runnin_blue
Banned
Oh, ok. So a mod did it? Lol.The title was edited from its original state. (Originally was just "RUMOR:")
Oh, ok. So a mod did it? Lol.The title was edited from its original state. (Originally was just "RUMOR:")
There is no way NX has HDD; internal NAND like Wii U; and this will probably be the norm for the future; which I think is a good decision. If the point is no moving parts, low consumption, low failure rate, then no internal HDD.
512 gig HDDs in current consoles are already tiny. 64 gig internal NAND will last like a day in the current climate.
512 GB HDDs are tiny because of mandatory installs, otherwise they're perfectly fine.
Portable games cost less since there's a long standing expectation from consumers that they should cost less then console games, as well as typically having much smaller development budgets then console games. I'm sure publishers would love to charge more for portable games to make up the extra cost of the media if they thought they could get away with it.
Sold, pre ordered and day 0'd.
I miss carts.
Still better than PS4/XBO system of have disc, game installs on your system, still need disc to play.cartridges
IN 2017
I was just about to say this. If they're using a media format that doesn't need to be installed somewhere first, they can keep the internal storage to a minimum. The only thing you would need it for are the OS and some save data, neither of which should need anywhere remotely close to that much storage space.
well even if they have a blu ray player already it's just the convenience of having and using a machine that could include that feature as it's not too difficult too include. you have a point though i suppose it's not that essential.As far as Blu-Ray goes, anyone who wants a Blu-Ray player already has one. You may have a point with 4K Blu-Ray, but Nintendo isn't one to pay licensing fees for a known disc format. It's part of the reason why they made their own knock-offs of Blu-Ray discs instead of using actual Blu-Ray discs for the Wii U.
Patches?
The average console attach ratio is around 8? How much space does the average patch take on PS4/XB1?Patches?
The average console attach ratio is around 8? How much space does the average patch take on PS4/XB1?
Enthusiasts can always spring for bigger drives/cards like with Wii U and 3DS.
Hybrid or two separate devices, we all agree that the console and handheld sides of NX will both play the same game cards, right?
Of course they would love to charge more, that's not the issue. My main point is that nothing deterred publishers from charging $40 for 3DS ROM cards when manufacturing even 4GB cards must have cost a great deal more than Wii U discs to manufacture, which MSRP for $60.
The logical conclusion we can gather from this is that cost of manufacturing the medium is not a major factor in MSRP. I don't see how that can be argued.
If I recall correctly, Dead Rising 3 once recieved a 16 GB patch. And i'm pretty sure Halo 5 has recieved around 40GB of updates.
I did a double take the other day watching this Miyamoto interview. Towards the end the translator says:
Now it seems less like a translation error and more like a slip up!
If I recall correctly, Dead Rising 3 once recieved a 16 GB patch. And i'm pretty sure Halo 5 has recieved around 40GB of updates.
Patches work on the 3ds cause the games are small.
PS4 and Xbone patches can be fucking mammoth.
If we are going off the idea that it would a cart that could be used for both the console and handheld HDD would be out cause you aren't putting an HDD in a handheld.
So now your talking about putting enough storage in the handheld to hold the patches for all of your games + room for any digital items.
How much storage would you need to make it feasible so you aren't gimped like an 8 gig Wii U, and how much does this add to the overall cost of the handheld.
Someone else in this thread brought up patching directly to the cards. I'll go back and find it.
Neither of those were on Nintendo consoles though. Based on previous history, I can't see Nintendo allowing patches that large. Third parties wouldn't be happy with it at all, but Nintendo could want to keep things family friendly. Waiting hours upon hours for a 40GB day one patch is not family-friendly.
Neither of those were on Nintendo consoles though. Based on previous history, I can't see Nintendo allowing patches that large. Third parties wouldn't be happy with it at all, but Nintendo could want to keep things family friendly. Waiting hours upon hours for a 40GB day one patch is not family-friendly.
Those are two 1st party titles. What's a patch like for an average multiplatform game like COD or FIFA or Arkham or Just Dance, etc? Bonus what are patches like for those games on Steam/Origin/etc?If I recall correctly, Dead Rising 3 once recieved a 16 GB patch. And i'm pretty sure Halo 5 has recieved around 40GB of updates.
cartridges
IN 2017
Those are two 1st party titles. What's a patch like for an average multiplatform game like COD or FIFA or Arkham or Just Dance, etc? Bonus what are patches like for those games on Steam/Origin/etc?
Eh, Nintendo would probably only disallow it if the game was unplayable without the patch. There isn't really any evidence that they enforce any real size limits on patches besides inherent system limits.
The average console attach ratio is around 8? How much space does the average patch take on PS4/XB1?
Enthusiasts can always spring for bigger drives/cards like with Wii U and 3DS.
Load times, durability, no moving parts, card art, anti-piracy, smaller retail packaging, built-in special hardware, ETC.
You still arent getting near HDD speed
Well, because you probably won't see Halo or Dead Rising 3 on NX. DR3 is around 30GB total on Steam with 3GB of dlc, why is a 16GB patch really even necessary?Whether first party or third party, why would that affect patch size? And we even started the discussion on DLCs.
Well, because you probably won't see Halo or Dead Rising 3 on NX. DR3 is around 30GB total on Steam with 3GB of dlc, why is a 16GB patch really even necessary?
I think cartridges makes a lot of sense if the NX is what we think it is.
If it's not, then cartridges are a baffling decision.
That's actually a fair point: carts would have a substantially higher transfer speed, and so would probably not require installing the game, unlike the PS4 and Xbone.I actually like this idea. If it means it doesn't need a 1tb hard drive inside. Each game is a relatively lower cost high capacity card, hopefully one with higher end transfer speeds.
If NX is just a box full of puppies and kittens (Nintendogs and Cats 2) then cartridges would make no sense at all. What would those adorable animals even do with cartridges?
People keep saying third parties won't bother. If this does have some kind of handheld compenent and both devices play the same games, you can bet that most Japanese third parties will bother.
Nope.
a) because its a dumb thing to do. You get a shitty handheld and a shitty console.
So no, it wont be a hybrid.
They are good fit for handhelds though.cartridges
IN 2017
Thats a weird thing to respond, an hybrid would have some benefits but i think we can agree the minuses would overwhelm the pluses.Yeah because Nintendo has never developed hardware that flopped.
People keep saying third parties won't bother. If this does have some kind of handheld compenent and both devices play the same games, you can bet that most Japanese third parties will bother.
Evergreen titles also tend to get updated rereleases though. Even from Nintendo sometimes with NSMBU now coming with the dlc on disc at retail now for example. Nintendo won't limit things to what the storage devices ship with either, it will be expandable as needed.Usually isn't 16 GB patch. It's more for evergreen titles that get updates overtime. Games like Destiny or now Overwatch will be constantly updated as it lives and breathes.
Plus all of the dlc.
It's more cumulative.
An amount that would be a non-issue if the price was right.
Expect 30-64 GB game cards.
cartridges
IN 2017