This.
I'd rather have Physical rather than physical AND install.
Its time to stop with included storage and just have support for expandable memory. This also helps with the cost.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The Nintendo Switch coming with 32GB seems crazy to me for 2017
- Thread starter Gowans
- Start date
This.
I'd rather have Physical rather than physical AND install.
Its time to stop with included storage and just have support for expandable memory. This also helps with the cost.
Who ever said anything about ports or lazy devs? Though it's common to aim for the lowest common denominator and most probably switch ports will be given to B teams anyway. Fifa anyone? If it's not profitable for them to put in the effort to port to switch, then decide why do it in the first place?
I would also imagine the carts would not go bigger than the available internal storage space, as the game also need to be available digitally.
RichiRamjag
Member
Gimme splatoon 2 at 1080 on dock and they can call it whatever the fuck they want.
Personally, I hope this is the replacement to 3ds. I want all efforts on switch personally.
Personally, I hope this is the replacement to 3ds. I want all efforts on switch personally.
Familienoberhauptvogel
Banned
I wouldn't consider 500gb particularly large and a big swathe of thathe space gets reserved by the OS.
ALLseeingEYE
Member
64gb is still meager, and ideally, they need 128-256gb at the very least, but having double the memory is not insignificant. At the very least, being able to install twice as many games, could mean that people buy twice as many games digitally.
The big thing here is that, a huge amount of people will likely never buy that extra SD card, or will have to deal with that meager amount of memory until they can afford, or be arsed to buy more. So starting them off with more memory could make a big difference, if even to ensure that the system is just functionally decent, right out of the box.
My experience with WiiU was that only having 32GB of system memory, was a huge headache, especially as the system always defaulted initial downloads and title updates to that drive, and that it was such a small amount of memory, that you could barely fit anything on it. It was a poor user experience.
goldenpp72
Member
When's the last tablet or smartphone or, any mobile device that has 128 or 256gb in it?
You will also sell your kidney for one of them, they aren't even commercially available at this point.
Theonik
Member
When they actually exist.
They're not trying to host 10-50GB games so they don't need that extra size. If Nintendo wants any AAA titles then it's hard to argue against needing a larger size.
http://www.apple.com/shop/buy-ipad/ipad-pro or almost every other major mobile device out there.
inb4 goalposts moving.
Theonik
Member
Except those phones don't have game cartridges.
goldenpp72
Member
Switch won't be getting those games regardless of the amount of memory Nintendo included, i'm sure they know that.
goldenpp72
Member
Can you expand the memory on those? And how much is the cheapest 128gb option?
Let's see some goal post move
It would be nice if they made an attempt. You know it's not like 3rd party support carried the ps4 and xbone through otherwise serious droughts. And it's not like this has been an ongoing issue for many of nintendos consoles.
You say this as if developers and publishers don't now live in a time where digital distribution is increasing at pace offering them higher margins as well as cutting out sold copies circulating second hand in shops
Why should publishers give more than token efforts to the Switch from the start when digital downloads are fairly dependent almost from day one on consumers buying more storage?
Can you expand the memory on those? And how much is the cheapest 128gb option?
Let's see some goal post move
This is what you originally asked:
Nothing about expandable memory or how much it is. I gave you an answer to your exact question. So you're either moving goalposts or baiting.
both. If you're going to bait, you gotta be a bit more clever.
Should be out within the year, pricing will be expensive.
Though it'll push the price of the other cards down.
512GB is about the same price as the system itself.
I think casuals understand the concept of buying a SD card to expand the memory.
Don't think having to expand the memory with a SD card will hugely impact digital sales for casuals as how some people think in this thread.
When 360 Arcade released people went out and bought HDD for their 360s. I have friends who bought a SD card for android phones.
64GB would have been nice of course but I guess there was a cost issue with the Switch.
Perhaps down the line they can release SKUs with bigger internal memory when costs come down.
Don't think having to expand the memory with a SD card will hugely impact digital sales for casuals as how some people think in this thread.
When 360 Arcade released people went out and bought HDD for their 360s. I have friends who bought a SD card for android phones.
64GB would have been nice of course but I guess there was a cost issue with the Switch.
