Nintendo of America confirmed today during its Nintendo Treehouse stream that focussed on upcoming games for the Nintendo Switch that the system will support up to 256 Gigabyte Micro SDXC cards. This is encouraging news but the cards themselves are fairly expensive. Still, additional memory is never a bad thing.
The Switch comes with just 32 Gigabytes of internal memory, a portion of which is set aside for system use. On today’s Treehouse livestream, however, Nintendo revealed that the Switch can support up to 256 Gigabyte Micro SDXC cards.
Not even remotely enough for those who prefer to buy their games digitally. 32GB internal storage in this day and age, kinda ridiculous.
And no, using game cards as a medium doesn’t really change any of that.
grow up sdcards end of debate….and cartridge RULES spinning discs OBSOLETE,HARDRIVES HEAVY SLOW OLD NOISY
a totally solid state system. LOL FANBOYING STOEAGE SPACE,,currection. DUALSHOCK IN 2017 IS RIDICULOUS
grow up so you see I don’t want to spend 80€ extra to have only just a little over half as much storage than what’s standard nowadays end of debate….cartridge SUCKS if it means I only get 32GB internal storage RIDICULOUS,WHAT ABOUT SPACE FOR DIGITAL DOWNLOADS VIRTUAL CONSOLE
a totally backward state system. LOL FANBOY DAMAGE CONTROLLING LOW STORAGE SPACE,, currection. HAVING TO USE SMART DEVICES FOR THE MOST BASIC ONLINE FEATURES LIKE MESSAGING AND VOICE CHAT IN 2017 IS RIDICULOUS
Cartridges and internal storage have nothing to do with each other.
People justify the low internal storage with having cartridges instead of discs, as they can store more data, which means you won’t have to download extra data onto your console’s storage like it’s the case with the XB1 and PS4. That’s what that statement was referring to. :)
And it’s a valid point, with games on those systems having to install onto the hard drive before they run off the disc, as if it’s some form of DRM. The Switch is a hybrid system. Solid State is a better option not just because it’s a faster medium, but because it’s more robust. Less moving parts means less prone to malfunctioning, which is what you want on a system you’re going to take everywhere. Carts are much faster in terms of access times and can hold more data than discs.
Agreed, 32GB internal storage might not be enough in the grand scheme of things, but with the Switch able to support SD Cards and when the system is docked you can still use your external hard drives, it’s a fair enough compromise. Be thankful Nintendo aren’t doing a Sony and forcing you to use proprietary media as they did with both the PSP and the Vita. SD Cards nowadays are dirt cheap and don’t incur much of a cost. If it’s €320 for a 32GB system, heaven forbid a €500 price tag if it contained a 256GB SSD!
In this day and age, where digital copies of games are such a huge thing, I personally honestly don’t think it is a valid point. I don’t criticize the choice of going with carts instead of discs. But having carts doesn’t eliminate the possibility of having a larger system storage at the same time, I just believe having both would have been the ideal situation.
I am aware that the Switch supports SD cards, but they are an additional expense you need to calculate in when buying the system. 32GB is not a good amount of base storage, no matter how I look at it. Yes, with the cartridge medium, you don’t require as much as you fundamentally would need with discs, due to the limitations of the disc medium, but it doesn’t mean going with a storage with a size as small as 32GB is reasonable. I’m not asking for 1TB, but come on, 32GB?
With the logic I’ve seen some people defend this decision, it sounds like they’d be fine with no internal storage at all, as you can “just expand storage as much as you want with SD cards”. That’s not how it works.
And bringing up the Vita as an example doesn’t really help, because that’s pretty much the worst case scenario. Just because this situation isn’t as bad, doesn’t mean it’s not bad at all. It is bad indeed, in my opinion.
I highly doubt the Switch would have had a 500€ price tag if it was given a 256GB built-in storage.
And no, SD cards are not dirt cheap. At least not where I live.
