Bloomberg: Switch 2 hasn't provided expected boost to outside developers. They complain game-key cards.

Why didn't Nintendo go via the Blue-Ray or optical disc way, instead of the format they chose?
because its a handheld system.
imagine integrating a full-size blu-ray reader into the switch2 haha.

would be cool if the dock had a blu-ray reader and thats how you install games.
but (i) piracy and (ii) piracy and (iii) piracy and (iv) switch would need more internal memory (more $$$) and (v) makes the console less portable and (vi) nintendo probably still has a "f you sony" mentality and doesnt want to pay disc licensing costs.
 
Last edited:
I imagine Hades 2 will sell well on this.

Problem with the third party games is most have been around for years and run better on all other hardware. Unless you're Nintendo only why the fuck would you pick up cyberpunk 2077 in 480p low settings 30fps?

Yakuza 0? Been around for what, 7+ years?

New third party stand a chance like Silksong.
 
I imagine Hades 2 will sell well on this.

Problem with the third party games is most have been around for years and run better on all other hardware. Unless you're Nintendo only why the fuck would you pick up cyberpunk 2077 in 480p low settings 30fps?

Yakuza 0? Been around for what, 7+ years?

New third party stand a chance like Silksong.
For portability, for the umpteenth time ffs. I own all three: PS5, SX, S2 and just like with S1 I prefer playing on a hybrid system. If Sony comes out with a hybrid system, I'll be all over it.

If how things ran and performed were my top priority, I'd get a beefy PC.
 
For portability, for the umpteenth time ffs. I own all three: PS5, SX, S2 and just like with S1 I prefer playing on a hybrid system. If Sony comes out with a hybrid system, I'll be all over it.

If how things ran and performed were my top priority, I'd get a beefy PC.
For the umpteenth time you aren't the entire fucking customer base.

Neat you wanted to play an old super GPU intensive game portably at 30fps 480p. That doesn't mean everyone else fucking did. Or else guess what? The sales would've followed.
 
It's a dumb complaint. You want big games that can be patched and updated. Key cards gives you that. What is the difference if you put out a full game on a cart that's been patched 7 times anyway. It's the exact same thing.
 
It's a dumb complaint. You want big games that can be patched and updated. Key cards gives you that. What is the difference if you put out a full game on a cart that's been patched 7 times anyway. It's the exact same thing.


st,small,507x507-pad,600x600,f8f8f8.jpg
 
the difference is that the game is on the cart... very simple difference.
That's not a good argument. That game on a cart is also installed with 7 patches.

I guess 30 years from now you might be able to install it to a vanilla state if someone hacks the os and hacks the need to check the servers. Possible I guess. 🤷‍♂️
 
Last edited:
For the umpteenth time you aren't the entire fucking customer base.

Neat you wanted to play an old super GPU intensive game portably at 30fps 480p. That doesn't mean everyone else fucking did. Or else guess what? The sales would've followed.
Sure thing, Goldie locks: PC too hot, Switch 2 too cold, PS just right!
 
Nintendo should offer lower storage cards to 3rd party developers without extra cost so they can use that. A lot of us don't want GKC and prefer games fully inside the cart (one of the main factor to own Switch console).

I'll be honest and this is not popular but at this point I'm willing to pay extra for full game inside the cart instead of GKC if there was an option.
 
To be perfectly honest I tried to have physical carts for Switch and it was annoying trying to carry carts around with me or just deciding which game I wanted in my Switch when I traveled somewhere

For Switch 2 I'm going all digital because that just makes sense for a portable

I still buy discs for my PS5 because it doesn't move anywhere and neither do the discs
 
That's not a good argument. That game on a cart is also installed with 7 patches.

why is the number of patches of any relevance?
if patch 1 improved performance slightly, patch 2 to 4 patched minor bugs, patch 5 added a... I dunno... new costume..., patch 6 added a new accessibility option, and patch 7 did another small performance optimisation, what exactly are you missing out on if you only have the cart?

most games are fine as they are. if you buy a retail copy of Super Mario Odyssey, first print, and you have zero internet access, and you put it into your Switch, you'll never think you're missing out on anything just because you don't have any updates installed.
 
Last edited:
Nintendo at its peak had game cartridges that provide real value:
1. Holding game data
2. Allowing users to select a game and boot directly into that game.
3. Providing a collectible object, box and manuals.
4. Allowing users to load games significantly faster than disc or ssd based games.

Nintendo lost their lightning fast load times with the move to optical disks.
Switch 1 reduced those down to just holding game data and providing a collectible object.
Switch 2 cut that down to just providing a collectible object with no real purpose.
Nintendo traded a bunch of great gameplay-centric qualities for clock speed and increased resolution.
 
Nintendo at its peak had game cartridges that provide real value:
1. Holding game data
2. Allowing users to select a game and boot directly into that game.
3. Providing a collectible object, box and manuals.
4. Allowing users to load games significantly faster than disc or ssd based games.

even more value. some of them came with entire additional processors on the board. and I'm not just talking about the SuperFX, but stuff like the SA1, which was a slightly modified version of the SNES' CPU and basically doubled the SNES' CPU performance by being included on the cartridge.

imagine if that could happen nowadays lol
 
Yup, not to mention the slow read speed of the game cards being slow enough that devs like Ubisoft (for Star Wars Outlaws) couldn't use game cards even when they wanted to due to how slow data moves off the cards compared to on-board storage/sd express cards.

