Lego City Undercover Box Reveals a Mandatory 13GB Install

Yeah.
I heard it from another website this morning.
Kinda suck, but as long after finished dowloading I can play it Offline, plus some new contents inside, full customize for disguise, I will grab the game quickly.

If BotW didn't have mandatory installs, I don't see any logical reason why this should. It didn't have them on Wii U, so what gives?

Bought this game with the Wii U, beat it, sold it, want to play it again. Hopefully Tt games will share what improvements they've made to the upcoming port.

@MarcelRguez
Avoid high price of Switch cart maybe ?
Yowch...some 3rd party developers start to sabotage themself and Nintendo with that decisions...

One has to realize that the difference in manufacturing cost between 8GB and 16GB is negligible to a company as big as Warner Brothers. They weren't forced to take the 8GB carts as their only viable option. Even at 16 GB, having a relatively small install download of 3 or 4GB is preferable to THIS.

You always come up with different, creative ways to piss me off, WB.

Well, guess I'll keep playing Zelda until Mario Kart comes out, then.

It's a compromise so they don't have to charge more for an expensive game cartridge (a la RiME). It's either your storage or your dollars. Buy expandable memory. It'll save you more heartache in the future.

The Wii U game crashes my console when I try to play it, so I might pick this game up again. Didn't realize there was a new co-op mode, which would be nice to share with my roommate.

It's a confusing mess.

It's 18GB on Xbox One.
eShop says 7GB.
Packaging for Switch says 13GB install required.

So what? Getting on the eShop gets you a hidden 11GB of data? Getting it physically means you only buy a 4GB game card?

No idea why, but if it is production costs of a suitable card size, it's WB. They can eat that up.

Then again, this is WB.

@MarcelRguez Sounds to me like they didn't want to spend the extra on a larger card.I can bet this won't be the only time this happens when it comes to larger 3rd party games.

@Anti-Matter @OorWullie Didn't think of that. I bet that's it, or at least one of the main factors.

Bad decision, as far as I'm concerned. I won't get again a game I already have if it's going to eat that much storage space. What's the point of getting games physical if you still need to get a new drive after a while? This is my biggest gripe with 8th gen consoles (minus the Wii U), and I thought game cards were supposed to solve the issue.

@SCAssassin
I just wonder about the price of 8 GB, 16 GB & 32 GB Switch cart.
If Nintendo can put their Zelda on 16 GB cart, sell it with $60, Why should Warner Bros choose 8GB cart and sell it with SAME $60 ?

So... you buy a physical copy and yet you have to download more than half of the game size. Is buying half physical, half digital a thing now?

Well, it's better than 50-60GB downloads that are needed with most PS4 or Xbox One games. Yes, even with physical games.

Okay now I can't wait for the game to get out.
If we just have to "install" the game to reduce load times (like you usually do on PS3/4) it's fine.
If you have to download half of the game, this is terrible news for playing Switch games in 15-20 years.

@MarcelRguez
I will check again the different things between Switch and Wii U version. If Switch version allows me to put Boxing gloves onto my custom disguise (Wii U version can't do that, lack of different hands / gloves for custom disguise), I will buy it. But if not..... well, hard to say.
I really need Freedom to customize my own disguise with ALL body parts from every single Default Disguise.

This is completely unacceptable. I have never bought (or known of) a retail game on a Nintendo console that was unplayable without a mandatory download (and an especially large one at that!). Unless WB rectify this act of despicable miserliness, there's no way in hell that I'll support this, as this will otherwise add a dangerous precedent on top of day 1 DLC/patches, DRM, microtransactions and all of the other despicable business practices that the masses have unfortunately allowed to taint the industry. To add even further insult to injury, WB have the gall to charge almost double that of the current retail price of the Wii U version, which is at least playable out of the box. That 13GB of extra storage that the user will need to cough up isn't exactly cheap either (Micro SD cards are still quite expensive in Australia).

In one fell swoop, this became a day 1 purchase to a "no chance in hell". I won't even consider this at a bargain bin price. Screw you, WB.

Never got round to playing this on Wii U,I considered it when it became a Select but was put off by the complaints around the load times.The long load screens frustrated me big time in Dues Ex so I gave up.That and the fact I've hated every single Lego game I've played,I decided to give it a miss.If the load times improved with the Switch version I may have considered it when it could be bought cheap physically but after this stingy move,no chance.

@KoopaTheGamer You can put 6TB HD's in these consoles. That's the problem.

@sillygostly this is a gross overreaction to what amounts to an inconvenience, at worst. Buy expandable memory. Nintendo's onboard 32gb is laughably insufficient by any standards.

@souziago You can put 2TB SD cards on Switch. Problem solved.

That said, SD cards are quite expensive compared to HDDs. I think 128GB should be enough for most people, and those cards are relatively affordable.

@Anti-Matter Can't help you with that, I'm afraid. I haven't been following this game much.

@TobieOBrown It really isn't. Every game should be ready to play after you take it out of the box. All the more so in portable systems, which might not have internet access 24/7.

Another game that goes to the 'awaiting for a sale' basket together with Rime.

@TobieOBrown : You've completely missed the point. What's the point in even producing physical media if the software is unusable without an additional download?

You want to support anti-consumer practices? Then please, be my guest. It's apathy such as yours that allows this sort of thing to happen, and it will only get worse as long as consumers continue to support these sorts of practices.

I was going to wait for a price drop for this game. I definitely will now and wait until I have bought some extra storage.

I agree that this might be worth it if load times are improved. If not, this is a bit disappointing really.

This really isn't that big of a problem. Even Wii U had mandatory downloads with many 3rd party games. Sure, 13GB is nearly half of the storage, but you can always buy a 16GB SD card. Those are not expensive at all.

@jimi I think you may be looking at it wrong. As stated it requires "13 GBS" of data free. You can't stream that data instantly over the net - it "requires internet" not "requires constant internet connection" as you have to download that 13gigs of data to your console - which means it is a mandatory install.

Unless that 13gigs of data is just videos, you will absolutely need all that information!! How can they cut down on 13GB of data and say it's the same game? It is 100% mandatory.

@jimi
Ah... i'm glad I owned the Wii U version since September 2016 before (Already finished the storyline, still completing all disguises and Gold Bricks).
I will buy the Switch version if the sacrifice of 13 GB space has some really worthy new contents.

@KoopaTheGamer the difference is, a lot of that data was stored on the disc and was copied to the internal storage for faster access or faster loading.

In this case - they are providing half the game and making you download the rest.

@KoopaTheGamer : Some Wii U games had patches, but they were still playable without them, and no Wii U game (that I know of) had two thirds of the game's data locked behind a download.

Seems like a ploy to scam some easy money from people who buy physical. If the internet download is more than what's on the cart then it makes the cart redundant.

@RazorThin : If the game is unplayable without an internet download, then the cartridge is redundant, regardless of how much (or how little) of the game is stored on the actual cartridge.

Was the wii u version any good? I don't have a switch (and don't plan to either until xenoblade 2), but have been curious about this since it first released on Wii u

Wow, this really blows. I was thinking about rebuying it after a time. Good point in twenty years will this game even work at all without a download. I don't see what the effing problem is. Cards go up to 32 gigabytes and with all those extra pins, load times should be just as fast if not faster than the SD cards. Unreal...

Y'all can say what y'all want. Fake physical copy is bs. This is a cancerigenous practice, I'm not supporting this. My collector self feels disgusted.

I have been looking forward to grabbing this and was going to preorder today - as of now, they have lost my purchase. That's just a BS move and I'm not wasting space on my storage because they are too lazy to put it all on one cart.

