Xenoblade Chronicles 2 pre-load live, file size - Nintendo Everything

Submit a news tip

Xenoblade Chronicles 2 pre-load live, file size

Posted on November 7, 2017 by (@NE_Brian) in News, Switch

As was mentioned in today’s Direct, Xenoblade Chronicles 2 can now be pre-loaded on the Switch eShop. Two options are live.

You can either go with the base game or a digital bundle with the Expansion Pass. The two are priced at $60 and $90 respectively.

Xenoblade Chronicles 2 will take up 13GB digitally.

Source: Switch eShop

Leave a Reply

  • wytxus

    WOW it’s so memory space friendly for such massive game

    • Rodrigo Coelho Costa Junior

      nintendo always does its magic, tis incredible

    • masterjedi

      Yup. Once again, a Nintendo studio is able to compress a huge game effectively. Meanwhile, other 3rd party developers would have us believe that “AAA” games simply MUST consume 30, 40, 50GB of space.

      • Dumdum

        Maybe if you actually develop games, you’d have a better idea of how big assets are with games nowadays, especially with AAA ones targeting 4K resolution support. Switch games only deliver up to 1080, at best, and many titles don’t even go past the 900p/720p mark, which means they can do smaller textures. Depending on the art style used, they can even use smaller/more compressed textures than usual. Say, a cartoony Mario can get away with less detailed textures than a Battlefield 1 that’s striving for ultra-detail.

        Not all AAA games are created equal. Not in terms of detail, art style, targeted resolutions, etc. There’s no Nintendo magic there, it’s finding a happy compromise in development.

        • masterjedi

          Sounds like you d Celia games then?

          Here’s what I know:

          Zelda looks and plays very similarly to Horizon. Zelda is 14GB, Horizon is 40GB. Doom on PS4 is 40GB, on Switch it’s 13GB. Whatever is happening, somehow, some way, Switch file sizes are smaller. Since games like Doom do run on Switch, it lets me know the file sizes do not HAVE to be these 40GB behemoths. Are the smaller file size versions of the game going to have ultra hyper realistic visuals on Switch. Obviously not. But is it going to run well on Switch and be a perfectly enjoyable experience? Absolutely.

          • Jay Andrews

            Horizon has so many more physics-based rendering, detailed textures, detailed meshes, and complex shaders than Breath of the Wild does. Because they play similarly doesn’t mean that they should share similar features.

            As stated, art styles play a huge role in the size of texture files. The trees and nature in this one scene alone


            Doesn’t rival the same amount of texture detail in


            In Zero Dawn the trees are casting shadows, there are so many polygons on the ground in the form of sticks, each tree is a mash of meshes. In BoTW, the polygons are more simple, and the way the textures interact with the lighting make everything pop. There are far less shadows being cast, even though there seems to be a lot sticking above the ground (a lot of the grass is actually one mesh with transparent textures – you can see when it’s moving how an entire patch of grass sways one way and another sways entirely different instead of individually). The textures are also lower resolution.

            That’s not to say BoTW is any less beautiful than Zero Dawn. But there’s so much more under the hood happening in these two games than many people realize, and it does affect filesize and performance.

          • masterjedi

            My point is if it takes 40GB to make Horizon look like that and it takes 13GB to make Zelda look like that, maybe more games need to look a little more like Zelda and a little less like Horizon because the storage required to house all those hyper realistic Horizon visuals is expensive.

            Either the hardware manufacturer, the developer, or the consumer is going to have to cover that cost initially, but in the end I the consumer am always going to cover that cost. If the hardware manufacturer puts a ton of storage in the hardware, it costs more for me to buy it. If the developer makes the game super big with hyper realistic graphics, I either have to buy the hyper expensive hardware with enough storage to hold the game, or I have to buy the the extra storage myself.

          • Jad

            It’s a compromise. I do prefer the smaller file sizes of the Switch, but when comparing storage options between the Switch and PS4, the PS4 is far superior.

            The Switch comes with 32 GB’s of storage out of the box. The PS4 comes with 500 GB (15.625x more than Switch) for the older models and 1 TB (31.25x more than Switch) for the newer models. This means that even though greater file sizes are present, storage price to usage ratios will be more favorable for the PS4 for digital games. Compression would need to match or exceed storage price to use ratios for there to be a true complaint when comparing platforms. You will be able to store more games on the PS4 when compared to the Switch, even if you just download the exact same games for both systems if you limit yourself to only games that both systems have.

