-
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
goldenpp72
Member
Switch is a handheld by design though. It's just as much a console on a literal scale, as a PSPgo (which had a dock and could use a Ps3 controller for TV play btw) Of course one is smaller than the other, but the same general rules apply.
Doesn't mean PSPgo suddenly had Ps3 specs ya know? It's a mobile device being pushed as the replacement for their console, I don't see why some people are expecting the thing to literally match a PS4 when that's impossible. It's entirely fine to say, I wish Nintendo made a dedicated console with much higher specs, but this is what Switch is, and it has to follow the same rules of specs/pricing/form factor as other mobile devices. People saying it should have way more memory are also saying it should cost a lot more, which would bring in all sorts of whining
We are in complete agreement on this, don't get me wrong.
The device itself functions as both, so clearly it must be made with the limitations of a handheld in mind.
People have unrealistic expectations of a $300 mobile device. Nothing new there, though. This is GAF after all.
outunderthestars
Banned
goldenpp72
Member
They should, the logical option would be to let people store games on it but not play them off it (as doing so would screw up if the system removed from the dock)
More like an easy to access locker or something, would be quite nice imo. Just move the games you want to play to the internal storage and shift it around when you're done, not the most elegant but better than nothing. Considering you can't use external HDD for PS4 i'd say it would be fair.
This would be really cool. I wouldn't be surprised if they enabled external storage via the dock's USB ports at some point, but obviously it seems the OS is going to be extremely barebones at launch.
32GB doesn't seem like much and it isn't but because of other elements of the Switch it isn't as much of an issue as it could be on another console.
Tegra supports advanced texture compression and HEVC/VP9 video decoding support.
The Switch uses flash memory as its game storage medium which with its low latency and good throughput alleviates the need to install game data to the internal flash storage of the Switch.
Many games will target 720p/900p and games assets will be adjusted accordingly further reducing the need for space over what an PC/PS4/Xbox One game assets would require.
Patching games may be an issue as developers can't rely on users having a lot of storage space, in theory this could be alleviated with re-writable game carts but there are pitfalls with that approach like if power is lost while the cart is being written to it could cause the game to become inoperable.
I highly doubt Nintendo would go with fully re-writable storage for game carts but in theory they could design game carts so that a one or more banks of memory is writable for storing patches/updates and the base game resides on non-writable banks of memory. I think this approach would be too cumbersome and not worth the hassle so it is more likely the game carts will be read only.
Tegra supports advanced texture compression and HEVC/VP9 video decoding support.
The Switch uses flash memory as its game storage medium which with its low latency and good throughput alleviates the need to install game data to the internal flash storage of the Switch.
Many games will target 720p/900p and games assets will be adjusted accordingly further reducing the need for space over what an PC/PS4/Xbox One game assets would require.
Patching games may be an issue as developers can't rely on users having a lot of storage space, in theory this could be alleviated with re-writable game carts but there are pitfalls with that approach like if power is lost while the cart is being written to it could cause the game to become inoperable.
I highly doubt Nintendo would go with fully re-writable storage for game carts but in theory they could design game carts so that a one or more banks of memory is writable for storing patches/updates and the base game resides on non-writable banks of memory. I think this approach would be too cumbersome and not worth the hassle so it is more likely the game carts will be read only.
megarockexe
Member
At least with the Wii U, they were upfront about supplementing storage with an external drive. This time though, it seems more like an afterthought and definitely limits expandability potential. Will we find out the Switch is neither a good handheld nor a good home console?
nikos
Member
Yet iPads and iPhones come with up to 256gb.
And they cost close to $1000... What's your point? :lol
Totally irrelevant to the current discussion.
Edit: iDevices use flash memory, not HDDs. It is not cheap.
dcx4610
Member
Yet another marketing fail for Nintendo. 32GB internal memory is fine...for an operating system. You don't advertise that.
Instead of SKUs for goofy neon colors, you do 3 SKUs with different memory sizes like a Smart Phone and like people are used to these days. 32GB, 64GB and 128GB and rather than it being internal, you just include SD cards.
Instead of SKUs for goofy neon colors, you do 3 SKUs with different memory sizes like a Smart Phone and like people are used to these days. 32GB, 64GB and 128GB and rather than it being internal, you just include SD cards.
outunderthestars
Banned
Why would you launch a SKU that is just the same thing with a bigger microsd card? That makes literally no sense from a business perspective. You now have to manage more sku's, negotiate more shelf space, constantly you adjust pricing as SD card prices lower, etc.
Yes. Up to. That's the maximum. And you pay for the storage upgrades. Allowing you to expand it yourself with Micro SD cards makes upgrading the storage capacity of the Switch cheaper than if they sold models with higher storage capacity built in. And this storage would have the disadvantage of being non-swappable.
I think that everyone understands the advantage of making expandable storage available, yes? But it also means that it doesn't make sense to include more than a reasonable minimum amount onboard, because adding more would increase the bill of materials and consequently the cost of the console for all consumers even if they wouldn't use more than the 32GB onboard.
