Talk:Nintendo Switch/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Can we "Switch" this around

Sorry for the pun, but I think we to change this "The Joy-Con can attach to both sides of the Console to support handheld-style play, connected to a Grip accessory to provide a traditional home console gamepad form, or used individually in the hand like Nintendo's Wii Remote." When the joy-con are connected to the "Grip", it's more like an Xbox controller, not like a gamepad. The Wii U was a gamepad. When they are attached to the console, they then look like a gamepad, right? 2602:306:374A:8F70:F1:5064:B730:294B (talk) 17:51, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Gamepad is just another name for a controller. It doesn't mean there has to be a screen in the middle like the Wii U GamePad.-AnonWikiEditor (talk) 21:02, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Still, which one looks more like a gamepad? 2602:306:374A:8F70:F1:5064:B730:294B (talk) 21:31, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

You might want to visit Gamepad. This is the correct terminology. A "Gamepad" is a type of game controller (As opposed to things like joysticks), including Xbox controllers. -- ferret (talk) 22:13, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

I meant when the jon-cons are attached to the console they become a gamepad, no? 2602:306:374A:8F70:F1:5064:B730:294B (talk) 22:25, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

I've already been to the page, in fact, I have question that hasn't been answered on that page. 2602:306:374A:8F70:F1:5064:B730:294B (talk) 22:27, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Maybe provide an example of what sentence(s) you want changed in the article so we can better understand? -AnonWikiEditor (talk) 22:34, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

The first sentence I wrote has the sentence I want to change in " ". 2602:306:374A:8F70:F1:5064:B730:294B (talk) 21:00, 16 February 2017 (UTC) Sorry, I mean quotes. 2602:306:374A:8F70:F1:5064:B730:294B (talk) 21:00, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

I don't think what you are suggesting is necessary. A (lower-case) gamepad is the same terminology for a controller (eg the Xbox controller is a gamepad too). The Wii U GamePad is a special instance of a (lower-case) gamepad/controller. --MASEM (t) 21:31, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

On the early Switch shipment...

At least one person had received their Switch ahead of release and published a video about its UI, which many many sources have picked up. I have not had a chance to read these in detail but I would anticipate a few of them would provide an encyclopedic description for us to include. (And no one is doubting that this is fake). If we have, say, Polygon or GameSpot running down the list of UI features based on this user video at pre-release, does this seem something appropriate to include?

(Note that I would say the same question would be true if someone created a video as they broke down their early-delivered Switch and put out all the HW specs, which other sites picked up to validate as appearing legit. ) --MASEM (t) 23:58, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

More specifically this article reviewing the video identifies that eShop purchases are tied to the account and not the console (as with Wii/Wii U). This would be appropriate info to include, but again, I want to make sure this "chain" of information is appropriate given the circumstances. --MASEM (t) 14:40, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

But that's not new. Your Wii U and 3DS eShop purchases are also tied to your account. -AnonWikiEditor (talk) 20:41, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

No, the situation with both those is that while the content was tied to the account, it was also tied to a system, so as soon as you downloaded to a Wii U or 3DS, you could not go to a different Wii U and 3DS , re-register your Nintendo Account to that system, and then redownload; instead you had to use special transfer tools from Nintendo to move the software from one system to another (effectively deauthorizing it on one, reauthorizing it on another), and at least for a time you could only transfer a limited number of times; you could redownload a title onto the same system it was last authorized on, but not to another. With this, there's no hardware lock; you just have to register your account to that Switch, and all titles you've purchased are available. --MASEM (t)

So yes. What's changed is the ease of delinking / relinking your account to another Switch system which *possibly* no longer requires neeeding your old system. -AnonWikiEditor (talk) 20:59, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Not really as "simple" as that, as most sources are excited that Nintendo has finally joined with how MS and Sony offer digital software, and that they recognize it is a major step. It's the elimination of the console-lock on software that's key, not that you can register your account. --MASEM (t) 21:59, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

7th Major Home Console Entry

Just a clarification, would the Color TV Game not count as a major console entry being in the 1st generation of video games (aka: "pong machines")? If it does then that would make the Switch the 8th home console entry. SparktehFox (talk) 02:46, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

We have to go by what reliable sources say and they classify it as the 7th console. They may have opted to only consider consoles with switchable carts or equivalent. --MASEM (t) 02:57, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Units Shipped should not be in the infobox yet...

The source itself states that Nintendo plans to ship 2 million units in the month of March. They haven't actually shipped the units yet, meaning it could change. I think that information should be kept off of the infobox for now. Just my opinion. --50.149.242.19

Removed it before seeing this message. Agree. A source about "planned to ship 2 million units" from 4 months ago can't be used to say "They shipped 2 million units." -- ferret (talk) 13:28, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

SoC details

Prior to release there was a discussion here about inclusion of reputably cited but unconfirmed specs of the Tegra SoC as published by Ars Technica and Digital Foundry While I do not believe there was a firm conclusion, there was a push by some to wait until the official product release. That has now passed. In the absence of confirmation, I would again push for inclusion of this information. This is well in keeping with Wikipedia policy which states: 'Predictions, speculation, forecasts and theories stated by reliable, expert sources or recognized entities in a field may be included'. Dbsseven (talk) 21:37, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean. Official product release isn't until March. -- ferret (talk) 21:39, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

(EC) Expect the product hasn't been released; it's in media circles but that will not allow those that strip down to figure out the stuff in the box to do so. I am 99.9% certain that March 4 will have some reliable source reporting on these details after their own tear-down of a Switch. --MASEM (t) 21:41, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

At the time the Masem stated 'I do note we're under 4 weeks until full reveal, so it seems okay to just hold off until Jan 13 when we should have zero guesswork of what the specs are.' This is the date I was referring to. Never-the-less, clearly this information fits within Wikipedia's policy, so I do not see/understand any grounds for exclusion. Dbsseven (talk) 21:47, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

At that time, I thought that when Nintendo was going to give full specs, they were going to give the full shabang. But they didn't - they speced everything external on the system, but very little internal, still only calling the chip a custom Tigra one. So we're still in speculation mode about what that chip actually has on it, and will be that way until the public at large can get their hands on it March 3. There might be pre-press copies of the hardware sent and from that we may learn sooner. But barring any change in the March 3 release date, I fully expect detailed chip specs will be reported without a hint of speculation on March 4. --MASEM (t) 21:55, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

I do not believe 'we're still in speculation mode' unless you only consider the manufacturer or a hands on teardown reliable sources. Again Wikipedia policy does not share your standard for inclusion/exclusion. A previous discussion and RfC on a similar issue found a reasonable compromise. Applying that here would be something like 'In December 2016, prerelease and unconfirmed reports stated the Tegra SoC would...'Dbsseven (talk) 22:09, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

The other way to look at it is that we are just about a month away from this point. There is no deadline for inclusion. If we had this much information about the console 6 months before its release and only lacked the chip specs, and we had normally reliable sources on those, then there's a reasonable argument to include them since its clearly absent data during those months. But with so little time now, and assured system dissectors will report on it as soon as they can, I think we can also wait at this point, since this would be the only "speculative" data now for the system, and its also the least interesting to the general reader (HW/gamers may have a genuine interest in that, but not the general reader). --MASEM (t) 23:44, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

But that very WP:Deadline page you cite also states "Don't rush to delete" and the alternative viewpoint of "The deadline is now". The argument within "there is no deadline" suggests the significance has not been established. Clearly given your comments the SoC are significant. Again, there is no WP policy against unconfirmed by reputably cited information (though you are calling 'speculative'). The argument that the SoC specs would be 'of least interest' is not supported by the fact chip specs are included in a number of other game system articles (and therefore I do not believe is a general opinion). I see your point that confirmation is coming, but that does not mean the data we have in-had is automatically insignificant or speculative Dbsseven (talk) 00:51, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

The data is speculative because 1) Nintendo hasn't reported it and 2) no one outside Nintendo has legal access to a Switch to break down and confirm for themselves. The sources you have are generally accurate, and can read between the lines of marketing material and other facts, or may have inside communications with Nintendo directly to gain this information, but unless we know exactly how they acquired information that is otherwise not publicly available, it remains speculation. --MASEM (t) 01:38, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Let me also add that when re-reading the Digital Foundary article ([1]) the impression I get is that the chipset they describe is relatively weak (an improvement on the Wii U but not as good as they could get). It includes the claim that games run faster when it is docked (more power to drive). Depending on your position, this could be taken as a negative, and a reason why Nintendo has been very quiet on actually talking about the chipset. --MASEM (t) 01:47, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

There is a difference between speculation and an anonymous source. Simply being unconfirmed by the producer does not make a report inherently speculative. I agree manufacturer confirmation or a teardown is the most rigorous standard. But it is not an absolute standard. Have you read the RfC I keep citing on this very issue? Dbsseven (talk) 15:53, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Well, there is yet another thing in the mix, and that is that we "know" from an accidentally leaked video that the dev kits for the Switch have at least one major difference from the console as reported by Nintendo, that being the on-board internal storage size. I wouldn't expect that the dev kits use a whole separate chipset from the Switch, but there could be other features of the chipset that could be different to aid developers (making them more powerful/capable) that won't be on the consumer product. And it is unclear from the DF article if the info they got is either what the devs saw on the their devkits or information directly given to them by Nintendo about the consumer product. There's enough doubt that waiting the month absolutely doesn't not hurt us. --MASEM (t) 16:44, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

I began a RfC on this topic (below). I do not believe delaying for absolute confirmation is a fair standard, but am trying to find a general consensus. Dbsseven (talk) 16:56, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Given the huge volume of new Switch stories today (Feb 23), it looks like most media outlets have gotten their versions of the hardware and/or any review embargos are completed. As such, any new article from an RS about the hardware specs should be considered fair game for inclusion at this point. --MASEM (t) 15:09, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

And now that review embargoes are apparently lifted (All the major gaming sites have them reports), and EG/Digital Foundry are still saying, based on their evaluations, the same details on the chipset/etc., it is now completely fair game to include them in the article (ping @Dbsseven: to allow that to go forward). Still make sure that these should be attributed to DF's analysis rather than any published specs, at this point. --MASEM (t) 14:47, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Review summary

From VG247 with links to all the reviews (following the embargo today). Dropping more for myself to pull from but looks like most are happy with the hardware but disappointed with a quiet launch list of games that doesn't yet show off its potential. --MASEM (t) 14:51, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, that's consistent with what I've been reading as well. Sergecross73 msg me 16:00, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Here's Metacritic's review compilation too, for future reference. Sergecross73 msg me 01:41, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 March 2017

On the fourth paragraph of the History Development section, Nintendo is mispelled in the following sentence: Rather than trying to compete feature-for-feature with Microsoft or Sony's offerings, Fils-Aimé said that Nintedo's goal for the Switch was Slingshoteffect (talk) 08:07, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Done Thank you for noticing that. Gulumeemee (talk) 09:23, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Wrong Grammar

It should say "...and will be released worldwide on March 3, 2017." but says "...and was released worldwide on March 3, 2017." Ararepepe (talk) 14:00, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Time zones my friend. Friday has started in Australasia. -- ferret (talk) 14:12, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

And even if we're under 24hr from release, it's pointless to bicker on wording that will remain fixed from a point forward; we're well past the point of any CRYSTAL-problems (like delayed shipments) may postpone release. --MASEM (t) 14:32, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

The Switch does not support optical discs and is not be backwards compatible... take out "be"

codename should be "code name" (???)

livestreamed change to live-streamed— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ka0t1c (talk • contribs) 10:18, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

How is this NOT the successor to the Wii U??