Was going to buy it digital anyway as it's more convenient that constantly swapping physical media.

But! For People that want to buy physical... Yeah this is a rip off and a low blow, even for WB standards!

@jimi Some games on Wii U downloaded some data from the disc to the system memory. Games like Batman: Arkham Origins downloaded multiple gigabytes to the system memory (or external HDD).

I didn't mean that you needed to download through internet. But then again, most people have internet anyway. It doesn't really matter where the system downloads the data from.

They have a captive market at the moment. What is the retail copy competing against this month? Nowt! So, they are milking an opportunity. I do not feel valued at all here. Thank you WB.

Any petition, guys ?
Warner Brothers should know about this stupid decision.
They have to know the consequence by putting half game content inside cart and when the server from Nintendo shutted down.
Simply unplayable then...
I'm afraid if one by one , 3rd party developers start to sabotage themself, sabotage Switch sales by hurting with stupid decisions.

@KoopaTheGamer it actually does. Should Warner Brothers decide they want to pull the game or stop selling it (or lose the rights to the Lego titles), you will potentially no longer be able to play your physical copy. Its the one thing physical media has over digital - it's always there no matter what happens.

The other factor is speed - 13 gigs is a lot to download for some people on slow speeds. So they buy a game physically and have to wait another day to play it?

You may feel it's not that big an issue - but in reality it is. They are trying to make an extra buck at our expense, and we are the ones with potential to lose our.

If I were allowed to swear in these comments sections, then this would be the perfect opportunity to do that very thing.

What a bunch of_[snip]

This looks very shoddy indeed. There's no way I'm supporting this game now.

Nintendo were the ones who decided to go with cartridges which cost more than disks, so they're the ones I'm blaming if stuff like this becomes commonplace on the Switch.

@sillygostly This is not anti-consumer. What does Warner Bros. stand to gain by being anti-consumer? If you're going to play the blame game, get mad at Nintendo for being stingy with the Switch's default storage capacity.

@MarcelRguez While it's a nice thought that every game will be ready to play out of the box, this is no longer a reasonable standard to which to hold publishers. The complexity and size of modern games necessitates downloading or installing at least some portion of a game. Even Zelda had to install, for example. If a company can find a way to make a wider profit, they have every right to do so (and in the case of a publicly traded company, the responsibility to do so). You have a right to speak with your money, too. If you think missing a game is worth making a point, that's your prerogative entirely.

@Anti-Matter No, this is not petition worthy.

This (if true) does sound rather stupid.

LEGO City Undercover won't sell well if this is their attitude (I certainly will think twice). This then feeds the "no third party support" vicious circle. Oh WB why?

@TobieOBrown : The storage capacity of the console itself is not the issue here. The game could have fit into a 32GB cartridge with no issues whatsoever, or a 16GB cartridge with tight optimisation. WB decided to screw over the consumer by using a cheaper cartridge that benefits no-one but their bottom line, and forcing the consumer to download a large amount of data, when they had the means to prevent this from happening. The game is completely unplayable without the download, so when WB decides to switch off their servers, the cartridge itself on a fresh console is more useless than used T.P.

However, I will blame Nintendo for allowing a publisher to release a retail game in such a manner when no other game on a Nintendo console in history has been released in such a manner.

@MarcelRguez
I know right? Carts shouldn't need mandatory installs

Honestly, they lost my purchase, at least for now. I might be tempted once it goes way down in price, but this is unacceptable.

If an actual installation were needed for loading times, I could live with that. I have a PS4 and Xbox One, I know the drill. But the Switch uses cartridges and the biggest plus about that is the way faster loading speeds. This is WB skimping on the more expensive/expansive cards because they're probably anticipating somewhat low sales and are trying to make money wherever they can.

I've gone pretty much full on digital with the PS4 and XB1 and am loving it. With the Switch, due to me using only a 128 GB microSD card, I was planning on buying every physical release in its physical form. It's these kinds of stunts that make that really hard for me.

good thing I have a 256gb micro sd

I don't have an issue with mandatory instalations, if it is completely necessary for the game to be functional on the Switch. The issue here is that a good chunk of the game itself has been left out of the cartridge, and needs to be downloaded separately. That is what I have an issue with.

@sillygostly Yeah... Warner Bros. wanted to make more money. That's why they exist. To make money. And hey, the cartridge saves you 7GB of storage that can be used on Virtual Con-... oh right Nintendo dropped that ball, too.

Well this sucks; been thinking more about patches and downloads for disc based games these days and leave sme with little confidence about the future preservation of games. If someone has a copy of this game years in the future and WB has shut the data server for it, its basically useless.

Was mildly considering this game as skipped the Wii U version but now its a definite "not bothering".

So it begins...mandatory installs...for cartridge-games...on a device that already has very little memory-space...and forces you to place your save-files on the internal-memory.

Yet ANOTHER turd on the now gigantic and pretty smelly turd that is the Switch!

Ahhh i really miss the days of NO internet and the games were 100% finished, good or bad, no patches, no installs and memory was no problem why can't we go back to then??? WHY!?

This is down to expensive cartridge costs. The game is 20GB but Warner Bros. would have had to pay for a 32GB cart which is probably significantly more expensive than an 8GB version. They can absorb the hit on that size but someone's got to pay for the bigger cart, either the publisher or the consumer. Just look at Rime costing €10 more than the other console versions. And how did people react to that? They said they'd buy the game elsewhere, wait until it hit the bargain bins or wouldn't buy it all.

3rd parties are already taking a risk making games for Switch. Warner Bros. could be down serious money had they took the hit on a 32GB cartridge print run. And what happens then if the game doesn't sell? Which given the history of 3rd party games on Nintendo consoles it's likely not going to be great. A lot of Nintendo owners have already played the game.

I agree of course it sucks but it looks like Nintendo may have gone back to the good ol' days of expensive proprietary cartridges.

@KoopaTheGamer that is not the point. The problem is a 7GB game launched in cartridge with a 13GB mandatory download even if the limit of the card is 32GB. They are doing that just to spare some dollars/euros/yen/bananas and send the bill to the consumer. The game is already expensive, why not to pack it full in the cartridge?

@TobieOBrown You're right, it isn't reasonable anymore. The thing is, the issue you point out (sheer complexity of games these days) is a problem that wasn't created by the consumer in the first place (or not entirely, at least). Since I'm not the one asking for each game to be a gargantuan open-world behemoth —I'm of the opposite mind, actually—, that excuse doesn't fly with me.

Besides, don't forget the specifics of this case. This game is not that complex to begin with, and it doesn't require installs at all on Wii U, a console that uses optical media. They're selling us an old game that's functionally more inconvenient on the consumer's end that the original version, and on a system that uses cartridges. It's bizarro world. That's why your Zelda example is funny: it had mandatory installs on Wii U, not on Switch.

I don't think WB should be blamed here. If it's because the carts cost more then their choices were to eat the cost/charge more/use a cheaper smaller cart.

I think the reality is every switch owner needs an sd card. Games are going to get patched, and when they do it will have to be installed to the memory.

@SLIGEACH_EIRE Nobody has officially said why Rime is more expensive - outlets have just jumped onboard to say its cart cost. There has not been one official response.

Fact remains that the Switch version has been outsourced for porting while the others are being done in house - that's an additional cost and I'm happy to wear that kind of price jump if it means a quality product. Then it could just be greed and they feel they can fleece the new console.

This on the other hand, is just cheap. Carts don't cost that much - we know this based on 3DS pricing and fact that Nintendo and other publishes can put out games at a reasonable price - and that other devs have already confirmed price parity with PS4/Xbone titles.

