The 64GB cartridge costs $16 which is likely significantly more expensive than the slow ass Switch 1 carts, the people crying about this can go pay that extra surcharge themselves, game companies aren't a charity entitled to take a $16 less per copy versus a PS5 or XBS version of a game because purists need a curated copy of a game on Switch 2. You want that, then you pay the difference, and for 128GB carts that would amount to probably $25+ more per game. Lots of 3rd party games won't fit on a 64GB cart. Now you're getting into N64 territory of like $90+ games, happy now? Then lets see how bad these people crying for physical actually will put their money where their mouth is. 

The dumbest thing about this is cartridge push is it's still literally the worst way to play a Switch 2 game even with speeds better than Switch 1 carts. Switch 2 cartridges are still significantly slower than both internal storage and flash storage, so these people are clamouring for the most expensive way they can to play games in the shittiest format available. It's ridiculous. 

Sorry but I don't want to have compromised ports where devs are forced to find a way to fit games into 64GB. I pay for games too and I'm not interested in having devs resorting to do things like put lower res textures into Switch 2 versions of games so they can be squeezed into 64GB just so edge lord 38-year-old collector/"gaming purist" can have more plastic shit on their shelf. Nor do I want 3rd parties disadvantaged in the Nintendo ecosystem by having to take $16 less per copy vs a PS5/XBS version, that makes the platform significantly less appealing to developers and puts Nintendo at a massive disadvantage versus the Sony and MS ecosystems. $16/game is a massive difference, if your margin on a game is $30, that's damn well half your retail margin gone versus a PS5 or XBox sale. 

David Gibson, Senior Analyst at MST Financial, reports that 77% of the Switch 2s shipped were the MKW bundle, so 4.5m copies of MKW were acquired that way and 1.13m sold separately:

https://x.com/gibbogame/status/1952219747837460499

Speaking of game cards, manufacturer Macronix says they plan to meet "varying capacity requirements" suggesting that sizes other than the 64GB one currently in use are on the way:

https://www.gonintendo.com/contents/51440-rumor-switch-2-game-card-manufacturer-may-have-hinted-at-expanded-storage-size

I heard that game keycards are going to be dropped, and that a 32 size is also being added. No idea if its true or not. 

Macronix is the manufacturer of Switch 1 cards while Rohm is the manufacturer of Switch 2 cards, there is nothing confirmed but only rumours about them manufacturing different card sizes…. we’ll see. 

For now yes, but Macronix could well move to Switch 2 as Switch 1 card production winds down now that the system has been replaced; their quote was referring to the future.

Series sales from various Nintendo IP's, only includes titles that sold one million units or more.

I sometimes forget how big the "Switch boost" has been for most series. We're talking 2-3 times the sales of the previous best seller.

You keep whining about imagined people, but the thing is that the people who want physical games would pay for them. If faced with $70 digital vs. $80 physical, they'd go for it, just like all the times that $20 indie games received $30 physical versions on Switch 1. It's game ownership vs. buying a license to use a game.

Loading times that are a few seconds longer aren't going to kill anyone. Donkey Kong Bananza has shorter loading times than MKW, so giving up game ownership in exchange for 1-2 seconds saved per loading screen (which don't occur often to begin with) is a terrible trade-off.

Third parties don't get disadvantaged by technological specifications, they get disadvantaged by their own decisions. The refusal to release physical versions reduces the sales potential of their games by at least 50%. Also, why are you even still talking about a Microsoft ecosystem? Desperate much?

As for costs for gamers, you apparently don't realize how stupid your argument is. You fantasize about 100 GB games to make your point, but "owning" them in digital format means that you'll need multiple micro SD express cards over the course of Switch 2's lifetime. Taking the full digital route won't save you money as opposed to buying physical games, even in the case that physical games should cost more than their digital counterpart.

I have doubts people would pay for them, what would happen is games would become $80-$90 standard on the Switch 2 and you would have 10x more complaining about the platform and how Nintendo is ripping people off/this that and the other because people don't understand the supply chain differences between a 5 cent Blu-Ray disc and a $16-$20+ cartridge. 

Cartridges are literally the worst way to play Switch 2 games, at least on the N64 the cartridges was a stupid decision but had some tangiable benefits like being way faster than 2x-4x CD-ROM and allowed more seamless 3D open world games for example, playing off the cartridge on a Switch is frankly just being stupid. There are 4-10 second differences in loading too all throughout games, it's not just 1 or 2 seconds here and there. The Switch 2 cartridges I believe are 450MB/sec, that's just not going to keep up with the internal flash storage that is 1000MB/sec and SD Express cards are also double the speed. Cartridge is the worst format and the most expensive on top of that. This loading time disparity will also get more noticeable in games later too like the next-gen Zelda, it's not going to get any better for carts. 

Nintendo is essentially trying to make a fair compromise with people and boomer/grandma/grandpas who won't let go of retail and little children that prefer physical gifts. The Key Cards allow developers to basically sell their games at parity with PS5/XBS physical versions of games and not have to take a $16 hit per copy (and probably $20+ when or if 128GB ever happens).

There are tons of 3rd party games that are already well over 64GB too, Final Fantasy VII Rebirth is 145GB, Baldur's Gate 3 is 100GB, Final Fantasy 16 is 90GB, Microsoft Flight Simulator is 120GB-200GB, Forza Horizon 5 is 103GB, NBA 2K is over 100GB, COD Black Ops 6 is 120+GB ... 64GB is already a low amount for 2025, it's not going to get much better in that regard. To hold over the Switch 2 for a life cycle, you're going to need 128GB cartridges and probably even 256GB carts eventually, what's that supposed to cost? $30 a game eventually to have the crappiest experience? 

This is like getting into an argument with your airline that you want to downgrade your ticket from business class to coach because of nostalgia and you want to on top of that to pay more. 

Nintendo are more than a third of the way to their 15 million FY forecast for Switch 2 in the system's first 26 days, with 9 months still to go; unless they completely screw the pooch, they should exceed that number easily.