Nintendo Switch already having trouble with third party support

archive.is/ZkMOZ

WB refuses to publish 20GB Lego game on Switch cartridges that can hold it in order to save production costs (Switch cartridges can go up to 64GB). 7GB is in the retail release Switch cartridge, the rest is a required download. Cannot play without internet connection (on a device you are encouraged to take on the go). Every Switch comes with 32GB storage space.

Who was in the wrong here? Warner for being jews with a history of poor/outsourced ports of their games and refusing to pony up for proper cartridge size or Nintendo for having poor storage space to begin with? And this is just some dinky four year old Lego game that even the Wii U could run (without required downloads or an internet connection), what does this say for other third parties who may want to gyp the customer with smaller cartridges and required downloads that eat away at nearly half of your Switch's storage space?

Other urls found in this thread:

eurogamer.net/articles/2017-03-28-fans-have-noticed-something-odd-about-lego-city-undercover-on-switch
youtu.be/XLX5cKG6h0E
eurogamer.net/articles/2017-03-10-why-nintendo-switch-games-are-ending-up-more-expensive
usgamer.net/articles/puyo-puyo-tetris-coming-to-switch-and-ps4-in-april-
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

You already made this thread before. Did another thread need to die to appease your autism?

>Who was in the wrong here?
Considering all the screeching that was done about the Batman game having a piss poor PC port, I would say WB. But that's probably not what OP was looking for.

They confirmed this was not true.

"Lego City Undercover publisher Warner Bros. has provided us with this short statement on the game's cartridge version, which suggests you will be able to play without downloading anything"

Source: eurogamer.net/articles/2017-03-28-fans-have-noticed-something-odd-about-lego-city-undercover-on-switch

You don't have to download anything

youtu.be/XLX5cKG6h0E

I'm not autistic, you are you fucking autistic neckbeard neet.

>play without downloading anything

Okay, but there has to be a catch, notice the wording they use. How much am I going to be able to "play"? You can't tell me the full game is present in that small 7 GB cartridge. Even the guy in the second post's video is confused and suspect.

This is a reasonable discussion about the Nintendo Switch and the future of its third party support because it's incredibly likely that this won't be the last time it happens, you can't really censor it nor think it's outrageous to have continued discussion about it because "duhh we talked 'bout it already", drone.

>N64 couldn't hold shit
>Third parties fucked off to Playstation that used discs
>Switch can't hold shit
>People are surprised

eurogamer.net/articles/2017-03-10-why-nintendo-switch-games-are-ending-up-more-expensive

Is this why I get to pay $50 for Bomberman and 1-2 Switch??

We were also giving cartridges benefit of the doubt, on the assumption that there would be virtually no loading times.

Boy was that a mistake.

switch is already dead

I'll say

...

this kills the switch

usgamer.net/articles/puyo-puyo-tetris-coming-to-switch-and-ps4-in-april-

I'm pretty sure that Nintendo is in the wrong here. Sure WB is up there in terms of publishers that can be called the salt of the earth, but this cartridge shit is affecting everybody. If they aren't only partially selling you a game and asking you to download the rest, they're asking you to pay slightly more for what is objectively the inferior version of a multiplat.

Console games rarely go above 64GB, so Switch can hold shit. If publishers are willing to pay for the extra storage or not is another story.

>And this is just some dinky four year old Lego game that even the Wii U could run

it was also +20gb there making it one of the largest games on the system, incidentally it also had an eshop release

>ten extra donaldollars for an inferior version of a game that came out nearly two console gens ago
laffin

One console gen

Read this last night. It's going to be a serious problem, at least for 3rd party games. They're going to cut the cost of publishing by reducing the game cart size to the absolute minimum. Then you have to download the rest of the game.

MicroSDs will basically become a Nintendo tax, where it will cost more to play your games because you'll need the SD space for them.

Personally I'm only planning on buying 1st party so it's not a big concern, just hope Nintendo doesn't do this as well.

>but there has to be a catch
no, you are just fanatical and unable to not believe bad news.

They wont. They sure as shit didnt want to pay for cartridges during the N64, why on earth would they want to now? It makes me wish Nintendo just made a regular fucking home console instead of adding pointless gimmicks.

i bet the dl will be for videos
partial installs used to be a thing at one point for pc games when hard drives were barely larger or even smaller than cd's

>if I install that game would I play?
>it would be extremely entertaining
>it needs a big install
>for you

Uh, you don't get to bring 20GB

JUST

Loading times were pretty awful back then to be fair.

>We were also giving cartridges benefit of the doubt, on the assumption that there would be virtually no loading times.
Only a complete idiot was making this assumption. I kept reminding people that N64 games had no visible loading times because they were mostly only 8MB large

There's nothing inherent about cartridges that implies no loading times. And there's a huge difference when it comes to quality too. 3DS carts only transfer at 15MB/s for instance, which is how Nintendo can tell the difference between a real cart and Sky3DS because the Sky3DS is actually faster

Instal times are horrible these days, too. Carts circumvent that due to far quicker read/write speeds

>It's just a reflection of current year

The game is like 19 GB on Wii U, how the fuck is it only 7 GB on Switch?

