Talk:Wii/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

→

Archive 10

new page

I archived the old talk page due to its length. I don't think there were any unresolved issues in there.In general the nintendo revolution page is pretty stable but there are a few citations missing esp. towards the end of the article - if there is a rumour in the article with out any link it will probably be removed eventually - so add references PLease.HappyVR 16:21, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

High Definition

Why is IGN so upset about no HD support. Does it even impact games? Tutmosis 16:44, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

It depends and hurts!
There are some grown men who likes Nintendo more than Sony & Microsoft, infact some grown men are even Nintend0 fAn.
Some men, have expensive HD Televsion, so they would like to share it with other things...AKA, cable, dvd-movies...ect.
Since 7th gen is here, games will support HD, some men can now have the chance to play there fav first party: Nintendo games on their HD TV.

PS3 & 360 are going HD, why an't Rev0 going HD!?

You know...it just feels lonely for em:P

>x<ino 16:54, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Doesnt make sense since it all depends on the games resolution. Is nintendo saying they aint going to support HD resolution? Tutmosis 17:00, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Most 360 games are just upscaling to HD resolution anyway. It is deifinitely nice to have the capability for higher resolutions, but I doubt many developers will sacrifice visuals in order to get the higher res. --203.214.58.56 03:32, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Price and time-to-market I believe are the biggest issues. I don't have the reference on me at the moment but I believe there's a quote somewhere saying that not supporting HD helps bring the cost of the system way down. Zebov 23:27, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

And that suker Reggie says the Rev0's resolution will be just like the gAmecube's

>x<ino 00:08, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Nintendo doesn't belive that visuals is what will make the next generation, they belive that the evolution of the actual gaming expirance is what will make the next generation. They want to take the differnt path, sure, from a technical point they will suffer, but from a gameplay point, Nintendo looks like they will be leading the pack, hopefully the Revoltuons controller lives up to its potential, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.29.246.102 (talk • contribs)

Cleaned up

Great work on cleaning up this article...Just checked it now, all those other useless crap are now gone!

>x<ino 17:00, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

New specs section

This was added earlier. Believe it's unsuitable in its current state. I'm going to merge it into the existing specifications section. --OscarTheCat^talk 22:25, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Seemed like a good summary of everything that is actually known about revolution - however I removed the wired ethernet bit - erm not true?HappyVR 22:50, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi HappyVR. I initially thought that about the wired ethernet stuff. However, we've got a sentence in the article already "Nintendo has also provided a device that will be able to connect the Revolution online via a Windows XP computer, a USB port, and a Broadband connection as an alternative to buying a Wi-Fi router" which does suggest that a non-wifi option will be bundled/optional. What do you think? --OscarTheCat^talk 22:57, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Ah yes, I think this is a USB wifi dongle to plug into a PC. The PC is connected to the internet and the Revolution connects to the PC via wifi. (Probably very similar to the Nintendo DS wifi dongle see [1]). My guess is that the Revolution will use something similar. As far as I know this is not yet absolutely official.HappyVR 12:29, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi - as the other part of the article references this, I've updated the specs section to show this, to maintain consistency. Suggest that if the USB wifi dongle turns out to be mere conjecture, then we can remove the original sentence and this newly added part of the specs section. --OscarTheCat^talk 19:27, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, If I've got this right I think the Revolution remains wireless and connects wirelessly to either a WiFi 'hotspot' or a PC with (Nintendo supplied?) WiFI transmitter/reciever connected to the PC via USB. In fact I think its a safe bet to assume that even the DS USB WiFi 'dongle' might pick up the Rev signal (or it might be configured to talk only to DS's). To be honest I know technically nothing about wifi. Now I think about it it's supposed to be easy to turn any internet connected PC into a wifi hotspot (no need for specialised nintendo hardware). In any case if someone knows better they'll soon clear this up.HappyVR 19:53, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Oops, I think I've just repeated what is already in the article. I've now noticed that in the section 'Ports and Peripherals' it includes 'Optional USB PC-compatible 802.11b/g wireless router.' which seems to duplicate 'Wired via USB (see Nintendo_Revolution#Connectivity)' in the section 'Networking' - I've done an edit - if it's not better then just change it back.HappyVR 20:02, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Developer Support

Hey, this is MAGUS from the NSider forums. I find your developer support section quite a bit lacking, and I figured I might as well post a link to my NSider forum post which is famous (or infamous) for its massive amount of listed Nintendo Revolution support by people AND companies. Everything on my list includes a source (or multiple sources) and quote(s).

I'd do some editing of the section myself, but I currently lack any time to do so.

Anyhow, I thought that I'd try to pitch in and help this article out a little bit by posting that. However, I may have posted it at a bad time considering the fact that the size of the article is currently being discussed.

Masamunecyrus 08:13, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, thanks, there's already a link to a list of developers but I'll definately have a look at your link and see if there's anything else. Thanks.HappyVR 12:29, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

• I updated the topic to Version 7.3. For a complete list of all of the developers supporting the Revolution and URLs to the source of each confirmation, take a look at the topic. Otherwise, here is a complete list of all of the developers that have been confirmed to be developing at least one game for the Revolution: Activision, AQ Interactive, Artdink, Atlus, Blitz Games, Clover Studio, Electronic Arts, Koei, Konami, Kuju Entertainment, Midway Games, Namco Bandai, Natsume, N-Space, Inc., Sega, Square Enix, Ubisoft, Tecmo, and THQ. Masamunecyrus 15:32, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I've used your list in part (so I hope it's right I'm sure it is).HappyVR 19:34, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

The new references

Is it just me or is the new reference format a pain in the ---- to use. I know User:OscartheCat kindly changed the refs to the new type and I don't want to seem ungrateful but personnally I prefered to be able to check a ref with a single click. Is there some way this can be achieved with the new reference method? I don't know it might be just me being old and grumpy - all I want is to click on a reference and be sent straight to the site. Any feedback??HappyVR 15:01, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Shucks. You're quite right, it does take 2 clicks, even if using popups. I've been helping out by updating quite a few article to use this format (Calvin and Hobbes, PlayStation 3, Xbox 360, PlayStation Portable), as it seems to be the preferred layout (e.g. it's used on today's featured article The Protocols of the Elders of Zion and many high-profile articles such as Wikipedia). That said, I am interested in feedback - perhaps we can pass thoughts on to the creator of the template (or author of popups), to see if this can be overcome somehow. --OscarTheCat^talk 18:46, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

I appreciate that there is now a list of references (with summary) at the bottom of the page - this is good. What would be REALLY good is if the summary line came up when the mouse pointer hovers over the link and clicking on the link does the jump, plus keep the list at the bottom. I've been meaning to ask about expandable text as well but have no idea who or where to ask. e.g. clicking on a highlighted word brings up a short explanation etc.(I've no idea if wikipedia can even do such things at present.) Anyway for now it doesn't really matter. Carry on your good work.HappyVR 19:25, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi, just to let you know I've asked the question on the popups talk page Wikipedia_talk:Tools/Navigation_popups#Previewing_of_references_using_popups - you might want to add it to your watch list, see if we get anywhere. --OscarTheCat^talk 20:15, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I've had a look at that page and it seems like it might be possible by editing some User:file (see http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Wikipedia:Tools/Navigation_popups#Installation and further on) but unfortunately it still seems to link to the reference list and doesn't show the reference -shame but I'll keep a watch on that page, I didn't even know about the popups before, thanks.HappyVR 20:42, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Darn. By the way, popups are worth installing, are excellent for checking out links (to see if they suffer from pointing at a disambig/redirect) and also for reverting duff edits. --OscarTheCat^talk 21:12, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the popups show that some of the things I mentioned could be done e.g. expanding abbreviations to full text, explaining 'difficult' words without having to jump to a new page etc. I'm suprised that they're not included in user:preferences.HappyVR 21:26, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Lupin added it to the development version of popups. See Wikipedia_talk:Tools/Navigation_popups#Previewing_of_references_using_popups. Superm401 - Talk 04:09, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Have started using it, and by jingo it works! Most excellent. --OscarTheCat^talk 07:51, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

magazine scans

The url was missing a few digits so I fixed that. On the same site there is also this:Nintendo of Japan Marketing report pictures It's the same thing but tidied up.HappyVR 23:27, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Fair Use Image Gallery