We know the sequence of NES, SNES, Nintendo 64, GameCube, Wii, Wii U, Nintendo Switch. But, what argument is there that supports the statement that this is NOT the successor to the Wii U?? Georgia guy (talk) 13:18, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Nintendo has explicitly stated it is not a successor, not is there any announcement concerning any sort of discontinuation of the Wii U or Nintendo 3DS. We have to wait for sources to make a call on this one. It could end up being a co-current product line. -- ferret (talk) 13:19, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Nintendo has explicitly stated that it IS the successor. -AnonWikiEditor (talk) 19:01, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Can you provide a source to back your stance? They've stated the focus is as a home console, but their literal stance, straight from the President of the company in 2016, is "The NX is neither the successor to the Wii U nor to the 3DS". Sergecross73 msg me 19:10, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

They also said that the DS was not a successor to the Gameboy Advance, yet it is listed in Wikipedia as such . 2605:6000:E523:CE00:E1EF:CD94:8CCB:FF9B (talk) 00:58, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

At an Investor Q&A session (I'll look for an English translation) it was explicitly asked if NX was the successor to both the Wii U and 3DS to which Nintendo responded that it was the successor to the Wii U. As for that quote you keep citing, you're posting an incomplete quote. Read more than the headline. The full quote (and the earlier comments from Iwata corroborate), state that Switch is the successor but because it's a new hybrid style of game play, it's not a pure successor to either has been traditionally seen when a new system releases. -AnonWikiEditor (talk) 19:28, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Can you please show the sources/direct quotes that show this. Because I read on in the source I provided, and it says that NX/Switch is ...a new way of playing games, which I think will have a larger impact than the Wii U, but I don't feel it's a pure replacement for the Wii U. which sounds like even more proof that its not a "successor". Sergecross73 msg me 19:34, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Exactly; and the only comment on the Wii U is that they've said they're going to start slowing production of it, but never said discontinued. --MASEM (t) 13:20, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

That doesn't mean anything though. PlayStation 2 production didn't end until 2013[2] - the same year the PS4 launched. -AnonWikiEditor (talk) 07:00, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

How can you act so bewildered without even looking up Nintendo's stance on it? Or even doing the most basic Google search. Yeesh. Sergecross73 msg me 13:44, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

It is replacing Wii U and in terms of generations, it is absolutely the next generation. -AnonWikiEditor (talk) 19:01, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

So. Where's your source? -- ferret (talk) 19:07, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

The 3DSXL "replaced" the normal 3DS, but we don't consider that to be next generation. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 04:54, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

That's because a 3DS XL is still a 3DS. Everything is the same, except for the larger screen size. It plays 3DS games. Also, the XL didn't replace the non-XL either. The Switch is a brand new home console. -AnonWikiEditor (talk) 05:02, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

But as Nintendo has said, it's not replacing the functionality of the Wii U. It can be taken as a different product line, a less powerful console that can work as a mobile device, rather than dedicated. That's why it's not a successor. --MASEM (t) 05:55, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

It's replacing Wii U as Nintendo's home console going forward. -AnonWikiEditor (talk) 18:39, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

You understand that essentially every source we currently have contradicts you, right? -- ferret (talk) 19:00, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

We're going to have to disagree on that. Switch is their next home gaming system. Per Nintendo. -AnonWikiEditor (talk) 19:46, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

They did say that, but they also said the Switch would not replace the Wii U or 3DS. — Gestrid (talk) 20:08, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

"Switch is their next home gaming system" and "Switch is not a successor to the Wii U" are not mutually exclusive statements. Take for example, how MS is positioning the "Project Scorpio" unit as being a 4K, VR-ready Xbox system but one that does not displace the current Xbox One. This is the same thing. It is a different home console, but not meant to surplant the Wii U (partially indicated by the lack of backwards compatibility); they can co-exist. This makes both "Switch is their next home gaming system" and "Switch is not a successor to the Wii U" equally valid. --MASEM (t) 20:09, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Backwards compatibility is not a factor in whether something succeeds the other. -AnonWikiEditor (talk) 20:15, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Plus, as of yesterday, we know the Switch will be part of an "ecosystem" of systems of some sort. It could be that one of those is a Wii U successor, not the Switch. — Gestrid (talk) 20:11, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

What's the source of this "ecosystem" talk? -AnonWikiEditor (talk) 20:13, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Bloomberg interview with Tatsumi Kimishima. — Gestrid (talk) 20:25, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

He's talking about accessories or add-ons to Switch. Nothing was said about entire other systems,. -AnonWikiEditor (talk) 20:40, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

In your very first comment in this discussion, you claimed you had explicit quotes from Nintendo calling it a successor. Where are these references and direct quotes you speak of? You keep arguing, but everything so far has been vague anecdotes and original research. Sergecross73 msg me 21:00, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

[3][4](English translated)[5]. We also discussed the President's comments before[6], which we disagreed about. There's plenty of older ones too, but we'll stick to the more recent. If you want other sources to cite about the use of the word "successor" [7]. -AnonWikiEditor (talk) 23:20, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

I can't read 1 and 2. 3 is a translation by a random twitter user - not usable. 4 is a LA Times headline. None of this is explicit, straight from Nintendo. Sergecross73 msg me 01:25, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

It's from a investor Q&A session. Whether there are issues with them as a source or not, your personal inability to read them is not one of them. 3 was merely to show an English translation of what was being said in Japanese. -AnonWikiEditor (talk) 06:11, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Just so you know, we are allowed to use sources in other languages, though English sources are preferred, (see WP:NONENG for more on using foreign sources) but we can't accept tweets as official translations because that is user-generated content (see WP:USERG). Basically, in this case, the foreign source would be preferred over the tweets, as far as citations go. — Gestrid (talk) 06:21, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Please find a source like one deemed usable on Wikipedia at WP:VG/S. Sergecross73 msg me 17:37, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

• Comment I think this "successor" business is all pretty moot as the lead already states ..is the company's seventh major home gaming platform after the Wii U]] making a statement about it being a successor simply unneeded. Although I think it is about a billion-to-one that a latter wii u successor will actually launch, all the sources point to Nintendo denying this, so "successor" should be avoided as being unnecessary and unsupported. --Jules (Mrjulesd) 19:54, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
• From how this is being positioned, this feels like it is slotted in between the Wii U and 3DS. If Nintendo does make a full, home console to succeed the Wii U, I'm pretty sure they won't be using a system-on-chip designed primarily for use in tablets and microconsoles. ViperSnake151  Talk  23:42, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Late October source

• https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-28/nintendo-s-big-switch-q-a-with-president-tatsumi-kimishima - This has got to be the most recent word on this. An extremely reliable source with a direct quote straight from the president, saying that their stance is that it's not a successor to Wii U or the 3DS. It does not get any direct or clear cut than this. It's not a successor to the Wii U. Sergecross73 msg me 18:08, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

No, that does not clearly state Switch is not succeeding Wii U. It follows in line with his previous comments that they wanted go a different route in terms of not directly following the style, etc. of Wii U and 3DS, but says nothing about Switch not succeeding Wii U. In fact, the next answer about if 3DS will be discontinued seems to support that the Switch is succeeding Wii U. -AnonWikiEditor (talk) 18:40, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

It doesn't say anything about the Wii U. It says, Thanks to our software, the 3DS hardware is still growing. So that business still has momentum. And certainly rather than being cannibalized by the Switch, we think the 3DS can continue in its own form. It seems to me you're trying to imply something the source is not saying. However, this also doesn't seem to outright say that this isn't a successor to Wii U or 3DS. The source says, We didn't just want a successor to the Wii U or the 3DS. So our original concept was, "What kind of new experience can we create?" And what we showed this time was an object that's both stationary and one you can take outside to play with anyone you want. That first sentence can be interpreted by some to mean that it's a successor to both, or it could be interpreted by others to mean it isn't a successor to either. — Gestrid (talk) 19:09, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

The quote says "so *that* business [the 3DS] still has momentum [and won't be] cannibalized by the Switch". Their only other game hardware business is Wii U. This matches with other statements they've more directly talked about the impact Switch (the "next home gaming system") will have on Wii U [8] -AnonWikiEditor (talk) 20:09, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

I'm referring to the part where the president of Nintendo says We didn't just want a successor to the Wii U or the 3DS. It's saying it's not a successor to either. If he wanted to express the last few of being a successor to both, he would have needed to circle back and say more about it. Sergecross73 msg me 20:31, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

As was noted by someone else, that's not necessarily what he's saying. -AnonWikiEditor (talk) 20:49, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Saying the 3DS isn't a predecessor to the Switch doesn't automatically mean the Wii U is. I'm pretty sure that's a logical fallacy of some sort. — Gestrid (talk) 20:40, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Because of the EC tag, I'm not clear if this is a response to me (since I did not make such a statement), but if it is I just want to clarify that I did not say because the 3DS isn't, the Wii U automatically is. -20:49, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

I apologize. The reply was to your previous comment that begins The quote says.... I edit-conflicted with Sergecross and (apparently) you, and I didn't realize Sergecross hadn't indented their comment. — Gestrid (talk) 21:10, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

The sources are clear.The opinion of Nintendo is not a secondary source but a primary source. The secondary sources are clear and the consensus too. Also, Nintendo will stop the Wii U after the release of Switch. --Panam2014 (talk) 12:27, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Your source cites a Eurogamer rumor that hasn't been confirmed yet. We can't act on that yet. (Someone already pointed this out, directly below, as well. It's not new info to the discussion.) Sergecross73 msg me 12:35, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

@Sergecross73: I am not agree. The end of Wii U is a rumor, not the fact that Switch is it successor. --Panam2014 (talk) 12:42, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Right, but the whole premise of the article is based around something that may or may not happen. Until it happens, its speculative. We shouldn't be defining the history of video games based on the speculation of a tech blog. Sergecross73 msg me 12:44, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Also, we had something similar going on with people adding "March 2017" to The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild. We added similar hidden comments throughout the article at every mention of the release date, and the problem suddenly stopped for the most part. So I like to think that the comment in this article is working. — Gestrid (talk) 14:50, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

It also does not make clear how many "cartridges" will be needed to run each game, because, as we all know, for instance, the Legend of Zelda game franchise features a huge map which can be freely explored by the player, right? I say this because I know that, when the Gamecube version of Tales of Symphonia was released, it was split into two game discs, but, since the Switch will no longer support optical discs... hence my question. --Fandelasketchup (talk) 13:29, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

The basic fact is that in the decade since the GameCube, solid state storage has surpassed optical discs for storage and small size. I seriously doubt the Switch will have any games that have multiple game cards. -- ferret (talk) 13:51, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Yes, agreed. Multi-disk games are a rarity these days, and multi-cartridge games are virtually unheard of throughout all video game platforms. Not entirely sure how this factors into this discussion on video game generations, but regardless...it seems unlikely. Sergecross73 msg me 14:48, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Wii U Discontinued, Company Executives Refer to Wii U in past tense