This comes down to greed.. nothing more.

No thanksu.

@derrin I haven't complained or heard any one else about needing an SD card. Its a given everyone will need it and acceptable.

What's not acceptable is not including a full game on a retail cart, and forcing additional costs onto us. Either include it in the price or don't bother. This is 100% Warner Brothers choice and fault. They deserve blame for it - no questions asked.

Fact remains carts don't cost that much - its become the "scapegoat" of excuses.

If kind of accepted that initial physical games are going to be more expensive until the cost of manufacturing the carts inevitably come down but to me this solution to the problem is counterproductive. Huge mandatory downloads are one of the worst aspects of modern gaming. I'm saving my storage for indies. I wasn't going to get this anyway as I've previously completed it but still.

@OzHuski - "Nobody has officially said why Rime is more expensive - outlets have just jumped onboard to say its cart cost. There has not been one official response."

This is from the developer.

"We cannot enter in any specifics, but we can assure you Rime's price is based on the costs of development and costs of manufacturing for each specific platform." - Tequila Works

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

I see the usual negative nancies are already rubbing their greasy man-boobs with glee over this.

@Akropolon I go digital on Xbox One for one simple reason - game sharing. Saves me a lot of money having to buy a multiplayer game multiple tomes. With multiple switches, physical is the only way.

@SLIGEACH_EIRE with this kind of attitude they practically assured that the game will not sell. This is for me lack of competence to optimize the game.

I guess this is where the downward spiral begins. While the 1st party and Nindies library grows strong over the year, more bigger 3rd parties use the same technique as Lego City Undercover or sell the game more expensive than other versions which ends up with Switch's 3rd party support being similar to on the Wii U.

@SLIGEACH_EIRE exactly my point.. everyone is focused on the fact that it costs more to produce - but we already know it doesn't cost that much more at all.

What everyone glosses over is the fact they outsourced the game for development on Switch which would have cost them a bundle.

And I stand by my "I'll buy Rime on Switch" - as I know the guys at Tantalus do amazing work (thank you for Zelda: Teilight Princess HD) and I am 100% sure that's where the extra cost has come from.

This though.. is BS and laziness on WB's part. The game is being done in house and carts don't cost that much more. And as long as news outlets keep using the "carts" as an excuse, they will use it to make more profits and continue to misinform people.

@jimi For what's worth, I don't recall any large files for Arkham Origins on my drive either.

@OzHuski Let me highlight the issue even more specifically for you.

"We cannot enter in any specifics, but we can assure you Rime's price is based on the costs of development and costs of manufacturing for each specific platform." - Tequila Works

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

They're not allowed to talk about it specifically but they're partly blaming the cartridge cost.

@OzHuski Yes, I understand that this may cause problems if Warner Bros. decides to stop selling the game and makes it impossible to download the data. Whenever that happens, I do not expect to see any physical releases of Lego City Undercover sold anyway. If you have already downloaded the required data, it will stay on your system memory (unless your memory/SD Card breaks).

This problem also concerns all of the digital games. That doesn't stop most of the people from downloading games.

What I was mainly talking about is required memory for the download. I do not think this is as big of a problem as many people think it is.

@SLIGEACH_EIRE well WB are gonna get so much stick i would not be surprised if people don't buy the game now. They have lost my sale with this BS decision.

I am not buying a physical copy of a game which is practically worthless.

Nintendo need to get on top of this ASAP. If other publishers start pulling this then it's gonna be a problem!

Consumers won't accept it.

@jimi I'm not talking about patches. I'm talking about data that the game downloads to the system memory from the disc. This is also what most games on PS4/Xbox One do.

I'm not sure if the game was Arkham Origins or Arkham City. I need to check this at some point.

I'll pass on this game. The Wii U version will still be enjoyable, even with its longer loading times.

@kobashi100 You're blaming the publisher but perhaps Nintendo should be to blame. They created the expensive medium. If they've so much faith in it, they should sell the cartridges to game publishers at the same cost as Blu-rays. Remember N64? The 2 reasons why game developers stayed away from there was limited cartridge size and expensive cartridges. What happens if a game is over 32GB?

Edit: The cost of the larger game cartridges is probably significantly more expensive than a smaller one. Think similarly to the cost for us when buying Micro SD cards. A 64GB card is relatively inexpensive but a 1TB card is crazy expensive. Nintendo may be relying on the costs of manufacture to drop with time.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying customers should accept this, I'm playing devil's advocate.

Man.
This sucks.

Just to note, the game is basically being shipped on a 8GB cartridge then requiring you to download a 13GB day one patch(why the Eshop version is listed at 7GB and not 20GB is because of the extra 13GB coming in the form of a patch)

I never buy lego games so I wont buy this one either. But, this is a very poor marketing decision. Physical cart with a DL that is a larger size than the actual cart... wow brains trust worked on that one then eh?

Im surprised this passed the Nintendo Seal of Quality test... but then again I have not seen the seal on any game cards yet...

@SLIGEACH_EIRE day one of Breath of the Wild on disc on Wii U and it was already available for free to download. I pretty much think that the game companies have no problem (the opposite) with cartridges.

@SLIGEACH_EIRE they are trying to be abstract and not discuss specifics. I can guarantee you they are not allowed to discuss the deal with Tanatalus, or the cost of carts and are simply point out those two facts as reasons.

The carts are not the blame here - again we have a good idea of how inexpensive it is to produce a cart. When your 8 months out from launch and you have to bring in a new crew to developer the game to match the others release? Its very very likely that's where the cost comes.

Even if they just passed on the cart costs, you would be lucky if its $2. Very lucky! Again - let's point out I can buy RETAIL Switch games cheaper than I can buy them digitally. So how does that work?

Again - its not the cart. It coming down to greed and laziness on the part of Warner Bros.

As I recall cartridges were extremely expensive at the beginning of the N64 era and then as the generation went on, more were produced and coatings went down. These things usually happen at launch but I'm sure in the coming months as supply and demand re-balance, games will be cheaper and this sort of BS will likely cease.

Hopefully this won't become a pattern for third parties wanting to save a bit of money.

@jimi Yeah, same experience here. Didn't have much of a problem with it either. Season pass drama notwithstanding, I enjoyed it just as much as Arkham City, if not more.

@MarcelRguez you don't have any grasp on how complex Lego City is, but the point is moot regardless. The times are shifting and it's a bit ridiculous to think that a mandatory install, regardless of the type or size of the game, is outlandish or unreasonable. I get that you want your cart to hold everything, but obviously this can not happen every time. It's just the way Nintendo chooses to do business.

If WB was really, really fearful of the cost of a 32 GB card, they could have put the game in a 16GB card with an extra (but still manageable) 3-4 GB download install. That would have worked fine for the vast majority of people.

But this...no...this is BS.

@SLIGEACH_EIRE You are over thinking this and being far to quick to point a finger at Nintendo (as usual I fear). This is WB exercising opportunism. Simple.

@westman98 I was thinking that too. But a 16GB card is maybe still very expensive and they may be thinking that well seeing as customers still have to download part of the game regardless that they may as well go with a cart size that's neutral on cost.

It's down to the cartridge cost people, there's no other logical explanation.

@TobieOBrown I own it on Wii U, you don't get to tell me what I do or don't know about the game. Again, if Zelda needs a 13GB install on Wii U and Lego City doesn't, there's something very wrong when the opposite happens. I don't see how that can be considered a point of contention.