Just really a total fuck up. So many folks out there supporting physical Switch 1 releases left and right and now this...
I supported the fuck out of Switch.
I avoided the fuck out of Switch 2.
Laughing emojis be damned.
My wallet feels fuller.
 
Last edited:
That's why i refuse to buy them. I am not going to buy any Nintendo game that is not physical.

So far, I have Mario Kart ( sadly, this is online because it came with the system), but then again it was much cheaper than a physical purchase, so I am good. )

My other game is Donkey Kong, and that is physical. next game is Metroid Prime 4, and if its not a physical whole game on the card, I am going to pass on this game too.

Their game ? sure. But it's my money. Let's see who will win lol.
They will win, I promise.
 
even more value. some of them came with entire additional processors on the board. and I'm not just talking about the SuperFX, but stuff like the SA1, which was a slightly modified version of the SNES' CPU and basically doubled the SNES' CPU performance by being included on the cartridge.
imagine if that could happen nowadays lol
It feels like nobody at Nintendo ever takes a step back and draws up an objective list comparing old Nintendo to modern day Nintendo.
They've traded a long list of amazing features for a short list of less impressive ones.
 
Not sure why we are making this a game card issue. As outside of core hobby gamers nobody cares. Third party software had a tough time on the original Switch and always sold pretty modest numbers. It's very simple as Nintendo's own first party games will always drive the platform.

Like it of not software is going digital, key cards give you a reasonable option. The main problem is as Nintendo are only offering a higher Gb capacity card, so many third party developers making games under 30Gb are simply not going to see the value in putting their game on a cart.

But at the end of the day third party software will have a tough time on the Switch, game cards or not.
 
Last edited:
Not sure why we are making this a game card issue. As outside of core hobby gamers nobody cares. Third party software had a tough time on the original Switch and always sold pretty modest numbers. It's very simple as Nintendo's own first party games will always drive the platform.

Like it of not software is going digital, key cards give you a reasonable option. The main problem is as Nintendo are only offering a higher Gb capacity card, so many third party developers making games under 30Gb are simply not going to see the value in putting their game on a cart.

But at the end of the day third party software will have a tough time on the Switch, game cards or not.
Not fully true, Japanese devs have had success on the original Switch, as well as some surprising Western devs like what few Rockstar games were on the system. Indie devs also see success on the og switch.

But I agree with you about the game key cards. Only people bothered by it are the hardcore. Anyone else buying a switch 2 game from a store doesn't care or even notice.

In fact, I'm not sure why this thread is focusing on the switch 2 at all. The issue is that game sales, specifically physical, are down and the switch 2 didn't boost it. It's an economic issue. People don't have the money to spend on these games. $70 is a lot of money to a lot of people. Bills and food come first and cheaper hobbies exist, not to mention cheaper or free to play games.
 
Not sure why we are making this a game card issue. As outside of core hobby gamers nobody cares.

Game developers literally just said in the article that they care. They aren't happy with the storage media options given, and that's when Nintendo gives the option to publish on Switch 2 at all. If Nintendo sent out more Switch 2 dev kits, and made carts smaller than 64GB available, we would have more Switch 2 games.

Instead they just want everyone to make Switch 1 BC games instead right now. It appears like they are comfortable to "scale up" later, which is maybe a silly degree of confidence to slow things on purpose when they ought to getting every chess piece into place as fast as humanly possible to secure momentum. They feel they have enough of it, and want to stop it so Switch 1 install base isn't overshadowed too fast, but now Switch 2 customers and third parties have to pay for that.
 
Okay so the whole article is:
- comparing the launch of Daemon X Machina in the UK and Japan
- an analyst's feelings about the whole game key card situation
- a Nintendo shareholder's question about game key card

The whole stuff being wrapped into a "devs complain about game key cards, no sales boost" article. And it's already 3 pages of discussion here.
 
Game developers literally just said in the article that they care. They aren't happy with the storage media options given, and that's when Nintendo gives the option to publish on Switch 2 at all. If Nintendo sent out more Switch 2 dev kits, and made carts smaller than 64GB available, we would have more Switch 2 games.

Instead they just want everyone to make Switch 1 BC games instead right now. It appears like they are comfortable to "scale up" later, which is maybe a silly degree of confidence to slow things on purpose when they ought to getting every chess piece into place as fast as humanly possible to secure momentum. They feel they have enough of it, and want to stop it so Switch 1 install base isn't overshadowed too fast, but now Switch 2 customers and third parties have to pay for that.
I never said developers did not care. All I said was on the whole customers are not bothered about game cards. And third party software has not pushed the sales of Switch hardware.
 
I don't see that in the article.