Perhaps down the line they can release SKUs with bigger internal memory when costs come down.
goldenpp72
Member
I'm pointing out that context matters, you're comparing 600 dollar devices where you can only download and have no method to expand the memory, to a device that is 300 dollars and can have it's memory expanded to that same level for about 30-40 bucks more.
So no, I don't see anything remotely comparable, I was hoping to see something similar to Switch in price because the last phone I bought had 16gb built in, and that phone is 'worth' 600 dollars. I also understand of course that a tablet generically has far more function than a Switch, but just going by the hardware vs cost, i'd not use Apple as a good example. Logically, the main point is to see something to compare as to why Nintendo is being stupid or unfair as this topic is generally claiming.
shouamabane
Member
This was always the least of Switch's problems. Micro SD is fine.
Irrelevant because digital sales are what all the publishers are targeting, and what they're trying to encourage. The main goal isn't just distribution; it's a matter of larger profits and a more engaged audience.
It's not getting them because of Nintendo failing to garner the audience these games need and because of hardware issues. Of which, this thread is an excellent representation of the latter. Note too, that even Nintendo games are starting to intrude into that limit.
Gaiaknight
Member
just gonna pick up a 200GB micro sd and call it a day nintendo game sizes usually arent that big plus for those very rare 15GB+ nintendo games i will just buy physical.
People have been going around in circles for page after page, after page. Comparing a handheld/console hybrid to a tablet or phone which make very little sense.
Most people are going to look at the Switch and compare it to the PS4, the Xbox One, the 3DS and the Vita (depending on if they value the portability or home console aspect more)
You're comparing the Switch to a phone or tablet that can do many other things the Switch cant. In return, the Switch can play better games, that's about it. Also you want to talk about context.
13GB for BoW if you buy digitally into a 32GB memory card.
2.39GB for Bully on a 32GB iPad.
I trust I don't have to do the math for you to see why 'context' matter of why many people are a bit peeve that it's not at least 64GB which would help ease some of the issues. But as someone said, this isn't even the Switch biggest problem.
64GB is as irrelevant as 32GB, it is nothing, that's why they let you buy a Non Proprietary Micro SD of whatever the fuck size you want, probably they will support external HDDs for the dock too.
goldenpp72
Member
It makes perfect sense if you compare it as a device with specs against any other device with specs that have a similar form factor and the restrictions that carries. If you compare any mobile device in 2017 to what switch will have included, the switch will likely come out on top as the fairest price. This disregards the content on the platforms, etc, but only factors in the hardware itself.
I could be out of touch, but I bought my fiancee a tablet that was on sale for 250 for Christmas and it has issues running Plant's vs Zombies 2 at a reasonable speed, so if a brand new device with 2 detachable controllers and a dock also has the ability to crunch games like Zelda, i'd say it's not that unfair. Oh and her tablet has I think 16gb of internal memory, but it does have the ability to expand the same way Switch can, with the only superior tech aspect likely being the bigger screen (10 inches)
People need to understand that the Switch is a mobile device, the marketing and messaging doesn't matter, it's what it is, and it should be compared to those kinds of devices if you want a reference for what is fair and logical in the hardware space. If you want to argue the Switch and its marketing message and all that, that's another topic and has plenty of merit to argue, but this is pretty pointless.
being able to install at least twice the amount of games isn't irrelevant just because you said so. Also you're missing the point with "that's why they let you buy a Non Proprietary Micro SD of whatever the fuck size you want".
Yep we have gone full circle.
Arkam
Member
Honestly I would have liked 64GB of storage but anything more than that would have been silly and overly costly when it doesn't solve the real need for massive storage if you are going all digital. Regardless we would have needed to add SD cards. All they would have gained by going 64GB would be ensuring that there is plenty of room for DLC/patches for users who dont go mostly digital.
So I guess in that sense 32GB seems reasonable... but again I think 64GB would have been a sweeter spot.
So I guess in that sense 32GB seems reasonable... but again I think 64GB would have been a sweeter spot.
But marketing and messaging...inform the customer to get them to understand what the product is?
I need to lie down.
FinaruDensetsu
Member
But loads of people told me that it's not a tablet and not a handheld.
To those people I say to you once and for all:
Yes it absolutely is a tablet and a handheld.
outunderthestars
Banned
Do you have any idea how small a NES/SNES rom file is?
goldenpp72
Member
If Microsoft threw a 19 inch screen on top of the Xbox One S and called it their next portable, would you then compare its specs and price to your tablets 32 gigs of storage? The company can call it whatever they want, but the fact is consoles, desktops, laptops, phones and tablets all have unique advantages and disadvantages due to their size. Nintendo has created a mobile device that has to be restricted under the same laws any other device its size has to be.
I own all of this stuff, I own a PS4 Pro, an Xbox One and a Wii U, I have tablets, laptops, computers, it would seem like some people can be told by a company the device is something that it's not, and believe it. This is Nintendo's next console because they won't be releasing another console, they have gone all in on mobile devices at this point.
Blueingreen
Member
I would argue It has more problems as a handheld, I'm really hoping for a cold dish of crow this coming march because right now the consensus I'm getting from this system is incomplete as a console yet bizarrely ill conceived as a handheld.
MrGreencastle
Member
There is a USB 3.0 port in the dock as far as I know. Can you not use it for HDDs?
The patch typically just resides in the system memory, just like the 3DS. Carts on not writable. I dunno what the biggest patch on PS4 or XB1 but I bet its close to 20gb.
shouamabane
Member
Do you have a source for this?
FinaruDensetsu
Member
But it's Switch + Card + my $900 iPhone to do voice chat for the Switch proposition.
What kind of source do you need? Every 3DS should be source enough. The patch is installed on the device not the cartridge.
Yeah, the Switch is pretty deficient both as a handheld and as a console. It will be a big question mark as to how much these deficiencies end up hurting it.
killatopak
Member
what a disaster.
goldenpp72
Member
I think he may have mistook your use of the words system memory, you are correct in that it is stored on the systems SD card.
Yup. Any of the 3 systems can fill up just as fast. 500gb sounds like a lot, but when even a physical disc enforces an install and huge patch sizes, having the switch not install games and only having 32gb doesn't seem as severe as it should be.
It's not really about deflecting criticism, I think. I've wanted to write more on Gaf about the kinds of compromises that have clearly gone into making this product, but it's not worth it if I'm just going to be labeled a Nintendo fanboy or something just because I don't think that the decision to include 32GB of onboard storage makes all of Nintendo into anti-consumerist hobgoblins. The system isn't exactly a handheld — in that it doesn't neatly fit within our preconceived notions of what a handheld gaming device is — but it's still a mobile device, even if it's a "console for the home." Tablets and laptops are mobile devices and are, by and large, for the home too. They're a better analog.
Nintendo has been pushing the physicality of game cards as core to the Switch experience since the reveal. The system is designed to be used with them as its primary mode of play. If you want to go all-digital, you can, and there's a Micro SD slot that enables you to expand the memory further. Sure, it would be nicer if it had 64GB, or 128GB, or if it was $200 instead of $300, or if included a pro controller, or ... whatever. This isn't defense force bullshit, just a pragmatic view of what Nintendo is doing and why.
Talking about how this is going to limit AAA multi-platform titles doesn't matter that much since they are likely not going to come to this console in the first place. Nintendo building their product around megaton third-party support that is never going to manifest would be foolish.
It's easy to say that Nintendo could've just thrown in a few extra gigabytes, but this adds to the bill of materials. It's easy to say it's just a few extra bucks, but that's not how margins work. If Nintendo "threw in" every feature that's tossed out as some trivial cost or implementation detail, the system would be $400 USD.
Nintendo isn't Apple; the Switch is not an astronomically high-margin product like an iPhone, and it's just over-dramatic to accuse Nintendo of arrogance or anti-consumerism because they made a reasonable compromise to reach their target MSRP, while still leaving options open for people who want more space.
There are annoyances in the way that the SKUs have been divided (that charging grip not being included — argh!) and I'm seriously worried about the lack of info on online and VC. The smart app nonsense sounds ridiculous. These are the areas where the Switch has glaring issues and also the areas where player feedback has the most opportunity to make an impact.
But there is a lot of intellectual dishonesty going on in this thread and others, a lot of ill-considered cynicism, and a lot of drive-by shit-posting. It makes it difficult to actually discuss the platform's rights-and-wrongs, and the true missteps made in the product's messaging.