Support NeoGAF

[EDarkness]

Does Nintendo really hold none of the blame with some of you?

Wait, why would they? This is 100% Warner Bros. Blame them.

As for the issue at hand, it doesn't bother me. I'll update my game when it comes in and if you're going to own a NS, then you should have some sort of microSD card in your system, even if you're going 100% physical. You never know how this all shakes out, so better to be prepared.

 

[Formless]

The price we pay for having a portable system I guess.

It'd be nice if Nintendo ate the cost of the more expensive carts but it's probably not trivial, and maybe they can only justify it for big releases.

 

[MisterR]

Wait, why would they? This is 100% Warner Bros. Blame them.

For various reasons pointed out repeatedly in this thread. Why should WB have to choose to either do it this way or make less profit on the Switch version of their game? Nintendo has made them make this decision.

 

[AstroNut325]

Wait, why would they? This is 100% Warner Bros. Blame them.

So they should just eat the additional cost of the larger capacity cart?

 

[EDarkness]

For various reasons pointed out repeatedly in this thread. Why should WB have to choose to either do it this way or make less profit on the Switch version of their game? Nintendo has made them make this decision.

Because it's their game and they can choose not to port it to the NS in the first place. If they don't want to deal with the costs involved, then they can avoid it. Giving them some sort of pass is crazy. They make the decision, so they'll live or die by it.

So they should just eat the additional cost of the larger capacity cart?

Yes. Or they should learn about compression techniques to lower the file sizes.

 

[b00_thegh0st]

I guess the same exact money Nintendo gained by charging 3rd parties a different price depending on cartridge size.

Sure enough. But how much is that?

 

[Seik]

Wait, why would they? This is 100% Warner Bros. Blame them.

As for the issue at hand, it doesn't bother me. I'll update my game when it comes in and if you're going to own a NS, then you should have some sort of microSD card in your system, even if you're going 100% physical. You never know how this all shakes out, so better to be prepared.

Nintendo is partly to blame because they gave the OK for this shitty practice in the first place, too.

Like I said, there's not a 'single' guilt here, both parts are to blame.

 

[AmyS]

Because it's their game and they can choose not to port it to the NS in the first place. If they don't want to deal with the costs involved, then they can avoid it. Giving them some sort of pass is crazy. They make the decision, so they'll live or die by it.

Yes. Or they should learn about compression techniques to lower the file sizes.

This.

I couldn't agree more.

 

[Fdkn]

Sure enough. But how much is that?

Enough for them to think that going this way will get them more money.

If we take the asumption that the difference is negligible, why isn't Nintendo eating that negligible difference in the first place?

 

[EDarkness]

Nintendo is partly to blame because they gave the OK for this shitty practice in the first place, too.

Like I said, there's not a 'single' guilt here, both parts are to blame.

When will people learn that Nintendo doesn't put any barriers up to stop companies from doing anything. They put this in the hands of the publisher/developer (as it should be). The publisher/developer makes 100% of the decisions and therefore will sink or swim depending on the decisions they made.

Just curious do people blame Google when some app on the Google Play store does something crazy?

 

[akidnamededdy]

*looks at Skyrim*

Nintendo is partly to blame because they gave the OK for this shitty practice in the first place, too.

Like I said, there's not a 'single' guilt here, both parts are to blame.

I don't think Nintendo is in any position to be putting restrictions on what third parties can do on their new platform.

 

[GraveRobberX]

So when Nintendo gonna clamp down on this
If WB cutting corners like this, you know other publishers will follow suit

Save money from carts and let the end user deal with it

Buy game, full price, 1/4th on cart, 3/4ths you have to DL

 

[guek]

When will people learn that Nintendo doesn't put any barriers up to stop companies from doing anything. They put this in the hands of the publisher/developer (as it should be). The publisher/developer makes 100% of the decisions and therefore will sink or swim depending on the decisions they made.

Just curious do people blame Google when some app on the Google Play store does something crazy?

The problem here is everyone is just shooting in the dark. We have no idea what the cost difference is between 1, 4, 8, 16, and 32GB carts. The difference in cost between the first 4 modules is likely extremely small but that's still just an assumption.

 

[Marty Chinn]

Wait, why would they? This is 100% Warner Bros. Blame them.

As for the issue at hand, it doesn't bother me. I'll update my game when it comes in and if you're going to own a NS, then you should have some sort of microSD card in your system, even if you're going 100% physical. You never know how this all shakes out, so better to be prepared.