>There's nothing inherent about cartridges that implies no loading times
There is, though - they're faster to read than discs, since discs require physical movement (spinning) to read data, whilst carts are a digital connection. It's similar to why SSDs are better than HDDs.

No, just Judaism on a new console.

That's pretty shit if true, but still cartridges are much better than discs, especially for collectors since all discs will one day suffer from disc rot, and it's irreversible, meanwhile cartridges don't have such a huge problem.

id have to say WB
paying more for a cartridge might be the norm from now on... but id rather pay 10 bucks more then be forced to purchase an entirely new memory card.
whats worse? why is it online only? thats just autistic.

I canceled my pre-order.

Why can't WB simply release it digitally?

I have plenty of games on my PS4 that take 20, 40, 60 Gb and I downloaded them through store.

>Carts circumvent that due to far quicker read/write speeds
Faster seek time. Transfer speed depends on the quality of the nand. They can be far slower than your typical 5400rpm mechanical disk drive. Most games tend to have all of their data in large pack files making seek times largely irrelevant

You have to be over 18 to post here, kid.

>1995 (before you were born)
Neither N64 nor PS1 required you to install games to a hard drive, so internal memory was moot. N64 CARTRIDGES had storage problems, as CDs were becoming larger.

>2017
PS4 and XB1 require people to spend time installing and downloading a fuckload of data to play, even if they buy a boxed copy with a disc. Thus internal memory really matters for PS4 and XB1. SD cartridges now store a lot more than DVDs and BluRays.

Physical Switch games run off cartridges and do not need to be installed. So internal memory is largely irrelevant for boxed copies. However, this one greedy publisher might be screwing up, wanting to use a smaller SD than their game requires.

The switch only has 32gb of built in storage.

SSDs are incredibly high quality NANDs that transfer at 400-600 MB/s (or higher). Nintendo's 3DS carts are class 4 SD nands with write disabled. They cap out at 15MB/s. I know what you're saying but there is a huge variance there depending on the quality of memory you're using. Nintendo isn't putting SSD quality nands in their carts. It's the cheapest available so that it doesn't cost too much to produce.

just because they can be faster doesn't mean they are most of the time

That can't be true. My flash drive have more space.

this game runs like ass on the Wii U and the load times are both frequent and abysmally long

go away

Install to system memory. Load speeds are identical to the Switch

I know, I just wanted to explain in the simplest way possible since Sup Forums is pretty retarded.

That is true but OPs post is not

The PS4 has games that let you "play" as they download and install.
Except they define "play" as "watching a themed progress bar.

This could easily be similar, they might be saying you can play some miniature sandbox thing off the cart but the full game is locked behind the download.

They might be confirming this whole thing is bullshit but the numbers do not add up and the smell of bullshit is coming from them more than anyone

i didn't even know that was something you could do on the wii u, honestly

Did I say something wrong?

Well obvious if you buy from Eshop you can choose where to install it

If you have it on disc you can hack your wii U and install the data directly to give yourself a free eShop version

>g-go watch your movies, sonybro! I h-have real games to p-play!

Its true, its as bad as it was on Wii U and you need SD storage space if you want something decent.

It is true.

It's not an issue for boxed games which run directly off the cart with no install required. Zelda is 15GB and requires no install, for instance.

However this greedy publisher might be fucking up, wanting to use a smaller, cheaper cart that can't hold their 20GB game.

The Switch is also compatible with up to 2TB SD cards if you want more internal memory. I think 128GB SD cards are around $40 USD.

It is WB's fault.

>There are bigger carts out there
>The carts for other Switch games have released at reasonable prices

WB is just being cheap.

Cartridges aren't expensive to produce, otherwise devs would have stopped producing 3DS games ages ago.

so jews jewing jews then

They will require you to download the rest of the game. It's literally right in the OP

>Cartridges aren't expensive to produce
Multiple devs have set their Switch version pricing higher, citing the cost of cartridges

Rather than charging more, it seems like WB is just mitigating the cost, which isn't really something to blame.

It's Nintendo's fault for all of it

Nin "Fuck the developer" tendo.

Why is this okay?

it's literally 10 cents more

10 cents more would be double the cost of optical media, and that's a bold faced lie anyway

even a paltry 8GB flash memory costs a couple bucks

It really was a poor decision to resort to SD cards combined with 32gb storage space. When it comes to 3rd party games it is absolutely going to doom Switch to just be a TV pluggable portable game machine. Nintendo is constantly two steps behind everyone else but still demands premium prices. 32gb internal storage should've been a New3DS thing.

Makes no difference to people who wanted a Switch just to be able to play shit like future Monster Hunters Phoenix Wrights, Pokemans, etc. on a proper monitor with a proper controller. People who wanted a new home console with titles that make the most out of it being a home console are going to get absolutely fucked. I would wager that the majority who bought the Switch just bought it because that's where the new Marios and Zeldas are gonna be so it makes no difference to them either.

Basically majority of Nintenfags have very specific first party needs and expectations that they don't care about everything else around them being a garbage dump.

>10 cents more would be double the cost of optical media

That's how cheap discs are

Except it's not true. None of Nintendo's games have any sort of inflated price tag. BOTW costs the same as the Wii U version, for example.