@SLIGEACH_EIRE
Hey Bro, I know Rime will be more expensive due to cost of carts no doubt, but the knock on effect has already started. Minecraft story mode by TT has been announced with a $10 more expensive price tag on switch than other versions

Well at least this puts lie to the nonsense told by the developer back when this was originally released on the Wii U that it would be impossible to have an off-screen mode on the GamePad.

@NintySnesMan Ya, even Zelda: BOTW is more expensive on Switch than on Wii U. Same game.

@SLIGEACH_EIRE
Oh, I don't doubt that cart prices are part of the problem, but was offloading 2/3rds of the game via a mandatory install really the best solution WB could muster??

It's kinda hard to tell without knowing the actual cost of production of the various cart sizes, or in this case, the 8GB vs 16 GB vs 32 GB carts.

@SLIGEACH_EIRE "It's down to the cartridge cost people, there's no other logical explanation."

Let me do you the favour and highlight that.. you can't think of ANY other reasons than cart price for the outcome of this?

@GrailUK You are over thinking this and being far too quick to defend Nintendo(as usual I fear).

See what I did there?

@NintySnesMan read his previous posts.. you will likely see there is another reason to this.

I'll continue to repeat myself - physical games are CHEAPER to buy than digital - including all Switch games! So how can anyone justify this decision?

Reading the comments above, I thought it made sense to point out as a handheld the Switch couldn't use discs- it has to use carts.

Already played this so I won't be getting it again, but I will be curious to see if other gameside follow suit. If they do I'make going to be far more selective on what games to buy that need extra downloads.

It could also be Warner Bros. making a stand and highlighting an important issue. That if Nintendo want games on their platform that they'll have to absorb the cost of cartridges, not the game publishers. Otherwise they'll end up with crazy fiasco's like this.

@OzHuski
I agree, it can't be justified. This is just one of the reasons I won't buy a switch but main reason is am just not hyped for the switchtab

@SLIGEACH_EIRE
I agree that it's probably down to cartridge costs. But it's a gamble on their part either way. You wrote " And what happens then if the game doesn't sell?" in regard to the higher costs for the larger game card and respectively higher losses, I assume. This is certainly a valid concern for them. At the same time they need to worry about turning off potential buyers with the current practice. I am now thinking about it twice, not out of spite or because I feel "betrayed" or disappointed, but for much more practical reasons.

I usually do not fret much about such issues like downloads and installs, and for me it's really not about the money, but for full retail price I usually prefer retail game cards if at all possible, because they're (more) future proof. Digital to me feels much less "concrete", so I go digital only with smaller games (Indie) or irresistable Steam sale offers, which are too good to be ignored (the risk isn't so great for small-price purchases either).

Here "half digital" might as well be "full digital" however, as others have already pointed out. It might as well have been a DL code only. I played this title on Wii U already (100%ed it actually), but seriously thought about double dipping (thinking about better performance). This now makes the thought much less attractive. Might just fire up the Wii U version once more instead...

If however the performance is much better than on Wii U and there is extra content, I might still be inclined again, who knows. Waiting for the review now.

I'm still worried that this could indeed become a trend and affect the "third-party for Switch issue" perception negatively. I'd rather pay a little more and have a working retail game card, and I'm really not sure about this "experiment".

Utter and complete failure from Warner Bros. Way to cheat on physical version buyers.

WB related games = avoid like the plague.

Shame that WB tries it's best always to ruin the works of their game companies.

Why don't they just ship empty cases with a download code? That would really cut down manufacturing costs. They could even have the cover art as a download you print yourself. Even more savings!

Whatever people think the reasons for this are and who is to blame, the simple fact is that a physical release of a game where the game isn't actually on the card is pointless.

Ludicrous - so you could pop into a shop whilst on holiday or in a motorway services and buy the game to keep little Jonny quiet in the back of the car and he won't be able to play it because you have to download the rest of the game? Seriously WTF???? If it's bought physically then it should work out of the box!!!

@SLIGEACH_EIRE LOL so Nintendo - who doesn't take hits on their own hardware AND software, should take a hit for everyone else? Then how can Nintendo release games at reasonable prices, along with others, and yet its heir fault and not WB's?

I love how you can turn any issue into Nintendos fault - when this is nothing but Warner Bros being greedy or simply lazy.

@NintySnesMan then your missing out. Its amazing and for the first time in ages - even gaming sites are saying they are hyped for its future.

@jimi Your memory of Arkham Origins is a little fuzzy. I had all sorts of problems with the game including areas of the map not loading correctly which caused you to fall through the world. The game was all around a rush job. The Wii U version also was missing multiplayer content and lacked the additional DLC add-ons past challenge maps. I love that game and 100% it (well 99% it because there was a bug in that too), but it was a flawed game all around.

As for what WB Games are doing here, it is lazy and misleading. Especially on the eShop version where it will really matter how big it is. You know there will be people that purchase it thinking it is 7 GB and then not be able to play it due to the additional 13 GB for mandatory installs. Given the code is still as bloated as ever, I would bet that the load screen nightmares still haven't been corrected.

@OzHuski I blame Nintendo because it looks like it's their fault. Nintendo have gone for a medium that has obvious benefits but also may have a couple of significant disadvantages. How do you blame WB for being lazy?

@JunkRabbit "I'd rather pay a little more and have a working retail game card" that is exactly my point to @SLIGEACH_EIRE: the problem is not the price of the cartridge nor the download content, the problem is that we have to buy a game that is half physical and half digital and this decision is just stupid as it seems to be. I had prefer to buy full digital or full physical for a full price.

@EternalDragonX I've got a 200Gb card but I really resent the prospect of having to download and store half (or more) of the game on it if I choose to buy it physically

WB, one of the biggest jokes in the industry. This bs better not become standard practice for third parties (I can't see Nintendo or its second party partners ever being dumb enough to try this). Went from day one buy for me, to no buy at all, on any console. Of course when it fails to sell on Switch we'll get the typical 'Nintendo owners don't buy our games' line rather than these idiots just admitting their own scummy mistake.

@SLIGEACH_EIRE Nintendo has no impact on if they release a full game or not.. WB have chosen to be cheap cut down on costs and make us pay for it. Nintendo aren't he distributor or publisher - so how does Nintendo have any impact? And once again - we know rough prices and know there is VERY minimal price disadvantage here.

Right now - the Switch version could actually BE CHEAPER to produce than Xbone/PS4 but they don't have a choice on costs on those systems or medium.

But since you bring it up - what disadvantages does the cart pose other than a "slight" cost increase? Which we also know is utter rubbish and not an excuse for any price hike of any magnitude.

And again, Nintendo doesn't produce the carts either.. so how is it their fault? How will you twist it this time? How do you respond to actual physical games on carts being cheaper than the eShop?

was tempted to buy but no longer, i refuse to take this sort of stuff from companies any longer with or without vasaline.

Love this game on Wii U and was on the fence about picking it up again on Switch. This is a deal breaker. I'm not one who gets their panties in a knot over storage space, but this is just flat out anti-consumer practices, and I won't support it with a purchase. Its cheap, and it's lazy. Nintendo should not be allowing it.
3rd parties pull crap like this, then wonder why their game won't sell. Either put the whole game on the cart, or go digital only.

@SLIGEACH_EIRE
With this I do not agree. I had thought about this, too, but came to a different conclusion. Sure, Nintendo may force 3rd parties to use a cartridge of adequate size for retail releases to prevent such practices, but at the same time they must make concessions to keep the 3rd parties happy, at least for now (though once it's established it will be hard to turn back). I believe you of all people here know why. So I really cannot blame them.

