Is the Nintendo Switch cartridge capacity size no longer an issue as of 2019? Do we get to see some leeway on this front?

[delete12345]

I read upon an interview about Virtuos porting Final Fantasy X and X2 to the Switch here:

https://nintendoeverything.com/virt...ter-zodiac-age-to-switch-challenges-and-more/

(I think there is a separate thread that posted this already...)

But the main takeaway is that Virtuos is considering how to fit 50GB of raw data onto a 32GB cartridge.

Back in 2017, our favorite admin, ZhugeEX, mentioned how 32GB would cost 60% more to manufacture:



But now we're in the start of 2019. Maybe 32GB cartridges will become cheaper towards the end of 2019, beginning of 2020? Maybe we might be able to see 64GB cartridges, as claimed by Nintendo towards the end of 2019?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/ninten...abyte-switch-game-cards-until-2019-1514360941

 

[Gay Bowser]

I'm actually surprised a 32GB Switch cart only costs 60% more than a Blu-ray. Blu-rays are hella cheap to make.

 

[Deleted member 1413]

Virtuous quote is weird.
X2 is a download for XHD.

I guess Zodiac age is 40GB which is weirdly large already

 

[Eoin]

There will never be a point where the cost of the cards is "no longer an issue". It should become a smaller issue over time, and that's your realistic best-case scenario.

I'm actually surprised a 32GB Switch cart only costs 60% more than a Blu-ray. Blu-rays are hella cheap to make.

Click to shrink...

The context of that quote is the entire cost of the production of the game, so it includes the other materials in the package, the package itself (and the process of packaging), and perhaps shipping. With a card, all the other steps in the process are the same cost as a Blu-ray or lower, the premium of 60% over the cost of a Blu-ray package is entirely down to the card format.

 

[Doctre81]

Virtuous quote is weird.
X2 is a download for XHD.

I guess Zodiac age is 40GB which is weirdly large already

Click to shrink...

Its not weird. One of the games is as large was 50GB originally and they got both games down to 32GB each for a total of 64GB for both the games total. It's on a 32GB cart so the first game is on the cart while the 2nd game is a download

 

[Glio]

It will continue to be a problem but it will be a smaller one due to economy of scale.

Beyond that, it is an intrinsic problem of portability for which there is no solution. It's not like they could have put a blu-ray player. I think anyway that several thirds partys are going to be encouraged to port their games as they go cheaper costs.

 

[delete12345]

I'm actually surprised a 32GB Switch cart only costs 60% more than a Blu-ray. Blu-rays are hella cheap to make.

Click to shrink...

I'm assuming it's because there are extra materials required when manufacturing the medium.

 

[The Boat]

I would like to know values actually, although it's probably not going to happen. What about smaller cards? I have my doubts the mark-up some publishers put on Switch physical games (that I think also translates to the digital version?) is proportional to the extra cost, especially as I'm pretty sure some of these games use smaller capacity cards. I don't know if this price difference continues to happen or is common though.

There will never be a point where the cost of the cards is "no longer an issue". It should become a smaller issue over time, and that's your realistic best-case scenario.


The context of that quote is the entire cost of the production of the game, so it includes the other materials in the package, the package itself (and the process of packaging), and perhaps shipping. With a card, all the other steps in the process are the same cost as a Blu-ray or lower, the premium of 60% over the cost of a Blu-ray package is entirely down to the card format.

Click to shrink...

Indeed, packaging and shipping should be cheaper on the Switch due to the smaller physical size (less plastic on the box, a single shipment can take more boxes). There was actually a very interesting post on GAF a few years ago from someone who worked with the logistics involved in packaging and shipping, which is something people usually don't think about.

 

[DestroyerOfWorlds]

In most regions it looks like X-2 is actually a download and not on the cartridge. So, they're probably using 16gb carts in those areas to cut costs.

So, yeah, I believe it's still a limitation.

Especially when you consider the fact that many games this gen are 100+ GB. No clean way to put that on the switch.

 

[Nuclear Muffin]

The cartridge size will forever be an issue, even when prices come down and sizes get bigger.

It's always cheaper to use the smallest available card and make the consumer eat the storage costs. Publishers (especially western ones) will always do this at every opportunity so long as Nintendo lets them.

They don't give a fuck about you, especially if you're a Nintendo console owner, you are a mark and a mug to them and nothing more.

 

[Nilaul]

In most regions it looks like X-2 is actually a download and not on the cartridge. So, they're probably using 16gb carts in those areas to cut costs.

