Bite my shiny metal cockpit!

That's what you think but they didnt

 They even showed the difference in read speeds. Remember star wars outlaws prior to switch 2 is an only next gen game..the game engine was updated to work with series s,x and ps5 SSD in mind. 

All of them have SSD speeds far greater then switch 2 catridge speeds and switch 2 internal.  Therefore they are not wrong. Even digital foundry tested it out and the devs weren't lying. People have to accept that Nintendo made a mistake here when they designed the switch 2.  It's not always the devs faultm

olStoppable said:

The Star Wars developer lied.

1. So far there's no public information for how much Switch 2 game cards would cost to produce if there were different sizes. The one-size-fits-all 64 GB approach may come down to achieving lower massproduction costs, just like it's common that low capacity SD cards from various manufacturers were eventually phased out because their production became more expensive than high capacity cards due to the volume of production.

Also, you pay $10 more for digital versions this generation. You don't pay more for a physical game because it uses only a fraction of the game card's capacity, so from a consumer's point of view, it makes no difference how much space of the game card is being used.

2. Entirely wrong because digital and physical versions of the same game cost the same in the USA. It's only in Europe where the MSRP for physical games is €10 higher than for its digital counterpart, but that was a Nintendo decision based on European retailers routinely undercutting digital prices in the past, making digital versions more expensive and a worse deal. So when European retailers now undercut the MSRP for physical Switch 2 games by €10 (and that's what they already do), then digital and physical cost the same.

3. Compression rates of less than 2:1 leave a lot of room for improvement. A 3:1 ratio is definitely doable.

This would either reduce Nintendo's profit margins or lead to a price increase. Not ideal scenarios for Nintendo.

1. True, but solvable by the premise of my thread: instead of using expensive proprietary media, they could have used mass-market microSD cards, which are already fairly inexpensive, and relied on system storage to install and play the games, similar to the PS5

2. This answer is purely speculative. If we're speculating, I foresee that an increase in fixed production costs for physical media will prevent physical games from decreasing in price as they once did, since physical retailers already operate on thinner profit margins. I don't think we will ever see physical Switch 2 games being sold for 30 USD even many years ahead, at least not for true physical games, maybe for GKC

3. Based on...?

Nintendo should just do what Switch 1 did and offer more sizes. Some games are small so they should at least offer 8-16-32 and 64GB carts. Switch 1 ranged from 1GB to 32GB.

Each publisher is making their own decisions whether to use game-key cards. As such, it's the responsibility of the respective publisher and never Nintendo's. The same logic holds true for code-in-a-box packaging.

Your suggestion is to replace glorified digital with glorified digital. Either way you quickly run into the need to purchase a large micro SD express card when one of the important points of physical games is that that isn't necessary.

Did Cyberpunk 2077's physical version on Switch 2 have massive texture streaming problems?

1. When you say "True", you acknowledge that there's no problem to be solved in the first place.

2. My answer isn't speculative because it cites the facts. But sure, physical games may now bottom out at $40 instead of $30, now that they start with $10 higher prices. Same difference.

3. ...developers who are better at compression than Square-Enix.