At the same time I cannot blame WB either for using such a loophole to cut costs, especially as long as they cannot be sure how well the title will fare at retail... It is a tough choice for both companies. I do not believe in "blame" btw, it's something that rarely helps a discussion, nor does it help you to be happy with what life presents you. It's how it is, and all parties involved had their reasons for their decisions. We - the gamers - will vote on their decisions with our purses, and hopefully they will draw the right conclusions for future decisions...

That said I still think it's a bad decision though, as I feel it might become a self-fulfilling prohecy. WB might see the title not selling well at retail, thinking they were right to make this choice, but who knows if it wouldn't have sold better as a true retail card? Nobody will be able to tell for certain, so how to avoid something like that?

@OzHuski
Could this be true? I had considered this option, because I usually prefer a "wait and see" approach to such news, but thought it unlikely, because seriously, what sort misudnerstanding at TT could possibly lead to such an error? Unless of course they had in fact considered the option at one point but later decided against it. That would at least be plausible.

Well, I hope your mate is indeed right about this. Should teach us all a lesson if it's true though... lol!

Who cares? I have 26GB lying empty still on my console itself and over 110GB empty on my SD Card. Isn't this the whole point of buying extra storage? To fill it?

@OzHuski
Nah Bro. Impossible to miss out on something,if your not interested in it. I am happy for those that are hyped, just like I used to be for Ninty hardware

I was thinking of selling the Wii U version and getting this. But due to the install, guess I'll have to skip that. Don't want to waste such important space for something I already played and beaten.

Welp, all the more reason for me to purchase digitally if the physical medium won't hold half the default game anyway. X^)

We won't know how much WB saved nor how much the full price would have been for end users until we see 3D Gb gamecards in the wild, but I can only roll my eyes at everyone chirping about "Nintendo's fault for using a more expensive medium". Someone never had a PSP or was actually fond of its discs and loading times? Someone misses CD players with their mandatory but not even failproof skip protection? Cheaper or costlier, cards are where it's at, and I won't be surprised in the least if PS5 or something switches (no pun intended) to this medium like Vita already did. Unless Sony themselves decide to go full digital and streaming by then. Discs hardly offer a big enough gap in price anymore as to cover the comparative problems associated with them.

@Randomlight
You can thank PlayStation and Xbox gamers (myself included, I have Injustice 1, MK X and Batman: Arkham Knight on PS4, the latter two which ended up being pretty big disappointments compared to their last-gen counterparts) for WB thinking anti-consumer bs is ok. Really disappointed I ever bought games with the WB label.

@JunkRabbit Best comment I read here!

@SLIGEACH_EIRE how you can blame Nintendo for this I don't know.

@SLIGEACH_EIRE
I agree. This is a mess Nintendo created.

This is a mess. Nintendo justified the switch to cards with the fact they can hold large capacities of data with little to no mandatory install meaning that the low in built storage is not an issue. Now so companies can make more of a profit using smaller cards, the consumer is paying for it with large mandatory installs on a tiny hard drive.

This is completely stupid. I was going to get this game, since I never got it on Wii U, but not anymore. I am not going to waste a ton of the small hard drive space on one game. Which is why I buy physical, but this is for the physical version, so no buy for me.

I will double dip... but on PC. It's available for £15 and I have an HDD bigger than a shrew on that.

I wonder what the price difference is between the two sizes?

I had this game before I sold my U. Good game but I'm definitely waiting to hear results from people who do plan to spend 64.19 tax included for this game. A mandatory install? Wow lol... Is this even bigger than Botw? Nintendo themselves manage to create an open world without a mandatory install. Interesting.

@kobashi100 if this ends up being true, and not just some printing error, Nintendo is just as to blame for allowing it. Nintendo would be well within their rights to tell them to a) put the full game on an adequately sized card, b)go digital only or c) take your game and shove it. All of which are better options. Nintendo can't allow this to become common practice.

Haha!

@SLIGEACH_EIRE Dude, it's maybe $.50 more expensive to do the 32 GB one. WB's just being... a jerk.

Yeah, this is a jerk move on WB's part.

Plus I read this game is still 720p even when docked.

WTF WB.. no excuse for that

@stylon Damn Stylon you're all over the place lol Good to see you from purexbox and xbox hub. An yeah I agree, i feel like they they did this to save on a larger cartridge which is criminal if you ask me.

Time to grab a micro SD I suppose. I hate when you're forced to download games and waste precious space. The PS4 does this with every single game and it annoys me to no end.

What people are also neglecting to remember is that the cartridges are ROM cartridges, so they will be significantly cheaper to produce than SD cards and similar types of storage. Similarly, 50GB Blu-ray discs are more than double the cost of 25GB discs (at least in my experience), so publishers may also cut corners in order to squeeze the game onto a 25GB disc (however, this tends to be more commonplace with niche films, due to the lower asking price for movies as opposed to games).

I get that Switch versions may cost more, and I can accept that so long as parity is maintained between platforms. For example, due to the lack of licensing fees, PC games are generally $10 cheaper than the console versions, so I would understand if a Switch version of a game is $10 more expensive than the other console versions (which isn't a big deal considering the added portability and other benefits of owning software on Switch). Ideally, publishers should aim for parity across all platforms and find a way to subsidise the costs, but I won't be holding that against them knowing that Switch games are more expensive to manufacture (and we don't know exactly how much). If I wanted to buy retail games with nothing on the discs but a serial key and a Steam installer, then I'd be gaming on PC (and this is precisely the reason why I don't buy games on PC).

Hell, I was willing to buy LCU at launch despite the fact that it is available on Wii U for only $20 (that's almost 1/5 of the cost of the Switch version!), but now that's completely out the window unless WB issues a reprint with the full game on the cartridge. I won't support this release any other way. If we support this sort of gutter practice, then other publishers will follow. I really, really, really, really hope that EA doesn't try to pull this crap with FIFA 18. It's the one third party game that I'm really looking forward to, and it just occurred to me that I will refuse to buy it if they try to pull anything as despicable as what WB has done with LCU.

@EternalDragonX Yeah I got a Switch at launch so I'll probably be on here quite a bit now .

It would be sad if Nintendo had to put out a policy that physical game cards have to be playable out of the box. It'll be even sadder if they don't do it....

@westman98 "they could have put the game in a 16GB card with an extra (but still manageable) 3-4 GB download install."

Been wondering about that myself. All I've come up with is MAYBE (all I've got are maybes) maybe Nintendo, being aware of the cart price, is actually eating the above disc cart price on 8GB carts. Eating as in charging the same for an 8GB cart that others charge for discs, this way companies don't pay more. But, they do charge extra once you go up in size. From a devs perspective, whether it 1 cent or $1 more, it's still more, so companies balance sheets match up for 8GB and discs. They would only need to add the extra expense for anything over 8GB, and that's why WB balked, not b/c of the extra cost, but principal. I just don't see cost between 8 and 16 being that much different unless Nintendo is eating the 8GB cost above disc.

In numbers that might make sense, let's say 8GB is $1, 16GB is $2, disc is 50c. Nintendo eats 50c on 8GB, only charging 50c for parity to disc. But, no discount on 16GB, so that's not double the cost, $1 vs $2, it's quadruple, $2 vs .50c. That's where "principal" and cost come in. It's not just "pennies more", it's a choice of 4x the cost of a disc or same price as disc. I'm guessing the guys in accounting would prefer "same" over "4x".

All of the above is just guess work and speculation, on cost and Nintendo policy, but it's a possibility that makes sense over why they might choose 8GB and a huge 60 minute download - over 100 comments and no one mentions time to DL 13GB to play a physical game - rather than 16GB and a more reasonable 15 minute download.

Edit: Strong possibility that principal should be principle, I'm blaming autocorrect.