We should probably cut down a bit on the use of fair use images. I realize there's a valid promo photo claim, but they're still fair use and we should be conservative. I don't think there needs to be a full gallery, for example. Superm401 - Talk 04:05, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Fair comment. I've added a copied pic of the rear (showing connectivity) to another section. As it stands, I believe the gallery is no longer needed - we've got all the pertinent pics in the other sections (console, controller, rear of console). Also, I'm no fan of the gallery tag - it leaves far too much white space around the pics. --OscarTheCat^talk 07:25, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

I've cut the gallery down to 4 images though I think even these still seem superfluous. Also changed image description from 'rear' to 'side' mainly because it's not the backside - personally I can't wait to have a look at that but so far the only images I've seen are of the prototype? plastic case castings/mouldings (in nintendo book mentioned in 'miscellaneous'). My suggestion would be to leave the gallery with just one or two pictures until some newer/better ones come out.HappyVR 19:13, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

• In my opinion, only one of the current images should be kept, and other images (especially the one of the white Revolution next to the controller) should be readded. Cosmos 18:20, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Which one? and why the image you mention? My edits were just a response to comments that there were too many images (which I aggreed with). I think they are all of dubious value..Maybe we don't need any of these images at present?HappyVR 19:14, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Nintendo Go

Just a heads up. Engadget has an article about a picture that was suposedly snapped at the GDC. They speculate that the real name of the Nintendo Revolution will be revealed later today and that this could be it, the Nintendo Go. Also, in the comments there's speculation that instead of the console being named this it might be the name of Nintendo's online service. Hopefully, this stuff will either be confirmed or denied in the next few hours. Since it's just one picture and some speculation on Engadget I don't think it's worthy of being included in the article just yet. Engadget article —This unsigned comment was added by TheKoG (talk • contribs) .

I agree, we should wait until it's confirmed what Nintendo Go is before adding anything to the article. -- VederJuda 18:35, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

And just seven minutes after your post an anon added it to the article. :p --TheKoG (talk|contribs) 18:45, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Ugh, I just checked Digg and they have a news story saying that it's true about the rename. Their source: The same engadget article I posted that's only speculating about the name change. :p --TheKoG (talk|contribs) 19:07, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

I am sorry for any confusion i have caused concerning the Nintendo Revolution i guess i should wait till a name gets confirmed before making any drastic changes (please first give my Proposed name a chance and if it turns out it doesn't get renamed or is renamed something different feel free to revert the change after emailing me at ericjraack@yahoo.com ,thanks —This unsigned comment was added by 207.213.160.84 (talk • contribs) .

It's no big problem. It's just that facts added to the Wikipedia need to be verifiable. At the moment the Nintendo Go name is just speculation. In all likelyhood it is the new name; however, before changing the Wikipedia article to reflect this it needs proof. --TheKoG (talk|contribs) 19:45, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

According to [[2]] Gamespot article, the console is still just being refered to as "just code-named Revolution." Probably won't know anything more about it anytime soon. Erik C 21:51, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

New REV Info?

I just heard that Sega Genesis downloads (at least some) were confirmed, as was another system's game. . .

Can this be verified? —This unsigned comment was added by 71.52.243.126 (talk • contribs) .

Yep, it's in the article under the section called "Virtual Console" with a link to its source article. Also, please remember to start new discussions at the bottom of talk pages. --TheKoG (talk|contribs) 20:45, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, I just added it. This is actually my first time ever truly adding something to an existing article, so if anything needs to be cleaned up or changed, just let me know what you did so I can learn ;) Erik C 21:41, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Blargh, I just noticed where you (or someone else) added it towards the beginning of the virtual console section as well, TheKoG. I'll try to clean it up a bit more. Erik C 21:44, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Just a quick note, 150.156.212.140 changed the "1,000 games from the..." to "selec (sic) number of games". Personally I think the number is impressive and worthy of being in the article, but I'm open to any alternatives Erik C 22:15, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

You misunderstood. It's not 1000 games. The Genesis had a 1000+ game library. Nintendo said "best out of the Genesis' 1,000+ gaming library" or something like that. Read IGN's report. K1Bond007 22:33, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

According to [[3]]: "According to Nintendo, over 1,000 games for Sega's Genesis console, released in 1989, will be added to the Revolution's library." That doesn't sound like a select amount, that sounds like over 1,000 games from the Genesis will be added to the Virtual Console library. Do you have a link from IGN that doesn't jive with that? And if so which source is more valid? Erik C 17:16, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes,...this cheap info can be verified! 1UP conference on Nintendo So wiki users! LOOK SHARP! and add this details

>x<ino 22:30, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Intro Clean up?

I noticed we have a little note up top that says the intro is a bit to long, any suggestions on how to fix this. On thing that might be able to go would be the last paragraph: "Nintendo has been coy with release of information regarding the Revolution, leaving some..." Since it really doesn't seem overly relevant, nor does it give an sources for such a claim. The second paragraph "he system was unveiled at Nintendo's 2005 E³ press conference and the system's game controller was revealed at the 2005 Tokyo Game Show by Nintendo President..." Seems a little wordy as well. No dout it contains some useful information, chronicaling the revalations of the system, but I think bare bones info like the release date and perhaps the date of the first unveiling would suffice. Any other ideas, suggestions? Erik C 17:21, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

We could just ignore the 'introduction is too long' tag and carry on as normal? But your suggestions were good too.HappyVR 17:39, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Heh, I was going to ask where it even came from, since whomever added the tag didn't bother to post in the discussion page here. I'll clean it up a bit as outlined above and remove the tag. Erik C 21:04, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

At least it's in its proper place now. Awhile ago I noticed it was in the references section, so I just removed it as nonsense. I had no idea how long it had been down there or who added it. --TheKoG (talk|contribs) 21:10, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Alright, I had at it. Anyway to make it even more streamlined is more than welcome. Have a go and such :D I removed the tag for now. I think in the future if folks are going to add tags like that it'd be cool if they just poked their head in and talked about it. Erik C 21:19, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Here's where it came from in the first place: [4]. Though I don't know why having many references would be a bad thing... Robert 21:21, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I see. I agree though, can one really have to many references? Especially when you're dealing with the launch of a video game console and rumors just fly everywhere. I can see where someone would come from saying there are a lot of references. But if they all serve a function can you really complain? Thanks, Jax1 Erik C 21:24, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Nintendo go - new pictures

WHAT WHA WAT! wat is going on! Have I missed E3 already
Some suker already added Nintend0 g0, as the real...I must have missed e3. The fact about the damn pictures of the console & controller

can someone please tell me what is going on!?

