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

Forums - Nintendo - Why would Nintendo only support up to 128 GB for the Switch?

Maybe the rumor got it wrong and 128GB isn't the maximum supported size of SD cards, but the size of the card that ships with it.
Maybe not very likely, especially if there is internal storage of some kind, but 3DS shipped with an SD card already installed too.



Around the Network
vivster said:
Shouldn't the real question be why Nintendo only provides so little internal storage? People who actually buy an SD card for the Switch should be the minority.

If the cartridges comes with a possibility of patches / DLC space, then it would be no real issue at all.



In the wilderness we go alone with our new knowledge and strength.

Pyro as Bill said:

Because cartridge-based systems don't need to install therefore no/less HD required.

This.

Why did it take so long for someone to figure out? :P



hershel_layton said:

I find it strange in all honesty. I think 128 a good amount, but with huge SD cards becoming cheaper by the day, I thought they'd increase the limit to prevent space management from becoming a hassle.

Also, what will they do for third party games? Call of Duty Infinite Warfare is over 100 GB...I'm sure people won't be too happy knowing their SD card is almost depleted because of one game.

Just the other day I found a 256 GB SDHC card for $80. That's a ridiculously good deal. It even had decent writing speeds and was not a fraud(took some research to make sure). Within 1-5 years that will probably shrink in value as UFS cards begin to replace SDHC cards as the go to miniature storage for media devices.

You really don't need to look to much in to that, info saying "officially" support up to 128GB MicroSDXC, reality is that you will be able just to format any bigger size card than 128GB and use it. For instance 3DS "officially" suports up 32GB, but in reality people using any size of card, I know people using 128GB.



Pyro as Bill said:
Ljink96 said:

True, but we don't know what type of card NIntendo will be using. Simply using a SD card from Sandisk or something would not only be costly for a game card, but it never happens due to how easy it would be to pirate games. 

And yes, Blu Ray is very slow compared to SD cards but to remedy that we all know Sony and Microsoft implement games to be mostly run from the hard drive....which I believe will be nonexistant or very limited on Switch's side of things. Either way you slice it, 100+GB games aren't going to be normal on Switch. 

Playing from the HDD is slower than a typical SD card.

Nintendo can use 2 cartridges for 130GB games like CoD, just like Sony/MS will need 2 or 3 Bluray disks. The difference is Nintendo can run straight from the cart instead of installing to the HD or SD card.

I think Nintendo carts will run at double the speed of a HD for lower loading times.

Irrelevant. Games will have several GB day 1 patches along with the normalized free update system that most titles use to drive engagement. Even if no game was entirely installed, you'd eat through it super quickly.



"We'll toss the dice however they fall,
And snuggle the girls be they short or tall,
Then follow young Mat whenever he calls,
To dance with Jak o' the Shadows."

Check out MyAnimeList and my Game Collection. Owner of the 5 millionth post.

Around the Network
Nuvendil said:
hershel_layton said:

I find it strange in all honesty. I think 128 a good amount, but with huge SD cards becoming cheaper by the day, I thought they'd increase the limit to prevent space management from becoming a hassle.

Also, what will they do for third party games? Call of Duty Infinite Warfare is over 100 GB...I'm sure people won't be too happy knowing their SD card is almost depleted because of one game.

Just the other day I found a 256 GB SDHC card for $80. That's a ridiculously good deal. It even had decent writing speeds and was not a fraud(took some research to make sure). Within 1-5 years that will probably shrink in value as UFS cards begin to replace SDHC cards as the go to miniature storage for media devices.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHA

HAHAH...hAHAHAHAHA

....

Wait, you're freaking serious?!

Just...what the crap?  That is some freaking bull.  There's no reason - NO REASON - for the file size to be nearly as big as that.  This is laziness to the highest degree and is freaking inexcusable. 

Box might as well come with a reversible cover with this on the front, signed by the head of the dev team:

Apparently its the size for Infinite Warfare + Modern Warfare Remastered, so essentially 2 games.



Platinums: Red Dead Redemption, Killzone 2, LittleBigPlanet, Terminator Salvation, Uncharted 1, inFamous Second Son, Rocket League

I just suspect the Switch isn't going to get many third party ports of western developed titles. I think we're going to see a lot more Japanese and indie developers making games for the Switch, like a combination of 3DS+Vita+WiiU+PS3(in Japan). I suspect developers releasing JRPGs on the Vita are gonna move over, as well as Capcom and Square teams working on 3DS, and any indie games released on PS4 and Xbox One will likely make it, but we just may not see the new Call of Duty or Assassins Creed or whatever. I'm OK with that, so long as the Switch enjoys the kind of exclusives their handhelds got and then some. I do hope the Switch is powerful enough to accept SOME ports, like Dark Souls would be amazing mobile, but I don't think it's a but requirement that they be "another console" like the others so long as they have the games.



Pyro as Bill said:
Ljink96 said:

True, but we don't know what type of card NIntendo will be using. Simply using a SD card from Sandisk or something would not only be costly for a game card, but it never happens due to how easy it would be to pirate games. 

And yes, Blu Ray is very slow compared to SD cards but to remedy that we all know Sony and Microsoft implement games to be mostly run from the hard drive....which I believe will be nonexistant or very limited on Switch's side of things. Either way you slice it, 100+GB games aren't going to be normal on Switch. 

Playing from the HDD is slower than a typical SD card.

Nintendo can use 2 cartridges for 130GB games like CoD, just like Sony/MS will need 2 or 3 Bluray disks. The difference is Nintendo can run straight from the cart instead of installing to the HD or SD card.

I think Nintendo carts will run at double the speed of a HD for lower loading times.

 

I dont understand. You mean NS can boot games from 2 cartridges at a time? You're not making any sense.

 

Yes standard doesnt mean the biggest, but it also doesnt mean the smallest. It can always mean the second largest and no one knows. We dont know the real info, but for now, we all know even the SMALLEST blu ray (25gb, and it can be expanded to 128gb) has larger space than this NS "standard" cartridge. And this "standard" cartridge doesnt have enough capacity to load most AAA games.

 

Back to the topic, the question should be Why Nintendo doesnt support HHD or SSD for Switch in docked mode?



Puppyroach said:
I would hope all three console manufacturers could agree on some kind of size cap, because this has become ridiculous. There is no reason at all for MW to be 100GB, or Halo 5 being in that range as well. It's just extremely lazy programming on their part and they should be forced to reduce filesizes.

I doubt Nintendo of all the consolemanufacturers should demand that. It's very simple for third party developers otherwise. If it costs to much energy to develop for the Switch they will skip it all together.



Please excuse my (probally) poor grammar

Who cares about digital distribution anyways, it's not that big of a deal. Much like proper online account systems and game features, no one uses these.