@Anti-Matter Defeats the purpose of buying physical if you still have to download most of it.

@SLIGEACH_EIRE BoTW has the exact same MSRP on Wii U and Switch. You've claimed the Switch version is more expensive before. Where are you getting this information?

@Crono1973
No way !
I will buy it physically.
I'm not a digital download gamer.
I play my games physically 99.9%, only a few are digital downloads.

@Gamer83 "This bs better not become standard practice for third parties"
@Grumblevolcano "the downward spiral begins."

FFXV is over 60GB, Uncharted 4 over 40GB, on my PS4. Unless 3rd parties start laying out big bucks for big carts I don't see how this can NOT become standard practice. Those large games are exceptionally large, but surely Nintendo hopes to get some large games on Switch, larger than 32GB anyway. I'm guessing FIFA and Sky rim are both over 16GB at least. Almost every PS4 game I have seems to be. I think even Knack was over 30GB. Yes Knack.

Plus, the industry trend toward whatever Destiny is. Destiny 2 might, might, fit on a 32GB cart, but what anout what comes later? Not exactly the same if you still get the full game, but games like Witcher 3 and Fallout 4 have DLC. Not sure how that will work out either. I have over 6GB of background downloads for my disc version of Lego Dimensions on Wii U. Every new movie pack downloads about a gig, less for new level packs. The industry is all about constant downloads now. Horizon Zero Dawn being the very rare exception, but I'd bet it's over 32GB to start.

We have seen the future, and it isn't necessarily all that cart friendly.

@stylon I couldnt get my hands on a pre order so I had to stand ata gamestop for 5 hrs at launch lol. I love it though, great system.

I hope this isn't the norm for future retail Switch games.

What in the world? Were they just too cheap to pay for slightly larger carts? This is dumb, maybe I'll just keep playing Zelda and ignore this one on Switch too...

I am planning to get by without a SD card, so I don't think I'll get this.

Case closed: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2017-03-28-fans-have-noticed-something-odd-about-lego-city-undercover-on-switch

Come back WB and Nintendo, all is forgiven. Neither of you are evil scum after all. Let's have a group hug!

This is kind of a classic "Internet jumps to conclusions and hates Nintendo" story isn't it? In less than 24 hours, Nintendo Everything reports on this story and cites it as an unknown but peppers it with speculation. Then numerous other outlets report it as "another developer struggling with Nintendo's publishing costs", and before long tons of sites had determined that publishers can't afford 32gb gamecards and are opting for 8gb cards and just forcing 65% of the game to be downloaded. All before getting a statement from the company.

And here we get an update "the download isn't required for physical" and the hint that the box art may be wrong on the boxes printed so far.

Can the internet "journalists" start sitting on news until they confirm the news instead of reporting conspiracies before they find out the reality? (Props to NL for being the first site I've actually seen print an update!)

If this was a real thing it would be massive, massive, fail, and an open assault on physical games and customers in general (especially on a Lego game that will attract lots of kids who may or may not have bandwidth for 13gb downloads.)

Yet as the story clarifies it may be a non-story at all beyond a box misprint.

I'm interested in following it as that's the difference between rebuy and not buy for me, but I seriously wish the internet would focus on being "right" instead of being "first" with everything. Heck, that applies to regular news, too.

@NEStalgia Very well said.

@NEStalgia 'Putting speed above quality and coherence' - Media

@rjejr What I was meaning by the downward spiral beginning was:
3rd parties do things like increase price for Switch only and only have some of the base game on the cartridge -> Nintendo fans don't buy the games because they think it's a ripoff -> 3rd party games sell bad on Switch -> 3rd parties stop supporting the Switch citing sales as evidence -> Switch becomes a console only for Nintendo games and Nindies

At this point we should probably also note that on Amazon the Switch version is £5 CHEAPER than the Xbone and Ps4 versions.

@Grumblevolcano Oh, THAT downward spiral. Yeah, that's one downward spiral beyond the one I was looking at.

PS - Update says it's all a big misunderstanding, box is wrong. I hope NLBruns another article when the whole truth comes out, nobody ever reads the updates.

@BLP_Software Reads update. Voice of reason.

@NEStalgia
Hear, hear!

OzHuski had reported some insider info from TT before my post 126 that this might indeed have been only a misprint. The respective comments are apparently now deleted, but that's what I had been reacting to.

I stand by my last sentence in that post and humbly include my own self...

I don't even understand what's going on. This is the kind of skullduggery that will just turn customers away.

@NEStalgia As you say, this is the norm for all media. Sadly that is how rumors work. No matter if there is an update staying that the original news was wrong, people will only remember the original news and use it in their arguments as if it were true.

Nicely done as usual NintendoLife....you have become a garbage site, that doesn't bother to check facts...it's a rush to be first. I won't trust anything from here from now on.

@setezerocinco
(Reading the Eurogamer investigation)
So, it was a Good news or still Bad news for Physical gamers ?

@Zingo
Now, now...
Anyone can do mistake.
Maybe there are some "Oopsie" moments that lead to misunderstanding.
Just now we got clarification.

@rjejr "FFXV is over 60GB, Uncharted 4 over 40GB, on my PS4. "

FFXV is just a bloated mess from 10 years of development and still incomplete. I expect that from Squeenix, but it's egregious to put it mildly.

Uncharted 4 works just fine without any downloading at all. The downloads add in a whole pile of free online maps. I HATE when they make me download gigs of online play junk just to get a patch for single player. That's wrong and eats my bandwidth, but that's still a whole different thing. I stopped downloading ANYTHING on my PS4 and turned networking off entirely. It only gets downloaded if it's to fix a game breaking bug (or in the case of AC: Unity, not at all...) Most everything plays just fine that way, particularly Sony 1st party stuff. Haven't popped FFXV open yet. With downloads like that I probably never will.

My rule is: Patching my game to make it playable shouldn't use 3x more data than 200 hours of Splatoon

In light of the updates here, I've finally placed my preorder for this game in time to get my amazon discount in.

@rjejr Only just woke up.

Its an interesting update but I have one question.

Why does Xboc say 17GB and eShop say 8.2GB.

Did they manage to fit it on one card? If so why not address the big file differenve?

Not sure I have a problem with this. If it's something akin to the memory packs that you could download for Xenoblade Chronicles X to speed up loading, framerates, etc., it's a good thing.

Yeah, the Xenoblade one was optional, but who did not foresee their needing to buy a micro SD card for the switch anyway?

@NEStalgia
Eh... in other word, FF XV is Blah, right ?

Once again everyone gets but hurt over nothing

It's so far a non-story more of a correction it appears. WB says it runs off the card and didn't need a download. so it appears the box maybe wrong.

Now I get the argument why the Switch version is smaller than the XBOne/PS4 but also keep in mind the Switch maybe using higher compressed data as well as 720p assets (or less scaled up like WiiU) while the other guys are using 900p/1080p level assets which eat up a lot more room.

@Zingo reads comment. checks bio. join 20 minutes ago. Gotcha

I find it odd people freaked out over this, it's been happening for years now(welcome to modern gaming Nintendo fans). Hell it's been happening since the X1 and PS4 came out.

@Anti-Matter The gigabytes of downloads required for it are blah and the bloat of the game is blah. But I can't say if the game itself is until I play it. The downloads just have it pretty low on my backlog list My preconception of it is that it's a game with a lot of boredom to suffer through but some memorable great parts sprinkled in if willing to put up with the other parts.

I mean it' HAS to be better than FF XIII right?