>x<ino 17:26, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Nothing is happening - remain calm - there is nothing to see here.
What about the new pictures - should the other old ones in the gallery go or what - there was some discussion before about this.HappyVR 17:39, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

More importantly, when was the name "Go" actually confirmed? (Momus 17:43, 24 March 2006 (UTC))

It has not be confirmed yet. At least no one's been able to cite a source to confirm it. Some editors probably saw the pictures online out of context and jumped the gun. Please read the Engadget article I posted in the "Nintendo Go" section. --TheKoG (talk|contribs) 17:50, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Here's a Google News search of "Nintendo Go". Every single one of those articles is just speculation about the two pictures. There have been no official announcements from Nintendo. --TheKoG (talk|contribs) 17:52, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

I was about to say...GDC!? Nintend0 g0!? This nintend0 fAn are too damn...even TheKoG was mAd when he reverted some edits. l0l!? Nintend0 g0!? time to g0 Afrika!

And for the pictures, I say they should stay! I hate conflict edit >:@

Oh yea... and Thek0G... how can you forget IGN!? you should be ashamed of yourslef:)[5] IGN got pics:P

>x<ino 17:56, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Ummm, I'm not quite sure I completely understand your comment. :p --TheKoG (talk|contribs) 17:59, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Not sure but wasn't the nintendo GO thing just some fan created hypothetical new logo/name?

Thanks for the links xino, these new pictures should replace the old ones in the gallery I think. However note that (as far as I can see) the new pics don't show anywhere a GO logo etc..?HappyVR 19:02, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

thAnks:P

And it will be a good idea not to remove all pictures of the Rev0, we can label like 2 or 1, " The console display shown at E3"

>x<ino 19:11, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes the Nintend0 G0, maybe the real name of the Revolution. Because if you look at the logo, which looks like a 3d damn First Aid Cross. If you steer at the middle you will notice the Gamecube logo. Anyway, I thinkg the name "Nintend0 G0" might just be the nickname for the downloadable content, or the name of the wifi service.

>x<ino 01:51, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

GDC images

Why did someone add more images of the Revolution system from GDC? They're horrible pictures. Hard to see and they don't add anything to the article that the other 100 pictures we have of it already do. For what: a power cord, a video port, 2 USB ports and an exhaust? Come on. Seriously, this is just a waste of Wikipedia's space and I'm highly suspect of the license that was added to their page in anycase. I highly doubt it's "free-use" since they're all stamped. These need to be removed and deleted. We're not a fansite. K1Bond007 20:47, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

I can't find any copyright notice on them?

Whats wrong with adding the pictures from GDC? It is the first live model of the Revolution since E3 05 and is closer to the final product. Know one has seen the back of it before GDC 06. So I think they would remain on, especially the one that shows the back.

I like the new pictures from GDC (that's just my opinion), I'm not sure of the pros and cons of whether they should be included/replace older pictures/not be included. Maybe some other people will help decide what the gallery will/should contain.HappyVR 16:34, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

I like them to that's why I put them up. I think they are slightly more important the previous pictures b/c it is more of a real life representation of this system, especially the back of the system. Anyone that finds a better picture of the back of this console, I would be happy if it would take the place of the GDC Picture.DivineShadow218 23:14, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

• I highly suggest we replace this and this with this and this.

The former is an excellent view of the back and latter is an extremely detailed view of the controller. -- Masamunecyrus^(talk)_(contribs) 03:11, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

They are not that detailed... but a bit fuzzy

I particularily agree that http://media.revolution.ign.com/articles/697/697733/img_3480721.html should be an image in the gallery - not only is it a good view of the rear - but shows that the Revolution will have 'External power supply shame' - since the input is 12v DC - there must be a transformer/power supply - also now this is 'known' maybe there should be a mention of this in the article.
also the latest images show that black in not neccessarily the most likely colour.HappyVR 17:22, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

• So... Should I go ahead and add the images? I have Photoshop, so I can make them brighter and make the image more cool (as opposed to warm) if it would help the visibility. Either that or I could just add them as-is. -- Masamunecyrus^(talk)_(contribs) 18:26, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

No! It's a copy righted picture! Second: We need a picture, that should define the console real, not another fake-Prototype Third: We need the pictures for the GDC!

>x<ino 18:31, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't think photoshopping is the way to go... However the copyright issue definately needs to be sorted out. I can't find any obvious copyright message.HappyVR 18:48, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

First of all...you don't need to see it. If the person that actually took the picture, sees this...he might sue.

>x<ino 19:17, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

I doubt IGN cares if we post an image from their site. Second, the images I discussed further up ARE from GDC. Moreover, they're from a final or near-final version of the console -- not just some prototype. That said, I'll just contact IGN and ask them for permission to post the two images on Wikipedia. If they decline, then that ends that debate. :-) -- Masamunecyrus^(talk)_(contribs) 19:22, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I don't need to contact them. Here is one of many images posted on Wikipedia that is from IGN. It is classified as fair use. I hope this clears the copyright issue up. -- Masamunecyrus^(talk)_(contribs) 19:36, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

I still think that the picture from IGN of the controller is still horrible. but if you would like to use it, go right ahead, just as long as you keep the other pictures up as well. If you want to replace the one of the back, go right ahead. DivineShadow218 05:10, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

In Second thought, I really like the back view from Revolution Report better. only because it shows the flap on the top where the GCN controllers and Mem card go into and as well as the front of the controller. DivineShadow218 05:28, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Alright. As long as there's debate, I won't put the pictures up. ^^ -- Masamunecyrus^(talk)_(contribs) 06:24, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Masamunecyrus You don't need to contact nobody...We can use any picture as we like. But all we have to do is set a copyright tag...like "This image is from a video game screenshot but copyright!". But I don't understand the linking to the Genji picture:/

DivineShadow218 yea the picture, is quite boring, but it does show the advancing of the console, that it isn't real and it looks exactly like the prototype version. Also the white skin version.

>x<ino 06:57, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

What's wrong

"In an interview with IGN following the Game Developers Conference in March 2006, Beth Llewelyn (Nintendo of America's senior director of public relations) stated, "The penetration rate of HD is very small. Certainly down the road Nintendo will adopt that. Yes, in the future, we will.""

I removed thisHappyVR 08:06, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

I also removed this:
"A digital directional pad is positioned at the top of the controller face, with a large button labeled "A" directly below it and a trigger on the underside acting labelled as the "B" button. Below the A button is a row of three small buttons labelled from left to right: Select, Home, and Start. Towards the bottom of the controller are two additional buttons labeled "X" and "Y". To the right of each of these buttons is a label faced, so that when the controller is anti-clockwise, would label the 'X' button the 'B' button and the 'Y' button the 'A' button. This is the same layout as the original NES controller, implying that the controller will be able to be turned and used to control NES games via the Virtual Console."
Probably a bit unpopular but I don't see the point in describing in text what a picture (or nintendo's promotional video) would explain much more clearly.HappyVR 18:44, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

And this I also removed:
" It is unknown what effect this will have on importing and playing games from one region on another region's machine; since Nintendo's consoles are also region locked, it is likely that whatever method importers use to circumvent the regional lock-out would have to override the parental lock-out as well.

Some politicians have expressed that they are pleased with the concept of hardware based parental controls. For instance, an article listed on Nintendo's website claims that the governor of Washington, Christine Gregoire, feels that it "gives parents more information and more control over what video games their kids play and at what age."

However, this may prove unreliable as most current parental control systems have a relatively easy way to reset the password, in case one forgets the password. This method is usually, in fact, in the instruction manual, and therefore, almost anybody could bypass a parental lock. Details are currently unknown. This feature is included on the Xbox 360 and will be present on the PlayStation 3 as well."
My reason is that the article still states that parental controls will be present, why is all this 'editorial' comment here.

The article already has (a much too long section) on non HDTV support - and the second comment is infered (and not confirmed), here:
"** HDTV not supported, though compatibility may be added in the future"
Why is is always 'may' or 'suggests'? How about 'will'.HappyVR 18:55, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Rev patent?