While the Switch can't yet be considered a successor to the Nintendo 3DS (NoA President Reggie Fils-Aime has stated that 3DS will still be supported), I feel it is safe to officially say that the Switch is the successor to the Wii U. The company's main Japanese site listed the system as ending production back in November, with NoA mirroring this statement that all Wii U's for this fiscal year have already been shipped. A recent TIME interview has Reggie relate that one of the Japanese execs hopes that "consumers look back at Wii U as a necessary step, in order to get to Nintendo Switch." That first interview I linked to regarding the 3DS also has Reggie only talking about the 3DS and Switch co-existing, with no mention of the Wii U as being part of the company's future. It's safe to say that the system is done. --UBracter (talk) 17:12, 16 January 2017 -(UTC)

I have to agree with this. The arguement that Switch is not the successor is simply too weak. In fact I believe it was a bizzare move to even consider it not to be a successor. The interview with Reggie that you posted was from 2 days ago, after the Switch's presentation, so that should only make it more clear that the Switch is, undoubtedly, the successor of Wii U. --Pincerr (talk) 19:23, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

I strongly disagree. On Wikipedia, we need to stick to what sources directly say, and we've got a third party reliable source directly citing Nintendo stating its not a successor. That trumps any of your interpretations of what tense Nintendo execs are using to formulate whether or not it would be a successor. Sergecross73 msg me 16:36, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

More accurately, in the video game hardware world, the term "successor" means that the unit is an evolution, improvement, or similar modification to the prior unit, and not so much "the next one in the lineup". Nintendo's goal is to try to make sure consumers do not see the Switch as a evolution of the Wii U (Which sold poorly), and why they focused that the Switch has a lot of hardware DNA from nearly all past systems within it. Hence why they say it is not a "successor" and why we stay with that language. --MASEM (t) 22:51, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Reggie also said that Breath of the Wild was going to be the last first-party Wii U title. This is surely a conclusion. ViperSnake151  Talk  16:37, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Again, key is that "successor" in video game hardware is generally not "next in line" but "derived from", which Nintendo has said is not the case for the Wii U to Switch. Definitely, the Switch is Nintendo's next home console unit after the Wii U, but it is not its successor. --MASEM (t) 17:08, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

It sounds bizzare to call something the next console in line but not its successor. In the case that you are saying the right thing, then how will we describe it? The Wii U will need to be at least mentioned in the article's lead (and vice versa) but what would be say if it isn't the successor? 'Follow-up', '7th home console', perhaps? --Pincerr (talk) 02:03, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Again, there are multiple definitions of "successor" in play. We and the video game industry generally use "Successor" to mean an evolutionary followup to a previous unit, and Nintendo has specifically said that the Switch is not the successor to the Wii U , in this sense. The other meaning, simply being "next in line", is accurate but not how we generally use the term. --MASEM (t) 02:17, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Its not bizarre at all. It's just "another platform by Nintendo". Not every new thing is a successor to an old thing. Not everything is so black and white. Sergecross73 msg me 03:23, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

In addition, it's premature to make this call. Wait until the console is released, and if Nintendo changes their tone and regards the Switch as a successor to the Wii U, then we can call it a successor. MichaelIvan 21:00, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

I acknowledge not every new console is a 'successor', case in hand the Virtual Boy. But the Switch clearly isn't a Virtual Boy. Switch is not being treated as a special machine like that but a proper new one, not to mention Wii U is getting its last game soon. It's all signals. --Pincerr (talk) 22:46, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Nintendo's statements about the Switch so far have indicated that they consider the Nintendo Switch to be apart from the Wii U, not a direct successor. I agree with you in a sense; When you disregard Nintendo's own statements, it definitely seems that the Switch is a successor, but Nintendo's word is the most official there is, and until their position changes, the article can't make the statement on their behalf that it is the successor. It's that simple. MichaelIvan 00:25, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Then until their position changes (if it will), we should somehow mention Wii U in this article's lead section and vice versa. If it's not the successor we'll have to call it something else. 'Follow-up' and 'next in line' came up in my mind as I said above. I've tried to do something like this on the Wii U article's lead by saying that Nintendo will release a 'new flagship console' in March 2017, trying my best to avoid calling it 'successor'. I hope we can do something similar on the Switch article - perhaps 'Nintendo's seventh major home console' (or similar) sounds alright. What do you think about that? --Pincerr (talk) 01:24, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Well, do reliable sources support any of these wording variations? Sergecross73 msg me 02:00, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Actually, I have included enough about the Wii U's production shutting down and Breath of the Wild being the last first-party game in explaining how Nintendo has compared the Switch to the 3DS and the Wii U. Still not called a successor, but enough detail that one can read between the lines that they are replacing production of the Wii U with the Switch. --MASEM (t) 02:03, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Last Wii U game

The Wii U's last first-party game will be the upcoming Legend of the Zelda game. It is yet another sign that Wii U's life is ending soon, so Switch is not an 'co-exist' thing but clearly its follow-up. This BBC news article (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-38689991) says that the Wii U will be 'succeeded' by Switch, notice the words. --Pincerr (talk) 02:03, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Nintendo Officially Discontinues Wii U

• http://kotaku.com/wii-u-production-has-officially-ended-for-japan-1791813878 - This right here is accurate as of today, Jan. 31. The company has ceased production for the console in Japan. And its likely they will follow suit worldwide shortly (of course we should wait on confirmation of this however). In regards to how we could word Switch as a successor to Wii U, we could employ a similar line to what's stated in the Gameboy article: "Prior to its release, the Nintendo DS was marketed as an experimental, "third pillar" in Nintendo's console lineup, meant to complement the Game Boy Advance and GameCube. However, backward compatibility with Game Boy Advance titles and strong sales ultimately established it as the successor to the Game Boy series." That can be decided upon later however. Max Lazy 10 (talk) 15:53, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

That still doesn't make it a successor; it makes it Nintendo's next home console after the Wii U, but not the successor since Nintendo has said it is not the case. Key here is that Nintendo is suggesting that there's little of the Wii U "DNA" within the Switch, in contrast to the Wii U being a successor to the Wii as it included making of the existing Wii features. --MASEM (t) 16:16, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

References

NX

Did any source from Nintendo actually call it the NX? I can't seem to find any. 68.186.160.22 (talk) 20:34, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Iwata himself [9]. --MASEM (t) 20:36, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Yes, many times, for months. Why? Sergecross73 msg me 21:18, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Did the Nintendo Switch launch in 61 countries on March 3rd?

I was doing some searching, and I find out the Nintendo Switch Parental Controls mobile app is only available in the following countries:

Albania, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Honduras, Hong Kong, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macedonia, Malta, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Panama, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Slovakia, South Africa, Spain, Suriname, Sweden, Switzerland, Trinidad and Tobago, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States, and Venezuela.

So, basically, could Nintendo have officially launched the Nintendo Switch on March 3, 2017 in 61 of the 154 countries recognised by the Nintendo Account/My Nintendo? Hope(N Forever) (talk) 13:29, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Seems unlikely? Usually companies focus on the major markets (North America, Japan, UK, etc) at launch, before hitting a lot of the other smaller ones, especially in cases like this one, where there is limited stock to be sold. They may just have the parental controls all set up for any countries they plan on eventually selling it in. Sergecross73 msg me 13:38, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

If that's the case, how come the list does not include major gaming markets like Brazil, India, Taiwan, and South Korea? Nintendo did not even include mainland China as an eligible country in the Nintendo Account list to begin with, and other companies consider it a "key market" nowadays. It was expected Nintendo should have started releasing their mobile games and apps in mainland China as well. Hope(N Forever) (talk) 09:09, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

I have no idea. Where are you going with this? If you're trying to use this as some sort of "source" that the Switch launched in 61 different countries, that'd be original research. We'd need a source that outright says it directly. If that's not where you're going with this...you'll have to fill me in... Sergecross73 msg me 12:34, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

SoC details RfC

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I am trying to find an consensus for a standard of inclusion of specifications about the chip inside the Nintendo Switch, though it is unconfirmed by the manufacturer. The reputability of the source publication has not been questioned. However the disagreement appears to be between:

• Include final and verified specs from the manufacturer, perhaps conveyed by a reliable source. Include specs from a credible third party with physical access to the final product.
• Include reported information of products prior to release from a reliable source.

I believe this has already be addressed in the RfC here. However, my proposed compromise language based on this RfC has being rejected.

The discussion began in December and has continued in February Dbsseven (talk) 01:11, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

• Comment It is true that discussions of this sort have been going on for a while. Perhaps it's time we establish a WP:VG-wide consensus for this type of thing if possible? Also, in regards to the related RfC given: if I'm not mistaken, a consensus found on an article's talk page only applies to that article unless otherwise stated or consensus on a wider scale overrides it. — Gestrid (talk) 02:41, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
  • I agree that the RfC I cite was only a local consensus. But in the absence of any larger consensus it is the only compromise on the topic I am aware of. I would be happy if this grew into a a larger scale discussion.Dbsseven (talk) 16:06, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

It'd be easier for people to take a stance if you provided the suggested sources and content additions. Some of it may boil down to how exactly the sources word their claim, and you plan on representing that... Sergecross73 msg me 16:25, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Good point, I was trying to keep a neutral PoV in the RfC. The link to the reference is [10]. My suggested compromise language is: 'In December 2016, prerelease and unconfirmed reports stated the SoC would be an Nvidia Tegra X1 SoC with 4 ARM Cortex-A53 CPU cores and 256 Maxwell based CUDA GPU cores. The CPU cores are expected to clock up to 2GHz, while the GPU cores are vary between 768MHz and 307.2MHz depending upon if the device is docked.'Dbsseven (talk) 16:34, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Communicating 'unconfirmed reports' would not normally be acceptable, right? Am I right in thinking that you think this is justified because we eventually will know for sure? ♫CheChe♫ talk 10:00, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

But unconfirmed by whom is the critical question here. Quite a few of the details of modern consoles are not confirmed by the manufacturers. Some of those details are not necessarily accessible when the units are in-hand. But reputable journalists may (and often do) have anonymous sources. This need not be pure speculation. I believe a consensus is needed as no-where in the article does it state "rumor" or "speculation". This this is something other WP editors are assigning, and using to invalidate an otherwise agree as a reputable source. Dbsseven (talk) 18:39, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

There is a big difference between confirming the technical details (otherwise not stated by the manufacturer) of a product out in public distribution, and confirming these details for a yet-released product based on unnamed but presumably trustworthy sources. In the former case, as long as we trust the people that have physically evaluated the unit (like Digital Foundary would) to report on specs not directly mentioned, that's fine - technically anyone that purchases the unit and the required equipment to test can validate that. But they can't for an unnamed source for a yet-released product. I would note this situation would be different if it was a known developer, say like Bethesda, that came out directly and said "here's the specs we got from Nintendo", even if they broke confidentiality agreements for that. DF doesn't have that information themselves. --MASEM (t) 18:48, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

But you're making an inherent assumption that Ars' source isn't Bethesda or some other developer, and is keeping the source confidential (because it would break NDA). By that logic, we need to evaluate the source of a publication's information, rather than simply the source itself. For absolute and confirmed sources this is easy, but when the source is confidential this becomes impossible. What is the point of describing a publisher as reputable? By this logic the Pentagon Papers and Watergate scandal information should not have been trusted and excluded from WP, despite reputable publishers for both. (Both were confirmed after the founding of WP) Dbsseven (talk) 21:00, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

