It's been a few months. Are game carts a viable option compared

>>385312965

> Are game carts a viable option compared to discs?

You understand the only nintendo console to NOT use carts was the gaycube, right?

>>385313454
And the Wii, and the Wii U. And the fact that both Sony and Microsoft are currently using discs in their consoles.

I'm just asking how Switch carts are holding up against bluray discs son

>>385312965
>being retarded

>It's been a few months
It's been three decades

>Are game carts a viable option compared to discs?
Yeah

>Are loading times noticeably different?
Sometimes

>Does the 32gb cap get in the way often?
Sometimes

>Does the bitterness prevent kids from swallowing it?
I dunno. Have you swallowed a cart yet?

Yes they are, they're faster. Most games have uncompressed textures, video and music and could be easily be more compact for downloading or fitting in a cartridge. Besides that they're similiar we can't write to the Blu-rays to get any advantage on wasted space on them so saving files and updates are all stored in the console, same for cartridges.

Breath of the wild takes about a minute to load any given scene whenever you teleport to one of the sky pillars.

It's shit. As usual Nintendo fucked up entirely. Why do they even try?

>>385312965
It's already been debated hell and back. Cartridges are much faster than discs, fast. However, cartridges cost more per GB to produce than discs. A 50GB Blu-ray costs pennies to make, a 50GB cartridge costs dollars.

Optical media has been obsolete for about a decade now.
The only reason why people are still using discs is because they're incredibly cheap to manufacture compared to carts.

>>385313961
I'm playing on Wii U, and I don't have this problem, I've seen lag exactly once when I played, never really had any slow down, never saw a single glitch yet, I have about 70 hours in the game.

>>385313454
No it wasn't.

>>385313864
>Most games have uncompressed textures
No

File: 1489502480037.jpg (19KB, 470x323px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 470x323px

>>385312965
>cartridges are faster than discs
>speed runners rather play Wii u version of BOTW because loading times are faster
Defend this

>>385313454
Wii and Wii u?

>>385312965
Are you okay with paying 10 dollars more?

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

>>385312965
handheld using cart is normal

They said that 64GB carts will be out by February of 2018, so we see.

>>385314226
Switch is not a handheld.

>>385314192
ok speed runners are autistic and play games because it loads faster, not because the game is good or the controls are more fun on another system

>>385314240
but will developers be using them when having 64gb carts inevitably end up being too expensive to print?

File: 1500610976298.jpg (155KB, 334x334px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 334x334px

>>385314269
nice try nintendo

>third party publishers already opting to download and install to disk rather than pay for a cartridge larger than 2GB
>because they know the sales of non-nintendo games on the system aren't worth it

>>385314192
Switch has a weaker CPU which translates into slower I/O reading. It's like transferring files through FTP on a hacked Old 3DS. You could have a class 10 speed SD card and 100mb/s internet connection but the Old 3DS CPU will limit you to max of about 5mb/s for installs/transfers.

>>385314192

Cartridges are faster than discs, but flash cards are not "cartridges". Cartridges, which haven't been used since the N64, are basically pieces of RAM where the memory isn't volatile. They're as fast as RAM (or on that order) but are about as expensive to make. They're also fucking gigantic, you wouldn't be able to shrink one down to even a GBA cart (which used flash memory in its internals) whilst holding a decent amount of data.

Flash cards are some kind of happy medium between discs and carts. They'll be able to hold more than discs starting from 2018, and they load much faster, yet they're far cheaper but slower than true cartridges.

>>385313978
yep case in point, thread closed.

for an example, see HDDs and SSDs

>>385314367
>Switch has a weaker CPU

No it doesn't

>>385314269
sure it is.

>>385314192
>>385314367
>>385314276
It's a rushed port, that's the actual reason. Stop talking nonsense.

>>385314192
Speedrunners play the digital version not the disc based version.

>>385314508
Switch uses a low power ARM CPU. They did it on purpose to make the system cheaper and to make it go into handheld mode without burning your hand. Even when the switch is docked it doesn't hold a candle to Wii U's PowerPC CPU.

The only thing the switch does better is GPU and RAM

File: bust-a-move.jpg (2MB, 2524x1484px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2524x1484px

>>385314456
see the big black cartridge? it could hold hundreds of megabytes but only the largest had something larger than standard cds.

or it could be bust-a-move and be a 1.1mb game on a cartridge the size of a fucking dinner plate.

>>385314668
Jesus stop spouting bullshit

>>385314018
Go kill a Moblin base and enjoy our silky smooth experience :^)

I'm only downloading games on the switch because I know I'm going to lose them if I ever buy a cartridge game for it

>>385312965
Not really because the internet and digital distribution and 8TB harddrives. If you need a physical alternative it might as well be the cheapest which is still discs.

