Does Nintendo let you play content that you accidentally downloaded from the high seas? And do you need to worry about Nintendo killing your account for doing such a thing?
Well, at least for the physical edition, they have to account for the cost of the 64 GB game card they are using. Wasn’t that rumored to cost like $16 a piece?
In theory it makes sense but in the past buying digitally as opposed to physically hasn’t netted anyone any savings. And with the new system where the card doesn’t even hold the actual game, it’s an even worse offering.
no, they don’t. but the game has been out for 5 years at this point.
articles like these seem quite pointless to anyone who doesn’t already own a switch 2. and possibly pointless even to people who own a switch 2, but have already played cyberpunk on better or similar hardware.
this article is an attempt to pat a multi billion dollar company on the back so it doesn’t feel as bad that people aren’t racing out to buy their 5-year-late, overpriced attempts to dominate the handheld market again.
Possibly the dumbest take I’ve ever seen on this site, are you saying an article objectively comparing the performance of two handhelds is “an attempt to pat a multi billion dollar company on the back”?
articles like these seem quite pointless to anyone who doesn’t already own a switch 2.
“Performance comparisons are pointless if the results aren’t what I like”, I’m sure if the steam deck performed a lot better you would be in the comments singing praises for it. Digital foundry have been comparing performance for many years but suddenly now their findings are worthless.
They disclosed it many times and have talked about that video often, it doesn’t affect their content. I didn’t like it either but acting like they’re not trustworthy because of one time they were sponsored is dumb
Nintendo aren’t the ones who set the price
Does Nintendo let you play content that you accidentally downloaded from the high seas? And do you need to worry about Nintendo killing your account for doing such a thing?
Well, at least for the physical edition, they have to account for the cost of the 64 GB game card they are using. Wasn’t that rumored to cost like $16 a piece?
In theory it makes sense but in the past buying digitally as opposed to physically hasn’t netted anyone any savings. And with the new system where the card doesn’t even hold the actual game, it’s an even worse offering.
At least e.g. steam can’t arbitrarily choose to brick your colputer
no, they don’t. but the game has been out for 5 years at this point.
articles like these seem quite pointless to anyone who doesn’t already own a switch 2. and possibly pointless even to people who own a switch 2, but have already played cyberpunk on better or similar hardware.
this article is an attempt to pat a multi billion dollar company on the back so it doesn’t feel as bad that people aren’t racing out to buy their 5-year-late, overpriced attempts to dominate the handheld market again.
They’re literally selling faster than the original Switch, what the fuck are you smoking?
Possibly the dumbest take I’ve ever seen on this site, are you saying an article objectively comparing the performance of two handhelds is “an attempt to pat a multi billion dollar company on the back”?
“Performance comparisons are pointless if the results aren’t what I like”, I’m sure if the steam deck performed a lot better you would be in the comments singing praises for it. Digital foundry have been comparing performance for many years but suddenly now their findings are worthless.
Yeah they’d never shill for Nintendo and fail to disclose it was an ad https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=V10wHzV5zp0
They disclosed it many times and have talked about that video often, it doesn’t affect their content. I didn’t like it either but acting like they’re not trustworthy because of one time they were sponsored is dumb