There's nothing wrong with being absolutely dedicated to having an all-digital library, but like ... the means are there for you to do so. You can get a 200GB Micro SD card for under $70 USD. That's a solid price for a solid storage upgrade, and Nintendo won't get any of it.
It's an edge use case, not something Nintendo should be accountable to footing the bill for. It would be nice to have more onboard storage, just like it's always nice to have more of anything. But to frame this move as Nintendo fleecing their customers is unreasonable. It's something that's better for Nintendo and for consumers.
Eh, in order to remove mechanical parts of consoles it's fine, not sure if a portable console with a HDD for the sake of more storage is a good idea.
Also this.
Also this.
Far less egregious than the PSP's forced use of Memory Stick, that move was one of the main reasons I never bought a PSP.
Blueingreen
Member
This is um a really strong point, but I just want to add that if we're to look at the Switch as a mobile device then why is it being pushed primarily as a home console? even the software is designed as a home console experience. I remember a common critique of the PSP when compared to the DS was unlike the DS which emphasised mainly on quick pick up and play games, the PSP focused mainly on console experiences that weren't really all that suited for the on the go nature of a handheld, I mean why play GOW on the PSP for 6 hours when you can just sit down on your couch and play it on a Console which is easily the superior experience.
If someone was going to play a Zelda, Skyrim, or even a 3D Mario wouldn't you rather play it at home rather than a commute to work, or a lunch break I guarantee most people would play them at home because they're designed to be played on a couch rather than on the go.
I think the issue with the Switch is that if we're to address it as a handheld it brings forth a whole slew of issues that aren't really ideal to a handheld from the high price point, cumbersome design and console centric library.
And if we're to address it as a Console then you have to deal with the inferior specs, the lack of memory and again the high price point, the Hybrid nature of the system is ultimately it's greatest issue.
In your first paragraph you stated "...just a pragmatic view of what Nintendo is doing and why." But I don't think the question is as to why Nintendo is doing what they're doing rather than should they have done what they're doing.
It's harder to sell 60 dollar games for a handheld with an hdmi out than it is for a home console that can be carried around.
More like investors would frown upon a handheld system when mobile has been killing it for so long.
Yeah because clearly Nintendo is giving a shit about investors.
Movalpolos
Banned
We already know it's the worst of both worlds.
Sinfamy
Member
They've yet to say so.
Inferno313
Banned
That seems fine to me? I would guess that for the majority of customers, the folks and families who don't really follow dedicated gaming blogs, and tend to just buy whatever they like the look of at Walmart, 32 GB is MORE than enough given that the Switch won't have installs. For the power users, the ones who will be doing a lot of digital downloads, expandable media tends to be preferred. I'd rather keep the cost of the initial hardware down, and put in whatever size MicroSD I feel is necessary.
Milly Osworth
Member
Micro SD cards are slow and break when you use them a lot. Is that true?
With games being routinely patched in today's gaming world, how does this work on the Switch? 32GB seems low. What is the system's cartridge capacity? It might be too low. Will online patches save to the cart? Patches can come in gigabytes. Of course for a mobile system, Nintendo had no choice but to use cartridges.
Theonik
Member
Cart size will dictate how big games can actually be on Switch as well which is also worth considering. I don't think they have disclosed this at this point in time.
Because the majority of the console market is still physical and there is not sufficient evidence to suggest that this will change?
Well yes we might get consumer 2TB cards by the end of the year. Not sure if people would rather sell kidneys for them.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.
It's not irrelevant because the majority of software sales will still be in carts. It's only a question of how big the Switch audience will be.
I addressed the mobile issue in my post. Just because it's a mobile device doesn't mean it's not intended primarily to be used in the home, like a tablet or a laptop. However, "use in the home" does not necessarily mean "use on the TV". I think this is probably a weird use case to imagine for people who really wanted a more traditional home console.
That said, it's also just a bit of product positioning. The 3DS isn't dead yet, and Nintendo is trying to avoid saying that this is a direct competitor to one of their own products. But I also don't find this positioning dishonest. In the end, the classic console/handheld dichotomy doesn't really hold up anymore. The Switch is a hybrid device, and people arguing "it's a home console/no it's a handheld" are missing the point.
Is the hybrid approach the right move? Many might claim to know the answer, but it's honestly impossible to know right now. Initial enthusiast reactions are not great predictors of mainstream, long-term success. It's obviously not going to be a huge hit right from the start, and Nintendo is obviously launching it with the intent of first capturing the enthusiast market and then building momentum and value going into the holiday.
I get why people might be frustrated in the ways this console is compromised as an at-home device compared to a PS4, but it's hard to imagine what other options Nintendo had both the Wii U and 3DS needed a successor, and Nintendo can't produce a box that competes with Sony on both specs and price. Furthermore, it's just not in Nintendo's DNA. It was never going to happen.
breveglieri
Banned
Silly you, expecting support from third-parties...