If you go to wish.com for the memory card of the 256, its dirt cheap…
Most console games(I think it was about 80% or higher) prefer physical copies so they can resell the games or buy them used, but you’re right that the download market is important. Unfortunately SD cards and microSD cards are the only option and it one of the big reasons that Nintendo shouldn’t have done the hybrid thing. Even he HDDs connected to the dock thing that they’re considering doesn’t really fix anything because there will still be games reaching the 32GB of the game cards and that can’t fit on internal storage either.
In that case, 64GB should have been the minimum and I can’t tell you the exact amount that 256GB of internal storage would have raised the price but I’m pretty sure it’s $50-$60 which would translate into the Switch costing $400… which is about twice as much as I would pay for the thing.
How many digital games do you buy? I’ve never reached to the limit.
Personally, I try to buy physical copies whenever I can, especially for games that I care a lot about, but I don’t pass up on digital versions when there’s good deals going on. I buy indie games and non AAA games digitally too every now and then. But even so, I’ve reached the limit on my PS4 a long time ago, which is definitely not a result of the disc format only. I have reached it on my PS3 as well.
Well, I am pretty much the same, I always buy retail versions unless the game only exists digitally or there is some kind of digital sale or something.
The Wii Us 32GB storage have proven to be enough for me.
And I’m not surprised that you have storage problems on PS, since you have to install even retail games which takes huge amounts storage, while on Wii U and (99% sure) the Switch you don’t need that.
So that argument is really only true if you are planing on downloading a lot even then there is probably the option of using multiple SD Cards over time, with smaller ones being cheap.
Thats my opinion on the matter at least.
As I’ve said in my previous comment, me reaching the storage limit on PS4 and PS3 is definitely not to be blamed on the usage of the disc medium only, much less on PS3. On PS4, I have about 10-15GB of video recordings only. The Switch is going to support video capturing as well, 15GB would be almost half of the entire internal storage of the system.
I also have a whole lot of downloaded games I got off the PS Store on both consoles, which take up quite some space too, certainly more than 32GB. Also, what about updates and patches? Not unusual in this day and age, those can require a lot of space as well.
Of course I’m not denying that having to install retail games takes up space, they definitely do, but they do not take up 460GB, making 32GB okay on a system that won’t have those installs.
People who prefer digital downloads will need to buy a bunch of SD cards then, because games like Skyrim Special Edition alone take up 22GB. If someone wants to buy Zelda (which is going to be around 12GB, if I remember correctly) and Skyrim digitally, they will already exceed the storage limit. Not enough internal space for only two games, I can’t help but think that’s ridiculous, sorry.
I’ve bought way too many games digitally with only 3-5 being actual physical. The other 10 or so are digital. I’ll look at my PS4 later & see if I’ll be comfortable changing out the internal storage myself. If so, I’ll try to buy a 2tb next month.
You do realize that you can put micro SD cards into the Switch right? That if you want more than 33GB of storage space, that you can literally have an infinite amount of storage space with micro SD cards? How do people not understand these incredibly basic concepts? You can have 1.064TB of internal storage for your Switch. Go buy 4 256GB micro SD cards. Problem solved. Download games to your heart’s content.
You do realize I’ve already mentioned that, right? Having to buy SD cards creates additional expenses to take in mind when buying the system, expenses I don’t want to make because a larger storage for a console that supports digital downloads should be taken for granted this day and age.
And go buy 4 256GB SD cards? Yea, let me just go casually spend 320€ on SD cards, sounds like a brilliant idea defeating all arguments that speak against the 32GB internal storage.
I also love cartridges, but for example, the game I won’t shut up about, DOOM, is like, 45 gig’s without updates…the game updates on my Xbox alone would eat most of that space… so I’m legit worried we are not going to see modern games that take lots of space, or if we do they will be ridiculously priced to account for increased cart size. Plus it totally makes it impossible for Digital Gamers to save all their games to the console. (People who don’t want any game disks or carts, and want to carry their library with them)
Now, if the switch is used exclusively for Nintendo games… I think that’s fine. Nintendo doesn’t build realistic games, (some are very beautiful, but they don’t do realism) so for a Nintendo-exclusive machine, or old ports like skyrim, then the storage should be about right… but it won’t be enough to pull PS4 or Xbox1 gamers to Nintendo… which hurts the install base, which hurts 3rd party support.