I removed this link :http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/search-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PG01&s1=20050237323&OS=20050237323&RS=20050237323 Nintendo Revolution U.S. Patents
Can anyone confirm that this actually relates to the Revolution and not say the DS or something else?HappyVR 20:04, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

virtual console

Could someone sort out the virtual console section because it's a mess - duplicated infomation in the section and elsewhere in the article , trivial links , no structure - just new paragraphs added as the news comes in. Seems to need to be at least partially rewritten.HappyVR 20:29, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

You are right...just paragraphs & paragraphs. I will give it a go and try and sort it out!

>x<ino 01:41, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

It really needs to be rewritten - not just a few meaningless paragraph headings.

• I tried my hand at it. It's not the best as I had only 45 minutes to do it, but feel free to revert or fix it up. -- Masamunecyrus^(talk)_(contribs) 19:56, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for doing that - your rewrite is readable - and so good enough for me.HappyVR 17:29, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

virtual console reference

This reference appears dead:
<ref name="dojorev">{{cite web | url=http://www.nintendojo.com/infocus/view_item.php?1118165596 | title=Brand New Revolution Details Revealed | org=nintendojo | accessdate=2006-03-17]}}</ref>
It could be only temporary but otherwise it'll have to go.HappyVR 11:05, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

• It works for me, as of March 27 -- Masamunecyrus^(talk)_(contribs) 19:25, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Still doesn't work for me? As no one else seems to be having problems I'll leave it as is for now.HappyVR 17:29, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Started working again - everything back to normal.HappyVR 17:31, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Some more specs

IGN got some information about the hardware here. Some good reading, although most is already known. -- ReyBrujo 04:35, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Is this strong enough info to update the article's CPU/GPU Speeds to 733MHz and 243MHz respectively? Zebov 14:09, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't see any reason not to include this and no one else has voiced against it so I added it. Zebov 17:25, 30 March 2006 (UTC)#

I think no - quote from article "IGN Revolution contacted Nintendo of America for comment, but the company did not return our query in time for publish." and also from Slashdot http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/03/30/044254&threshold=-1 "Matt Casamassina hates Nintendo and takes every opportunity to talk about how weak and worthless their hardware is. Every three months for awhile now he's posted "leaked" specs about the Revolution. Every one of these "leak" stories takes care to talk about how much more powerful the XBox 1 is than the Revolution. In all cases the source is "sources".

Frankly I think it's most likely the Revolution will be the weakest of the three next gen consoles, but I'll believe this when I see , and after the rabid and rapidly decaying lack of journalistic integrity shown by Matt Casamassina in the last couple of years, I personally refuse to believe anything I read on revolution.ign.com at all.

You can feel free to believe what you want of course." This comment was rated as 'insightful'.

Interestingly I just removed a similar thing from the rumour and speculation section - now the next day IGN posts the same info again plus some processor speed. Coincidence? I can't see any reason to respect this - all it serves to do is increase IGN's web ranking.HappyVR 17:31, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to be so negative but I have had to remove this. It could be put in rumour section if people think it is sufficientlt interesting/important rumour.HappyVR 17:58, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree, it is not confirmed, but a strong rumour. -- ReyBrujo 18:01, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

I see. Sorry about that, I'm not familiar with Matt Casamassina's writing so wasn't able to verify based on author, but IGN is used as a reference in many cases. I'm not sure where the GPU speed came from (from "reading into" the article, it seems as it was some sort of benchmark test... or maybe a random number generator), but the CPU quote is "IBM's "Broadway" CPU is clocked at 729MHz, according to updated Nintendo documentation." I think that, since Matt cites Nintendo documentation for this clockspeed, it should at least be included in the Rumors/Spec section. Zebov 18:06, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Added to the Rumors/Spec section. Tlesher 18:25, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

My two cents: Nintendo has told us they are not interested in releasing the console specs. This would imply they would not like ANYONE doing this. Thus, any developer in possession of the specs and/or development kit would have to sign a non-disclosure agreement. We can pretty much be certain there is such an agreement, or the 'secret feature' of the Rev would've been revealed. Also... April Fools? Though I must agree a better theory is found in the unsigned post above, where Slashdot is quoted as saying Casamassina has been 'leaking' Rev specs for several months now, all unconfirmable, and all very negative. I don't think Casamassina counts as a trustable source for information anymore. --King Nintendoid 18:29, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Me again - just to qualify - the memory specs are very old, the processor speed (as far as I know) is new, putting this in rumours was the right thing to do. If you read the actual IGN article you might laugh :"a developer we spoke with alleged" - maybe that should be 'an alleged developer we spoke with' - I kind of get the feeling that the writer does some of his best work in the pub. Basically IGN creates new stories regularily (for PS3 or Nintendo) whether there is any real story or not. I don't blame IGN or others for doing this - after all they are only satifying a demand (and obviously electronics companies won't mind a bit of free publicity if it keeps consumers eyes on their ball) - but - like any daily news story it needs a bit more looking at to make sure of the truth. Obviously if IGN is right then we've missed out for not being more trusting...HappyVR 18:45, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

• I don't care if the specs are added ot not, under one condition -- don't compare the Revolution with the Xbox 1 in terms of power. From what I've read on various sites, as well as the insightful comments on Slashdot, the Revolution's Gecko-based CPU is leagues more powerful than the Xbox's. I guess due to the fact that they're completely different types of CPUs (PowerPC vs Intel PIII), the PowerPC is substantially more powerful than the PIII. I don't remember all of the details, but most everyone who knows anything about technical details have all agreed that despite the numbers, the Revolution will be substantially more powerful than the Xbox 1 due to other non-number issues. -- Masamunecyrus^(talk)_(contribs) 01:44, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

I added comments to the trouble sections (CPU/GPU and Technical Specs) in attempts to disuade people from puting the 729MHz/243MHz IGN information in without consulting this discussion. Hopefully this will tune down the number of reverts (being that there's been tons in the past 24 hours on this very topic). Zebov 02:35, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

I'd say those specs from ign are very likely to be the real deal. For the moment its best they stay in the rumours section anyway as a precaution. Though I'd wager that if those specs released were actually good, it would be a different story...--Count Chocula 00:00, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

It's not necessarily the case that the specs are 'bad' - if the 'speed' MHz measure is the same as Sun uses (and not the measure Intel uses) AND the processors have multiple 'execution units' (e.g 4 is common) then the proc is quite good...But we don't have this info. Apart from the data being rumour it's also currently 'valueless' or 'meaningless'.

Also it seems that the cpu 'speed' is exactly 3 times the gpu 'speed' does anyone know why this would be?HappyVR 09:13, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps some sort of shared clock? Zebov 21:13, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Specs

Nobady should add these unless we can find a source that says that nintendo said the info.--acfan-Talk to me 00:02, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

I'd like to add that one problem is that even if these current new specs are right insufficient info has been provided for anyone to make a reasoned value judgement.(i.e. in the absence of other info 729MHz means practically nothing.)HappyVR 18:12, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Here is the current tech spec got it from Gamespot [6]

>x<ino 17:20, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

rumour section edit

I removed this:

• In a CNN interview, when discussing Revolution's two USB ports, President Satoru Iwata states that "practically any storage method can be used". This could imply that a USB-based flash memory drive or external hard drive could be connected to the system.
  

Not because it's wrong (it's true) but because it's trivia - and not a rumour - connecting things like hard disks etc are what USB ports are for - it doesn't have to be speculated.HappyVR 09:02, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

This had to go to:

• The Revolution may still have a PPU with 128 or 256mb of ram to lift strain off the core processor.

Even though the section is named rumours this is just too much 'out of the air'.HappyVR 09:05, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Also this:

• On December 30, 2005 Nintendo released to a few select news sources that the Revolution will sell for less than $299.