            No, I’m not arguing that the PS4 is a better system and I’m not ignoring Switch advantages like it being massively more versatile by being a portable console and using cartridges for its’ physical media. I’m just comparing one aspect of both in the hopes that what may seem like laziness can be given a different perspective.

            The PS4 is a more powerful system overall and has double the amount of cpu threads available to it. Developers have chosen to use that power more for building their world. Instead of taking a performance hit for extreme decompression, they use larger assets and take the hit in memory instead because they can afford it. As stated above, you will not get a game that looks like Horizon Zero Dawn on the Switch while using the exact same techniques. You can cut corners and play with optics a bit to get a similar effect, but it wouldn’t be the same. Now is it meritable to do so? That depends upon the game and is up for the developers to choose for their projects.

            Have you compared Rayman Legends on Switch to Rayman Legends on PS4 or Wii U? It has a smaller file size on Switch, but it takes a significant performance hit on Switch for decompressing and loading assets. The hit is so hard that the game loads more slowly on the Switch than on the Wii U. The Switch is more powerful than the Wii U in every way and should have faster read times due to the storage it’s using. Unfortunately, it can’t compete with the system. When compared to the PS4 it gets smoked badly while the PS4 loads higher quality assets that haven’t been compressed. The Switch can likely handle all of the assets uncompressed, but the games file size would likely be large enough to cause dissatisfaction for gamers. At least that’s likely what Ubisoft believed, hence the compromise.

            Does this mean that this sort of compromise will always be present? Yes and no. It honestly depends upon the developer and what they decide to do. Disgaea 5 on Switch performs extremely similarly to the PS4 version and has nearly the same file size for the game. It comes up to being a little over 6 GB’s in size so it seems like Nippon Ichi was fine with allowing a game of that size release. I’m personally cool with it, I have it digitally. It does display at 720p natively for docked and undocked, but the assets in this game are often reused for many scenarios and challenges. It doesn’t have to deal with the same amount of variety of Rayman Legends while dealing with real-time, action based gameplay.

            My comparison isn’t fair because I didn’t compare additional storage options? Fine.

            You can get a decent 128 GB micro sd card for $40 right now for Switch with Black Friday deals. For the PS4, you have two options. 1. Replace the internal hdd (which is the more expensive route). 2. Add an external hdd (which is cheaper and adds to the storage that the system already has in a manner that mirrors how the SD card works for the Switch). For option one, you will pay around $180 to double your storage (PS4 uses 2.5″ drives). For option 2, you’ll be spending about $46-50 to add an additional 1 TB of data to the PS4.

            As much as I love and play my Switch (I don’t even have a PS4), the Switch’s storage options when compared to the PS4 is a joke. That’s only in the context of comparing just the storage alone without considering other factors. The only argument that I could make against the larger file sizes on the PS4 (or the Xbox One) when compared to the Switch are the data caps that some people may hit and that’s about it. The storage upgrades for an apples-to-apples comparison is close enough to show that while storage is at a premium on both systems ($10 more expensive on the PS4) you will absolutely get a better bang for your buck with the PS4 when solely looking at storage options.

            Switch = $299
            PS4 = $299 ($199 with Black Friday deals)


            I do look forward to eventually playing PS4 exclusives, just gotta wait til I can buy a PS4. That and Xenoblace Chronicles 2 and the Ballad of the Champions is about to drop.

          • masterjedi

            I actually read that whole thing and I see your point. You offer some real tangible evidence to support your stance and I appreciate that. I just think when it comes to storage and file size, companies have got to find a way. One of the main reasons I bought a Switch was because it was cheaper than the competitors. I do not like the idea of game developers saying “we’re going to make our games huge so if you want to play them you need to buy the more expensive system.” That’s essentially what’s happening. They are missing out on a lot of sales by taking that approach because in the US alone, over 40% of gaming households are single console. If that console is the Switch, a lot of those owners are just going to leave those huge games that take up all the space on the shelf. For instance, even though I REALLY want to play LA Noir and WWE2K18, I am leaving both of those games on the shelf because I do not want to buy them physically but still have to download a bunch of the game.

          • Jad

            Yea, I’ve been holding off on L.A. Noire for the same reason. I don’t have a problem with buying games that need a lot of space, but I do have a problem with buying games that don’t ship with all of their content. I double dipped on BOTW to get it physically and digitally, but I’ll be damn if I buy L.A. Noire or Dom physically and it still takes up a buttload of space on my system. I’ll wait for the storage prices to drop for carts so that their Player’s Choice/Nintendo Select’s versions will come on a cart without a required download. I don’t get how they think they can charge premium prices without going all of the way with their product. It is an insult that they are subsidizing their costs with our storage in that manner. If they came with everything on the cart, I wouldn’t have an issues. DLC and updates on my storage? That’s fine. If I buy it digitally, then I know what I’m getting into. But this hybrid release approach? That sucks and it’s going to suck for collecting. Even though the Switch allows for sharing udpates completely offline between systems locally, it will still be a pain.