>BOTW costs the same as the Wii U version, for example.
The price tag being the same has nothing to do with the MATERIAL COST. An optical disc costs literally pennies. 16gb flash costs a few dollars.

Nintendo did literally nothing wrong here, that's just WB being Jewish as fuck.

>The price tag being the same has nothing to do with the MATERIAL COST
Then why did third parties raise the price? Is it because they're greedy jews?

Do people not see that publishers are just taking advantage of early console drought to rack up prices? This is nothing new.

both

Nintendo can afford to take the hit to keep their pricing at 59.99. The whole world is looking critically at the Switch and $65 games would not be a good thing.

3rd parties don't give a shit. They're going to pass the added cost onto the consumer.

If that were true, Nintendo's own games would be the first to experience this price hike. Not third party companies we know have a shady history with ports.

>buying/playing Digital Download Undercover

WB can do whatever they wan't they don't owe Nintendo,Sony or MS shit. Nintendo knew this would be an issue so they should not act surprised.

Game isn't for grown ups btw. Sure there is collecting but the world has features removed from your typical lego games.

Have it on Wii U.

That's just some crap third rate publishers peddle because they know the Switch wont' sell as much to meet their margin.

>People who wanted a new home console with titles that make the most out of it being a home console are going to get absolutely fucked.
You faggots really need to stop bringing up "muh power" as an excuse on why the Switch doesn't work as a home console

>You can't tell me the full game is present in that small 7 GB cartridge.

Why not? You really think it's a 1:1 from other consoles? Nigga, please. Whatever port comes to Switch is going to be a gimped version in some aspect, usually the visuals, and you have to come to terms with that as a Switch owner.

This is not what he meant and you know it you smegma stained fucking underage cuck, there were playstations before the ps3 and ps4.

WiiU 2: Electric Boogaloo

Nintendo is just willing to eat the cost because they'd look bad with games higher than $60

Oh bullshit, Warner Bros is a multimillion dollar company, you're just making up excuses for them being greedy jews and put Nintendo in the spotlight

>MicroSDs will basically become a Nintendo tax, where it will cost more to play your games because you'll need the SD space for them.

$20 won't break and you'll get an SD card setting you for Switch's lifetime. This ain't Vita with proprietary cards and prices out the ass.

Switch cartridges can hold more data than a dual-layer BD.

You know that the companies burning all the discs for publishers don't actually buy the discs from anywhere like you do when you want to record a disc? They just inject a fistful of plastic into a moulding machine and make their own disc, the machine after that electroplates the silver layer matching the glass master disc, so you don't even need to record it. If you skip the cost of all that expensive equipment, which is what you are doing if you use the services of one such company that already has it all set up, the cost of a single disc is like a plastic plate worth of cheap plastic dust, few grains of metal and some power.

I'd hazard a guess that storage, packaging and distribution of said disc is eating up a lot more money than the disc itself.

Do you realize why manuals were phased out of game boxes? So publishers can literally save 10-15c on each copy. They WILL opt for a smaller cartridge and fuck the consumer.

So they're being greedy fucking jews and you're blaming Nintendo for it. Got it.

Greed is the driving force behind capitalism.

There are 3 options:
1) eat the added cost
2) pass the added cost onto the consumer
3) mitigate the added cost

WB has chosen 3, by deferring data to a download. Other developers have chosen 2. Nintendo is at the moment choosing 1.

Which choice you make really has nothing to do with greed. Again, Nintendo can't afford to have $65 games. It would look really bad. Losing that $5 is better than bad PR.

And the entire problem has been created by Nintendo going with cartridges. So I would say that yes, this makes it their fault.

Considering how fundamental third party support is, this thread is actually really relevant.....but NOT for a Nintendo console.

Xbox/Ps live or die from 3rd party support. Nintendo consoles....no one cares. People will buy the switch for zelda/mario/smash/assortedninentoip, not third party games. These are the same people that bought the wiiu, the wii, etc...and the same that will buy the switch 2 or whatever

Yeah, because will "afford to take a hit". Nintendo. Are you fucking insane or just living in alternate dimension? Publishers are Jews and Nintendo are Jews.

WB is pretty scummy all things considered, I feel like people rag on EA and Activision a lot but ignore how bad WB and Ubisoft are.

I can see publishers going the vita way in the future where they just put their games on the system digitally because sony can go fuck themself with their vita cartirdges and the same will happen to nintendo.

Am I supposed to believe that games like Rime cost $10 more on the switch because of the cartridge cost? As if mass produced carts would cost the publisher that much more. Please.

Nintendo also charges higher licensing fees

The fact that 1 2 Switch is a 50 dollar game should raise an eyebrow.

>Still making excuses for WB's greedy jew tactics
It has everything to do with greed faggot, stop trying to make Nintendo the bad guy here

It's easy to ignore WB since nobody here plays their games.

oh, i thought you meant install the disc data like you could on the 360. I have it on disc and i'm not going to hack my wii u, as effortless and risk-free as it may be, until i've finished with Zelda

I would argue that WB's choice is better than option 2 but whatever.