Unfortunately the link is no longer there. Luckily there is already some info. on the pricing in the article.HappyVR 11:47, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Meristation

I have noticed that a lot of the rev news (14 weeks release, stuff about controller etc) is originating from 'Meristation' and the references we have quote this site but do not give a reference - since the site is in Spanish? should the actual original reference be listed or should the secondary (english) sites be used???HappyVR 10:51, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

If you find another reference, you can use it. Meristation got some exclusive interviews some months ago, which ended in the references you are finding around. Any site you find with the same information will likely have a reference to Meristation. -- ReyBrujo 22:26, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately they referencing sites don't give an exact reference so it's difficult to find, especially in you don't speak Spanish. What I was wondering is which is preferable - the original site in Spanish, a secondary site in English (not first hand info.), or a translated link (e.g BabelFish auto translation) to the original site.HappyVR 08:10, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Nintendo nplay

Revolution Report is *ahem* reporting [7] that Nintendo has released an *ahem* press release [8] where they state the new Revolution name is Nintendo nplay. However, the press release does not exist, or has been removed, and a quick Google search gives no matches. Thus, it must be a joke. -- ReyBrujo 18:42, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

More then a joke... an April Fools prank thats got everbody thinking its real.--acfan-Talk to me 02:12, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

• It even says "Happy April Fools 2006 from Revolution Report!" on the page, now. -- Masamunecyrus^(talk)_(contribs) 06:47, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

I think it should be kept...as there's a redirection for Nintendo Go, why not nplay? 09:26 2 April

• Because nplay was proven undeniably false. -- Masamunecyrus^(talk)_(contribs) 18:06, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps keep it but redirect to "List of April Fool's Day Hoaxes" or something similar, instead of to the Revolution article. --Ukdan999 22:46, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

New Release Date

I live in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada and I talked to a Toys R Us clerk who told me that the Revolution won't come out until Christmas instead of Thanksgiving in North America. I have made the change to the section regarding the said issue.--Killswitch Engage 02:39, 2 April 2006 (UTC)Killswitch Engage

Ok, A toys R Us clerk is not exactly the best source. IGN is much more verifiable.--acfan-Talk to me 02:40, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Also, no original research. --Maxamegalon2000 03:08, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

It's certainly heartwarming to know that the people who edit wikipedia are easily outwitted by Walmart employees.... HappyVR 16:51, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Luckily, you can simply fix any mistakes they make. Ashibaka tock 13:58, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

They said, Iwata won't release the Revolution on a world wide released. Due to the price, because the DS, they seem to be having problems with. It seems stores nearly around the world seem to be running out of stock. Nintendo have to start resending more DS Units to them. Which this is really stoping them from sending a wide release. He said he hopes this problems clears up by April.

I can't even remember where I got that information from!

But the Rev0lution won't be a world wide release

>x<ino 16:13, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Actually, Iwata' statements seemly were misunderstood. According to CVG, "The comments have been taken out of context," the unnamed Nintendo spokesperson told MCV. "What he's actually saying is that we're not holding a worldwide launch just because everyone else is doing one too. It's just another re-iteration of the fact that we're not looking at what Sony or Microsoft are doing." [9] -- ReyBrujo 16:44, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

K you know what, I'm freaking sick of being insulted. I was not outwitted by a WalMart clerk, I went and asked and he said Christmas. As he is a clerk at the freaking store, I took his word for it, as he would know in the first place. What do you know? I think a Toys R Us clerk would know the relese date of a game system coming to a store he works at, not a bunch of people who blab on about original research and IGN.--Killswitch Engage 18:32, 2 April 2006 (UTC)Killswitch Engage

Don't get mad. assume good faith in the previous comments. Also, do not feed the trolls. -- ReyBrujo 18:36, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

The day after

I can't believe nobody noticed this http://www.nintendojo.com/infocus/view_item.php?1143927317 HappyVR 16:51, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Well...add the cheap information

>x<ino 17:24, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

It's definitely a good thing. We would have had ANOTHER thing to revert all day. -- Masamunecyrus^(talk)_(contribs) 18:05, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

um..that info. was created on April 1st. Do we know that its not just a joke. Jedi6-(need help?) 19:52, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

The article is blank now so it was a joke. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.156.207.207 (talk • contribs)

3D Realms note removed

Why was the 3D Realms note removed? I thought Wikipedia was UNBIASED? You fanboys like hiding information that doesn't make your precious company look good. GET OVER IT! It's a valid point to make note of. Fanboys.... they lack free will. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.162.192.39 (talk • contribs)

Please, be civil and assume good faith in the edits that have been made. By the way, which edit? Can you point to the diff? -- ReyBrujo 23:28, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

I have no idea what you're talking about, 206.162.192.39. As with the above reply, please provide a diff URL. Also, if it pertains to 3D Realms, it may have been removed because Mark Rein now supports the Revolution. -- Masamunecyrus^(talk)_(contribs) 01:34, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

The person means this:
"* However, 3D Realms has stated they will not support the Revolution. In an interview, 3D Realms president George Broussard stated he believes the Revolution will be a failure and has no interest in developing for it." from 09:08, 2 April 2006
I removed it (if it's any consolation I totally agreed with your previously edit removing the word 'revolutionary') - Two reasons:
It's a very trivial point and not worth inclusion.
No reference provided and I searched too and couldn't find the interview (on the web)

I'd like to read that interview though as I like that sort of thing - if any one has a reference for it please leave a link..HappyVR 17:14, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

• I found it. Clicky. It's MUCH more neutral than the troll seems to say. From the sound of it, 3D Realm's CEO is very doubtful about the Revolution, but he says that he cannot comment on the controller until he's used it himself. Also, it was not George Broussard -- it was Scott Miller. I wouldn't mind if the quote was put in the article, but I'd note that he hasn't used the controller, yet. Mark Rein had a similar attitude towards Nintendo, slamming it harshly several times; however, when he finally was able to use the Revolution controller, he changed his mind about it and is now excited about the system. -- Masamunecyrus^(talk)_(contribs) 23:02, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Can't be the same reference surely - the only similarity between the edit and reference is the name 3d realms.HappyVR 17:25, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

• That's the only story I've ever heard that likens to the removed comments, at all. I'm pretty sure that's the one. -- Masamunecyrus^(talk)_(contribs) 18:59, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Missing bit

Not long ago user:xino stated in this talk page:
Here is the current tech spec got it from Gamespot [10]

>x<ino 17:20, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

For the most part current article is contains similar info. However one thing that is missing is the very low cost of dev. kits - apparently about $2000 - I think this could be mentioned in the article - agree/disagree?HappyVR 18:07, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

The $2000 price tag was mentioned by Matt at IGN Revolution, and I don't remember anything official about it. So, it should go in the rumours section, as the specs he leaked. -- ReyBrujo 18:26, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

The reference is http://revolution.ign.com/articles/690/690730p1.html for anyone wishing to check or maybe add this. Not sure myself.HappyVR 19:06, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Error in IGN.com's specs

There is a technical error in IGN.com's Revolution's Horsepower article that I thought I would point out here. It states the following:

"The 'Hollywood' is a large-scale integrated chip that includes the GPU, DSP, I/O bridge and 3MBs of texture memory," a studio source told us.

