that optical drives on bulk would only cost a few dollars. While this is true, it doesn't factor in the reduced size, weight, casing, power, shipping and storage costs of the overall console itself. The Wii U could be half the size without the optical drive. Smaller size = much lower overall costs of production, shipping and selling. All said, Nintendo could save at least $10 per hardware unit without the drive. Since an extremely good attach rate is 10 games per console per life, Nintendo could subsidize 3rd parties the additional $1 in production costs and still come out on top.

-The above point assumes 100% physical media sales. We know this is no longer the case. Even on hard drive-limited Nintendo systems, digital sale percentages are pushing 30%; more on some titles. In two years it's not a stretch to say sales could be 50%, reducing the impact of media costs greatly, and putting extra emphasis on reducing hardware expenses.

-As has been stated, the mass market has moved away from physical media. Before each migration virtually every industry had those stating they really want to have CDs, DVDs, etc in their hands. Games are no different. The tablet market has established a very clear standard that the typical consumer is used to buying software digitally.

-The idea that core gamers want their boxes more than casual audiences is unfounded. Core PC gamers are perhaps the most core gamers of all, and that market is now dominated by digital game sales.


All in all, I think it would be an impressive step forward if Nintendo was at the forefront of game media for a change and developed a system that was heavily focused on download and card-based game delivery. Blue Rays are old tech. A fantastic digital store and cool-looking card media would seem way more high-tech.

Iwata didn't need investor's permission. Its a whining, not a command. They can't force Iwata to do things or make Iwata resign, unless they can convince Yamauchi family and all other core owners.

Gamestop can sell highly profitable limited editions and accessories. Nintendo's character products actually sells, pretty profitable business compared to selling new games.

Both of you are partially true. It is true that people are more likely to impulse buy at the store (There was a research for it.)  But it is also true that digital market place allows new kind of sales tactics that can cause impulse puchase in their own ways. (Also research.) Consider countless people purchased RPG Maker and Sony Movie Maker when they are on the sale when they had no interest on making game or starting youtube channel - yet

Last move Nintendo could pull is to allow hosting local server for their handheld games on console. Giving choices to player, increases multiplayer design space and reducing the main server load.