• Comment New here. As I see it it is less a matter of NPOV and the rest of the acronym fruit salad than a matter of relevance and notability. (All the other items still count, but they would count whether we have generations or fuss about generations or not, and so they should not be the subject at issue.) Who says X is a new generation? Or that X will be a new generation? What will make it a new generation? What is notable about the new generation? (Even to gamesters? If you cut all the flapdoodle about a new generation of someone's hardware, what remains is pretty slim pickings for notability.) As someone said, we are in no need to hurry. If it really is likely to make a difference to everyone's lives (even just everyone's lives in the gaming business) then it not only is possible to wait another month or even year for definitivity, it actually is necessary in terms of the functionof WP, let alone WP's principles. If all we have to go on is some journalistic opinions about prospects, that would not generally be justifiable even if the source were universally regarded as reliable. We are not here to gratify the demand for the thrills of the purchasers of every bit of game kit on the market and punters of whose predictions and whose publicity machines will be most reliable, but to document and explain realities. Between journalistic predictions and market releases there always is many a slip; commonly much vaunted items appear that differ considerably from company promises and from both vendor and customer expectations, or a release even could be cancelled. And then what service have we performed by quoting "reliable sources" in WP? I say: if we do not have substance, don't post. And trade journal predictions are not much substance. JonRichfield (talk) 07:33, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
• Comment Words are a sharp sword that when used right can do almost everything for you. So let me look at a few words from the public:
  • express.co.uk: "Switch fans may have uncovered the news we've all been waiting for, as Switch specs may have been unearthed in a new leaked document."
  • trustedreviews.com "Let’s run down the raw specifications of the three consoles."
  • arstechnica.com "NINTENDO SWITCH SPECS (AS CONFIRMED BY DIGITAL FOUNDRY)"
    and "Multiple sources have confirmed to Digital Foundry*1 that the Switch will run its GPU at two different clock speeds, depending on whether it's docked or whether it's being used as a portable—and the difference between the two is huge."
    *1=link onto eurogamer.net

All this is rating the data from DF as a very hard item. Business in the press is often in a way that details are sent to journalists quite ahead of time for their works with a set of well tuned dates what is allowed to them for publishing. So a reputable journalist has already all the data. Just when someone else has started publishing from whatever source and its that far in tune with the yet restricted data then they know that they can trust into those new second source - and of course they often feel free enough to not miss their deal from the reader's audience attention for their business. If a noticeable amount of reputable folks sees that data worth not only publishing but spreading it around (okay, the express might be less trustworthy one, just from my very limited remote view) but publishing it in a manor as if it is final product data, then from my best understanding, this will be the final data of the device. Minor deviations in a leas significant digit or an inaccuracy in a subordinate unimportant attribute are always possible just like typos are always possible. In this case is not like a crowd of uneducated folks is jumping upon the rumor train and telling you a hear-say thing using some attributes of general doubt. Here anyone in the business is telling you that this is already a durable and quite hard fact. RFC-Response: If a good amount of high ranks and wise man in the business agree on something whilst there is almost not serious objection or distrust then the item in question can be understood as a set trust able fact among the educated experts thus making it a valid fact for all others as well including wikipedia. We can use it because we can trust it! Adequate wording on the origin is recommended as long as the official confirmation is still missing (and this might happen either very soon or almost never). --Alexander.stohr (talk) 17:34, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

References

• For posterity, the standard is to not repeat speculation/rumor in an encyclopedia article. Wait until details are confirmed, and until then, they're likely not worth mentioning. If some litany of sources comment on the leaked info, then it has noteworthiness for mentioning on its own. But that is rarely the case. czar 05:45, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Infobox console image

It seems to me that the Switch in the neon blue/red colours (rather than black/grey) is the most common and most advertised (especially since the official launch last month). Because of this I believe it would be better to change the infobox image from the current one to an identical one but with the neon colours (but only when a photo like that is made and uploaded as there doesn't seem to be one at the moment). After all, the 'main' colours are always the one that are put onto the infoboxes, and rightly so - e.g. black for PlayStation 2 and Xbox, purple for Nintendo GameCube, black for Xbox One and white for Xbox One S. Any thoughts on this? --Pincerr (talk) 11:10, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

In terms of production I believe Gray vastly outnumbers the number of Neon produced. Nintendo.com features the gray one more prominently, such as on the main home page and various info pages like Nintendo Switch Features. -Crabipedia (talk) 18:45, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Bending/warping

Came across this today. Not sure how widespread it is or if we should add yet, so dropping here. -- ferret (talk) 13:10, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

I saw coverage of this, but the issue seems more sporatic compared to the Joy-Con connectivity issue and dead pixel stuff (also harder to verify since it appears to be based on 100s of hr of docked gameplay, something that probably many haven't hit). Worth watching to see if it becomes more noticed and/or nintendo responds to it. --MASEM (t) 13:45, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, same. A number of websites reported it on my newsfeed, but it doesn't particularly seem all that widespread, they all seem to be reporting on the same one incident. I'd hold off too, unless people insist, in which I'd put a brief sentence in there somewhere, nothing more. Sergecross73 msg me 13:52, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

I think we'd need to wait for evidence that there actually is warping going on before adding to the article. I haven't seen any articles yet that have proved that (though if one does exist, please share of course). -AnonWikiEditor (talk) 18:11, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

The reports seem legit, I don't doubt the veracity. But its the lack of being a known widespread problem at this point in time that makes me hesistant. --MASEM (t) 19:06, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Are you referring to a specific article or reports in general? -AnonWikiEditor (talk) 19:25, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Do a simple Google search. It's widely reported by WP:VG/S reliable sources. It's even been covered by some mainstream new sources. It's clearly not just reddit joke or something - it's happened to some capacity. The question, as already stated, is the frequency of this happening. Is it a one off thing? Or happening by the thousands?I personally think it's more of a fluke thing, but I do think it's worth keeping an eye on too. Sergecross73 msg me 23:54, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

all those sites in the Google search are about the same Reddit post. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.24.127.153 (talk) 21:26, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

That seems to be what started it, but some sources talk about other reports from neogaf. Sergecross73 msg me 00:35, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

That PCmag source you found is a good one. It looks at the whole situation and multiple potential causes and possibilities (such as the likelihood they came that way from the factory vs. warping on people). A single picture or measurement is only evidence of a current state, not that something changed over time. -AnonWikiEditor (talk) 22:15, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

the official site lists the cpu/gpu as just custom tegra

the article should therefore not say x1 because that is just speculation. the article should stick with the information on the official site only.84.212.111.156 (talk) 22:42, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

We have plenty of reliable sources that with the Switch in hand and broken down, confirming the X1, even if Nintendo doesn't outright say it. --MASEM (t) 23:02, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

a source can be faked which is the case this time. nintendo also does not want the specs known according to nvidia. i asked them personally to reveal the specs to me and they said that nintendo does not want them known.84.212.111.156 (talk) 21:56, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Well, we're on Wikipedia, so we need to stick to what reliable sources can verify. Sergecross73 msg me 23:37, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 June 2017

Under release, I'd recommend changing "WW" to "Global", as it is much more understandable. 47.185.94.11 (talk) 22:53, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Not done: WW is typical and standard across thousands of articles. -- ferret (talk) 23:28, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Console succession

There has been a lot of discussion here and on the Wii U talk page on whether or not the Nintendo Switch should be regarded as Wii U's successor. While I certainly understand arguments from both sides, it appears this topic needs further discussion. If I understand it correctly, those against using the term have pointed out the following justifications:

1. The Bloomberg interview shows Nintendo's stance that the Switch is not a successor.
2. Until Nintendo officially announces it as such, then we cannot consider that label on Wikipedia.
3. There aren't a sufficient number of sources using that label.
4. The Switch doesn't share the same generational characteristics (in terms of hardware and functionality) as the Wii U.

Perhaps there are more that I missed, but let's focus on these first. First of all, the term successor can be defined as "a person or thing that succeeds or follows", and to succeed can be defined as "to come next after something else in an order or series". In plain English, it is difficult by definition alone to oppose the label of successor. The Switch clearly comes next in the "order" of console releases from Nintendo. Some of us may be imposing a stricter definition of what that means in the gaming industry, so to settle that debate, we should look to what the sources are saying:

• Review: Nintendo Switch feels like the successor the Wii deserves – Irving, New Atlas
• Leak reveals just how successful Nintendo thinks the Switch will be – Epstein, BGR
• Nintendo Switch Game Console Off To Smooth Start – Seitz, Investor's Business Daily
• Nintendo Switch hardware review – the not-so final verdict – Metro
• Nintendo Switch review: a console whose totally unique design is sheer gaming bliss – Travis, EveningStandard
• Nintendo Switch review – revolutionary, at home and on the move – Kamen, The Guardian
• Nintendo is back in the game: Switch and ‘Zelda: Breath of the Wild’ break launch records – McGrane, GeekWire
• A Wii U owner’s send-off to a deeply flawed but essential Nintendo console – Cunningham, Ars Technica
• Nintendo Explains Decision to Name Wii U Successor 'Switch' – Humphries, PC Magazine

This is just a short list of the first few sources I came across. It is clear within each that the Switch is seen as a successor. This should satisfy any concern that we need sources for adequate support. As for the Bloomberg interview that I've seen quoted several times in multiple threads, the following phrase is being cited in opposition (with my emphasis):

"We didn't just want a successor to the Wii U or the 3DS".

If you remove just from this statement, then yes, those against the term successor would have a point. But clearly, the presence of just drastically modifies what this statement means. Kimishima is saying that Nintendo wanted more than just a successor, which actually acknowledges that it is a successor. The point being made is that the Switch isn't "only" a successor. I'm quite surprised it is being used in the article in a misleading way. Unless there is another example out there that shows the company's official stance, I think we can put this one to rest. Also, it's important to keep in mind that the subject's view of itself does not trump a secondary or third-party view in an encyclopedia.

The final point about sharing the same general characteristics as previous console generations doesn't seem to hold much water and instead muddies it, considering that historically that doesn't matter. If it did, then how could we consider the Wii a successor to the GameCube, or the GameCube a successor to the Nintendo 64? Hardware-wise, the console specs are completely dissimilar. Functionality-wise, the Wii revolutionized the way games were played on a home console with motion-sensing controls. This is hardly different than the Switch adding mobility, or on-the-go-gaming capabilities over the Wii U. Those arguing against succession would need to re-evaluate how we are applying that label to other consoles; it would be grossly inconsistent to deny its use here.