So, these are my concerns. I wish the Switch was EXACTLY what it is, but with a terabyte of hard disk, and enough muscle to play all the current hen games… then I would be bouncing off the walls with excitement.
How the heck do you expect the Switch to have 1tb of internal memory, and still be fully portable? For crying out loud, if you want 1TB of storage for downloaded games, go buy some 256gb micro sd cards. You can get some fairly cheap if you know where to look.
And some people did do that with WiiU. Have 3-4 jump drives and swapped them depending on what games they wanted to play… I suppose it is a possible solution
It technically is possible to give the Switch 1TB of storage without effecting it’s “portability” but it would require lining up four 256GB MMC flash chips together which would cost $200 at least.
I get where you’re coming from, and it is something that worries me too. I doubt we will see the Nintendo Switch ever compete with the Xbox Scorpio or PlayStation 4 Pro unless Nintendo finds a way to upgrade the Switch console unit itself like you would an iPhone or iPad. That being said, don’t forget that game cartridges (unlike CDs) can store more memory as they get cheaper to produce and hold more data over time.
Nintendo 3DS Game Cards started at a max of 2 GBs at launch then later expanded to 8 GBs. Four times the size.
The size if Nintendo Switch Game Cards is still an unknown, but if we are going by what we know so far with The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild being 13.4 GBs, then we can already assume the Game Card size is at least 15-20 GBs at launch. If that number were quadrupled eventually, you would have 60-80 GBs become the norm for Nintendo Switch games down the road.
And Game Cards are still a far superior medium than Blu-Ray discs are now as well in terms of faster load times, too. They are cheaper to produce as well, and they take up far less space in their card slot on the Switch than a harddrive or disc drive would. The Switch cannot be portable with any of the latter.
My thoughts are that the Nintendo Switch will receive good third-party support AS LONG AS Nintendo gets rid of any major software droughts with the Nintendo Switch and keeps it that way this time. People will buy the console for the first-party games and get quality third-party games as well. I know I’ll be getting Fire Emblem Warriors, Sonic Mania, Project Sonic 2017, Skyrim, and Yooka-Laylee on Switch this year, for instance. I can’t tell if the Switch will suffer from any Wii U-like software droughts yet, but it doesn’t seem like it will at all, thankfully.
Nintendo was smarter this time by launching with fewer titles but having a huge game (the definitive version of Zelda: BOTW) launch alongside the Switch and even more major titles launching very close to each other. It helps garner an audience for games like Skyrim when they come out, and if many people buy Skyrim on Switch, it will help provide continued third-party support.
My only issue is the quality and performance issues the Nintendo Switch will have if they don’t allow us to upgrade docks in the future or buy enhanced versions of the Switch console in the same vein like you would an iPad.
Agreed on all points!!
For Wii U, 32GB is dumb. For switch, 32GB makes sense to limit price. Micro SDXC are cheap as fuck. You can get a 128GB for 30 dollars.
Just because there are worse cases, doesn’t mean this is okay since it’s a bit less dumb. I’m not saying we needed 1TB, but 32GB just doesn’t seem very reasonable to me, no matter how I look at it.
128GB Micro SDXC starts at 40€ where I live, and I honestly don’t think that’s cheap, especially not for something that should be taken for granted in a console in 2017.
let’s be honest Nintendo could have at the very least added a 64gb-128gb into the switch’s internal memory, especially during a time when a lot of people prefer digital. Nintendo probably did it to stay under the current $300 price point so the switch doesn’t seem more expensive than the other devices and consoles, especially with all of the tech that went into the joy-cons.