So, yeah, I believe it's still a limitation.

Especially when you consider the fact that many games this gen are 100+ GB. No clean way to put that on the switch.

Click to shrink...

I persume those 100+ GB games basically include 4k textures, and multiple languages, videos etc.

 

[Zedark]

I'm actually surprised a 32GB Switch cart only costs 60% more than a Blu-ray. Blu-rays are hella cheap to make.

Click to shrink...

It's actually that the summed cost of platform royalties plus blu-ray/card cost is 60% higher iirc.

 

[DestroyerOfWorlds]

I persume those 100+ GB games basically include 4k textures, and multiple languages, videos etc.

Click to shrink...

Not necessarily. Some were out before the X1X or PS4 Pro, so there was no need for those assets.

 

[EvilBoris]

I'm actually surprised a 32GB Switch cart only costs 60% more than a Blu-ray. Blu-rays are hella cheap to make.

Click to shrink...

That's probably not the cost of the disc, it'll be the cost that a publisher pays the platform holder to manufacture each copy of a game.

 

[HotHamBoy]

There will never be a point where the cost of the cards is "no longer an issue". It should become a smaller issue over time, and that's your realistic best-case scenario.

Click to shrink...

Yeah, anytime a publisher can cut costs they will. You'll still get games that have Switch tax, you'll still get games that force a download of a big chunk of data because the smaller cards are even cheaper than they were before.

Oh, btw, most games that impose a Switch tax are using one of the sub 8gb cards.

 

[TanookiTom]

I'm actually surprised a 32GB Switch cart only costs 60% more than a Blu-ray. Blu-rays are hella cheap to make.

Click to shrink...

This. That should not add up to the 10$/€ premium publishers are sometimes charging for Switch versions. And even scaled up should not constitute such a huge amount no?

Would be nice to see some calculations for that. I am also wondering if the problem is more on Nintendo's side (overcharging on the carts) or if it simply can't be helped due to manufacturing costs.

 

[Deleted member 426]

This. That should not add up to the 10$/€ premium publishers are sometimes charging for Switch versions. And even scaled up should not constitute such a huge amount no?

Would be nice to see some calculations for that. I am also wondering if the problem is more on Nintendo's side (overcharging on the carts) or if it simply can't be helped due to manufacturing costs.

Click to shrink...

I believe the cost of 32GB carts was over $20, so it most definitely was on Nintendo.
However it does look like that is over, which is great news.

Whilst it is shipping on a 16GB in the west, that might be SE being a bit cheap, if they don't expect the physical sales to be that high. Especially as digital is getting so big in the West. It would be a bit of a waste of money to appease the handful of people that care about it.

 

[CommodoreKong]

I'm actually surprised a 32GB Switch cart only costs 60% more than a Blu-ray. Blu-rays are hella cheap to make.

Click to shrink...

The 60% higher costs includes the Blu-Ray and platform holder license fee. A single 32GB Switch card costs more than $20 per card for third party publishers. I imagine Nintendo eats some of the cost of the card in their license fee since they weren't willing to put Bayonetta 1 and 2 on a 32 GB card in most of the world despite not having to pay themselves a license fee.

 

[Oregano]

Yeah, anytime a publisher can cut costs they will. You'll still get games that have Switch tax, you'll still get games that force a download of a big chunk of data because the smaller cards are even cheaper than they were before.

Oh, btw, most games that impose a Switch tax are using one of the sub 8gb cards.

Click to shrink...

Yup, I remember Zhuge even saying a long time ago that not every case of a Switch Tax was due to the cartridge cost, some were simply because the publisher could.

 

[mrfusticle]

The cartridge size will forever be an issue, even when prices come down and sizes get bigger.

It's always cheaper to use the smallest available card and make the consumer eat the storage costs. Publishers (especially western ones) will always do this at every opportunity so long as Nintendo lets them.

They don't give a fuck about you, especially if you're a Nintendo console owner, you are a mark and a mug to them and nothing more.

Click to shrink...

Or they're just looking to maximize profits.. sans all the weird grifter language

 

[Deleted member 426]

The cartridge size will forever be an issue, even when prices come down and sizes get bigger.

It's always cheaper to use the smallest available card and make the consumer eat the storage costs. Publishers (especially western ones) will always do this at every opportunity so long as Nintendo lets them.

They don't give a fuck about you, especially if you're a Nintendo console owner, you are a mark and a mug to them and nothing more.