    • Mone Sabri

      Nintendo magic,Mario 64 was 6 MB and OOT was 32MB

  • Leonel

    Incredible I honestly expected this game to be around 20+ GB but then again when they announced the expansion pass it kind made me think that the content in the expansion might take a good chunk of the memory.

  • It’s called file compression, and it is art.

    • Lily Santos

      It’s called low res textures. There’s no magic compression. 13Gb probably is their limit for cartridges. Chronicles X has 22Gb

      • Robert Hastings

        32 is there limit.

        • _GLXC

          if 32 gb was their limit I would have expected xenoblade 2 to fix up some of the problems of the first two games, specifically the fact that the textures from xenoblade 1 looked like something out of the PS2. xenoblade X fixed this a little bit, but the animation seemed a little static, especially with the non-cinematic scenes, that were typically preferred over a cinematic experience that could be fixed with a stronger system. anyways, nintendo typically has a focus on gameplay over graphics so if it has a good game i guess it can outweigh all the bad

      • Robert Hastings

        Plus ports of Wii U games take up less space. MK8 with all DLC is over 8 GBs on Wii U. MK8D is little over 6 GBs. BotW DLC on Wii U is almost 4 GBs. On Switch it’s under 500 MBs. Pokken is 3.8 GBs on Wii U. On Switch it’s 3.2. It’s compression.

        • Lily Santos

          32Gb cartridges are expensive. Why do you think third parties are releasing games requiring extra downloads?

          • Eagle367

            Still 16gb is the limit

          • Game_God

            @ Eagle367 BUUUUURN! Good job on exposing salty ignorance 😉

          • ≈ KobobKC ≈ ᔦꙬᔨ

            You think Nintendo would risk graphics for smaller cartridges?

          • Robert Hastings

            You said 16 is the limit yet there is a larger option out there. Also I wouldn’t say XCX has better textures than 2.

          • masterjedi

            I think they’re doing it because they don’t want to pay the cost of the 32GB cart. I believe you are right about that. I just don’t condone it. They don’t get to transfer the cost of distributing their game to me the consumer because they don’t want to pay that cost. I didn’t make a billion dollars off the sales of GTA V like Rockstar/Take Two. I didn’t sell 2 million copies of Doom last year like Bethesda. I shouldn’t have to foot the bill for these 3rd party companies, who have FAR more money than me, to distribute their games.

      • Have you even looked at the game? It isn’t low-res.

      • Game_God

        @ Lily Santos Nice way to show off your ignorance…

  • Don Zaloog

    The compression techniques learned from Iwata are legendary.

    • Aline Piroutek

      Well, Iwata is a Legend itself. People learned its legacy abilities.

  • Tlink7

    Enjoy, you magnificent weebs <3 😀

    • Force

      We shall, you magnificently malevolent spy 😛

  • MusubiKazesaru

    From what I recall this is a good deal smaller than XCX’s size.

    • Nhat Anh Hoang

      XCX is 22.5 GB

      • MusubiKazesaru

        Plus the data packs.

        • Nhat Anh Hoang

          Nintendo’s compressed skill is amazing

          Vào Th 6, 10 thg 11 2017 lúc 16:00 Disqus đã viết:

  • RapGameBruceWayne

    might be time for me to finally put botw to bed and clear up space. I wanted to wait until champions ballad but I guess it’s time.

    • Or just get physical…

      • RapGameBruceWayne


        • You can have it shipped to you…

          • RapGameBruceWayne

            You aren’t full hikikomori if you open your front door. There is something nice about hitting a button and it being there immediately. It’s a convenience I’ve waited 23 years for.

          • Eagle367

            You really need to take a vacation from your home

    • Bruno_Ostara

      Use the archive option, you delete the game but keep the save file. And if you want to play the icon stays there and downloads if you click it

      • RapGameBruceWayne

        Cool beans, seems like the plan. I love that icon.

    • Hidden Flare

      Least remember to get the free Xenoblade DLC coming up later as a sort of preview of whats coming up?

      • RapGameBruceWayne

        True, so I’ll archive XC2 reload botw and mess around. I’m just drowing in games this year.

  • hi v3.0


  • Adam

    Does anyone know if there is a download component for the physical game card version? Or is the whole game on the card?