It should say that the Hollywood is a very large-scale integrated chip, not a large-scale integrated chip. For those who don't know, these are both technical terms used in digital design, and are abbreviated as VLSI and LSI respectively. The general difference between the two is the number of transistors: LSI chips have around tens of thousands of gates while VLSI chips have anywhere over a hundred thousand, such as modern-day processors. 137.48.130.200 23:20, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Your probably right but maybe you should try telling IGN themselves. Jedi6-(need help?) 00:08, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

I already did before posting here. I will also edit the Rumors and speculation section when time allows me to, for I now see that what is currently mentioned on the Wikipedia article is out of context. Comes to show that normal people won't realize that large-scale integrated is a technical term when they first interpret it. 137.48.130.200 02:05, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Maybe the definitions are slipping as time goes by just as what was a supercomputer 20 years ago might be considered underpowered today.HappyVR 17:25, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

It has nothing to do with time. These are terms used in digital electronics engineering to describe components, even components within chips. The Integrated circuit article suggests that LSI and VLSI are still widely used, else they wouldn't make VLSI conferences or still teach this stuff in university-level education. You can find LSI chips inside a normal pocket calculator, and anything processor-wise is VLSI. Also, although the CPU is VLSI, it is made up of LSI components, such as the arithmetic logic unit (which could be considered LSI or VLSI depending on the number of transistors in it). When drawing schematics in block diagram, either SSI, MSI, LSI, or VLSI can be used to describe each individual block, and you would choose one term depending on the number of transistors in the block. For example, an adder is considered SSI because there are only a couple of transistors in it. 68.226.61.4 19:12, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Physics Addition removed

I removed:

"CPU. Ageia is not listed as one of Nintendo's clients."

because I don't feel it is needed as CPU is already mentioned in this section. Also I don't see what the reasoning behind the "Ageia" sentence is. Zebov 02:18, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Basically, he is stating that the rumours regarding Revolution using an Ageia PPU are false. For this particular case, my motto is "if it is false do not include it", otherwise we would have an extremely long article denying every rumour we have heard about. -- ReyBrujo 02:29, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

I haven't seen any rumours saying an Ageia PPU will be in the revolution (though no doubt they're out there if you look) - though there have been for a 'generic' PPU.HappyVR 19:18, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Missing links

Who is deleting the links I provided in the external links section? This is a Wiki page. More than just "you" contribute. All links provided were Nintendo Revolution related and better then some of the ones you have up. Is there a reason they get deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Trainwrecka (talk • contribs)

Please be more specific as to what was removed... do you have diff links? Zebov 16:41, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

He's referring to this. -- Masamunecyrus^(talk)_(contribs) 18:56, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

The answer to your question is me. :-) Jedi6-(need help?) 21:12, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Jedi6 - do you have a reason? I'm not trying to be mean here - I just don't understand why? I'm new to this whole "wiki" thing so I didn't go through messing up the "real" info that has been compiled. I just added some links that have better information and usually more current information then what was up.Trainwrecka

Wikipedia:External links says you should try and avoid fan sites, especially if they aren't big parts of the topic. Alot of the info. on that site was either not confirmed or already on IGN or Nintendo.com Jedi6-(need help?) 02:58, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

usb

I removed this:

• • Because of the 2 USB ports in the back, "practically any storage method can be used."

Again, this is what usb is for, I don't think it needs to me commented upon. (as a comparison Xbox 360 and PS3 articles mention usb ports with out any further explanation).HappyVR 18:22, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

• 'Makes sense. :-) -- Masamunecyrus^(talk)_(contribs) 18:54, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

rare video game company

Removed this:
" Due to Microsoft buying out the games company called Rare (company), Microsoft have denied the use of the games Rare (company) previously produced."
a. Suggest not to include everything that is not supported.
b. No reference - is it actually true.
c. Inclusion is out of proportion with relevance. i.e. biased
HappyVR 19:03, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

All of the sources I've seen refer to this [11] on IGN. Then again, it's Matt Casamassina's blog and not an actual article. 68.226.61.4 06:11, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Doubt it actually is true. Most of Rare's games have been produced by Nintendo as well, and Rare has been planning games for the DS, so if anything, this is more of crystal ball-ing from an online blog than actual fact, and should not be included in the article. Darknut Slayer 21:23, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

removals

I removed the picture of the shell controller because (as far as I know) it's just a mock up.

Also removed this:
" In the newest May issue of Game Informer, Ubisoft's rumored FPS is to be revealed, titled "Red Steel", but leaked scans of the issue can be found here:[[12]]. A blog with the leaked scans can be found here:[[13]]. The graphics in the scans shoot down the idea to many that the Nintendo Revolution is not a next-gen system."

Rumours, leaks, etc - not in the article - suggest talk page first at least - and then maybe the rumour section...HappyVR 10:21, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Also this :
" The Revolution is believed to still use Bump Mapping to accelerate the hardware and graphical quality."

What does it mean 'still use'?HappyVR 10:26, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

It means that bump mapping has been around for a long time and is nothing to get excited about. Note that it used to say displacement mapping, but people keep changing it to bump mapping. Haakon 11:44, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, if the Revolution is relying on displacement mapping in order to achieve its next gen graphic effects, then it should be researched and the conclusions placed in this article. Since some fuffles keep changing it to "bump mapping", then a comment blurb inside the edit text itself would seem to be in order to prevent that. Daniel Davis 11:48, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

The stuff originally came from something like this (09:53, 26 March 2006 or earlier)

Nintendo has patents relating to hardware accelerated 'emboss bump mapping' http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&d=PG01&S1=%22emboss-style+bump+mapping%22&OS=%22emboss-style+bump+mapping%22&RS=%22emboss-style+bump+mapping%22 it is suggested that these patents could relate to hardware for the new Nintendo Revolution http://nintendo-revolution.blogspot.com/2005/12/is-displacement-mapping-last-secret.html

I removed it because I thought it would prove unimportant - seeing as it's come back maybe I should change it back - the references for this rumour are there though anyway - but keep in mind that the patent does not say it is for the revolution - could easily be for a handheld (or nothing)
HappyVR 12:10, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Nintendo frequently holds onto patents for years without any significant production using them. For example, they had Gyration's gyroscopic technology patents since 2001, but have only just recently begun to create products using them. If we don't have specific evidence that the Revolution will be using this technique, it would be wise to err on the side of caution and postpone its inclusion in the article, would it not? Daniel Davis 12:17, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Actually that is not an entirely true with that statement. There was a Game Called Kirby Tilt 'n' Tumble for the Gameboy Color that used a Gyro Sensor from what I recall. Also sorry not sure how to indent this as I'm actually Quite new to discussions on Wikipedia or even Editing on Wikipedia for that matter.

The Red Steel thing is not a rumour or a leak, and neither is the existence of the article. Game informer has a write-up about the article on their website [14], and wikipedia has an article (Red Steel) about the game, citing mostly from said article. The only thing that is "leaked" is the screenshots from the article. Although I'm hard pressed calling some blogger snapping a few pictures from his subscription copy a "leak". Copyright infringement maybe, but not a leak. --Codemonkey 21:41, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

It just looks like an advert for 'Game Informer Magazine' - as does IGN's coverage http://uk.revolution.ign.com/articles/700/700748p1.html - which is what it is - the game is mentioned in 'list of nintendo revolution games' so that seems ok.HappyVR 21:56, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

We could do with some screenshots but I don't think these will be suitable.HappyVR 08:50, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, If you read the website, you'll see that they will release more info online on the 20th. So we'll hopefully get some proper screenshots then. :)--Codemonkey 12:10, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

20 launch titles expected

Should it be mentioned Geroge Bush Sr. confirmed in this Months Game Informer that they expect about 20 launch titles(with about a third being made by Nintendo)? If so, it should be added that at this time it is unknown if Nintendo's coutning titles released on the Revolutoions Virtual Console. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.29.246.102 (talk • contribs) .

should pictures of Red Steel an upcoming Game with REAL game shots that were leaked be posted

should pictures of Red Steel an upcoming Game with REAL game shots that were leaked be posted —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.213.160.193 (talk • contribs) .