Nintendo certifies and approves every game that comes to the Switch. Nintendo has every right to stop such a process but they're allowing it to take place. So Nintendo shares the blame by allowing this to happen and you can bet this won't be the last time it happens if it works out for this game. You'll see more companies doing it. So yes, Nintendo shares part of the blame by allowing such a practice to pass certification.

Just curious do people blame Google when some app on the Google Play store does something crazy?

Google has guidelines that apps must meet to be allowed in the Play Store. Developers can't do anything they want.

I don't think Nintendo is in any position to be putting restrictions on what third parties can do on their new platform.

So if some developer wanted to put a lot of hardcore sex into one of their games, Nintendo would just let it through because they're helpless and desperate?

 

[VyechnayaSlava]

Surely, as someone who is all digital, you realize you're already being gouged out the ass right? Paying full MSRP for something with an infinite supply, no physical production costs, etc? Particularly nasty when you realize that retailers like Amazon and Best Buy have no qualms about offering services that provide a 20% discount day 1 on physical games when they still have to be turning a profit. Even though those physical copies actually have to be manufactured, shipped etc.

If anything this situation happening when this title is still $60 retail is atrocious.

Oh trust me, I know that...... But I don't care that much. I understand that it's how the world goes. So many times I've ended up regretting selling games at some point, and since I have 4 small kids digital is the best choice all around for me. That said, anything to keep physical costs down that will help digital costs is something that I'm ALL about

 

[Matt]

Nintendo certifies and approves every game that comes to the Switch. Nintendo has every right to stop such a process but they're allowing it to take place. So Nintendo shares the blame by allowing this to happen and you can bet this won't be the last time it happens if it works out for this game. You'll see more companies doing it. So yes, Nintendo shares part of the blame by allowing such a practice to pass certification.

Well, that opens up the question: how would it be better if the game just never came out?

 

[polyh3dron]

So much for buying physical games to save internal storage space.

 

[Marty Chinn]

Well, that opens up the question: how would it be better if the game just never came out?

Because it would stop other developers from doing it too. This is a precedent that we shouldn't want to become the norm.

 

[Seik]

I don't think Nintendo is in any position to be putting restrictions on what third parties can do on their new platform.

Well, people against this practice won't buy X games.

X game's sale perform in a mediocre way, publisher doesn't come back.

Issue not fixed.

If this becomes a norm I will skip a shitload of games on Switch and buy the versions where the physical media holds the thing entirely.

 

[guek]

Well, that opens up the question: how would it be better if the game just never came out?

The point some are trying to make is Nintendo hasn't done enough to mitigate whatever barriers there are to higher physical publishing costs.

Not that we have a good idea of what Nintendo has or hasn't done...

 

[GraveRobberX]

The problem here is everyone is just shooting in the dark. We have no idea what the cost difference is between 1, 4, 8, 16, and 32GB carts. The difference in cost between the first 4 modules is likely extremely small but that's still just an assumption.

It must be something significant, that WB as the publisher is going this route
Hell if the cart looks like to be a 8GB cart and extra download is 13GB for a rough total to match the WiiU of 20GB to save money

Why not go 16GB cart and have a 4GB download (more reasonable)

Understand why 32GB is out

So WB cheated out on the most cost saving measure, so there must be a great disparity between the 8 and 16 version that they don't want to pony up

 

[Hattori]

Well, that opens up the question: how would it be better if the game just never came out?

Yes imo, at least it doesn't set a terrible precedent for others to copy

 

[Matt]

Because it would stop other developers from doing it too. This is a precedent that we shouldn't want to become the norm.

Would it?

 

[b00_thegh0st]

Enough for them to think that going this way will get them more money.

If we take the asumption that the difference is negligible, why isn't Nintendo eating that negligible difference in the first place?

Well I don't really see how this game is going to make money on Switch now. Heck it shouldn't even be 60$ to begin with...

I don't think Nintendo anticipated this. Maybe they'll offer solutions down the road but this is clearly not consumer-friendly.

 

[K.Jack]

Because it's their game and they can choose not to port it to the NS in the first place. If they don't want to deal with the costs involved, then they can avoid it. Giving them some sort of pass is crazy. They make the decision, so they'll live or die by it.

So Nintendo creates the situation, and your response is literally "deal with it", or just don't bring your games to Switch?

Wait, that's always been Nintendo's response as well, which is what directly influences why their 3rd party support is perpetually abysmal.

Yes. Or they should learn about compression techniques to lower the file sizes.

You will die alone on that hill.

 

[guek]

It must be something significant, that WB as the publisher is going this route
Hell if the cart looks like to be a 8GB cart and extra download is 13GB for a rough total to match the WiiU of 20GB to save money

Why not go 16GB cart and have a 4GB download (more reasonable)

Understand why 32GB is out

So WB cheated out on the most cost saving measure, so there must be a great disparity between the 8 and 16 version that they don't want to pony up

Yeah, I don't get why it's not on a 16GB cart at least. I can't imagine the cost difference between 8 and 16GB being substantial but what the hell do I know.