I'm not advocating that we find a way to ram the term successor into the article, and it may be too early to consider it in the infobox until the product lifecycle of the Wii U ends by announcement. However, I think we need to stop hiding behind the alleged justifications listed above. There might be other reasons not to use the term, but those are all invalid in my humble opinion! --GoneIn60 (talk) 11:39, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Part of the issue is that Nintendo is not just home consoles. If it were Microsoft in this situation, who has no handheld line, it would be very difficult to take that argument that Microsoft's "Switch" not being a successor to their Wii U when they have no other hardware products seriously (assuming all other factors were the same). But Nintendo has a handheld line, and while those tend to run separately from the home console, there is no reason that Nintendo take a handheld and consider that a precursor to a home console, or vice versa, and thus just saying it is the next home console doesn't make that the successor to that home console. Add in that in their big reveal earlier this month, Nintendo considered that the Switch had DNA from nearly all of its past consoles in it (both handheld and home). It is technically the next console in their home lineup, but Nintendo has explicitly said it is not the successor to the Wii U, and that's the strongest argument to not list it as such. --MASEM (t) 13:39, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

I think the OP has a point when it comes to using the terms "Predecessor" and "Successor" when it comes to these two consoles. Nintendo has clearly stated the Switch is first and foremost a home console not a handheld console. Looking at their business decisions with their hardware they discontinued the Wii U and pulled all first party support for it. The Nintendo 3DS is still getting first party support and they are still manufacturing units. The industry articles are saying that the Switch is the successor to Wii U and this is something that in general wouldn't be disputed either. The Switch is not part of the Wii/Wii U product family but is the successor to the Wii U in terms of flagship home consoles. When the sales of the Switch are being compared the industry is primarily comparing it against the Wii U and the Wii not a handheld console. That is a clear indication which of Nintendo's product lines this console falls under as well. I don't want my comments to be taken out of context or rude but to put this in perspective there are way more sources that are very clear the Switch is the successor to Wii U compared to the sources of is the Switch 8th or 9th generation. So in the infobox for Wii U based on the sources from the industry as a whole the Switch can be labeled as the "Successor" and on this page the Wii U listed as the "Predecessor." ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 05:56, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

A lot of what you're saying just as easily comes down to making money rather than any of the intentions you're applying to it. They discontinued Wii U because it wasn't selling or making them much money, and they keep the 3DS going because its still selling well and making them money. There's also the regional aspect of things - Nintendo pushes the "home console" aspect in the West because home consoles are more popular here. They push the handheld aspect more in Japan, where that's more popular. That was the purpose of creating this new product line - consolidating resources into one product that could appeal in multiple regions despite their different preferences. Sergecross73 msg me 14:01, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Actually, Nintendo pulled 1st party support from 3DS as well. All their current game releases for 2017 are 2nd or 3rd party games. Even 3rd parties have now stated that Nintendo's 1st party focus is Switch.206.16.104.112 (talk) 20:23, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

"...but Nintendo has explicitly said it is not the successor to the Wii U"

Masem, the important part being glossed over here is the fact that we have reputable sources calling it the successor, and it's not just one or two. What source do we have that says it is NOT the successor? Are you referring to the one I mentioned in my first post?

Sergecross, thank you for the feeback, but I'm still not sure why the dictionary definition of successor doesn't apply. A new product line can still succeed an old product line despite being fundamentally different. If it covers the same market segment in whole or partially, it is a successor by definition. It seems like perhaps several editors or possibly even the WikiProject is going by a different in-house standard of what it means to be rightfully deemed a successor. Perhaps I'm mistaken, so hopefully you can enlighten me! --GoneIn60 (talk) 15:52, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

No, you make good points. I'm currently unsure where I fall on this. I was against it before, but some of the sourcing you're listing is starting to convince me, now that it actually exists. My argument above was more just that I don't subscribe to Alucard's reasoning. Yours is more persuasive. I was hoping others would weigh in before I gave my overall stance on this. Sergecross73 msg me 15:56, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

I could have sworn we had more direct quotes from N that said, effectively "The Switch is not the successor to the Wii U", but all that I can find lead back to the Bloomberg one. And that's really for me the only thing I'd had in mind to not fill in the successor field is what I thought was a stronger stance by N to keep the Switch distanced from the Wii U despite everyone else in the world saying otherwise. But if that's the only quote, and as GoneIn60's analysis points out, it's not exactly the smoking gun to prevent inclusion. Every other sign says it clearly is the Wii U successor, there's no OR or anything else at issue with that, so if the only thing blocking it was that quote, then that's really no longer appropriate, and I'd agree we can list these appropriate. (Now, if we start talking 8th/9th gen, that's a completely different line of reasoning). --MASEM (t) 16:22, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

I'm WP:BOLDly moving forward on this, with Masem's comment above. -- ferret (talk) 16:33, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

I think the three of us (me, you, and Masem) were the only real hold-outs left on this, so may as well. Sergecross73 msg me 16:36, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

I appreciate everyone taking an objective look at things. We can always revisit if needed. --GoneIn60 (talk) 17:29, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Sergecross my point was the sources are all saying the Switch was the successor to the Wii U. I was just using Nintendo's business decisions showing their business model compliments what the sources are reporting is all. ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 06:39, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Well, in those cases then, I don't oppose your line of reasoning. But you said a lot of thing like "Looking at their business decisions with their hardware they discontinued the Wii U and pulled all first party support for it. The Nintendo 3DS is still getting first party support and they are still manufacturing units. " that I find to be entirely irrelevent to this decision. Sergecross73 msg me 13:53, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Further to this idea, to what generation should the Switch belong? As per this page, the Wii U is Nintendo's current-gen console. If so, does the Switch constitute a mid-cycle revision, or should it be considered the first console of the ninth generation, a generation which Sony and Microsoft will not reach for many years thanks to PlayStation 4 Pro and Project Scorpio respectively. Given that all other major consoles have their generation listed, this must be pondered.Stormy clouds (talk) 15:58, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

It's not been determined, simple as that. There are a very few sources that say ninth generation, but they are all general news or local news sites (I.e. no focus or general expertise on video games). Most VG sources do not state it directly (with many stating that we're seeing the first "mid generation" refresh), and the most prominent general media is quiet. In short, the "idea" of generations has become fuzzy. -- ferret (talk) 12:00, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

It's been "pondered" at length on these various article talk pages - there's just no answer yet. We have to go by what reliable source say, and they're not consistently classifying it yet. Sergecross73 msg me 12:46, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

I don't expect the Switch to clearly be placed into a generation by reliable sources until Sony and Microsoft announce their "next-gen" systems. If Nintendo releases a new system around the same time Sony and Microsoft announce their "next-gen" systems then I can see industry sources placing Switch into the 8th gen but if Nintendo doesn't release another system around that time I could see the sources placing Switch into the 9th generation. It is worth noting that if the sources do place Switch into the 8th generation it wouldn't be a first for 1 manufacturer to have more than one console during a generation. Atari did release 4 of their home consoles in the time-span of 2 generations (Atari 2600 & 5200 during 2nd gen / Atari 7800 & XEGS during 3rd gen). Sega also had 2 home consoles released during the 3rd gen with SG-1000 & Master System. SNK released two Neo-Geo platforms during the fourth generation one that used cartridges and one that used CD-ROMS. It wasn't until the fifth generation there was 1 console per manufacturer (not counting add-ons released for older consoles.) ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 17:32, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Right, but until any of that happens, I don't think this warrants much discussion. All there is for people to do is speculate, and that's not really what Wikipedia is for. We'll just have to wait a few years.BruzerFox 10:34, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Predecessors

If using Wii U ports to Switch is the main reason Switch is a "successor" to Wii U, then with Monster Hunter XX, a 3DS game ported to Switch, why is this also not a successor to 3DS? There needs to be a predecessor part taken out, both Iwata and Kimishima both said the Switch (aka NX) was neither a successor to Wii U nor 3DS which is proven by the fact neither system's games are playable, with ports being the only way, and both will have exclusive ports when XX releases. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.16.104.112 (talk) 20:14, 27 July 2017‎ (UTC)

Games being ported is not the main reason, or even a reason at all, that the Switch is considered a successor to the Wii U. The most critical reason is that reliable sources refer to it as a successor. Secondly, for the home console market, it replaced the Wii U. Meanwhile, the 3DS has not been discontinued, and has even had new model lines introduced since the Switch was released. -- ferret (talk) 20:23, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

See https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Talk:Nintendo_Switch#Console_succession for the discussion and rationale on this. Sergecross73 msg me 20:37, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 August 2017

In the Lawsuits section it says "an Android-based gaming device that also features a tablet with detachable controllers."

This is not true, it has a single detachable controller, shaped like a U, which the screen can slot into. Like the Dreamcast.

It should be changed to "an Android-based gaming tablet with a U shaped controller" 81.153.37.112 (talk) 07:41, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Done nihlus kryik (talk) 07:48, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 August 2017

101.63.82.120 (talk) 14:33, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. — nihlus kryik  (talk) 14:35, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

regarding charging of joy-cons

i noticed that they will charge while the console is running with them attached to the switch. i did not use the switch for a while and when i started using it again the joy-cons was completely drained. i set them on the switch while it was running and they charged.84.212.111.156 (talk) 11:52, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Yup, that's how they work. It's mentioned at the Joy-Con article too. Sergecross73 msg me 13:00, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

i think it should be mentioned in the main switch article as well.84.212.111.156 (talk) 15:48, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Capitalization of "console"

I have noticed that throughout the article, there is no consistency whether or not the word "console" is capitalized when referring to the Switch. Most often, it is when the product is addressed as the "Switch Console" that "console" is capitalized, though it occurs other times as well with "Console" by itself. I don't think that capitalization is necessary, and that instances of "Console" be made lowercase for consistency (except in titles and references). —TheAnonymousNerd ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:43, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

No, there is a difference. The Switch home console has three major parts, the Joy Con, the Dock, and the Console. Any capitalization of Console should be specifically when referring to the unit when not in the dock and not incorporating the Joy-Con. When any collection of these parts are mentioned, then that's the home console, and should be kept lower case. --MASEM (t) 05:38, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Amount of wattage the Switch is rated

I've seen the Wii U rated as 75 w for power, I believe we should add the AC power draw for the Switch alongside its battery. I believe, testing it from an APC UPS, it uses up to 15 w when docked. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saiyaken PHOENIX (talk • contribs)

Do you know of any websites that state its power draw? -AnonWikiEditor (talk) 20:28, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

https://www.anandtech.com/show/11181/a-look-at-nintendo-switch-power-consumption/2 this is one source of the Switch's power consumption on AC power.

Generation

Is Nintendo Switch an eighth generation console or a ninth generation console? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 191.17.55.155 (talk) 00:49, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

The short answer: Sources haven't decided. They may never. For longer answers, search the talk page archives. -- ferret (talk) 00:57, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Video game critics and historians can't decide now, but they will decide in the future, as they did for console released to compete with older generation consoles like the Dreamcast or the NGage. If in a decade from now will be clear that the Nintendo Switch competed with PS4 and Xbox One, it will be classified as an eighth generation console. If the competition will be mainly against PS5 and the fourth Xbox console, it will be classified as a ninth generation console. Plain and simple.--79.54.7.123 (talk) 13:22, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Right, but in the meantime, there's no use debating this. BruzerFox 16:19, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Wii U was 8th. Switch is 9th. (that's how generations work) -AnonWikiEditor (talk) 04:24, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

That's how single product line generations work. It's not how broad industry generations work. As far as Nintendo consoles go, Switch is the 7th generation of home consoles for Nintendo. -- ferret (talk) 10:26, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

It does for the video game industry. The console generations are defined by the release of new generations of hardware by Nintendo (and Sony/Microsoft). -AnonWikiEditor (talk) 18:54, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Your response perfectly exemplifies one of the core issues that keeps coming up. We get all these self-proclaimed experts who are so certain about their viewpoints on the industry, but either they can't can't provide the sources to back their stance, and/or they can't garner a consensus of editors that support their personal views. Sergecross73 msg me 19:00, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

It's not personal views or original research at all. The articles are about subsequent generations of video game consoles. Nintendo released a new console that is a successor to their previous console. It's their next generation system. We don't need sources for basic definitions of words like generation. -AnonWikiEditor (talk) 19:12, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