>>385314752
It happened exactly once when I killed a moulin, haven't seen it since and I've killed enough that the white ones are out. I don't know what the problem is

>>385314746
Do you honestly believe that a fucking low power consumption tablet CPU is better than a real home console CPU that's never underclocked because it doesn't have to worry about battery or melting your hand?

>>385314192
Does it really? I've played both versions now and it feels like the switch is faster, runs a hell of a lot smoother at least

>>385314938
That's because the switch version has more patches than the Wii u verison. Nintendo really wants people to forget the Wii U exists.

>>385312965
Yes, the cartridges are much faster
But whatever, I prefer to have them in digital format

What kind of child old enough to play video games thinks it would be a good idea to put a video game in their mouth?

>>385314930

So by your logic a modern high-end ARMv8 chip is weaker than an 80486 because the former is aimed at mobile devices?

>>385315509
I don't know about literal kids but there was a bunch of grown ass men licking Switch carts because it was the vidya version of a Cinnamin Challenge.

Is there anything stopping Nintendo from making a 64 Gb version of the game cart?

>>385312965

It suits Nintendo games pretty fine, as the Switch is basically tablet hardware, so, we're not dealing with massive or overly impressive games.

>>385314317
They were ready by launch but Nintendo held them back due to cost, by February of 2018 the carts will turn a profit at the stander $60 MSRP.

They did this with their handhelds all the time in the past.

>>385313454
You shouldn't post on /v/ if you have no idea about anything related to video games
>>>/a/

>>385315897
>we're not dealing with massive or overly impressive games
BotW is massive.

>>385314198
>>385313620

The Wii was two Gamecubes duct taped together and the Wii-u was two Wii's duct taped together.

Ergo, only the Gamecube used discs

>>385313620
both the xbox and ps4 install the entire game on the HDD and the disk is pretty much used as an access key of sorts since read speeds of blu ray discs are not fast enough to be used on their own. the switch carts have much faster read speeds so almost all the data stays on the cart.
>>385314456
i think it also has to do with the data transfer method. old carts had a crapton of pins so you could assume it used parallel connection to transfer an entire byte per cycle. flash cards have fewer pins and instead rely on transfer methods similar to i2c where every cycle will send a single bit. this can affect read times overall and is more limited to the how fast the card can reliably be when transferring data which is why there are different classes of sd cards

>>385313858
>>It's been a few months
>It's been three decades
Did you remember to take your meds today anon?

File: Planetes.jpg (44KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 500x375px

>>385312965
>Are game carts a viable option compared to discs?
Nope, cards are the worst possible choice, but the only one they can chose for portable systems.
Disks are just a means to an end and they work perfectly for it, not costing any more than they should.
Cards on the other hand are 20x more expensive than a Bluray disk and even more so if you want to go beyond the standard storage cap (so most devs don't).

Card VS Disk speeds are literally irrelevant because games don't run from disks. You merely use disks to install the game, if you don't just buy it digitally in the first place. So it's a comparison between Cards VS HDD/SSD's, which is about the same.

The only thing Cards to is push away developers due to their higher costs or increase game prices to the final consumer (even if they buy the digital version, because Nintendo and other publishers want a parity between retail and digital prices).
Disks are the perfect medium to a full digital-only transition which will happen in a decade or two. You want want a physical thing to store your game. You don't want that physical thing to be expensive or to have good read/write speeds. It's there to intall the game onto your HDD/SSD and activate it on your account, so that you may re-download it on any console worldwide afterward.

TL;DR - Digital is best. Disks are better. Cards are the worst (especially proprietary ones) but the only viable solution for portable consoles until we go full digital.

>>385316053

Pretty shallow though, there's not a lot of landscape or monster variety.

>>385316283
>both the xbox and ps4 install the entire game on the HDD
If that were the case you wouldn't be able to play more than 8 games total due to how bloated games are nowadays. Also the disc wouldn't need to be read while playing.

>>385312965
>Are game carts a viable option compared to discs?
yes for portable console. And Switch is portable.

>Does the 32gb cap get in the way often?
I have 8 cartridge games and so far everything's been great, not much different from discs, sure there are also patches distributed via network, but so far I haven't encountered any large xxGB day one patches.

>Does the bitterness prevent kids from swallowing it?
>having whining, crying, smelly filth bags

>>385316618
>Cards on the other hand are 20x more expensive
You realise that they've been dirt cheap for the past what 10 years now?

>>385315656
What you say is irrelevant. What is relevant is the fact that Switch ARM CPU is weak compared to PS4 and even Wii U.

>>385312965
They're the only option going forward.
If all games go digital then harddrives have to get much larger, meaning a huge cost increase on consoles or else people will abandon the console. Even with discs, lazy devs are making the player install the whole fucking game.

Cartridges are the only way to hold games the traditional way, without installs, still have incredibly fast loading times. They can be advanced mid console cycle to do more with the same console hardware. If the console devs make them a decent size, then you won't have problems of dropping and losing them and they could hold far more data, more cheaply.