Nintendo likes to sell their consoles at a profit starting straight on day one, so they probably had some scope where they could have increased the internal storage size while leaving the price point at $300 still, without it causing too much damage, or any at all. Well, of course I have no confirmation or proof for that, but it’s just what I would assume at this point. Though, the fact that it’s behind the competition in terms of hardware (which is already pretty outdated), yet still has a similar price tag supports that assumption, I believe. Granted, the Switch being equally priced as the other two consoles is mainly caused by the built-in display, but I’m still almost certain they could have sold it for 300 bucks even if the internal storage was larger. The profit per console sold would just have been a bit lower than it is going to be now.
Agreed, I think the Switch console most of us would have found reasonable would have cost $350-$400. Then you’d have people unhappy about price.
At the end of the day, the console was primarily designed for Japanese lifestyles and game preferences. And it will probably do well enough.
I’m not worried about the console putting Nintendo out of business. I’m worried with then crazy success of their sip into Mobile, and their continued decline in the console arena (switch could still surprise us of course) – I’m worried Nintendo will go full mobile or something close.
That’s what scares me the most.
Have to look at this: there’s a strong possibility that games take up little space since they will be compressed. Also, save files could be smaller too. You’re right, price points vary for different countries, so that’s 100 fact on your end. I think, with the move they made, 32 over 500GB was a cost thing. Then again, the Wii U tablet is why the system had 32 GB and costed 400 at release. 300 is most likely 150 for that tablet. Maybe even more.
I thought about file compression too, but I saw an article that said BotW was 0.4 GB larger on Switch than on Wii U. It doesn’t seem likely that they solved any issues with file sizes.
But having to worry about the SD card corrupting and losing data SUCKS! That’s what happened on my Gamecube’s memory cards.
Cards don’t operate like that anymore. Things have progressed and changed.
The last thing you have to worry about is a failing Nintendo Cartridge. They have always been indestructible and last forever. There are a lot of things to worry about, but a failing Nintendo cart is not one of them. :)
Oh, you meant our upgraded SD cards, my bad. Well, I have a 128 gig jump drive in my WiiU. They said not to use it, but I did. And it’s been alive since Day one. I guess it depends on how lucky you are. Haha
$200 USD for an 512GB SD Card, $50 for a 1TB Hard drive. Can you explain to me how that’s cheap?
You can’t use a 512 micro SD card. You can only use 256GB as the largest size, and you can get them cheap if you know where to look. Yeah, obviously a 1TB external hard drive is cheaper, but you can’t plug it into the switch. Kinda takes away from the fully portable/battery life aspect. And yes, a teeny tiny cutting edge micro SD card costs more than a clunky hard drive.
You guys are missing the entire point of what I said (－‸ლ). 1) With the size that games are being these days, 256GB is barely anything. Developers don’t care anymore. 2) SD cards are way more expensive than HDD of price per gigabyte. 3) Getting additional storage is going to be extremely expensive for digital buyers. 4) Nintendo are making their customers pay more when the Switch should offer HDD support while docked and SD Card while undocked.
All your points are valid but it should be noted that the Switch supports Adaptive Scalable Texture Compression and can’t draw as many polygons as the other systems so geometry and texture data should be a lot smaller than they are on other systems so the mileage you’ll get out of a certain amount of storage isn’t apple to apples. It’s not enough to make 32GB feel anywhere near infinite but it should make 256GB feel closer to 512GB.
Supposedly they’re thinking about allowing an HDD to be connected to the dock but the fact that you’d lose that storage when it becomes undocked goes against the idea of the system and might still require you to have at least a 32GB microSD card to swap 32GB games between the HDD and the system. Sadly that’s also a lot more additional wear and tear on the microSD card too so that will likely shorten the life of that card.