@ThePoochyKid Ya right! That's why they did it. Give me a source for your $0.50 more expensive for a 32GB card please? It's very likely much more than that. Let's just say it's $3 more expensive than an 8GB cartridge and they print off 200,000 copies worldwide. That's being conservative btw, that's $600,000 before they even ship the game, with absolutely no guarantee that they'll shift all of them. On a Nintendo platform that's new and is a major risk for a whole host of reasons, e.g. 3rd party games don't sell well on Nintendo platforms, what happened with Wii U, it's a port of a last gen game(can we even say that? This is Nintendo's second attempt at this generation, another consideration for 3rd parties), etc.

@setezerocinco Shows how quick people are to jump to conclusions though...

Yay! Download not required! I may consider a purchase now!

@SLIGEACH_EIRE The disc/card is the smallest part of the manufacturing/distribution cost. Getting a production line, printing line, plastic boxes, and distribution/transportation/warehousing is the bulk of the cost. The disc/card is a negligible surcharge after you're done affording all that. The cost difference is pocket change to a mega publisher like Warner. It's barely more than pocket change to indie publishers that do physical runs.

@tanookisuit I've always believed Nintendo uses some incredible compression that's proprietary (heck, Iwata himself was a compression genius...) their patches are ALWAYS much smaller than the other companies, as is their DLC. BD discs don't seem to use much compression on the other platforms, the install size generally isn't much bigger than what's on disc. Nintendo stuff tends to unpack notably larger.

@BLP_Software Re: the update, my mind is stuck on the word "play".

I was only half joking in my twitter post, maybe the cart is 480p stereo sound, maybe the optional DL is a "graphics & audio" package for 720p and 5.1? Maybe no voice acting on the cart, not sure how much space that takes up.

WB didn't say the cart had everything, they said we could play it.

Unfortunately you can expect to see this from companies looking to cut corners. At the end of the day, i'm sure they evaluated the numbers and realized they'll get way more sales on X1, PS4, and PC, so they're leaving the switch version to rot. Unfortunate, yes, and definitely another heavy blow to WB's reputation.

I bring up the same argument I bring up on Ubisoft's Nintendo involvement. Do we really want 3rd parties like these when they engage in this kind of skullduggery with day one patches bigger than the game itself? If all they're going to do is be prudes, as we've seen them do time and time again this past console generation (Lookin' at you, Batman Arkham games), we'd be just as well off, if not better, without them even trying.

So there isn't a mandatory download after all? This is a really messy situation, and the publishers need to quickly clear up what's happening.

Ah, thanks for the update. I'm planning on getting the physical version.

So this was faked and again much fuzz about nothing. Sometimes I feel sorry for developers that have to deal with all sorts of Internet bs even before their product is launching.

Is it even possible yet for developers, to make a game-install / assets download from a physical game on Switch?

I am not sure, that Nintendo would allow this for every game? Perhaps only in special cases, where the full game can't fit on a 32 GB cartridge?

It's not something you just do as a publisher, but you need Nintendo's permission to use their cloud-infrastructure, to host assets for Download for a physical game. And all because you are to greedy to pay for a cartridge with bigger capacity?!?
Would Nintendo really allow that?

@TwilightOniAngel Read the original post again. This wasn't the data from the card being installed to the console's memory (like the PS4 and XB1 do), this was the card not delivering all of the needed data (only 7-8 GB) and you being forced to download another 13 GB. That's something else entirely.

@rjejr This. The phrasing has me at least a tiny bit spooked.

Thank goodness for that. Pitchforks sheathed.

@TwilightOniAngel
You know. The reason why this happened for the industry, was because of the very slow read-speed of Blu-ray Disc's, that PS4 and X1 uses.

Actually, many PS4 games can easily fit on a Blu-ray Disc, but it's just to slow for gaming. That's why you have to install all games. But it does not have to be that way. It's just a stupid limitation of the current generation of gaming media-discs.

Nintendo has always been against that idea, witch is the reason why they did not use Blu-ray for the Wii U.

And now with the Switch, they use fast cartridges to prevent game-installs. So I am not even sure Nintendo would allow this on the Switch yet.

@SLIGEACH_EIRE

Glad to hear it's not mandatory, cause f*** that.

I'll wait until we know for sure before condemning this publisher.

For the USA release date why do you have the 7th listed doesn't it come out on the 4th in the US?

@rjejr I had to laugh (in a sad way) at this comment about game sizes on other platforms. Only because I realized it's a sad fact that it's not like the Switch will get any big high profile AAA releases that will need big game cards like this..... :,(

Okay, so you don't need to download anything. Great!

The big question is, how is the filesize so small? Good optimization?

@HeroOfCybertron
Wait, what ?!
USA version will be 4th April 2017 ??
Gosh.... earlier than I thought.
Because I saw different release date on Gamefaqs. It said 30 April 2017.

@KoopaTheGamer
And how about the performance when being docked and portable ?

@faint And your point is? I joined 20 minutes ago and?

Well it's good news that the game still works right off the cartridge. It'd be an unlucky habit to get going with not including the full game on a physical release.

Well we know where the loading screen data is going. LOL.

Ironic that someone on a site called Reddit did not in fact 'read it' properly to start with 😂

Up to 13gb never meant 13gb. And best of all? Nobody has actually played the game to confirm it.

WBs statement makes things a bit interesting. Guess we'll have to wait until the game's actual release to find out whether the mandatory install is required.

Hey, hey, hey, let's not act like we didn't know this kind of bull crap was going to happen. Man, smh. The writing was on the wall in January when the Switch reveal happened.... They took a friggin Wii U, an old Nvidia Sheild Tegra X1 and combined them to give us a Switch, a console that has basically the same graphical power as the Wii U and the already old Nvidia Sheild tablet, some JOY CONS lol (new name for Wii Mote) because that's basically all they are is a new form factor Wii Mote (don't kid yourselves) threw all of that in a plastic dock with HDMI in it for $80.00 hahahhahahahah and boom, The Switch.

Just give me METROID and whatever else Nintendo does I could really give a crap about, and whatever the 3rd party devs do I could give a crap about as well.

Anyone who thinks the Switch is getting NEW 3rd party support from the big boys on top is both dumb and crazy to think that. The only think Switch is going to have is NINDIES and 1st party games.... And all the games that have been coming out are friggin old games, some are 20+ year old coin-op games from the NEO GEO lol.... Pathetic man.

Why would anyone buy this 3 year old game for $59.99 USD ???

If you own a Wii U, just find this game used or in a bargain bin, it's the same damn game anyways.

I would have gotten this game if it had an all-new longer storyline or some hook to have those who played on Wii U to double-down on this purchase. The game is amazing...but not worth it if you already played on Wii U. Plus, for those who may have missed it originally but actually do own a Wii U, you can pick this game up as part of the Nintendo Selects line. In Canada, that means the game is $29.99 vs. the $60+ for the Switch version. And you get the exact same game. I'd recommend going that route instead.

Hoping that Warner Interactive actually releases a proper sequel to this game, especially since the Switch is proven to handle open world sandbox games quite well with Breath of the Wild.

@spawn1210 Maybe because of the New faster hardware it won't suffer from those insane long loading times the WiiU Version suffered from?
I really loved the game, but got burned out by all the waiting...

So if the Switch Version will have drastically shorter load times, I will already be sold, next to that I can take it on the go as well.

The only thing the Switch has going against is that Lego City Undercover is no longer Nintendo exclusive and releasing simultaneously on PS4 and XBOne.
So it's not going to be a console selling title like Zelda and the upcoming Splatoon2 and Super Mario Odyssey.