Click to shrink...

Cartridge size can become less of an issue. You need to have a game that is at least playable on the cart. If you can't fit your game on the cart even with some compromises, then the game will not come to the platform.

That's the issue. If people were hoping it meant no more downloads then I'm afraid that'll still be a thing for publishers trying to save money.

 

[HotHamBoy]

Yup, I remember Zhuge even saying a long time ago that not every case of a Switch Tax was due to the cartridge cost, some were simply because the publisher could.

Click to shrink...

THQ seems to be the biggest perpetrator.

 

[Dekuman]

16GB cards do not include a PCB and only taks half of the cart space. We've afaik never seen a 32GB card at least the launch iteration. So I doubt it would include it either.

I assume for the new 32GB card to be worth it, it must occupy the current 16GB price tier and require a process shrink. This makes sense as 64GB cards are supposed to be rolled out this year, and looking at the Switch cart tear down videos, there simply wouldn't be enough space to fit a 64GB chip using the old process as 16GB chip used up 1/2 the physical cart space. To fit in the transistors for a 64GB cart, you'd need a chip roughly 2x bigger than what would fit.

If NamcoBandai can sell a 16GB game like Tales of Vesperia for $50 physical, cart prices must certainly have come down.

IMHO, if they can get 32GB cards to be a viable cost-wise for third parties, they should be in a good place in terms of ports.

 

[Mr Swine]

A while back around 2017, it was said that 8GB cards cost about as much as a 25GB Blu-Ray. I think back then it's impressive how far flash based media has gone.

Back then on the N64 I guess a 8MB cart cost several times a CD did. That was 1/80 of the capacity and now we have 32/64GB cards and even then a 8GB card is only 1/6 of the capacity.

Hopefully the 32GB cards cost a lot less to produce now

 

[Slam Tilt]

There will never be a point where the cost of the cards is "no longer an issue".

Click to shrink...

I welcome our All-Digital Overlords.

 

[Jedi2016]

Percentages are meaningless without knowing the actual numbers. When you're talking mass production, a Blu-ray disc probably costs pennies, so 60% more is still just pennies. If it's more than that, say so. Nintendo's NDA is intentional, I'm sure, they don't want publishers handing out how much they're charging per-card.

 

[gblues]

It's always cheaper to use the smallest available card and make the consumer eat the storage costs.

Click to shrink...

It's more insidious than that.

When entire games are downloads, the cart is instantly devalued. For example, I bought the Mega Man X collection 1+2, but if I resell it the buyer only gets volume 1–volume 2 is mine permanently.

And I think that's a big reason why Nintendo allow it, because it supports Japan's war on the secondary market.

 

[Dekuman]

Percentages are meaningless without knowing the actual numbers. When you're talking mass production, a Blu-ray disc probably costs pennies, so 60% more is still just pennies. If it's more than that, say so. Nintendo's NDA is intentional, I'm sure, they don't want publishers handing out how much they're charging per-card.

Click to shrink...

I believe it's been clarified the 60% is in relation to total cost, including packaging and platform royalties, so it's a lot. 32GB was never really an option but may be now based on the upcoming FFX/FFX-2 and FFXII ports using those cart sizes and 64GB cards becoming available this year.

The tweets and pricing referenced in this thread are also pretty old now.

 

[fiendcode]

I'm actually surprised a 32GB Switch cart only costs 60% more than a Blu-ray. Blu-rays are hella cheap to make.

Click to shrink...

It likely includes all platform fees. It's around $9 per unit for a $40-60 PS4/XB1 game so go from there.

 

[Eoin]

A while back around 2017, it was said that 8GB cards cost about as much as a 25GB Blu-Ray. I think back then it's impressive how far flash based media has gone.

Click to shrink...

That was also in the context of packaging and royalty costs. The assumption at the time was that Nintendo were reducing royalty costs to allow the 8GB tier to be as cheap as Blu-ray discs. If it were just the cost of producing the card vs the cost of producing the disc, the disc would win by a considerable margin over any sized card.

Percentages are meaningless without knowing the actual numbers. When you're talking mass production, a Blu-ray disc probably costs pennies, so 60% more is still just pennies. If it's more than that, say so. Nintendo's NDA is intentional, I'm sure, they don't want publishers handing out how much they're charging per-card.

Click to shrink...