I must give you credit, that’s a pretty informative rebuttal. Basically, the Switch is less powerful graphically (which should surprise no one) so hopefully games won’t use as much space. I still have issue with it from the developer’s POV. Will they spend extra resources compressing files or will they just drop a huge file and leave it to the console owners. I still believe using strictly SD cards is a pain to consumer cost-wise and will make the Switch “unattractive” digitally. Don’t forget: The Switch is a hybrid of a console and a portable, so it should do both without hinderance. I see no problem to why the console part of it should be able to use an external HDD when docked and the portable part use an SD card while undocked.
Options is all we’re asking for. We want the option to use external HDDs. If it keeps us from using the portable aspect, that’s a fucking problem we should have the option to choose for ourselves. This might be another case of Nintendo trying to enforce their own will on us if they deny us the option.
I find 512 GB for 100. Idk why you spending 200. 100 isn’t much when SD cards are faster unless you using a Solid drive, which is more money.
I’ll choose more storage over speed any day, especially if it’s going to cost me an arm and a leg just so I can play my digital games. $100 USD for a measly 512GB SD card. Games cost $60 each (눈_눈) Add that up and tell me how much money you just spent and then tell me when you have to get ANOTHER SD card.
“I find 512 GB for 100”. Really now??
PNY: https://www.amazon.com/PNY-Elite-Performance-512GB-P-SDX512U3H-GE/dp/B00XJRX01M
SanDisk: https://www.amazon.com/SanDisk-Extreme-SDHC-UHS-I-SDSDXPA-512G-G46/dp/B00NP699ZI
I just saw a 256GB SDXC card for $39.99!!
A year ago they said they won’t be doing digital games anymore on the eShop.
What?
?
Nintendo’s games are reletivly small. Super Mario 3D world was only around a gigabyte an Mario kart 8 was 4 gigabytes smash was a huge game and that was only 12. I don’t get why people compare the switchs memory to an Xbox where halo is 100 gb.
Zelda BotW is bigger than 12GB, which is almost half of the entire storage of the console, Skyrim is over 22GB, Xenoblade X was over 22GB too, and if Xenoblade 2 might turn out to be of similar size as well. You can not fit more than just one of those three games digitally on your Switch, because Nintendo thought 32GB is okay.
Well,l Zelda is 13.4 and that is a huge open world game. Splatoon is going to be around 3 GB (seeing that the original was only 1.8gb) Mario kart will probably be 6 GB. the new Mario could be around 7 gb since it seems to be open world. and all of those games would fit on the 32 GB. now pop in a 64 GB ( you can find one for like 20$) and you should be fine for a while. I had the 32 GB Wii u with a 32 GB USB and I barely ever had to delete games ( only DK tropical freeze because it was 10gb)
Someone’s not taking patches & DLC into account. And what about 3rd parties that aren’t good at file compression like Nintendo is? How about those of us that want to get most of our games digitally? If Nintendo doesn’t let us use external hard drives, we’ll be paying a lot more for micro SD cards to get 2tb worth of data storage a lot more than we had to pay for the console itself. :/
Well all im saying is that last gen with my 64 gb (32 gb on colsole and 32gb on usb) I did fine for the total of my wii u life span. I had a good amount of games on my wii u too. I get people concerns and i wish Nintendo had like 128gb or something like that out of the box but 32gb isnt as bad as many are making it out to be. if you are planning on buying 1st party games from Nintendo then you should be ok with a 64 gb sd card. Just a sugestion if you are going to buy a huge game (like skyrim, or xenoblade 2) make that your cartage game in the system you never take out and then you will just have saved 25gb out of your memory
Doesn’t mean we have to buy our own micro SD card? Besides I know what they cost.
I honestly am not seeing that much of an issue. If you’re genuinely concerned about storage, can’t you just buy multiple 256gig SD cards? Cheaper than buying an external hard drive for a PS4 or XBO.
One 256 GB microSD card costs as much as a 4TB hard drive.
Damn, you’re right. That’s a bit annoying, but I’m sure I won’t fill one up. I almost never use all my storage space.
Depending on where you look.
It’s not cheaper.
The thing that concerns me the most about the storage space for saving games (and the memory card stuff) is that, on the Gamecube, the memory cards was really my only complaint about the console. I was okay with memory cards for the most part, but it became annoying having to remember which card had which game saved on it. And having to plug them all in to find out (if you didn’t have it written somewhere). I’d hate to have dozens of SD cards, and have to search them all for my saved games. What a PAIN! Plus, I feel a bit uneasy about having to rely on an SD card to store my saved information. SD cards can get corrupted (and deleted) for no reason. Same thing that happened to my Gamecube’s memory card 1019.
It depends on the quality of the SD card too. I was unfortunately a victim of poor SD card quality. I’ve picked up a 32GB SD card for 10 bucks from an unknown brand. On the same day I got it was corrupted. Luckily I had a backup and immediately used my older SD card again. And that SD card I had for 5+ years and still strong.
I was hoping the internal storage would at least double from the Wii U. Oh well…
Still, if Nintendo continues being good at compressing files, the low storage capacity shouldn’t immediately be an issue. Investing in at least one more SD card is a wise move, though.
Agreed, NINTENDO games will be fine…and if it’s someone’s second console, it’s fine. But if it’s their primary and only console… 3rd party, whether it’s laziness or the types of games, will never, ever reach Nintendo compression efficiency, and so I think we risk losing a lot of games… or are you not concerned about that? (Seriously asking, because I am) – for a Nintendo Game machine, I think the memory, after you put the money into an SD card, will be fine!
Of course I’m concerned about losing some games because of constraints, if the system has a lot of them.
Personally, I don’t/didn’t have a lot of trouble with third party games taking up space -my download library consists of FAST Racing Neo and its DLC, Shovel Knight, Teslagrad, Ducktales Remastered, Metroid Zero Mission, Super, and Fusion, Donkey Kong 64, Mario Kart 8, Wii Party U, and UnEpic, among other things, and I still have a few megs left over.
Do I expect that trend to continue? No. Games are getting bigger and bigger just to include all the basic programming required for the game to run without crashing. So when the time comes, which may be sooner on this console than on the Wii U, I will add a card to alleviate the storage problem.
||You are forgetting that the Switch is even easier to develop for than the Xbox One and PS4, not to mention that this is the first time the Electrons are making a custom built FIFA game for a Nintendo machine…||
They also had the All-Play series for Wii. I’m pretty sure they were custom made. I don’t think they were very good.
http://www.dreambox.it/img_news4/ea-all-play-wii-logo.jpg
||Yes but nobody really cares about that compared to true FIFA games…||
Not concerned about that. The Nintendo Switch, out of the gate, will only sell ‘because’ of Nintendo games, not third-party games. Remember that third-parties and indie developers didn’t receive dev kits until very recently for the Switch.
Game Card size is the last thing anyone should be worried about. The issue will stem from whether or not the console’s hardware will prove to be efficient enough to support very demanding games, which I doubt it will be…at launch. And that’s the thing.
Due to the modular nature of the Nintendo Switch, Nintendo ‘CAN’ make full use of new accessories and features, such as an upgradeable dock or cloud computing, to enhance the console’s performance in the future. We might even see them come out with new Switch console units every couple years to keep the hardware up-to-date, and if that’s the case, they could give us the option to buy ‘just’ the new console unit and attach our same Joy-Cons to it, allowing us to pay ~$80 less for an upgrade.
So the Nintendo Switch can have a lot up its sleeve that we still haven’t seen from Nintendo. Only time can tell. I hope Nintendo does make full use of the Switch’s modular capabilities, though. That’s all I think anyone can hope for as it is what we’re buying into.
That one guy during the Treehouse Mario Kart session said that when playing the game in two-player mode UNdocked, both sides are 720p. That would mean that the Switch’s screen resolution is 1080p. Can anyone confirm?
The screnn has already been confirmed to be 720p.