To top it off, there isn't really a mechanism where the publishers can do anything to raise prices either. Most publishers have had enough bad will come their way recently that a move like that would be suicide. And the market it so competitive that risking that would result in lost sales to another competitor. So it's the best course. And the tech is extremely cheap nowadays anyways. So any excuses you hear from somebody complaining over the costs are bullshit. There are much closer to Blu ray costs than old cartridges ever were to traditional CDs.

>>385317110
Wii U:
>1.24 GHz Tri-Core IBM PowerPC "Espresso"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wii_U

Switch:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo_Switch
>Octa-core (4×ARM Cortex-A57 & 4×ARM Cortex-A53) @ 1.020 GHz

Holy fuck, you're right

>>385313978
Honestly, it doesn't even matter since digital download is the future. But cartridges does have the unique bonus of being small enough to be taken anywhere.

>>385314192

I thought speedrunners preferred the Wii U version because of some crap about whistling for the horse while on the run?

>>385317294
Not even factoring ghz, ARM architecture in general can't compute as much as PowerPC or x86_64

>>385317819
>it doesn't even matter since digital download is the future.
Eh not really.

>>385318113
Whistling while running gives you infinite stamina as long as you keep on whistling.
It's also possible on both versions.

>>385316080
XD

>>385317067
Right, that's why numerous games on the Switch are $10 more expensive than the PS4/Xbone port.
That's why developers and publishers themselves admited that the cartridges were the reason for the price increase.

Aight Anon, aight.

>>385316080
haha that joke was so funny i forgot to laugh haha

>>385312965
Cartridges are more expensive than blu ray disc.
By enforcing cartridges, nintendo can charge more to developers. Developers have to eat the cost if they wanna make switch games.

>>385317067
The difference is, nintendo cartridges are not the same as common cards like sd cards. Thus nintendo reserve the rights to charge devs whatever they want.

>>385316080
>The Wii was two Gamecubes duct taped together
It wasn't even that, it was pretty much a slightly upgrade Gamecube with new controls
>the Wii-u was two Wii's duct taped together
Also false, it was a completey new system and much more powerful, but that does make it extra retarded that they gave it the same name with a U

>>385314668
Fake news.

>>385318381
>that's why numerous games on the Switch are $10 more expensive than the PS4/Xbone port.
They aren't in first world countries.

>>385318720
What the fuck does that even mean, and why the fuck are they still more expensive in my 1st world country then?

Just go live in your own fanboy bubble please. Your denial is disgusting.

>>385316958
Yeah? 8 games in and my ps4 is full. Stop posting when you don't know what you're on about

>>385318842
>in my 1st world country
Because you're not in a first world country anon.

Discs > Cartridges
Games these days don't even play from the disc anymore, they install all the disc data directly to the hard drive or SSD. The prices of disc based games also go down quicker than cartridges, which is better for consumers.

>>385318865
>Stop posting when you don't know what you're on about
>he still thinks that discs are full installs
I don't think you realise what thatexams ams how much space it requires to do such a thing for multiple games that nowadays push 60 to 100 GB not including updates, patches and DLC.

>>385318946
>Discs > Cartridges
>Games these days don't even play from the disc anymore, they install all the disc data directly to the hard drive or SSD.

Why do you think that is? All you've proven is that Disc+H/SDD > Cartridge, but that wasn't the topic. Cartridges can be combined with base storage too.

Take the H/SDD out of the equation, especially in a portable console, and what do you get? The only real downside to cartridges is that they're more expensive.

>>385319624
>The only real downside to cartridges is that they're more expensive
That's not exactly an easily dismissed concern, especially when you're supposed to be making millions of the things. Sure, it's probably not going to be hurting the bottom line too much relatively, but the benefits of cartridges/flash don't themselves have an easily quantifiable number, so the people looking at the spreadsheets blanch when you're playing millions more for them.

For a handheld, they've become pretty much essential. The only one that I know of that took discs was the PSP with its goofy UMD. It was a pretty cool device, I won't lie, but it did make the problems with using discs on a portable apparent and Sony went with flash for the successor. The benefits for a portable, more than the general ones for cartridges, no doubt drove the decision for the Switch.

>>385313961
nigger what?
the game doesn't take even 45 seconds to load even the heaviest areas for me
and i play on the switch

>>385320001
Sure, I get it from a business standpoint. I was looking at things from the consumer and technical sides. But yeah, the suits aren't the ones playing the games, so it's a totally different line of reasoning.

>>385316618
>Digital is best
Opinion Discarded

>>385314668
>Even when the switch is docked it doesn't hold a candle to Wii U's PowerPC CPU.
Yes it does.

>>385319624
Not really.

>>385320473
Digital is potentially the best, unless your only option is to store the data on a shitty storage device. Other downsides are anti-tamper software and the fact that you don't really own the game.