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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - The cart limitations of the Switch is really starting to hurt the console.

dharh said:
Eh. Bleeding edge AAA non-nintendo content is not exactly what Switch was ever going to be known for in the first place. If you are a Switch exclusive owner then you don't care necessarily whether the content is on the Switch in the first place or whether it is a compressed lower res version. You bought it for Nintendo, because Nintendo.

If you want the higher res, best version of a AAA game that surpasses the limitations of what is currently possible with the Switch (cart size or otherwise) you buy a PS4 or XBONE. Does it perhaps tilt a _few_ peoples decisions in buying a PS4/XBONE first before buying a Switch? Maybe. But that ship sailed a while ago and there is virtually no turning back at this point. The Switch is going to do just fine and with a few more SKUs will do even better. I might even buy one eventually if the right SKU comes along.

If this was true we wouldn't have endless threads complaining about lack of support from third parties and port begging.

duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Around the Network
tripenfall said:
V-r0cK said:

I thought FFX/X2 physical bundle was only going to have FFX on cart and FFX2 digital code? Can you confirm?

For some reason they're both on the card in Asia only with no download required, whereas the US version has FFX on the cart and X2 is a download. To my knowledge this is the first use of a 32GB Switch Card. 

Thanks for sharing! Well that really sucks for US versions then loll

Veknoid_Outcast said:
I appreciate this thoughtful thread, but I think it comes down to this: the games that would suffer from this card capacity limitation will not define the success or failure of Nintendo Switch.

Thats basically saying:

"Nintendo makes consoles for themselves and dont care about 3rd party."

But I agree, Nintendo sees themselves as software developers 1st, and dont honestly want too much competition on their hardware.
Its why they often times have "issue's" (eg. lack of CD drive, weaker hardware ect), they just dont care about the loss of 3rd party, and might secretly not want too much competition for their own games on their hardware.

Nintendo see's themselves as software developers that make hardware.
Sony see's themselves as hardware makers, that also make software.
Microsoft see's themselves as a service provider, that also makes hardware.

The 3 differ slightly with their approuch to consoles.

Cobretti2 said:
Barozi said:

Pre-rendered cutscenes?
I play a lot of games and I've noticed that nearly everything is real time nowadays.
Hellblade doesn't have any pre-rendered cutscenes FYI.

interesting, i didn't realise that they all did it on the fly. Thought it was still videos haha.

sometimes the video scenes seem better quality then the game lol, so assumed was all pre-rendered videos

They are in higher quality. The camera is locked in cutscenes and there's no need for AI so that frees up resources that can be used to push better graphics.
Most visible in close-ups of character models.

Some game will still have intro cutscenes that are pre-rendered but nearly everything else is real time. Most of the pre-rendered stuff looks worse than real time, simply for the fact that they have a fixed resolution and are always compressed in some way (some more than others). 720p videos can be found quite often in games that use pre-rendered videos and while that might be fine for base consoles, it will look pretty bad on PS4Pro and Xbox One X. Wouldn't happen with real time cutscenes as they will be rendered on the fly at the game's current resolution.

Last edited by Barozi - on 08 April 2019

melbye said:
I can sorta understand that SOME publishers don't want to invest in a 32GB cart because they are probably really expensive, i have a bigger problem with Capcom who couldn't even invest in 4GB cart for Mega Man Legacy Collection. But i absolutely refuse to buy physical editions that come with a code in the box

I prefer physical editions that come with a code in the box, if the cart is playable without the code.


Around the Network

More on topic with this thread: One example of a game that wouldn't fit uncompressed on the cheaper medium = "o noes the switch iz doomd!!"

Flash storage is drastically superior to discs for a variety of reasons. It is more expensive, yes, but it offers a tremendous performance increase. I do agree, in this day and age where you can buy 32GB SD cards in bulk for less than $5 ea (just based on the very first Google result I found) - a markup of less than a dollar from the cheapest 16GB price I found - that there's no reason it should be as expensive as you claim in the OP, but honestly I doubt it actually is as expensive as that, anyways.


Plot twist: "Physical" version of MK11 for Switch will come with a code in the box.

The issue isn't so much fitting it on physical media.. Its the cost of the carts.  Its an inevitable issue with a portable based system. Costs will come down over time. 

Quick question: isn't hellblade digital only on every platform?

d21lewis said:
Quick question: isn't hellblade digital only on every platform?

Original release, yes. It's since gotten physical releases.