Since it's a paid article, I'm grabbing quotes from other sources such as
The lingering request from third-party publishers for Nintendo is to resume offering cartridges with smaller storage sizes because not all games need a large space. It remains unclear why Nintendo eliminated the options. A Nintendo shareholder criticized the key card in front of company executives at the recent shareholders' meeting. A company spokesperson declined to comment for this newsletter.

Sorry if I made a mistake.
 
Not fully true, Japanese devs have had success on the original Switch, as well as some surprising Western devs like what few Rockstar games were on the system. Indie devs also see success on the og switch.

But I agree with you about the game key cards. Only people bothered by it are the hardcore. Anyone else buying a switch 2 game from a store doesn't care or even notice.

In fact, I'm not sure why this thread is focusing on the switch 2 at all. The issue is that game sales, specifically physical, are down and the switch 2 didn't boost it. It's an economic issue. People don't have the money to spend on these games. $70 is a lot of money to a lot of people. Bills and food come first and cheaper hobbies exist, not to mention cheaper or free to play games.
This success is minor compared to Nintendo's own first party output. Yes it's a great platform for indie titles, and many game swill sell their biggest numbers on the Switch platform. But it's still pretty niche.
 
Since it's a paid article, I'm grabbing quotes from other sources such as


Sorry if I made a mistake.

That's a classic Mochizuki tactic. "the lingering request", but who said what exactly ? There is absolutely nothing in his article when you read it in detail.

His previous articles:

 
Last edited:
That's a classic Mochizuki tactic. "the lingering request", but who said what exactly ? There is absolutely nothing in his article when you read it in detail.

You're probably right, after all the key card is cheap.

Most devs that would ask for a smaller card, would probably have happily just used a keycard but were told to make a Switch 1 game instead.
 
It does not need it. Not suggesting it should not get more support by the way.

I mean, to me it's not really about what Switch 2 needs to do to stay solvent or support Nintendo or anything. The Wii didn't need to do anything but sell one console to each user because they profited on it; anything else was gravy.

It's more about what it should do, and then the context shifts to what it "needs" to do to accomplish that. Personally, I think Switch 2 should be running some new games that they're making me run a janky Switch 1 version. This is totally for cynical business reasons and pushed me away to play the games on PC, but why when I just bought a handheld they are perfect for? Feels bad.
 
That's a classic Mochizuki tactic. "the lingering request", but who said what exactly ? There is absolutely nothing in his article when you read it in detail.

His previous articles:

He's probably being fed this on background.

Impossible to me that publishers like NISA etc haven't noticed that consumers are unhappy with game-key cards, look at how people cancelled preorders en masse for a Trails special edition because it turned out to be a key card.
 
I mean, to me it's not really about what Switch 2 needs to do to stay solvent or support Nintendo or anything. The Wii didn't need to do anything but sell one console to each user because they profited on it; anything else was gravy.

It's more about what it should do, and then the context shifts to what it "needs" to do to accomplish that. Personally, I think Switch 2 should be running some new games that they're making me run a janky Switch 1 version. This is totally for cynical business reasons and pushed me away to play the games on PC, but why when I just bought a handheld they are perfect for? Feels bad.
Totally agree with you. It would be great for Nintendo to get this sorted out. Certainly on the development kit side of things. Not so sure the game card issue is the main problem. I will not play the Nintendo Switch Skywalker saga until we get a Switch 2 patch..
 
Totally agree with you. It would be great for Nintendo to get this sorted out. Certainly on the development kit side of things. Not so sure the game card issue is the main problem. I will not play the Nintendo Switch Skywalker saga until we get a Switch 2 patch..

At least that is an old game! Titles that came out after Switch 2 on Switch 1 only, with a superior PS5 version? Please...
 
I mean, to me it's not really about what Switch 2 needs to do to stay solvent or support Nintendo or anything. The Wii didn't need to do anything but sell one console to each user because they profited on it; anything else was gravy.

It's more about what it should do, and then the context shifts to what it "needs" to do to accomplish that. Personally, I think Switch 2 should be running some new games that they're making me run a janky Switch 1 version. This is totally for cynical business reasons and pushed me away to play the games on PC, but why when I just bought a handheld they are perfect for? Feels bad.
I legit am confused about Nintendo still pushing Switch 1 and telling devs to write Switch 1 games.

They should be moving people onto Switch 2 as fast as possible. If you have a Switch 1, there's tons of shit to play, but if you have a Switch 1 and just want to see more on Switch 2, Nintendo isn't trying hard enough to give you that.
 
Last edited:
Okay so the whole article is:
- comparing the launch of Daemon X Machina in the UK and Japan
- an analyst's feelings about the whole game key card situation
- a Nintendo shareholder's question about game key card

The whole stuff being wrapped into a "devs complain about game key cards, no sales boost" article. And it's already 3 pages of discussion here.

I was actually scratching my head which major japanese company released a game so far?

FF7 remake and Elden Ring are still TBD

That's a classic Mochizuki tactic. "the lingering request", but who said what exactly ? There is absolutely nothing in his article when you read it in detail.

His previous articles:


Oh so the usual bloomberg contributor slop
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom