Support NeoGAF

[Danjin44]

Of course it's not a problem on Switch 1 when it literally does not have the same GKC issue that is affecting the Switch 2. How many GKC games do you have on Switch 2?

For now only one (Bravely Default) even so they don't take much space compare to PS5 games but also Switch own first party games all work on cartilage itself, meanwhile ALL PS5 games require you install data on PS5 no exceptions and PS5 games can range from 50GB to 100GB or even more.

 

[Karim]

 

[HerjansEagleFeeder]

Did I get the memo correctly? Devs are now telling us to blame Nintendo because their already expensive game cards aren't fast enough?

 

[Bojji]

Well it wouldn't be an optional install at that point would it? And if that's the case why are you (i.e. the publisher) spending money on a 64gb cart?

It's also 20 years later than ps3. Who doesn't have internet at this point? It's a basic utility.

I don't get the problem. Oh no, a download.

I think for portable device, using it in the place with no or poor internet connection (ot with data caps) is quite likely.

And 15 years from when Switch 2 servers are no longer with us you could still use it.

 

[nial]

For now only one (Bravely Default) even so they don't take much space compare to PS5 games but also Switch own first party games all work on cartilage itself, meanwhile ALL PS5 games require you install data on PS5 no exceptions and PS5 games can range from 50GB to 100GB or even more.

No one is arguing that, but when the vast majority of Switch 2 games are on GKC, the 256GB is turning into a much, much worse issue.

 

[Danjin44]

No one is arguing that, but when the vast majority of Switch 2 games are on GKC, the 256GB is turning into a much, much worse issue.

To me that's already issue on PS5, that storage on original PS5 is not that big for the games take up so much space. Again I would say it's bigger issue on PS5.

 

[rodrigolfp]

they are a worse alternative to 1. digital titles

Nope as digital titles you can't resell.

 

[RoadHazard]

Because games cannot run off the disc?

Something like Rebirth ~100GB would take like an hour to install, it's faster to download?

The point is to have the game preserved in an offline format.

 

[nial]

To me that's already issue on PS5, that storage on original PS5 is not that big for the games take up so much space. Again I would say it's bigger issue on PS5.

That's because PS5 has larger games not yet available on Switch 2.
Final Fantasy VII Rebirth alone on Switch 2 will take up over half of the console's internal storage.

 

[Minsc]

The point is to have the game preserved in an offline format.

The internet already does this for me if I need it, which is extremely unlikely. So the point is lost on me, I/you would struggle to find any large scale case where that was a lifesaver.

Furthermore my "offline" media like UHD blurays - which I own hundreds of, seems contradictory but don't you worry, I do not own a device capable of playing them outside of on the PC which I use to rip them to my Plex server, those offline bluray discs routinely go bad/arrive in poor condition. And it's not just me, search any forum like blu-ray.com, there are hundreds and hundreds of people routinely returning bad physical discs because they skip/mess up on their players.

So if anything I think having digital media is a lot safer than physical based on my experiences.

I think for portable device, using it in the place with no or poor internet connection (ot with data caps) is quite likely.

And 15 years from when Switch 2 servers are no longer with us you could still use it.

I can still download every digital game I've purchased, from even longer than 15 years ago. Even 25 years ago. Games I purchased 35+ years ago and can't even run (like on floppies), I can still purchase and play digitally from Steam/GOG or download if they're abandoned. So it's a very weak argument.

If I was going on a plane with limited internet, or to a remote island, I'd simply load the games up ahead of time, set the device to offline mode, and be done.

If I was going to permanently relocate to the hermit lifestlye and live life unplugged from the world entirely, no cell phone, no internet, no TV, nothing at all, no electricity even, then your argument starts looking more appealing, but probably be better off simply buying a few handhelds capable of emulating GB through Switch /PS3 and loading them up on a 2TB card/drive, and get myself a nice big solar panel.

 

[Hero_Select]

I think for portable device, using it in the place with no or poor internet connection (ot with data caps) is quite likely.

And 15 years from when Switch 2 servers are no longer with us you could still use it.

You can still redownload Wii games that you purchased in 2006 - almost 19 years ago.

 

[Physiognomonics]

Since when developers are worried about loading times?

 

[Bojji]

The internet already does this for me if I need it, which is extremely unlikely. So the point is lost on me, I/you would struggle to find any large scale case where that was a lifesaver.

Furthermore my "offline" media like UHD blurays - which I own hundreds of, seems contradictory but don't you worry, I do not own a device capable of playing them outside of on the PC which I use to rip them to my Plex server, those offline bluray discs routinely go bad/arrive in poor condition. And it's not just me, search any forum like blu-ray.com, there are hundreds and hundreds of people routinely returning bad physical discs because they skip/mess up on their players.

So if anything I think having digital media is a lot safer than physical based on my experiences.



I can still download every digital game I've purchased, from even longer than 15 years ago. Even 25 years ago. Games I purchased 35+ years ago and can't even run (like on floppies), I can still purchase and play digitally from Steam/GOG or download if they're abandoned. So it's a very weak argument.

If I was going on a plane with limited internet, or to a remote island, I'd simply load the games up ahead of time, set the device to offline mode, and be done.

If I was going to permanently relocate to the hermit lifestlye and live life unplugged from the world entirely, no cell phone, no internet, no TV, nothing at all, no electricity even, then your argument starts looking more appealing, but probably be better off simply buying a few handhelds capable of emulating GB through Switch /PS3 and loading them up on a 2TB card/drive, and get myself a nice big solar panel.

You can still redownload Wii games that you purchased in 2006 - almost 19 years ago.

You can also do that with PS3 (even store still works) bur stores for Xbox 360 and Wii were shut down. And for DSi:

• No DSi Shop access:
  The ability to download games or other content from the Nintendo DSi Shop was terminated in 2017.

This will happen to every console and portable at some point.

Since when developers are worried about loading times?

It's also about loading assets in real time, not only loading times.

 

[asdasdasdbb]

That's because PS5 has larger games not yet available on Switch 2.
Final Fantasy VII Rebirth alone on Switch 2 will take up over half of the console's internal storage.

I'm not even sure Square can even offer the Twin Pack. That's gonna be awkward.

 

[Hudo]

Peak irony that Square are talking about performance while choosing Unreal Engine for the disaster that is the FF7 Remake trilogy.

 

[Hero_Select]

You can also do that with PS3 (even store still works) bur stores for Xbox 360 and Wii were shut down. And for DSi:



This will happen to every console and portable at some point.



It's also about loading assets in real time, not only loading times.

You can still redownload purchased games on your DSi, and its ever easier if you transferred your account to the 3DS though.

Yeah it sucks I can't boot up my Wii or DS and buy new games for it for sure though

 

[Fbh]

I still think the best solution is cheaper and slower cartridges that just install the game on the internal storage. If the current cartridges are already too expensive for most devs, some hypothetical faster ones will be even more so.

Peak irony that Square are talking about performance while choosing Unreal Engine for the disaster that is the FF7 Remake trilogy.

To be fair to them they use UE4 which doesn't run as horribly as 5 on consoles.
Rebirth Runs at 60fps and above 1080p on base Ps5, though I wouldn't blame people for not knowing this because it looks blurry as fuck for some reason.

Also FFXVI, which was made on their own engine instead of unreal, runs like shit.

 

[daclynk]

Is there any reason as to why Nintendo couldn't allow optional game installs like it was done on PS3?

 

[Durin]

It's just money. They don't want to pay for the additional cost of the cartridge, much less need 2 for bigger games.

The dumb part from Nintendo is they didn't include a way to expand faster internal storage, so even if they let you offload from cartridge to internal storage...it is limited to less than 256gb. PS5 even figured this out neatly by letting you add common m2 nvme sizes, Microsoft used CFexpress to package nvme drives into a plug & play format...but Nintendo just said "fuck it, here's micro sd again, but the express cards for modest boost".

They should've done what the Asus Rog Ally X does by supporting a 2nd m2 2280 slot that can add up to 8TB, or at least a smaller m2 2230 slot like the Steam Deck that can get to 2TB. Make it easier by cutting out a section for it in the back, use a screw to unlock it, and then set the m2 drive down, and screw it back on. Problem solved for future proofing.

 

[mrpants]

If I'm concerned about loading speed I would have purchased PS5 version of the game.

Nintendo used to be my go to for physical collection and now I'm leaning towards PS5 disc more with definitely the fastest loading speed.

 

[Minsc]

It's just money. They don't want to pay for the additional cost of the cartridge, much less need 2 for bigger games.

The dumb part from Nintendo is they didn't include a way to expand faster internal storage, so even if they let you offload from cartridge to internal storage...it is limited to less than 256gb. PS5 even figured this out neatly by letting you add common m2 nvme sizes, Microsoft used CFexpress to package nvme drives into a plug & play format...but Nintendo just said "fuck it, here's micro sd again, but the express cards for modest boost".

They should've done what the Asus Rog Ally X does by supporting a 2nd m2 2280 slot that can add up to 8TB, or at least a smaller m2 2230 slot like the Steam Deck that can get to 2TB. Make it easier by cutting out a section for it in the back, use a screw to unlock it, and then set the m2 drive down, and screw it back on. Problem solved for future proofing.

Wait, so are you saying if you buy a 1TB or 2TB SD EX / Express card, you can't use that to expand the storage for any game? I didn't know that was the case.

 

[Durin]

Wait, so are you saying if you buy a 1TB or 2TB SD EX / Express card, you can't use that to expand the storage for any game? I didn't know that was the case.

No, my understanding is the Nintendo Switch 2 does not currently support installing game data from physical game cartridges onto the Micro SD Express card to improve speed or load times. I believe with game key cards or digital games, you can download those to the micro-sd storage to run off that.

The internal 256gb of faster storage can only store digital games, game key card game downloads, patch data and save files. I'm just lamenting that Nintendo didn't build in a solution to expand the actual faster internal storage, or offer a way to install all game data from a game cartridge to that faster storage. You're basically stuck with micro-sd express speeds once you fill up that 256gb with digital games or game key card titles.

 

[Minsc]

No, my understanding is the Nintendo Switch 2 does not currently support installing game data from physical game cartridges onto the Micro SD Express card to improve speed or load times. I believe with game key cards or digital games, you can download those to the micro-sd storage to run off that.

The internal 256gb of faster storage can only store digital games, game key card game downloads, patch data and save files. I'm just lamenting that Nintendo didn't build in a solution to expand the actual faster internal storage, or offer a way to install all game data from a game cartridge to that faster storage. You're basically stuck with micro-sd express speeds once you fill up that 256gb with digital games or game key card titles.

Claim 1 (unless I'm mistaken by the thread itself): Capcom / SE say gamecards are too slow for playing games on.
Claim 2 (by me): You can play these same games on SD EX cards you've bought to expand the system's storage.

How is that possible? Aren't they too slow since that is the reason the game's are not on them in the first place? Or are the gamecards not as good as the SD EX cards? Only two things make sense to me:
1) Switch 2 games cannot be installed on expanded SD EX storage (which I was not aware of).
2) Game cards are much slower than the SD EX cards.

It is very short sighted if they made it support the SD EX format for expanding storage, but didn't utilize the format in the game cards I guess.

 

[Durin]

Claim 1 (unless I'm mistaken by the thread itself): Capcom / SE say gamecards are too slow for playing games on.
Claim 2 (by me): You can play these same games on SD EX cards you've bought to expand the system's storage.

How is that possible? Aren't they too slow since that is the reason the game's are not on them in the first place? Or are the gamecards not as good as the SD EX cards? Only two things make sense to me:
1) Switch 2 games cannot be installed on expanded SD EX storage (which I was not aware of).
2) Game cards are much slower than the SD EX cards.

It is very short sighted if they made it support the SD EX format for expanding storage, but didn't utilize the format in the game cards I guess.

So basically my understanding is that actual game cartridges with data on them are significantly slower (I think near 50% slower vs internal) and have longer load times than both Micro-SD EX and the internal storage that digital Switch 2 games can use. The game key cards though are basically a drm-check to download the games on either internal storage or Micro-SD EX.

Even then, the internal storage of the Switch 2 is not an nvme SSD like the Steam Deck (and other handhelds) or PS5/Series X use, instead it's UFS storage ranging between 500-1000 MB/sec when I look it up. The nvme ssd in the Steam Deck is pcie 3.0 I believe, so that's around 2000-3500 MB/sec, and the PS5 uses pcie 4.0 nvme equivalent running at 5500 MB/sec with up to 7000 MB/sec if you buy the fastest pcie 4.0 nvme available to add in to its extra slot.

I just wish the Switch 2 included nvme storage like the Steam Deck, since it's a newer device, and expected to last for likely 6-8 years like the Switch 1. I don't know why you also can't install the data from the game cartridges on to the internal or Micro-SD EX storage, since that would work out similar to blu-ray disc PS5/Xbox games installing to internal storage, and that way devs wouldn't have the excuse to resort to game key cards for AAA titles. Just sucks, because you lose the preservation benefit for those games, and are reliant on Nintendo keeping up servers to download the games.

 

[Minsc]

So basically my understanding is that actual game cartridges with data on them are significantly slower (I think near 50% slower vs internal) and have longer load times than both Micro-SD EX and the internal storage that digital Switch 2 games can use. The game key cards though are basically a drm-check to download the games on either internal storage or Micro-SD EX.

Even then, the internal storage of the Switch 2 is not an nvme SSD like the Steam Deck (and other handhelds) or PS5/Series X use, instead it's UFS storage ranging between 500-1000 MB/sec when I look it up. The nvme ssd in the Steam Deck is pcie 3.0 I believe, so that's around 2000-3500 MB/sec, and the PS5 uses pcie 4.0 nvme equivalent running at 5500 MB/sec with up to 7000 MB/sec if you buy the fastest pcie 4.0 nvme available to add in to its extra slot.

I just wish the Switch 2 included nvme storage like the Steam Deck, since it's a newer device, and expected to last for likely 6-8 years like the Switch 1. I don't know why you also can't install the data from the game cartridges on to the internal or Micro-SD EX storage, since that would work out similar to blu-ray disc PS5/Xbox games installing to internal storage, and that way devs wouldn't have the excuse to resort to game key cards for AAA titles. Just sucks, because you lose the preservation benefit for those games, and are reliant on Nintendo keeping up servers to download the games.

Yeah that about checks out, except IMO you over estimate the Deck SSD speeds. While PCIE 3.0 is indeed topping out around 3500MB/s, the 256/512 GB models only really saw ~2GB/s, and to be honest it feels a shit ton slower to me on my OLED Deck. Because that's sequential speed, and if you look at a disk test like this, you can see random write times drop to 200MB/s and read times as low as 30MB/s. And when you factor in patching game data which requires decryption + read/write data, it goes nothing like a Gen 4 nVME desktop IMO. Of course you can swap the drive for far better speeds if you wish as well.

Also fun fact the 64GB model had significantly worse speeds, even than the Switch 2, see here.

 

[nial]

why

 

[Durin]

Yeah that about checks out, except IMO you over estimate the Deck SSD speeds. While PCIE 3.0 is indeed topping out around 3500MB/s, the 256/512 GB models only really saw ~2GB/s, and to be honest it feels a shit ton slower to me on my OLED Deck. Because that's sequential speed, and if you look at a disk test like this, you can see random write times drop to 200MB/s and read times as low as 30MB/s. And when you factor in patching game data which requires decryption + read/write data, it goes nothing like a Gen 4 nVME desktop IMO. Of course you can swap the drive for far better speeds if you wish as well.

Also fun fact the 64GB model had significantly worse speeds, even than the Switch 2, see here.

Yeah, I just short handed the generic ranges that usually go off sequential reads. So many other use-cases for games are going to be vary lower.

IMO, the 64gb Steam Deck was never worth it (eMMC is absolutely worse than UFS), unless you wanted to save some cash opening it up to replace it with an nvme ssd to save some bucks. You can't even get a 64gb one now save for the very occasional refurbished batches, the 256gb model LCD and 512gb OLED are still the best value to just pick up and play.

I just wish Nintendo went with a better standard for internal memory, or offered a better upgrade option. It wouldn't have cost them much to do.

 

[Hudo]

Also FFXVI, which was made on their own engine instead of unreal, runs like shit.

Runs better on my PC than both Remake and fucking Rebirth, I have to say.

 

[Coolio McAwesome]

It seems like publishers are trying to defend the existence of game-key cards, but the only way to do that is to level criticism against proper game cards.

We're constantly being told that Switch 2 cards are too expensive, they're not fast enough, and they don't have enough storage space. Any valid defense of game-key cards is an indictment against the standard Switch 2 game cards. Publishers are telling us that they HAVE to use game-ley cards, because the standard game cards suck too hard! That's not a good look for Nintendo's newly minted system.