@BLP_Software Newer tech (even if not as strong). The Tegra X1 has native support for HEVC video decoding, which is encoded at roughly half the bitrate of AVC used by Wii U, PS4 and XB1, while maintaining equal quality. That's just for FMVs.

@spawn1210
Two reasons. The first is people want it as a handheld version (and a proper HD handheld version at that) and the Wii U doesn't offer that. You can do off TV play on sub-HD screen in a 20 ft range... but that's about it.

Reason 2 is alot of people rotate their consoles out. And Wii U is history. I still have mine connected, but only because it's modded and offers GC/Wii libraries. I also have X1 and PS4 Pro and PSVR and Switch, which doesn't leave much room for legacy platforms. I imagine a good many people would rather buy on a system they have connected than unbox their last gen system to play one game. That's assuming they didn't sell their Wii U to help pay for Switch (or trade it in)

@DatDog I'm not sure you read what I wrote. I didn't say that I thought not putting the whole game on the cart was a good idea. What I said is I'm not sure that this is WB's fault.

If Nintendo is charging extra for the larger cart, that may be out of WB's control. If so, they may be choosing between the options in my post: 1) charging more for the switch version, 2) eating the cost, 3) getting a smaller cart and putting content on SD via download.

Aside from all this, it seems like we don't have all the info yet so we need an update on what the real situation is on this game

@JaxonH The Wii U version actually doesn't even support off tv play. They used it for dual-screen full time, same as Zombi U. No off tv, no pro controller support, dual screen only.

Honestly, the biggest reason to rerelease this as a full price game is that it's a great game that almost no one got to play. Wii U had such a small install base... People will actually get a chance to play it now that it's coming out on PS4 / Xbox1 . Switch

Nice scare over nothing. lol. Oh well more entertaining that way.

(See updated article.)

@Anti-Matter On the eshop it says 4th.

sounds like they F up they can keep their broken game and every other they make.

That response is so suspicious, WB is likely hiding something unfavourable.

the 2nd half of the statement is missing, they also explained there is an optional "small content patch" for the game.

@NEStalgia They have or licensed it for decades going back to the 2CD resident evil 2 on a 64MB cart. GBA with long clips like in the kingdom hearts title among others. The Dragon Quest titles FF3-4 and others on the DS too and used that tech again on 3DS. They've done crazy compression licensing on movies and also must in textures too also back to N64 with its small texture buffer. They did yet again with big games on1.5GB GameCube titles too so no surprise.

Neat info! As long as they keep patch sizes down too it's another reason for me to focus on Nintendo. I'm so sick of huge PS4 patches!

this is all speculation at this point, but I"m wondering if this is simply a 'warning', that it would be necessary in a worst case scenario... as in, if the entire game had to be updated, it would no longer work off the cart, so 13GB install would be necessary. Content update could be between 10KB and 13GB kind of thing.

I don't believe their extremely brief statement. That doesn't explain why the game is only 8GB in size compared to the ~20GB size of the other versions. The 13GB download would bring the game up to 20GB, which is why we hypothesised that two thirds of the game were left off the cartridge. Also note that WB says that we do not need to download the "game" to play. No, in order to play, we need to download a significantly large "update". They were just trying to diffuse the uproar, at least in those who lack basic critical thinking skills.

If WB had nothing to hide, then they would have issued a more specific statement, which they didn't.

I hope that it's all been a huge mistake that WB has since rectified and that the entire game is stored on a single cartridge, but I'll ultimately reserve judgement come release day.

@Zingo I find trollish posts tend to come from newbies

@sillygostly maybe it's time to put down the pitch fork and breathe for a moment

@sillygostly I don't think you are conspiring potential compression on the Switch cart

I am guessing it was probably a hoax considering we didn't get to see the back of the box which is where it would normally say if an install was required and how big

“The information is listed incorrectly on the packaging of LEGO City Undercover for Nintendo Switch,” explains a Warner Bros. representative. “Players who purchase a physical copy of LEGO City Undercover on Nintendo Switch at retail are getting the complete game, and do not need to download additional content to enjoy the full experience. An internet connection is not required to play the game. The only internet connection suggested is to download the typical content update patch.”
https://mynintendonews.com/2017/03/29/physical-version-of-lego-city-undercover-on-nintendo-switch-includes-the-full-experience/

Hopefully NL will put up another article about this and not just update this one

@spawn1210
"Why would anyone buy this 3 year old game for $59.99 USD ???"

Probably the same reason people bought the HD edition of Skyrim 6 years after its initial release, because it's a freaking awesome game (I'd say LCU is better than Skyrim if I'm honest).

Thank goodness! That would have been sooooo terrible!

So, was this just a huge overreaction based on incomplete data?

I suppose time will tell.

Lol 200+ commenta of nothing. A huge overreaction toward Nintendo, as usual.

@KoopaTheGamer I know i'm kinda late but that's such a biased opinion and it's being beyond fanboy to point fingers at other companies to defend these practices..
On the PS4 for instance (i can't say about the Xbox One because i don't have one) most games don't have mandatory 50-60gb installs or whatever.. And about the SD cards, the difference is a 1TB HDD to put on the PS4 costs about 60€, while on the Switch that's the price of a 128gb card (at least over here)...

@mechamen8 I think you still got my point. Many games on PS4 require huge installations. 40-60GB is almost a standard with big AAA games like Watch_Dogs, Far Cry, Grand Theft Auto and many more. Of course, smaller games may not require storage at all (well, not counting downloaded games and save data).

Believe me, I'm not any sort of fan boy. I think the problem with big installations is only partly because of Sony/Microsoft. Developers are mainly to be blamed, but disc drives are also an issue because of their speed.

I personally like Playstation 4 and Xbox One. That said, it's ridiculous that some games need over 50GB of storage, even though you have a physical copy of the game.

@subpopz I guess, we all have to wait the two weeks and see what is indeed true. The information WB gave is very unclear, no mentioning of the game size and the download size of the day-one-patch.

@KoopaTheGamer I understand your point but i think you're confusing updates with mandatory installs (like half of a game on physical and the other half on digital).. Most games, even AAA games, on PS4 don't have that. I do agree that updates can be a bit to big sometimes (one of Battlefront's last updates was 30GBs BIG!!) but you still got the whole game when you buy the disc. One last thing i also agree that carts ARE better (even though more expensive) than discs because of the mandatory game installations on the HDD, i mean GTA V alone is 50GBs big.. :/

@subpopz Apologize for what? The packaging was wrong and the people bashing it were only going off of the packaging information. It's not like someone made it up and everyone ran with it, it was on the packaging. Look fella, this display of pushback will hopefully discourage other publishers who considered doing something like this.

@subpopz For the most part, the bashing I saw was aimed at WB for being cheap opting for a smaller cart and forcing consumers to download part of the game as a result. That Nintendo let them do it was the criticism against Nintendo.

Hopefully the backlash will prevent any publishers considering using a smaller card (forcing consumers to download part of the game) from doing that.

@subpopz I have always had a bad taste in my mouth about forced installs of console games. Huge games being installed on relatively small hard drives (because buying storage from one of the console makers is overpriced) even when you buy the physical copy is a path I am glad Nintendo didn't follow. I can't believe anyone is ok with how physical copies work on the PS4 (and I assume the Xbox One).

@JaxonH Yeah dude, we are one in the same. I am also that guy that has all of the consoles lol (360, PS3, XBONE, PS4, Wii U, Switch) I still try and find room for the legacy consoles.

Believe me I get it, but it just seems everything with Nintendo is harder than the competition.... poopy we've been doing for a better part of a decade is still in shallow waters with Nintendo.

There is no 13GB download. WB States the info is incorrect on the box.