 

[Marty Chinn]

Would it?

If Nintendo didn't allow it, yes it would stop it from happening. What kind of question is that?

 

[Matt]

The point some are trying to make is Nintendo hasn't done enough to mitigate whatever barriers there are to higher physical publishing costs.

Not that we have a good idea of what Nintendo has or hasn't done...

The only barrier is that adding space to the cards raises the price. Not by an obscene amount, but somewhat. Nintendo isn't really making money on the price difference.

 

[leburn98]

Just cancelled my pre-order on Amazon. I will not support this.

For those that are giving this a free pass, stating it's not a big issue and you should buy a microSD, etc. are missing the point. This isn't a simple day one update we are talking about, it's downloading the rest of the game. There are plenty of games that have day one updates, but most (if not all) are complete and playable without a patch.

 

[MetalliCabombination]

Are people seriously suggesting nintendo doesn't need to do anything to stop a dev from pulling this shit or sell a game at $70 because google doesnt do it for the play store?
Wow.
Regardless, the last entity to take significant damage from this is the game dev who can always just stop publishing on nintendo consoles like they usually do

 

[akidnamededdy]

So if some developer wanted to put a lot of hardcore sex into one of their games, Nintendo would just let it through because they're helpless and desperate?

That's a whole different beast, and you know it.

Well, people against this practice won't buy X games.

X game's sale perform in a mediocre way, publisher doesn't come back.

Issue not fixed.

If this becomes a norm I will skip a shitload of games on switch and buy those where the physical media I can buy holds the thing entirely.

Oh I'm not saying it's not shitty, I just think it's a little unfair to hold Nintendo's feet to the fire on this one when it's a result of them trying to make the platform approachable to third parties. This is all WB.

Also that last bit of your post...how many games on other platforms do you skip out on for shipping in various states of "complete"? Obviously this is an extreme case here (and let me be clear that I'm not buying this game), but in the current marketplace your ultimatum seems at least a little unreasonable.

 

[Matt]

If Nintendo didn't allow it, yes it would stop it from happening. What kind of question is that?

The point is, if these pricing moves are the only thing enticing a publisher to bring a game to the Switch, why would they still do so without that option?

 

[Seil]

Oh trust me, I know that...... But I don't care that much. I understand that it's how the world goes. So many times I've ended up regretting selling games at some point, and since I have 4 small kids digital is the best choice all around for me. That said, anything to keep physical costs down that will help digital costs is something that I'm ALL about

I feel that's where our views differ, I don't believe this actually helps keep the physical costs down at all. Or at least it shouldn't. Considering as I already noted retailers are capable of selling for notably less than MSRP. The publisher would make slightly less money, but they're already effectively overcharging. And then you have all of the digital purchases that are being way overcharged for. Worst cast scenario those overpriced digital sales are making back more than what they'd be losing on a larger cart.

 

[guek]

The only barrier is that adding space to the cards raises the price. Not by an obscene amount, but somewhat. Nintendo isn't really making money on the price difference.

Too much for Nintendo to subsidize? Too much for publishers to eat the difference?

 

[plagiarize]

The point some are trying to make is Nintendo hasn't done enough to mitigate whatever barriers there are to higher physical publishing costs.

Not that we have a good idea of what Nintendo has or hasn't done...

The result shows us that they didn't do enough. But WB shouldn't get a pass here either. Realistically what do people think the development costs of this port were such that they can't eat the cost of the larger cartridge? This is just a multiplatform port. Of a game four years old. Being sold at full retail.

Of course they could have easily not done this.

 

[phant0m]

And for that reason, I'm out.

 

[B-Dubs]

If this was a day one patch that'd be one thing, but half the fucking game? Are they kidding? Why even buy physical at this point? I won't be spending a dime on this, which is a shame because I was looking forward to it.

The result shows us that they didn't do enough. But WB shouldn't get a pass here either. Realistically what do people think the development costs of this port were such that they can't eat the cost of the larger cartridge? This is just a multiplatform port. Of a game four years old. Being sold at full retail.

Of course they could have easily not done this.

Exactly. This isn't a brand-new game, this is a four-year-old game. They already made their money back on this, they're just trying to squeeze every dime out while fucking us over in the process.

 

[b00_thegh0st]

This is going to bomb so hard, between the full retail price and this mandatory download shit. Not even funny.

 

[guek]

The result shows us that they didn't do enough. But WB shouldn't get a pass here either. Realistically what do people think the development costs of this port were such that they can't eat the cost of the larger cartridge? This is just a multiplatform port. Of a game four years old. Being sold at full retail.

Of course they could have easily not done this.

Basically how I feel about it as well.

 

[GraveRobberX]

Yeah, I don't get why it's not on a 16GB cart at least. I can't imagine the cost difference between 8 and 16GB being substantial but what the hell do I know.

Might be how many are printed?
If you do bulk buying cards, wouldn't the cost become lower?

I mean unless we have those prices these pubs are getting for putting games on Switch and what the cost effective measure is, we can only go by what is presented to us

I mean 8 GB cart with 13GB DL looks better and saves money in WB eyes than 16GB with a 4GB download
Bottom line counts

Unless this is like fractions of a cent that there being cheapskates
Even a full penny!
You know companies will cover their ass, like pay an extra cent for convenience for the end user, fuck that, we ain't a charity!


I'm waiting for a pub to do the ultimate troll
Sell the game at different cart spaces as premium
Oh tryout can buy so and so for $30 on 8GB cart and 20GB DL or go $35-$40 on 16GB cart with 4GB DL

$5-$10 saves you the pain of DL'ing extra GB's

Hell pay full retail and pre-order and get it on a 32GB cart!
Have all that extra space for all your saves!

 

[Bluth54]

*looks at Skyrim*

Skyrim is a pretty small game though since the game uses a lot of assets over and over again. I just checked, the PC special edition only needs 13 GB of hard drive space.

 

[thebisonxrc]

Hmm. This is pretty disappointing. Exactly the kind of thing that will deter me from buying a game. I buy physical so that I don't have to worry about big downloads. Hopefully this isn't a sign of things to come.

 

[Chindogg]

Honest question here:

What makes this any different from mandatory installs on PS4 or Xbox One? I don't hear anyone calling for Sony or Microsoft's heads over that.

 

[Marty Chinn]

That's a whole different beast, and you know it.

But Nintendo has no say. They're helpless and desperate. They can't stop it. So why wouldn't game be allowed to have it? Or maybe they do have control... so let's not pretend that they can't stop such a practice from being a part of their certification process.

The point is, if these pricing moves are the only thing enticing a publisher to bring a game to the Switch, why would they still do so without that option?

Because some developers would still want to make money on the platform. If you open up Pandora's box by allowing this, and the consumers normalize this, why wouldn't developers opt for a smaller cartridge to have a lower cost for all games moving forward? This is a bad precedent to set as normal and acceptable.

Honest question here:

What makes this any different from mandatory installs on PS4 or Xbox One? I don't hear anyone calling for Sony or Microsoft's heads over that.

PS4 and Xbox One mandatory installs still have the complete and fully playable game on the disc.

 

[marvelharvey]

Well there goes my son's birthday present.

 

[Sword Of Doom]

Well I don't really see how this game is going to make money on Switch now. Heck it shouldn't even be 60$ to begin with...

I don't think Nintendo anticipated this. Maybe they'll offer solutions down the road but this is clearly not consumer-friendly.

They've been in this business for a very long time. I'm sure they knew but didn't care because they were committed to the concept of the system.

I don't understand why people need to blame someone. This is the reality of the Switch. They couldn't afford putting more storage inside the thing and they couldn't strap a bluray drive to it.

 

[Chindogg]

PS4 and Xbox One mandatory installs still have the complete and fully playable game on the disc.

But what does that matter if you can't play it without the install?

 

[plagiarize]

Honest question here:

What makes this any different from mandatory installs on PS4 or Xbox One? I don't hear anyone calling for Sony or Microsoft's heads over that.

Those systems don't come with 32 gigs of data. They don't offer solid state physical games. They aren't portables.

You think I don't enjoy just being able to pop Zelda in and start immediately playing compared to the Xbox One experience?

 

[leburn98]

Honest question here:

What makes this any different from mandatory installs on PS4 or Xbox One? I don't hear anyone calling for Sony or Microsoft's heads over that.

Mandatory installs are installed from the disc to the HDD on the PS4/Xbox One. This Lego City solution is to have the user download the 13GB, completely different. The space taken up is irrelevant.

 

[Diablohead]

So when Nintendo gonna clamp down on this
If WB cutting corners like this, you know other publishers will follow suit

Save money from carts and let the end user deal with it

Buy game, full price, 1/4th on cart, 3/4ths you have to DL

Let's go full konami with mgs 5 pc, retail packaging with a paper code and steam on a cd, on the switch it would be like buying a 1gb cart with a launcher on it.