If they were leaked, there are probably copyright or trade secrets concerns that would prevent Wikipedia from including them. Haakon 20:55, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

What about a link to them —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.213.160.193 (talk • contribs) .

It's illegal to post or link to the scans. GI/Ubi have been going around the web today making sure that people have to buy the mag to see them. Look at the joystiq article where they explain why they took down the link. Seraphim 03:59, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

• I think we should wait until the 20th -- when the issue is released -- before posting anyhting about it. -- Masamunecyrus^(talk)_(contribs) 17:02, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Even then, could they be posted without the magazine's permission? --TheKoG (talk|contribs) 17:01, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

• No, they could not. :-) -- Masamunecyrus^(talk)_(contribs) 17:02, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

I didn't think so, but apparently the editors over at Red Steel think otherwise. :p --TheKoG (talk|contribs) 17:07, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

• I just checked Red Steel, and the only picture they have is of the magazine cover, which Game Informer posted on their website. They don't have any pictures of the actual scans. At least, they don't any more, if they did earlier. -- Masamunecyrus^(talk)_(contribs) 17:43, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, they were there yesterday. Looks like someone got smart and removed them in light of all the legal threats Game Informer has been handing out. --TheKoG (talk|contribs) 18:20, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

I removed them from the Red Steel article and put them up for deletion for Copyright Issues. I think this is the right thing to do. Zebov 20:04, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Problems with intro.

The following is incorrect. "Internationally, Nintendo is considering attempting a launch with no more than 14 days (two weeks) of difference between the first and last launching regions.[3]"

The article actually says: "What we can guarantee is that the Revolution will be sent in the same four-month period anywhere in the world."

3. a b Ellie Gibson, "Rev specs may not be released", Eurogamer, November 1, 2005.

The following article says the same the same. "Nintendo hopes to launch the console globally within 14 weeks or less (that meaning in the same quarter) of each other." "Jim Merrick Talks Revolution Launch"

14 weeks must have been mixed up into 14 days. 207.237.35.48

removals

I removed red steel by ubisoft from rumour section it's not a rumour right?

Also removed this big bit:
*IGN.com claims to have received information from third-party game studios regarding the hardware specifications. Among their claims:

• • The Broadway CPU runs at 729MHz according to Nintendo specifications.
  • The Hollywood GPU runs at 243 MHz and is actually an integrated "system-on-a-chip" that includes "GPU, DSP, I/O bridge and 3MBs of texture memory."
  • The system RAM is divided into 24MB of "main" 1T-SRAM and 64MB of "external" 1T-SRAM; access speed for both banks is the same.
  • The console runs on an extension of the Gamecube Gekko CPU and Flipper GPU architectures.

The consensus among game journalists regarding the technical performance of the Revolution is that the Revolution will perform roughly equally to the original XBox, although one very reliable source estimates the Revolution's horsepower to be only slightly inferior to that of the XBox 360.

No major objection to all this but talk of consensus seems more suitable for talk page - maybe there should be separate 'bullets' for each contrary rumour - also what about the other reliable rumours eg 2.4GHz Power PC etc? PPU 32 MegHappyVR 19:09, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

• Theres no reason to remove the IGN specs, they are the most recent tech specs available. IGN is a reliable source anyway.--Count Chocula 00:12, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
• HappyVR, I thought we had decided that this information should stay in the rumors section? (not the second paragraph, just the actual IGN rumor... see Some more specs above. Zebov 03:40, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, sorry - removed too much - the main problem was the second para - thats gone now.HappyVR 09:19, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

• This is definitely speculation material - these specs have not been confirmed by Nintendo, nor is there any evidence that IGN's speculation is especially accurate. The slightly dodgy analysis of the specs has no place in the 'Hardware and specifications' section, either, since the actual performance of the processor depends on much more than clockspeed - any kind of comparison to the Xbox is, by definition, speculative. RandyWang 05:16, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

I did however want to make a point about the different rumour specs that have been released - less recent figures have contained dissimilar info. yet claim that their sources are reliable - the most recent rumour specs seem to be no more reliable on the surface - should older spec 'leaks' also be included?HappyVR 09:19, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Those rumours from over 6 months ago are a bit outdated now IMO. The reliability of the 'Han Solo' source was pretty questionable when it first came out, and i don't think time has improved it much.--Count Chocula 09:39, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but the arstechnica speculation in rumours is nothing but speculation (assume/stated in actual article), despite its 'more serious' source. Perhaps this should be thought about.HappyVR 11:31, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Another removal

Removed this from section games and developer support:
"With the Revolution, Nintendo seeks to create games which appeal to everybody. This would include trying to impress the video game savvy, as proven by future launch titles Red Steel, a game where you assume the role of a Japanese yakuza member, as well as Sadness, a film noir type game in black and white."

Excluding the fact that there seems to be something wrong with the link (link misstyped or temporary problem?) - I just am trying to cut out these 'editorial' style additions - I don't see why the article should contain veiled links to this/last weeks latest news. - basically this edit seems to be the result of a web search for 'nintendo revolution news' for last few days. In terms of the overall picture it seems a bit insignificant?HappyVR 09:27, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Pink Ripple?

Pink Ripple?

• Yeah, that's BS. Just someone trying to make a joke based on the Bluewave rumor going around.

• Heh heh heh, Pink Ripple...

Idea for Additions

My Idea is that we do not add anything else unless it is confirmed by the developer or Nintendo themselves. No more posting IGN specs or 'rumoured' things... Lets just wait 3 more weeks till E3. In the mean time I think we should clean up this page for the E3 info when it arrives. DivineShadow218 03:56, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree - I think as it stands the article is good overall - with the possible exception of one or two parts of the rumour section - however we can't lock the article. In terms of a clean up I think this page suffers from 'too many references per real fact sybdrome' - about 33 references.HappyVR 11:23, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

another removal

Removed this from rumour section:
"There is speculation over the production name for the console, one of them is the the nintendo GO as seen in japan at nintendo HQ with a 3D D-pad as it's logo representing the 3rd dimenional gaming the console will be capable of."
Nintendo Go was a video - the cubic cross was something else?????HappyVR 11:23, 16 April 2006 (UTC) There is this reference http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/23/nintendo-revolution-nintendo-go but I don't get the 'as seen in japan at nintendo HQ' part - anyone know more?HappyVR 13:30, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

If it is to be included would this be better:
"One of the speculated names for nintendo's next console is 'Nintendo GO'. [15]The logo supplied in this 'leak' is a three dimensional cross that in some ways resembles the architecture of Nintendo's Japanese HQ as well as containing a cross motif similar to a D-pad."HappyVR 14:39, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Removal from cpu/gpu

Removed this:
"Much of this hardware may be more powerful than its similarly clocked PC counterpart because of that." (context is chips were designed from ground up)
Probably true but...HappyVR 17:51, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

• That's fine, but it was probably added in because of the stupid comparisons between the Revolution and the Xbox 1, awhile back. On paper, the current IGN-rumored Revo specs are about equal to that of an Xbox 1; however, in reality, the Xbox 1's chips were completely different, and they were more PC-oriented, as opposed to game console-oriented. This allowed the GCN to just aobut equal the Xbox 1's power with about 1/3rd of the power. Similarly, that's how it will work with the Revolution. That said, I see no more Xbox comparisons, so it's probably fine that you removed that. -- Masamunecyrus^(talk)_(contribs) 18:42, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Archival

This talk page is 81 kb and growing. Perhaps we should archive another page after all current discussions have been finished. -- Masamunecyrus^(talk)_(contribs) 18:49, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