But that means the VR rumours are nonsense. You cannot do VR with a 720p screen.
||40-45% of the rumours were pure nonsense…||
They weren’t nonsense. Remember the Switch is modular. If Nintendo wants to replace just the console portion (not the Joycons) of the Switch down the road, then they can do just that and sell an enhanced system with a 1920×1080 screen and 4K for TVs in the future.
I doubt Nintendo Switch will have a regular Nintendo console lifespan. It looks like they intend to have the console stick around for about a decade and upgrade it through modular capaabilties.
If dlc is downloaded ont the gamecart i have no problem with the amount of internal memory. I buy digital only on WiiU when I have to. On my X1 on the other hand I buy all games that I can digitally. Because when you need to install the entire game when you have it on disc it makes the disc versions less appealing.
Being on sd cards is a huge difference compared to disc even if it’s blue ray because the access speed is so much faster. We probably won’t have to install games to a hard drive anymore or at least as often (there are still digital games) and save data can still be written to the game cartridge itself like it was done in the past. The only downside to Switch hardware is the graphic capabilities seem to be more on par to just under xbox1 and this is a system being released over 3 years after that system was released. So I don’t know how long developers will be supporting it yet again. I’m getting it no matter what since i have been a fairly die hard Nintendo fan for over 25 years but i can admit when Nintendo screws up. Guess we will have to wait and see. Until then I will just have to be cautiously optimistic. How bout that new Breath of the Wild footage!!! So awesome!
Compared to discs, it’s faster, compared to spinning hard drives it’s slow. And SD cards are unreliable. So that’s a minus. Other than that, controller price, paid online and at least initial lack of 3rd party games are the negatives for me. The positive is Zelda, so overall a large plus of course.
That’s not exactly true. Though you’re right that most tend to be around 95MB, SD cards can still be faster than spinning hard drives especially when it comes to more random reads and reading a bunch of small files. You can also find microSD cards that read at 150MB/s.
I’m going to enjoy seeing the looks on people’s faces when they see the size of games these days and then realising how much money they have to drop down on an SD card for digital games.
You mean like how within 3 months of the Xbox One release, my son had to remove games of his hard drive because he bought a new game and it wouldn’t fit because of mandatory installs? At least with cartridges, we’re not forced to do mandatory installs of the game itself. It would however have been nice if the Switch had 64GB built in.
Trust me, mate. 256GB should be the minimum Nintendo put in the Switch. And yes, pretty much like that. What in the world can 32GB hold? Patches? at least for physical games. But digital? That can hold two games at most and that’s if they REALLY compressed the files. Don’t even get me started on SD card prices for anything bigger than 128GB.
“At least with cartridges, we’re not forced to do mandatory installs of the game itself.”
Can you explain this a bit? Aren’t cartridges just another media to use for storing games?
Depends where you buy your memory. I still agree that the console itself should have a ton of memory for those that want AAA games digitally downloaded. However shopping around for cheap micro sd cards is not difficult. For example CEX uk sells a 256gb micro sd for £45 and even less for 128gb.
After leaving GameStop after preordering my Switch, I looked at the SD cards. 40 bucks for a 64gb. I think it was 80 for a 128gb card. By adding to that, I myself will be looking at 300 for a bunch of SD cards. When I add that to the Switch’s price, that’s 600 bucks so I’m essentially paying 600, not 300, for a Switch. I’m sorry but if you defend the internal data storage on Switch, you are a complete & total dumbshit fanboy. The docks better allow for external hard drives that are 1tb or more because I like being digital with games I have no intention of selling! Buying a bunch of SD cards is nuts even if I don’t have to buy them often. Nintendo better do something to make me want to buy a lot of games like BotW physical because those are the games I intend to keep for a very long time so digital they WILL be! Something like the Master Edition of Breath of the Wild, but a lot cheaper than what that is going for, might just entice me to get it physical instead. This is going to be strike 2 if they don’t tell us if the dock will support 1tb or 2tb external hard drives before February 18th.
Pingback: Nintendo Switch Can Support SDXC Memory Cards Up To 2TB – My Nintendo News