The Switch won't have AAA games that are not developed by Nintendo, forget all that BS about "porting to the platform will be easier because Tegra", it'll be like the WiiU all over again: some old ports, some "new games" with the old engine (FIFA) and then they'll forget about the console altogether
The only hope for the Switch will be handheld games, the DS/3DS market. But even that will suffer, because it's more expensive and too big to replace those.
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
Personally I like this. In an age where games are frequently over 40GB (some way higher) this might put some pressure on developers to take the space issues down a notch.
MegaKungFuRadio
Member
Or Switch will get compromised games if at all.
Maybe 10 years ago, but modern MicroSD cards top out at 85-100MB/s (far faster than any optical drive used by modern consoles) and have a read/write lifecycle that will outlive you during regular use.
And yet the major publishers are all trying to convince people to go digital. Maybe they have an idea which way the wind is blowing? Or which way they'd like the wind to blow.
I mostly agree with you. I can see why Nintendo made the choices they did given the crappy situation they were in. However, I have a hard time trying to figure out what audience the Switch is supposed to address so it's hard to see it being much of a success. And with Nintendo putting all of their eggs in one basket, that's a recipe for disaster.
It's less that I'm expecting third-party support; it's more that Nintendo should be courting third-party support instead of shunning them. For the record, I'm only interested in this topic in the business sense. I don't really play AAA games and I don't play Nintendo games, so this is all academic to me.
That's about the dumbest way to convince publishers to slim down their games. Especially since they can just not release their games on the Switch, and that's what they're inclined to do in the first place.
superchunk
Member
No.
I can buy a $600 phone with 32GB storage that doesn't even allow SD card expansion.
I think this is ok and not one of the "complaints" I have about the launch. Its easy to pick up a $40 SD card to more than cover my needs.
Amazon $40 128GB Ultra UHS-I
I can buy a $600 phone with 32GB storage that doesn't even allow SD card expansion.
I think this is ok and not one of the "complaints" I have about the launch. Its easy to pick up a $40 SD card to more than cover my needs.
Amazon $40 128GB Ultra UHS-I
ALLseeingEYE
Member
While 128gb is an option now for Smart Phones finally, don't get me wrong. I don't expect Nintendo to offer 128GB or 256GB of internal flash memory. I'm just saying that that is what a consumer needs in this age, to comfortably use a modern game system that has games that are often between 4-12gb each.
I can see Nintendo's Logic, they want to be as stingy as possible on internal memory, while giving consumers some good upgrade options, assuming they will have to upgrade anyways, since they will need at least 64GB+. I just think 64GB should have been the absolute bare minimum, seeing as how poor my user experience was on WiiU, with such a small amount of internal memory. Like, 4.5 years later, it's not as if Flash memory hasn't dropped in cost, I'm sure they could have easily afforded to put it in.
Milly Osworth
Member
Really? My source is Totalbiscuit by the way.
But, when he said Zelda is always 60fps and will be on Switch too, I guess I should have known he has no clue what he is talking about.
Theonik
Member
Yes, but they aren't going to throw away sales now in order to advance their goals of an all digital future, which is why they still sell games at retail despite it not being so good for their long term business objectives. It doesn't mean much either way digital is available and consumers looking to switch will buy SD cards, publishers were always going to sell both.
What is actually important is the device selling, which Nintendo doesn't think they can achieve if it means making the device more expensive, and they perceive that this kind of device is a good way to differentiate themselves from the competition and secure sales for their platform, this concession is a consequence of this decision.
Whether it works out for them or not is where the real question is. Not if it has enough storage space for 5 full digital games or not. (what kind of game is Nintendo actually courting for digital?) If publishers think they can make money selling multiplaform games for the platform they'll go for it simple as.
Not releasing a game on the Switch isn't much of a sacrifice for most publishers.
cleveridea
Member
Really comes down to whether you want to go digital or not
As someone who doesnt, its totally fine for me but I can get why people are upset
As someone who doesnt, its totally fine for me but I can get why people are upset
Theonik
Member
Which is the actual problem, and having more storage space wouldn't have solved that.
Maybe not, but not making your console actively hostile to what the AAA publishers need wouldn't hurt.
It's not crazy that the Switch comes with 32GB of storage considering everything else Nintendo has to balance to get to the price they wanted for what they want to achieve, and compared to other devices that cost twice the price with no expandable memory. Let people figure out their own storage needs versus adding more costs to the Switch which people have complained about.
Really! Large Class 10 cards are very fast, and very reliable. The larger the card, the faster and more reliable (it's read/write cycle lifespan) it gets (generally speaking). This is true of all big brands, San Disk, Samsung, etc. You might run into problems with cheap Chinese knock-offs, but then, that's kind of your fault. :lol
goldenpp72
Member
64GB would take the complaint from "I can only store 3 gamez!" to "I can only store 6 gamez!" while also likely increasing the price. If they could have included 64GB with no additional cost, then they should have of course, but people would still compare it to the 500GB HDDs that come with the PS4/Xbox.