-Revive- editing Nintendo Revolution Page

Let me just state this again so we are all on the same page. I think that there should be no more major edits until E3. Mainly so we can actually clean up the page abit befor hand. DivineShadow218 19:51, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Why would a moratorium on edits help clean up the page? I would think that would delay cleaning it up. Andre (talk) 20:04, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

There are just a lot of needless edits that wouldn't make this page cleaned up. Most edits between now and e3 will just be needless, unless it is confirmed by Nintendo or a developer (which probably will not happen till E3). What I mean is no more posting Logo's, Specs, game rumors, etc. I think we all could wait till this stuff is confirmed at or around E3. DivineShadow218 21:22, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

How about a list of things needed to be done (if any)HappyVR 06:37, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

In the talk sure, I suppose I will start on. DivineShadow218 07:03, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

I am new to this but have added rumoured specs, I have only just read what you have put there. However I felt that the specs that have been rumoured from IGN.com are highly unlikely. Even though the ones I have put are proably too optimistic I thought that they at least offered a fairer view on the console from anyone reading this. (I put the quote from the Factor 5 employee) indy2k6

Not allowing any editing until E3 would be against Wikipedia's founding policy and thus will not happen. Jedi6-(need help?) 01:55, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

I am alowing edits, just not BS edits that will conflict with the cleaning up of this article, such as Indy2k6's Specs Edit. His edit was needless now we have to edit it out.DivineShadow218 04:09, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

You don't seem to know very much about Wikipedia. Edits that are "BS" as you so bluntly put it have never been allowed on Wikipedia, and preventing edits on any scale (other then by a admin) have never been allowed.--Anthony 11:33, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

I do know plenty about Wikipedia, I am just saying that I am trying to clean up this article, as well as a few other people. All I am stating is that there shouldn't be any edits that that put info in the article that doesn't belong per talk. Most of these newbies do not even check, so if info is deleted, moved or reworded, they shouldn't complain about it. As far as cleaning this article up. Any one have suggestions? What should be add befor E3, what needs to be rearange and reworded? DivineShadow218 21:45, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

What was wrong with my edit, I just added rumoured specs that I thought were far more likely than the ones quoted from IGN. I did state clearly they were rumours. I don't understand how that is BS and the ones quoted from IGN are not. indy2k6

Would you answer my question directly rather than sidestepping the issue. indy2k6

I made a small edit to the technical specifications section adding an audio and video specification that I found in one of my magazines Revolutionize 08:19, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

I suggest we wait for a few days, until the mainstream press have universally reacted to the name. Simply citing popular forums/usenet/IRC as reception is somewhat POV as they aren't de facto official sources. By all means when the main news agencies have posted reports regards the change and their opinion of it we can mention the general fan reactions alongside the press reaction. When the first of the humorous parody flash clips come out I humbly offer they be mentioned too. The name is fairly awful, and childish, prone to puns, sounds improper in conversations - Nintendo seems to think their entire market will simply warm to it over the following few days, it is very unlikely that'll happen. I hope Nintendo consider reverting to the Revolution, as this moniker is a total mistake, one that could cost them millions in revenue. -- D-Katana 20:36, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Things to be done

1. Clean up to Prepare for E3
2. Update Specs once they are confirmed
3. Add List of confirmed games at E3 on games page
4. Add Launch Titles to main article with screen shots
5. Delete rumours after E3
6. Add what is needed after E3

Well DUH! Like the millions of Nintendo fans aren't already on the ball JayKeaton 20:30, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

I just edited it for you all. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Auxilia (talk • contribs) .

Rename Article?

I'm sure this would be quite diffrent but bear with me. When the system gets a final name should the article be renamed as such? I'm suggesting (and expecting to get little or no approval) that this article is kept as such, and the final name be created as a second page.

The Revolution (under my thought process - I'm more then open to suggestions) article would retain all infomation that has to do with the system before it's is/was released, while the article with the final name would contain all final infomation.

To simply rename (and over time) lose so much infomation because it's not "current" seems like such a loss. To lose so much infomation because it's too long also seems like a waste. To create a second article instead of renaming this one would circumvent some rules that otherwise are good, but would... for lack of a better word... destroy all the infomation about Revolution.

I think recording what people thought at one time is sometimes just as importent as what would become reality. Is this one of those times? Maybe. Maybe not.--Anthony 11:57, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

This is what page moves are for. As long as no one tries a copy-and-paste move nothing will be lost. Earlier when there was a rumor about Nintendo Go being the new title someone tried a copy-and-paste move. That was quickly reverted and now the Nintendo Go article redirects to Nintendo Revolution. --TheKoG (talk|contribs) 12:43, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

I think yes it's a great idea - not sure how it will go in practice - not sure how keeping a page as a historical archive would go down - could have a page that links to the revolution edit list (set to a certain date/specific edit).
And I certainly think it would be interesting to be able to compare past speculation when the thing is finally released.

HappyVR 16:59, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

How about this though... We move this intire page to lets say Nintendo (final name here) - Pre-E3 2006 and have a link to it from the confermed info of E3. Or is Archiving it easier?DivineShadow218 21:39, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Like I said, there's no need for archiving or any of that. Once the final name is revealed then this article merely needs to be moved using the Wikipedia's move function (NOT copy-and-paste) and the entire page history will be moved along with it. --TheKoG (talk|contribs) 12:30, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you TheKog.--Anthony 20:21, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Also please don't move the page until Nintendo's actually announces it at E3. Don't just listen to a website, no matter how big they are. Jedi6-(need help?) 21:13, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't get why everyone wants to do anything after E3. Sure we will know the name of the system - But it will still be 5 months away before any consumer gets their hands on it, and only shortly before that that the media will get their hands on it. Until the very last minute there are still going to be rumors and infomation. To me "Nintendo Revolution" is the name before the system hits the shelf. The name after people can buy it is whatever Nintendo says it will be at E3.--Anthony 23:01, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

I disagree. A name is merely a word that we use to reference a physical item. After the official name of the console is announced at E3, people will not refer to the console as Revolution, it will be referred to by its official name. Likewise, after the official name is announced, the article should be updated appropriately, perhaps leaving a sentence or so saying the console was codenamed Revolution. After E3, there is no "Revolution" (well, unless they happen to pull the 'ha, the code name is the official name' trick) anymore, it will be confidential information blacked out. The article should be moved appropriately post-E3 and "Nintendo Revolution" should point to the article's new location. Zebov 23:12, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

This user is 100% right. Most likely once Nintendo officially announces the name the page will be moved in a matter of minutes. Jedi6-(need help?) 00:53, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Also when people search for this console on Wikipedia they will be looking for Nintendo "Whatever Nintendo decides to name it" and not Revolution anymore. Jedi6-(need help?) 00:56, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

About not listening to a website... You have to make an aception to the Nintendo Website and that is it. If it is on the Nintendo Site, then it has to be offical DivineShadow218 22:41, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't see why we have to get rid of all the prior information. Just make a section for History and/or Rumours, and move things there as they are outdated. Seahen 22:15, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Biased

"While Rareware Titles are with out a doubt among the biggest titles for Nintendo they will not appear in the Revolution's Virtual Console lineup."

Not necessarily! I would perfer Earthbound or LoZ or SMB. This seems a little biased, I will change it to

"Rareware Titles will not appear in the Revolution's Virtual Console lineup."

http://www.dsrevolution.com/article.php?articleid=1030

im not too good at editing wikipedia, but this is a pretty major thing, someone should add it in the artical.

Except they are "with out a doubt among the biggest titles for Nintendo". If nothing else sales prove this.--Anthony 02:11, 23 April 2006 (UTC)