Even game developers hate Nintendo's Switch 2 virtual game cards

Cal Jeffrey

Posts: 4,595   +1,682
Staff member
Facepalm: Nintendo's Switch 2 has flown off store shelves, but the console's new physical media format has developers and players equally frustrated. The company's decision to limit cartridge options has turned what should have been a straightforward upgrade into an industry sore spot.

Past Nintendo consoles offered a range of cartridge storage capacities, allowing publishers to balance memory needs with production costs. The Switch 2 pares those choices down to just two: 64GB cartridges – the most expensive format – or Virtual Game Cards. Known among players as "key cards," these are cheaper to produce but force users to download large chunks of data.

The cards have proven especially unpopular. Players must keep one inserted to play, but it's really just a proof-of-purchase that triggers a download.

"The key card feels rather half-baked as it combines the drawbacks of both the physical and digital versions," Kazunori Ito, an analyst at Morningstar, told Bloomberg Japan.

Sales data underscores the problem. Daemon X Machina: Titanic Scion launched in the UK on a standard cartridge, where 72 percent of boxed copies sold on the Switch 2. By contrast, Nintendo released the same game as a Virtual Game Card in Japan, and only 40 percent of its physical sales landed on the Switch 2.

Nintendo says the format helps keep games affordable. Its cartridges rely on flash memory, which costs significantly more than the discs used by PlayStation and Xbox. Since many modern games require over 100 gigabytes of storage, a cartridge large enough to hold an entire title could easily add $10 to $20 or more to the retail price.

The debate comes as developers face mounting pressure from mobile and live-service giants that capture most players' attention. Studios had hoped Nintendo's console refresh would boost sales across the board, but restrictive media options are making it harder for outside creators to capitalize on the Switch 2's early success.

Nintendo's cartridge strategy has faced similar blowback since the Switch 2 launch. Earlier this year, Ubisoft developers flagged Switch 2 Virtual Game Cards as a bottleneck for high-performance titles, noting that the format lags far behind the console's internal SSD or MicroSD Express cards in raw speed. The limitation has already influenced decisions about how studios deliver blockbuster ports.

"For the Switch 2 to be successful in the long run, it needs to become a more attractive platform for outside game developers," Ito said. Right now, Virtual Game Cards are doing the opposite.

Permalink to story:

 
Nintendo has always prioritized copyright protection over encouraging 3rd party developers… not really a story…
 
It is not so much because of the cost of NAND/ flash memory. They did that to avoid letting people rip the game out and put it on something like the MIG and to try and drive digital sales up since they have tight control of pricing in the store.
 
It's Nintendon't. What else do you expect? A company that ruthlessly go after the poorest of the poorest without mercy will do this sort of nonsense to protect its copyright.

I'm just glad that people have successfully managed to hack every newer generation Nintendo consoles.
 
The Switch 2 is a portable gaming system. Blu-ray just wouldn't work. Spinning disk, using up battery life, high random access time, longer loading times. I'm sorry, but the idea is disgusting. The games would require full installations.

The article has a bias tone, trying to push an opinion. It takes something that a publisher says, and make it seem as if all publishers absolutely hate the game cards. That's not good.

From what I've seen, players do not like the game key cards, for preservation reasons, and have no issues with the regular game cards.
 
A 256GB SD Express card is £15 on Amazon.

Surely their 64GB (apparently) slower cartridge must be pennies.

Nintendo could easily give 128 and 256GB options without adding more than a fiver to the game package price, they’re deliberately choosing not to here.
 
A 256GB SD Express card is £15 on Amazon.

Surely their 64GB (apparently) slower cartridge must be pennies.

Nintendo could easily give 128 and 256GB options without adding more than a fiver to the game package price, they’re deliberately choosing not to here.
A reasonably fast A2 SD card is not costly in today's context. Which is precisely why cost was never an issue. The cartridges are not cheap to begin with, so it is not like Nintendo is sucking up the cost of the NAND flash used. They simply pass the cost on to their customers.
 
Nintendo has always prioritized copyright protection over encouraging 3rd party developers… not really a story…
The reason would be IP protection. The virtual card probably has very good DRM.
The reason is monopolistic, greedy practices. It's clear with Palworld that they want control over the gaming world, and are willing to 'IP' protect decades old mechanics that they didn't invent just to force developers to pay them.

Disgusting company, hope that their hubris comes to haunt them.
 
The Switch 2 is a portable gaming system. Blu-ray just wouldn't work. Spinning disk, using up battery life, high random access time, longer loading times. I'm sorry, but the idea is disgusting. The games would require full installations.

The article has a bias tone, trying to push an opinion. It takes something that a publisher says, and make it seem as if all publishers absolutely hate the game cards. That's not good.

From what I've seen, players do not like the game key cards, for preservation reasons, and have no issues with the regular game cards.
So why do they need VIRTUAL game cards? Did you read the article at all?
 
It's Nintendon't. What else do you expect? A company that ruthlessly go after the poorest of the poorest without mercy will do this sort of nonsense to protect its copyright.

I'm just glad that people have successfully managed to hack every newer generation Nintendo consoles.

What are you referring to here? Nintendo lawsuits against pirating? Poorest of the poor? If you cant afford something….you should be allowed to steal it?

This reads like the dumbest comment I’ve ever tried to wrap my head around.

 
What are you referring to here? Nintendo lawsuits against pirating? Poorest of the poor? If you cant afford something….you should be allowed to steal it?

This reads like the dumbest comment I’ve ever tried to wrap my head around.
Wrap around your head again.
 
The reason is monopolistic, greedy practices. It's clear with Palworld that they want control over the gaming world, and are willing to 'IP' protect decades old mechanics that they didn't invent just to force developers to pay them.

Disgusting company, hope that their hubris comes to haunt them.
Fair enough, your opinion is your opinion. Mine happens to be different.
 
I still don't understand. What's the issue? That you need to keep the card inserted?

But why does it hurt?

And why don't you buy the game from the eShop then?
 
Back