There's several generations from an industry view point where a vendor released two consoles in the same generation. There's also the very likely possibility that the industry is no longer viewing things as concrete generations, due to large mid-cycle refreshes like PS4 and Xbox One are doing. The generations aren't set by Nintendo's release schedule. -- ferret (talk) 19:27, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

The problem is that there's different fundamental definitions for a vague word like generation". Some say its by timeframe. Some say it has to do with chronological release order. Others say system horsepower. Others say marketing. Others have other wacky ideas. Any time there is disagreement, we need sources and consensus. Saying otherwise would only show ones fundamental lack of understanding in Wikipedia's policy and procedures. Sergecross73 msg me 19:37, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Another way to consider the generations is that it is comparable to the idea of a social Generation - the baby boomers begat Generation X and so forth. It is the collective state of the console market. Unfortunately, while Microsoft and Sony walk hand in hand, in the sense that they are developing competiting consoles and thus are going to have comparable features, Nintendo has nearly always followed a blue ocean approach to innovation of late, and their consoles, released at the same time, do not really line up with the others often. As such, just because Nintendo has made a vastly different system from it's 8th gen, the others haven't, and the media seems to consider this that we are still in the 8th generation for all purposes, and/or they are hesistant to categories the Switch as 9th until they know what MS/Sony's next console release will be to see if the Switch fits. So basically we are hamstrung by the lack of any source to confirm a generation here. --MASEM (t) 19:55, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Yes, honestly, that is probably the most accurate assessment of the overall situation, considering how different sources define generational things like baby boomers or millennials with different timeframes, traits, tendencies, etc too. Sergecross73 msg me 21:20, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Don't be silly. If it were that simple, there wouldn't be year-spanning arguments over this. Sergecross73 msg me 12:16, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

I agree. The debate has been very silly. -AnonWikiEditor (talk) 18:49, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

I personally consider this to still be an eighth-generation console. Both Sony and Microsoft have released mid-term refreshes for their hardware (the slim versions, as well as PS4 Pro and Xbox One X). Although they are more powerful versions, they are still part of the same hardware and software ecosystem as their parent consoles. Then, you look at the Switch; unlike Sony and Microsoft, Nintendo decided to deprecate the Wii U rather than do a mid-term refresh. Also note that the Switch is also in a different product category than the Wii U (pure home console) and the 3DS (pure portable console), which Nintendo has not done before, and most of the games so far had been equivalent in fidelity to Wii U titles (if not slightly better). Nintendo's admission that the Switch is not a successor to the Wii U supports the idea that it is not a next-generation device, but merely one that has been taken back to the drawing board and went in a new direction. ViperSnake151  Talk  16:06, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

While I personally agree, we need some sort of sourcing that shows the RS's are treating it that way. VG sources have been mostly mum, while some earlier non-VG general focus sources actually called it ninth gen. -- ferret (talk) 16:47, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Nintendo Switch is officially not a successor to the Wii U

According to Nintendo themselves in a Famitsu interview: https://www.famitsu.com/news/201610/21118771.html the first question states that they don't see Switch as a successor to the Wii U, as it's a brand new, unrelated system. Josephvb10 (talk) 02:23, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

This has been discussed at length already in multiple sections of the archive. The decision ultimately was to wait until more sources came up for this, and in the meantime, to refer to it as a successor to keep things simple and easy to understand, because the details on console succession are fuzzy. Reliable sources are not discussing this topic and Nintendo hasn't brought it up anywhere aside from that single Famitsu article, as far as I can tell. BruzerFox 04:03, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

The result of the last discussion, Talk:Nintendo Switch/Archive 2#Console succession, was to include Wii U as predecessor. What remains undecided is the console generation, which as you say isn't really being discussed by RS (There's still length active discussions on that at the 8th gen talk page). -- ferret (talk) 11:56, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

This may have been mentioned before, but the Nintendo DS had a fairly similar situation surrounding it. It released years before the rest of the gen's consoles came around, and Nintendo was pretty clear that it didn't consider it a successor to the Game Boy Advance at the time, which goes to show that it's impossible to know until later on. In retrospect, the DS is considered a successor, and is grouped into the same gen as the Wii, PS3, etc, but there was no way to know for sure until the generation ended. I'm not sure if any such dispute occurred on Wikipedia, but it was a point of discussion in gaming at the time. Another point to bring up is that industry-wide generations may become irrelevant, at least as far as Nintendo is concerned. In short, the only option is to wait and see. BruzerFox 13:26, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Yes, that's basically where the back and forth at 8th gen is at. -- ferret (talk) 13:28, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

According to Famitsu, Nintendo Switch was never a Wii U successor. I imagine Nintendo officially stated that Switch is not the Wii U successor. Switch isn't a successor to Wii U. 45.247.145.185 (talk) 11:48, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

This makes me think you didn't read the linked discussions, where we have all acknowledged Nintendo's statement about succession. However, plenty of reliable secondary sources clearly view it as a successor, and that's what we report. -- ferret (talk) 12:26, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Critisism?

No one will add the criticism of the console? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.97.93.42 (talk • contribs)

If you actually read the Nintendo Switch#Reception and its subsections, you'll see that there are many represented, but feel free to present more ideas here (as long as they are backed with reliable sources). Sergecross73 msg me 13:42, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Removed superfluous 'the' articles

So, here I've removed the superfluous 'the' article from before 'Nintendo Switch'. This is a very common mistake even among native speakers of English, and even amongst tech trade journalists.

Permissible forms:

• Nintendo Switch — Note, that in case of company name + product name, the 'the' article is not required at all.
• the Switch (in italics)
• the Nintendo Switch add-on
• the Nintendo Switch device

Similar comparison: 'Apple iPhone 8 is a mobile phone...' is only permissible for article beginnings; otherwise, it's 'Apple iPhone, or 'iPhone 8', or 'the iPhone', or 'the phone', or 'the device', or 'the iPhone X widget' (pertaining to only that model).

Please do not revert. -Mardus /talk 13:37, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

I'm a bit iffy on Apple iPhone 8 in article beginnings, since 'iPhone 8' is a whole thing on its own, a better article beginning would be: "iPhone 8 is a mobile phone by Apple.". -Mardus /talk 13:40, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

• In some places, I did leave the 'the' article in, and that was where other people's text was quoted, as the person quoted perpetuated the misuse of the 'the' article. -Mardus /talk 13:42, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

I don't believe your change is an improvement. It leaves many of the remaining sentences reading rather awkwardly and mechanically. It hurts the flow of the writing. I'm also seeing many instances of GA and FAs that use a "the" in front of the subject.

1. Wii
2. Sega Genesis
3. Sega Saturn.
4. Sega Dreamcast.

I find it hard to believe all of these featured articles, with the level of excrutiating detail given in their reviews, all had this same oversight.

Additionally, please follow WP:BRD. If we're following protocol here, it is you who should not be reverting further. Sergecross73 msg me 14:18, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

There's a difference between "not required" and "not permissible". "Not required" doesn't mean it is strictly improper. If it hampers the reading and flow as expected by the majority of English readers to apply the exact technical grammar rule so strictly, then we shouldn't. This will just create headache as all those native speakers who get it "wrong" continuously try to add it back. -- ferret (talk) 14:31, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) (twice) Is there anywhere on the Manual of Style stating that that's how the "the" word should be used? Because I'm not finding anything on that. --TL22 (talk) 14:32, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

No, actually. There was just a recent discussion on updating it here [11] but that was more from a software standpoint, and a previous section at MOS/COMPUTING was ultimately removed.

The best advice I see from the talk pages at MOS is "use the method the manufacture uses". And a cursory glance at Nintendo's press shows "the Nintendo Switch". --Masem (t) 14:36, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

And just as I was going through, there is definitely a distinction when talking about the physical unit (where it is "the Nintendo Switch") and the system as a software platform where the definite article can be omitted ("Super Mario Odyssey for Nintendo Switch", or "...will be released on Nintendo Switch in..."). --Masem (t) 14:46, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

The physical unit should be treated the same way. If there is a desire to use the definitive article, then only in 'the Nintendo Switch device', if it's about a specific device to be used with its full make+model name. The problem, unfortunately, is widespread, and extends even to official PR materials both at Nokia/HMD (where they have 'the Nokia model #') and Nintendo, neither of which are headquartered in English-speaking countries. Furthermore, navboxes do not have the definitive article before the name/model of each device; presumably because of the same rule. -Mardus /talk 15:42, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

I think it's a matter of context. If it's reffering to the physical unit, then use "the Nintendo Switch", and if it's talking about the system as a software platform, then don't use the "the". Simple as that. --TL22 (talk) 15:49, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Yes, agreed. I also agree with Masem's sentiment and acknowledgement that Nintendo themselves uses the "the" in the same manner. Sergecross73 msg me 15:56, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

There is actually good explanation at MOS:TM why we omit definite "the" for products in article titling and infoboxes. Simply put, those are not read as full sentences, and thus is the briefest way to present them. But in prose, the best MOS advice we have is to follow the choice made by the manufacturer, even if it may seem wrong. --Masem (t) 16:11, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

This just seems overly pedantic to me. If a grammar rule is so little-known, even among professional writers, it could easily be argued that it's permissible to ignore. Rules of grammar are, after all, often up for debate, as language constantly evolves. It's just not worth anyone's time to remove it and put up a fight to protect its omission. BruzerFox 18:28, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 January 2018

Although the Nintendo Switch does have four Cortex A57 cores and Cortex A53 cores, the A53 cores are not used by the game and are only used by the SoC itself in low-power situations. 68.101.99.223 (talk) 20:38, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. -- ferret (talk) 20:42, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 January 2018

there should be a picture of a Nintendo switch in portable mode without the joy con thing because it can be used as a tablet I think 71.161.214.1 (talk) 16:42, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

 Not done I don't think it is hard to envision the Console by itself (without Joy-Con) given the first two pictures in the infobox. What would be nice is a picture of the Console standing by its kick-stand on a surface, which is "technically" the Switch's 3rd mode as set out by Nintendo, but we don't presently have any images of that mode to work from. If we can get them, that would be reasonable to include, but there's nothing to be done now. --Masem (t) 16:50, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

Table of shipments?

Does someone want to start this? I don't know how. Because Nintendo are very forthcoming with shipment data each quarter, it should be easy enough for someone to do (there are existing ones for the likes of Wii U, Wii, 3DS and DS you can look at for reference). Seeyoshirun (talk) 17:53, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Now that we can stock it with three quarters of data, absolutely. I've invis-commented a table fro the Wii page but haven't had the chance to run down the financial report refs from Nintendo to complete it, but there's no question of its value here. --Masem (t) 23:18, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

WT:VG Discussion on Switch generation

Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#Nintendo Switch generation. -- ferret (talk) 20:30, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Thinking of how to redo the sales section

First, I'll leave this here Switch hits 4M in Japan, but in trying to think how to add that, I realize the sales section is very haphazard. There are points of how fast the Switch sold that we can't leave out but I don't know if we need as much resolution for that, or at least state more simply that it was the fastest selling console in Japan, US, France, etc.. (similar statements elsewhere). --Masem (t) 14:48, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

The switch is actually 9th generation

that needs to be fixed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.83.26.92 (talk) 02:19, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

A long discussion has already been held on this topic. The outcome was that both the Wii U and the Switch are eighth generation systems. ~ P*h3i (📨) 02:23, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 April 2018

This sentence is a mess: "Takeda described the Nvidia chipset critical to bring similar performance for games as they have on personal computers, helping to achieve "high performance but low power consumption" for the Switch"

I would suggest something like: "Takeda described the Nvidia chipset as being critical for delivering gamers a level of performance similar to that which they experience on personal computers, helping to achieve "high performance but low power consumption" for the Switch" KaitainJones (talk) 22:36, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

 Done L293D (☎ • ✎) 01:58, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

"Home Console"

In the first paragraph, it says:

Nintendo considers the Switch a "hybrid" console: it is designed primarily as a home console, with the main unit inserted onto a docking station to connect to a television.

I feel like this statement needs a citation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CoolerMudkip (talk • contribs) 20:30, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

It is sourced in the body. Fils-Amie states its a home console you can take with you on the go (source 44). --Masem (t) 20:34, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

About Nintendo Switch Online

I think there's been enough coverage on the Switch's online service for it to have its own article. 344917661X (talk) 00:23, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

There’s no shortage of sources, but they all say very little about the service, which makes sense, because there’s still very little known, unless it’s just a really bare bones service. Either way, I don’t think there’s enough to be said to split it out yet. Sergecross73 msg me 01:23, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Maybe we should wait until the service has been out for a month or two and then create the article. The switch's online service will be notable enough eventually for it to have its own article. 344917661X (talk) 15:22, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, or even just upon the rollout, where every video game website will likely be doing a full rundown of it’s functions. Sergecross73 msg me 16:16, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

I agree with you that it should have its own article upon rollout, per your comment above, but a current news tag should be added when it is created and stay there for a couple of days to ensure no fake news or false information is added. 344917661X (talk) 16:44, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Discounts

Should we add information about retailers discounting switch games, or is that too promotional? Here's a source. [12] 344917661X (talk) 20:57, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Too promotional. Nintendo-packaged bundles as retail SKUs are fine, but not third-party bundles. --Masem (t) 21:07, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

That's fine with me. 344917661X (talk) 21:24, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

About the fifth reference

Reference 5, which is from the NYT, does not support the following sentences "but in Nintendo's subsequent years, its revenues had declined. With the release of the Wii U in 2012, the company had posted an operating loss and continued to see declining revenues. Nintendo saw 2014 as one of its largest financial losses in its modern history." I tried to find source(s) backing up the 2014 financial losses claim, but was not able to find any sources that said 2014 was one of their largest financial losses in Nintendo's modern history, although I was able to find many articles about the financial losses, they said nothing about it being one of their largest financial losses in Nintendo's modern history. Could someone add sources to back up the above claims, which are under the background section? 344917661X (talk) 18:23, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Nintendo Switch Online to split into a separate article

The Nintendo Switch Online service is now fully active worldwide. We should now split up the topic from the main Nintendo Switch article, especially considering all the negative reception the service is getting at launch. Hope(N Forever) (talk) 20:00, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

I don't know that there's enough here to justify a WP:SIZESPLIT yet. Are you expanding substantial expansion from what we currently have? -- ferret (talk) 20:05, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

I'm not sure its worth a split yet either. There's not a whole lot to cover. It's a paid service that allows you to play games online alongside 20 NES games, with more coming over time. Seems more like something that could be covered in a subsection rather than its own article. If anything, the section looks a bit bloated with little details... Sergecross73 msg me 20:30, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Surprisingly, not much information has surfaced since the service's launch. I suggest waiting a few months to decide wether or not this section deserves its own article. 344917661X (talk) 22:05, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

If we feel there needs to be a split, it should go to the Nintendo Switch system software page, since it is effectively But I don't think we need the split. (Consider both paid services of Xbox and PS are not separate pages). --Masem (t) 20:52, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Redirect Nintendo Switch Online (article) to the Nintendo Switch Online (section)

is there a way to do this? Mralext20 (talk) 04:20, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I just fixed it. You needed to change the target of the redirect... to get to that, when you enter a redirect, at the top of the page you are redirected to, you'll see a "Redirected from (page name)" with a link, that gets you to the un-redirected redirect page that you can then edit. --Masem (t) 05:32, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Should there be an article on the Nintendo Switch Launch?

There's a lot of information about the launch of the Nintendo Switch and it might be worthy of its own article, but i'd like to get a consensus on the Nintendo Switch talk page before we create an article on the Nintendo Switch's launch. So should we? 344917661X (talk) 13:59, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Nintendo Switch GameCube Adapter

Just thought I'd post this here (minus the pings) from my talk page to provide some context to my edits and I am also wondering what other editors views are on the wording for the gamecube adapter as I feel the use of 'Wii U Gamecube Adapter' alone is incorrect. I have updated the article to what I believe would be the correct wording, but thought it would be good practise to post this here anyways. Chieftain Tartarus (talk) 21:42, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

---

This refers to a specific product. In fact, Nintendo's "new" adapter is actually just a rebranded run of the Wii U version. This is about backward compatibility with an existing backward compatibility measure. ViperSnake151  Talk  18:54, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Actually it implied that only the Wii U adapter was compatible and neglected to mention that any USB gamecube adapter actually works regardless of branding. Was badly worded at best and misleading at worst. Chieftain Tartarus (talk) 18:57, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

The "other" ones are just off-brand clones of the Wii U one (same USB product ID/etc.) that is specifically recognized by the two consoles. Your broader statement is unsourced original research.. ViperSnake151  Talk  19:23, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

How on earth is it unsourced? https://store.nintendo.co.uk/nintendo-switch-accessory/nintendo-gamecube-controller-adapter-for-nintendo-switch/11793689.html Its quite clearly called Nintendo Gamecube Adapter for Nintendo Switch. A simple Google would have sorted that for you. Don't lecture me on policies when they don't apply or pertain to an issue (I understand that USB adapter was rather vague, so have reworded to 'Gamecube adapter', however I don't feel this policy 'bashing' is appropriate). I do not wish to be harassed, I only dropped in when I heard about Stan Lee. Chieftain Tartarus (talk) 21:07, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

I have reworded the part in the main body to this (numbers in brackets are citations in the article): "The 4.0.0 system update enabled support for GameCube controllers attached via USB with the GameCube adapter that was available for Wii U as well as the upcoming adapter for the Switch[3], allowing the user to play games with a GameCube controller with most games compatible with the Switch's Pro controller such as Super Smash Bros. Ultimate.[146][147][148]" I also reworded the part in the main box to say "via Gamecube Adapter" instead of via "Wii U Gamecube Adapter" or via "USB adapter" and cited both with the Nintendo website. I hope this compromise on wording will settle your objections. Chieftain Tartarus (talk) 21:25, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

---

Colored references and stuff....why??????

To me, this is just ridiculous. Why do we do this? I don't approve. Remove it NOW!! Zacharyalejandro (talk) 05:22, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

@Zacharyalejandro: A) What in the world are you talking about? B) You've been repeatedly warned about making talk sections like this. -- ferret (talk) 15:27, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

For some reason there is colored words everywhere in the editing process of things, like the dates, references are colored as well as the titles of games, developer/publisher and release dates. Plus the name for users and such. And B) I don't know how you guys think arguing considers as blocking and such, which is just not right. We all have argued online and moved on after, why can't you guys just accept and move on? Zacharyalejandro (talk) 18:11, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

That's the editor, not anything we have done. I think there was a recent change in the default editor for all users that deprecated an old version and defaulted to this highlighted version. --Masem (t) 18:14, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Somehow, the List of Nintendo Switch games seems even slower when I'm fixing to add games with the appropriate source(s). Zacharyalejandro (talk) 18:18, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

It has nothing to do with individual articles, there was a change to the editor interface site-wide. We can't help you. Maybe try WP:VPT. It probably relates to the very first topic, this. -- ferret (talk) 18:34, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

It seems the List of Xbox One games is running really slow to edit. Could we split that page? Splitting the PS4 games page, but not the Xbox One and Nintendo Switch pages? Really? Starting to annoy me more than ever. And I mess with other wikis, I get blocked immediately after I start editing there, which I why I'm staying here. I don't care. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 03:22, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

@Zacharyalejandro: You can turn off the syntax highlighter by pressing the highlighter icon to the left of the Advanced button in the top toolbar of the 2010 wikitext editor. If you need more technical help, go to WP:VPT instead of complaining on this random talk page. Jc86035 (talk) 08:32, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

How do I turn it off, at least for me, @Jc86035:? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zacharyalejandro (talk • contribs) 17:20, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

He literally just told you how to do this. Please read what he said. Your prior comments are ridiculous as well. There’s no need to either split or not split the list of games pages at the same time. There’s literally no reason to do that. You’re really testing the patience of editors and admin around here too, Zachary. Stop complaining about things like this for no reason. We don’t make changes based on your random, unexplained whims. Sergecross73 msg me 17:25, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Why is this being discussed here of all places? This is seriously off topic and has nothing to do with the Nintendo Switch Wikipedia article. 344917661X (talk) 03:12, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

What keeps happening to the Nintendo Switch Online section?

I am trying to add a list of the NES Online games that were available at launch, when games were added if they came out after launch, and upcoming games.

I also include cites for all of the sections, and also links for each game.

Every time I try to view the list on Mobile, the list disappears. It also doesn't show up on PC. Was it taken down, or what? If so, I added info. If anyone can help me, that would be... well, helpful! :) Thanks! CreeperDudeBro (talk) 05:08, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

@Masem reverted your changes, and left reasons in his edit notes. When your edits are reverted, you should receive notifications saying who and with what edit note they left. You can also use "View History" on the article page to see the revisions, including the reversions, and read the edit notes. -- ferret (talk) 13:09, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Basically, we've determined in the past that the full list of NES titles via the online service subscription is not really appropriate for this article (more of a catalog) so we're not including them. --Masem (t) 15:30, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

The title will likely be awkward but maybe the Nintendo Entertainment System — Nintendo Switch Online app needs its own article with reviews/reception too. ViperSnake151  Talk  16:33, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

On a related note

The Nintendo Switch Online section is too long-winded. It should be summarized and made into a dedicated article more like Xbox Live. See Draft:Nintendo Switch Online. ViperSnake151  Talk  17:16, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

• Support There is enough info now in the Nintendo Switch Online section that it should be split into its own article. However, the draft is very short and definitely needs improvement, so I suggest using sources about NSO that are already in the Nintendo Switch wikipedia article and putting them in the NSO draft along with copying content from the NSO section and rephrasing it in the NSO draft. 344917661X (talk) 18:22, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Also, if you are wondering what the special offers for the service are, the Nintendo Switch Online Service FAQ page says that the special offers are the NES controllers and Splatoon 2 DLC. 344917661X (talk) 18:26, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

• Agreed that the article is getting too bloated and could probably use a split here. Even with a separate page, 3449, please try to be a little more selective with the things you add. Sometimes it feels like you add every little trivial factoid NintendoLife says... Sergecross73 msg me 22:09, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

The draft is a WIP and I was opening it to other contributors. ViperSnake151  Talk  22:56, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

The draft looks a lot better now, but once it is published, the Nintendo Switch Online section in the Nintendo switch wikipedia article needs to be trimmed down a lot. 344917661X (talk) 23:35, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Izneo

Was this app ever released at the end of November? Couldn't find any information about its actual release. Anybody able to confirm this? I have no way to check it at the moment or no internet. Zacharyalejandro (talk) 03:47, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

I don’t know, but I’m not sure it’s worth mentioning either way. It’s a pretty minor thing. The whole article could use a good trimming - there’s way too much bloat like this in it right now. Sergecross73 msg me 16:30, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

"Fastest-selling console"

The lead mentions that the Switch "is the fastest-selling console in Nintendo's history, and is the fastest-selling console of all time in Japan and the United States". These statements have to be qualified with a timeframe and measurement criteria, since sales figures can change from one month to the next and there are many different ways to measure "fastest-selling". In terms of "fastest-selling" throughout the body of the article, the article mostly discusses sales during the first year of release, with some mention of sales around Black Friday 2018. A general claim in present tense that the console "is the fastest-selling console of all time in Japan and the United States" must be substantiated by a current source and time frame. Is it the fastest-selling console in terms of all sales since it was first released? Is it the fastest-selling console for 2018? For December 2018?

The body does mention that it has sold more units in its first 21 months of release than the Xbox One or PS4 did in their first 21 months of release. That's one metric for measuring fastest-selling, but it doesn't necessarily tell you how it's holding up against the other consoles in terms of current sales. For example, pretend that the PlayStation 4 outsold the Switch and Xbox One in November 2018. Then you could argue that the Switch is "the fastest-selling console" (because it sold more units in its first 21 months than the PS4 did) or that the PS4 is "the fastest-selling console" (because it outsold the Switch in November, in our hypothetical example). This is an example of why it's important to specify the specific metric used.

"Fastest selling console of all time" sounds like a timeframe at first (lifetime sales), but that could have other meanings. For example, pretend that the Switch sold more units in its first year than any other console has every sold during a one-year period, but then didn't sell as many units in 2018 as the Xbox One sold in 2018. Then you could say the Switch is "the fastest selling console of all time" because it holds the record for "most units sold in a 12-month period", even though more recently it hasn't sold as fast as other consoles. Another example of why you have to be specific when saying "fastest-selling".

Some guy (talk) 01:48, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

eight gen?

Resolved

 – Consensus is that the Nintendo Switch is an eighth-generation console. ~ Arkhandar ^{(message me)} 23:58, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

the wii u was eight gen. the switch is 9th gen.

wii competed with ps360, wu competed with xone/ps4. switch is next gen, and will compete with ps5/nextbox.

fix this please.KRISHANKO (talk) 01:16, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

This has been discussed in depth, as most RSes classify the Switch as 8th gen. --Masem (t) 01:22, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Look through the talk page archives. Consensus and sources support 8th gen much more so than 9th. Sergecross73 msg me 02:48, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

but nintendo called it its "next gen system" back when it was known as nx. i tend to trust the makers of the thing over.... regular people. except when they are wrong, like calling spyro trilogy an hd port when they are full-blown remakes.KRISHANKO (talk) 07:14, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

It may be Nintendo's next generation of console, but in the market it has ended up being part of the 8th generation, partially due to MS and Sony doing hardware refrehes rather than new consoles outright. The fact is the Switch is competing now, currently, against the Xbox One and PlayStation 4. Not their future replacements in 1-2+ years. -- ferret (talk) 13:56, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

An article published today by Eurogamer illustrates this. Note how they call Switch fastest selling console of the generation. That wouldn’t be much of a talking point if it was considered to be the only 9th gen system released so far. Sergecross73 msg me 21:47, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Proposal to split Nintendo Switch Sales section into its own article Proposal to trim Nintendo Switch article

Work in progress; comments welcome

 – The article has 85 kB of readable prose; per WP:SIZERULE it probably should be split or trimmed. ~ Arkhandar ^{(message me)} 19:22, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

The current sales section is getting too bloated, so it would make sense to move all of the content to a Nintendo Switch Sales article and cut back on the content in the Nintendo Switch Sales section. X-Editor (talk) 17:59, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

It needs to be cut down, not split out. We want to emphasize total sales, its initial performance (months from release), and describing how it became the fastest selling console, but about half the information starts getting into extraneous data weeds. --Masem (t) 18:01, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

@Masem: If you want to cut it down, then go ahead. I guess that would be a better solution than making the section its own article. X-Editor (talk) 19:08, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Also opposed to a split. This article needs to be trimmed down in a number of areas instead. Sergecross73 msg me 20:01, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

@Sergecross73: I've changed the proposal to trimming the article instead. What areas other than the sales section do you think should be trimmed? X-Editor (talk) 03:16, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

I've added a Template:Very long to the article. It has 85 kB of readable prose, so according to WP:SIZERULE it probably should be split or trimmed. ~ Arkhandar ^{(message me)} 18:11, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

If you read through the article, there are all sorts of places that can be trimmed back or reworded to be be much more concise. It’s bloated all over the place. I’ve been mentioning it for a while, but my time for larger efforts like this have been limited, and a lot of the active editors currently do nothing other than bloat the article further with every rumor and minor observation NintendoLife writes an article about. Sergecross73 msg me 18:23, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

@Sergecross73: What areas do you think should be trimmed back? Please be more specific. X-Editor (talk) 06:11, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

@Sergecross73: Hear hear... I've noticed that the Joy-Con section has a lot of information that might be easily trimmed since it already has it own article. Maybe a paragraph with it's main features is enough? ~ Arkhandar ^{(message me)} 19:20, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Sergecross73 msg me 00:25, 15 February 2019 (UTC)

As a point of matter, I know that when I added info to this article pre- and shortly after release, I was trying to add seemingly relevant info but avoiding proseline text. At this point, we can write more reflectively on the content now knowing the trajectory that the Switch is going and remove some of the fat from that. --Masem (t) 21:28, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Yes, related to that, there’s a lot of things we could say more efficiently. There’s a lot of sentences that are written as if the reader hasn’t read a single sentence of the article before or after it.

We can take bits like:

On April 2017, Nintendo of America President Reggie Fils-Aimes announced on an interview with IGN that sales had exceeded 3 million. In May, Nintendo of America President Reggie Fils-Aims announced that Nintendo was thrilled by the robust sales of 4.1 million. By June 2017, at a post-E3 after-party with GameSpot, Miyamoto went on stage and announced sales were at 5 million, an amount he praised as “successful”.

And change it to:

Nintendo announced that Switch sales surpassed expectations, reporting sales of 3 million by April 2017, 4.1 million by that May, and 5 million by June.

The same approach can be applied to any topic, it’s just that sales was easiest to make up an example. Sergecross73 msg me 21:56, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

@Sergecross73: As a rule of thumb we should avoid writing sentences with individuals instead of Nintendo as a whole, unless that individual has had a substantial impact to the sentence's subject (for example, in the development section, it makes sense to list and discuss designers; in reported sales, its useless to know who reported it). ~ Arkhandar ^{(message me)} 22:24, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Edit request - 8th gen

Please add the fact that this is 8th generation of video game consoles to the introduction. 2601:647:CB02:5034:35C4:A5D2:ABCA:62C9 (talk) 21:41, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Done (X-Editor) 01:46, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

How is it the eighth?? The NES is the first console; the SNES is the second; the N64 is the third; the GameCube is the fourth; the Wii is the fifth; the Wii U is the sixth; this is the seventh. What am I missing?? Georgia guy (talk) 01:51, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

8th generation of consoles overall, including other brands, which is not necessarily linear. Not the "8th nintendo console". -- ferret (talk) 01:55, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Which generation didn't have a Nintendo console and what did that generation have?? Georgia guy (talk) 01:56, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Nintendo came in third generation? 2601:647:CB02:5034:35C4:A5D2:ABCA:62C9 (talk) 02:38, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Where have you been? This has been discussed and debated off and on for years. Read through the talk page archives here and at the Switch article. 8th gen has been the consensus. Sergecross73 msg me 03:17, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Who is responsible for the generation numbers?? Georgia guy (talk) 12:55, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Best we can tell, it is WP that created them, popularized by citogenesis by real world sources. Back in WP's first days, we knew there was the 8-bit generation, the 16-bit generation, etc. so WP decided to enumerate those for the transition from 4th to 5th. That numbering appeared to catch on and stuck around. --Masem (t) 15:06, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

If WP created the generation numbers, then they're Wikipedia's original research, right?? Georgia guy (talk) 15:17, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

It was OR waaay back then, but since that's how they are referenced by RSes today (including the IEEE), it no longer is. It's a textbook citogenesis that we just have to deal with now. --Masem (t) 15:28, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

When did Wikipedia create them?? Georgia guy (talk) 15:29, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Around 2004. --Masem (t) 15:34, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

And if it started out as Wikipedia's OR, then why was it accepted so easily by sources?? Georgia guy (talk) 15:54, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Because unlike most other cases of citogenesis where a mistaken fact gets published by WP and it later can be debunked, there never existed a system of numbering generations before WP did it (as best we can tell), and it thus served as a useful means to break down console generations by other RSes. IT doesn't contradict anything previously published. --Masem (t) 16:12, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

@Masem: So let me get this straight, Wikipedia came up with the numbering scheme for different generations of consoles and everyone just agreed to the numbering scheme? Are you sure WP came up with it and the numbering scheme wasn't used before WP? Also, I didn't expect a discussion this long to come out of me simply approving an edit. (X-Editor) 01:15, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

We've looked, and its hard to find anything to show that the current numbering scheme (not the concept of generations) originated from anywhere else but Wikipedia. But I do want to stress the point that there didn't appear to be any numbering scheme beforehand - we had the "8-bit" generation, the "16-bit", etc., and there was idea of clear transistion from one generation to another. That is, there was some "first" generation, some "second" generation, and so on, WP just ended up assigned the 1st gen as those consoles like the Magnavox Odyssey and so forth. For some reason, that numbering scheme seeped into the coverage of the generations by others and re-enforced it. So while it could be called original research way back when by WP, it no longer is as it has become a standard for the industry. --Masem (t) 01:24, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying, but I wasn't saying that the concept of generations didn't exist before WP. (X-Editor) 03:06, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

I guess I'm just trying to say that the only real thing on the generations stuff is which generation was "1st", "2nd", etc. While this could be called original research, it is far from troublesome. It would be if we actually came up with the idea of a "console generation" in the first place. --Masem (t) 03:50, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

That's true, but luckily the idea of a console generation has been around before WP, so it's not original research. (X-Editor) 14:02, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

Software sales per hardware unit calculated

I have calculated the software sales per hardware unit sold (=games per console) for every region and for every quarter in the sales table. Can someone with the proper rights please add these values? Valus are:

Software sales per hardware unit in Japan	Software sales per hardware unit in the Americas	Software sales per hardware unit in other regions	Software sales per hardware unit in total
1.48	2.38	1.82	1.99
2.19	3.33	2.86	2.89
2.70	3.94	3.89	3.60
2.64	3.98	3.67	3.54
3.00	4.25	4.06	3.88
3.29	4.96	4.60	4.42
3.68	5.47	4.98	4.86
3.92	5.71	5.12	5.07
4.21	6.02	5.49	5.39

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.200.106.182 (talk) 21:38, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

But what is the purpose or need for this information? -- ferret (talk) 11:58, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

I think he’s more or less calculated “attach rate”, which, while that is a thing that is discussed in the industry...this is way too detailed for an encyclopedia. We’re not Nintendo’s accounting team, nor are we hosting Nintendo’s investors meeting. This doesn’t belong here. Sergecross73 msg me 12:44, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

Also the chart does not show dates or sources so it should not be added until the dates and the sources are added or found Cvxs (talk) 16:45, 2 May 2019 (UTC)