RolStoppable said:
If true - because there's no real confirmation here - the reason for one standardized size would be cost reductions in manufacturing while accounting for lots of third party games going beyond or about to go beyond 32 GB.
|
It's not going to be cheaper.
Cost of NAND (In this instance "xtrarom") has a direct relationship with the size of the chip itself... And Macronix will still manufacture and sell a myriad of different sizes.
With the Switch we had carts that had a huge memory chip and other carts where the chip was integrated in the contact portion of the cart.
If you are hoping scales of economy will make the difference, you haven't been paying attention to fabrication.. Costs have been rising, so larger chips always cost more verses smaller ones as you get less chips per wafer. (Which is the bottleneck in making these things.)
RolStoppable said:
What we can confirm is that these 64 GB cards are not too expensive for third parties, because a small publisher like Marvelous can go ahead with them. Additionally, CD Projekt is proving that massive games can be put on such cards with proper compression. Put these two facts together and it's clear that a lot of other publishers are engaging in anti-consumer behavior for no other sake than the hope for higher profits. I call it hope, because using game-key cards will predictably make them lose a lot of sales, which likely leaves them with less profit overall than if they had used a game card.
|
No issues with squeezing large games onto smaller carts, it's been a thing for decades... We need to remember that current games spend the vast majority of their storage on stuff like uncompressed audio, high quality 4k video and super high resolution textures, everything the Switch 2 can throw out the window as it's not relevant to the console.
It's not just compression, the Switch 2 just can't make use of assets of the same quality.
Developers will prioritize other aspects that the Switch 2 hardware is more proficient at, such as DLSS and Lighting. (RT)
RolStoppable said:
I call it hope, because using game-key cards will predictably make them lose a lot of sales, which likely leaves them with less profit overall than if they had used a game card.
|
I refuse to buy physical games if it's not a real physical game.
RolStoppable said:
And then we have a third fact which is that the publishers who are opting for game-key cards usually have a history of download-only or partial downloads being required on Switch 1 already. They are simply continuing with what they've already been doing, and just like there have been gamers rushing to their defense on Switch 1 to put blame on Nintendo despite contradictory facts, there will be gamers rushing to their defense this time around too. So what's going on is more of the same thing that has been going on since 2017.
|
We need to call them out on it, because it's pretty shit and anti-consumer.
Microsoft and Sony are bad for this as well, so we have kinda' been conditioned as gamers for years now to accept this, which I believe isn't great.
Wman1996 said:
This is dumb. You would think there would at least be 32 GB Game Cards available, or even 8 or 16 GB.
|
2GB/4GB/8GB/16GB/32GB is still available and still being manufactured. - And is 100% compatible with the Switch 2 AND Switch 1.
It's a Nintendo "idea" to ditch the smaller sizes for Switch 2 exclusive carts.
I think Developers should still be able to leverage the Switch 1 cart technology and it's lower costs (But also lower speeds) for Switch 2 game releases if the transfer rates are not an issue. (Think: Remasters/Ports from older consoles.)
Unfortunately Macronix contract lays with Nintendo and not the Publishers/Developers, so the decision is Nintendo's.