The percentage you're quoting isn't about production, it is the percentage premium above the full costs of making the game, including platform-holder royalties. So if you imagine that the cost of producing a Blu-ray and paying Sony royalties is US$10, then the equivalent figure for putting out a 32GB Switch card is US$16, with the additional cost of the card coming entirely from the card being more expensive to produce than a disc.

It's not clear to me why you thought anyone would be talking about pennies. You hardly imagined Switch cards are that cheap?

 

[Zedark]

16GB cards do not include a PCB and only taks half of the cart space. We've afaik never seen a 32GB card at least the launch iteration. So I doubt it would include it either.

I assume for the new 32GB card to be worth it, it must occupy the current 16GB price tier and require a process shrink. This makes sense as 64GB cards are supposed to be rolled out this year, and looking at the Switch cart tear down videos, there simply wouldn't be enough space to fit a 64GB chip using the old process as 16GB chip used up 1/2 the physical cart space. To fit in the transistors for a 64GB cart, you'd need a chip roughly 2x bigger than what would fit.

If NamcoBandai can sell a 16GB game like Tales of Vesperia for $50 physical, cart prices must certainly have come down.

IMHO, if they can get 32GB cards to be a viable cost-wise for third parties, they should be in a good place in terms of ports.

Click to shrink...

Hmm, well, 16 GB games have been being sold for $50 for basically the duration of the Switch' lifetime, though, so I'm not sure Vesperia is a good indicator for that. A die shrink having taken place makes sense, though, if the 64 GB cards have come into being. That in itself might have made all cards (or at least the 32 GB one) cheaper, at least I hope so.

 

[fiendcode]

Resident Evil Revelations was on a 16GB card for $40 back in 2017.

 

[Zedark]

It's more insidious than that.

When entire games are downloads, the cart is instantly devalued. For example, I bought the Mega Man X collection 1+2, but if I resell it the buyer only gets volume 1–volume 2 is mine permanently.

And I think that's a big reason why Nintendo allow it, because it supports Japan's war on the secondary market.

Click to shrink...

This seems a bit baseless. Nintendo more likely allows it because publishers otherwise won't bother (or claim to not bother) releasing the game at all.

 

[Dekuman]

Hmm, well, 16 GB games have been being sold for $50 for basically the duration of the Switch' lifetime, though, so I'm not sure Vesperia is a good indicator for that. A die shrink having taken place makes sense, though, if the 64 GB cards have come into being. That in itself might have made all cards (or at least the 32 GB one) cheaper, at least I hope so.

Click to shrink...

I know Skyrim/ Doom are 16GB and have been on vairous sales, but I assume bethesda got a sweet publishing deal to release those. Off the top of my head, I can't think of a third party 16GB game that launched at a discounted price. But I haven't been following all the physical releases.

EDIT: Oh right, RER. Any idea how much16GB carts cost?

 

[delete12345]

The tweets and pricing referenced in this thread are also pretty old now.

Click to shrink...

They are old because I specifically mentioned old info from 2017.

The main takeaway is the new interview that came out yesterday (the first link in OP), talking about how 32GB are now viable to consider when downsizing the game from 50GB. This interview was done in 2019.

 

[Dekuman]

They are old because I specifically mentioned old info from 2017.

The main takeaway is the new interview that came out yesterday (the first link in OP), talking about how 32GB are now viable to consider when downsizing the game from 50GB.

Click to shrink...

I mean the actual tweets are from Sept 2017. I don't know how current the actual data is.

 

[delete12345]

I mean the actual tweets are from Sept 2017. I don't know how current the actual data is.

Click to shrink...

Oh. Well, I am still waiting for updates, hence the thread title question asking if there were anything new on the front.

 

[Sub Boss]

Its definetly going to continue to be an issue for developers and publishers, but not as much as before

 

[Ganondolf]

hopefully Nintendo has got the 32GB card's price down to the cost of the 16GB cards (& the 16GB to the 8GB cost etc).

I wonder the status of the 64GB cards, they were delayed from 2018 to this year so it may be that the 64GB cards are pending and will cost as much as the 32GB used too (assuming the 32GB cards have dropped in price).

 

[Dekuman]

Only reason for a delay of the 64GB card would be a manufacturing process delay , so the die shrink wasn't ready in 2018. I assume the old 32GB cards was basically stiching together two 16GB on a PCB or something (which is why I wish someone donated a JPN DQHeroes 1&2 cart to confirm this) this would explain the immense cost.

If they can get 32GB down onto 1 chip, it should be cheaper.