Jump to content

Talk:List of Nintendo franchises

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Change format to tables

[edit]

This article should be changed to have the games sorted in tables instead of bullet points like List of Nintendo Switch games in which the games are sorted in tables instead of in bullet points. Perhaps using this table below: (1080° Snowboarding is used as an example of what a game would like in the format.)

Franchise Developer(s) Introduction Date Ref.
1080° Snowboarding Nintendo EAD 28 February, 1998

List criteria

[edit]

Before we fix this article, we need to determine a list criteria. What should and shouldn't be included? As a baseline, I would say that entries that have only had one game should not be listed as those are one-offs and not entire franchises. ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 15:44, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'd also like to add that depending on the franchise, if multiple franchises fall under one umbrella (such as Pokemon and all its spinoffs) then it should be reduced to a few. Also, remakes DO NOT count as new entries to the franchise. So Pokken Tournament only has 1 game in the franchise as it has 1 game and 1 remake. ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 16:00, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
So for example, with Mario, because of how broad the franchise is, Mario should not be listed but instead all of its franchises should be listed. With Pokemon there are the mainline games, and then there are the spinoffs. Maybe the spinoffs could be lumped into its own franchise category? ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 16:02, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Here's some potential ideas we've used over the years with the similar articles/templates. I'm not saying we should use them all, just throwing ideas out there:
  1. Must have at least 2 entries to be considered a series/franchise. (One-offs are not a series.)
  2. Must have its own series articles.
  3. Must have a reliable source directly calling it a series/franchise.
  4. Some sort of definition as to what it means to be a "Nintendo series". (Is Dragon Quest one just because Nintendo published a few entries? Or even generally speaking, is Nintendo just publishing enough? I'd generally argue no, but it'd be best to have some sort of rationale written up.) Sergecross73 msg me 20:24, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I like 1 through 3 (although 3 can be ignored if it can be deemed notable enough to be included on a list but not have its own article). I do like as well, maybe a "Nintendo series" could be considered a series developed by Nintendo or one of its subcompanies (i.e The Pokemon Company), or is generally recognized as a Nintendo series (so Endless Ocean would not be one as it is not developed by Nintendo). ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 20:54, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Sergecross73: pinging ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 20:54, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Blaze The Wolf: These are my ideas for criteria. They would be A: At least three entries to act as a series/franchise, B: Have reliable sources referring to these games as a series/franchise, and C and the most important to my mind: Be an IP that's produced in-house by Nintendo (ala Mario, The Legend of Zelda), co-produced or supervised by Nintendo (Metroid, Animal Crossing), owned by Nintendo (again Metroid, Fire Emblem, also later Xeno titles), or released exclusively on Nintendo hardware for its entire lifetime (Pokémon, series from Intelligent Systems and Monolith Soft). The latter's the most important, especially for series like Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles and Fatal Frame which were Nintendo-exclusive for a period but have gone multiplatform so no longer count. --ProtoDrake (talk) 20:55, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@ProtoDrake: I like that. I also would amend A to state that if a game has received multiple remakes but no new unique entries then it should not count as a series. ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 20:59, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with everything you both said. Sergecross73 msg me 21:04, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I can't think of any game that has only had one game in the series but has received multiple remakes but it would be a good idea to specify that so someone can't find a loophole. ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 21:34, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Sergecross73 and ProtoDrake: Is there anything else you guys think should be part of the list criteria? ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 21:47, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Blaze The Wolf: It's not exactly multiple, but Tokyo Mirage Sessions ♯FE basically got two distinct releases on Wii U and Switch. Also I spied Tetris there, but started on PC devices and has gone multiplatform, so I'm not sure it counts as a "Nintendo series" anymore. I think we need to further define that while Nintendo might own parts of a port or series release, that doesn't mean it counts as a Nintendo series/franchise. --ProtoDrake (talk) 21:55, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@ProtoDrake: I agree. And Tetris was actually never a Nintendo series in the first place. Tetris was originally created by 2 random guys and was ported to a few Nintendo devices, but it's owned by the Tetris Company. ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 23:06, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that the single game that gets ports/remastered/remade should not be considered a franchise. (TMS is the only one that comes to mind at the moment for me too, but I know there's more... Sergecross73 msg me 03:51, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think we've gotten it pretty good for the definition on what a Nintendo series actually is. What about series that have many, many games as part of its series (such as the Mario franchise, which has Mario sports games, Mario Kart, Mario Party, etc.), should we list the main series or only list the sub-series. In my opinion, I think for Mario, we should list its subseries, however for the original Mario games (Super Mario Bros NES, 2/USA, Lost Levels/2, 3, World, World 2: Yoshi's Island (would we still consider World 2 as part of the Original mario series or would it be part of the Yoshi series?)) I think they should be listed under Original Mario Series. ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 14:59, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@ProtoDrake and Sergecross73: Also, the above brings up another good point, at one point does a series split off into a separate sub series. Because with the original Mario series, we have Super Mario World and then Super Mario World 2: Yoshi's Island. World 2 seems to mainly feature Yoshi with Baby Mario so would this be the start of the Yoshi subseries or would it still be part of the Original Mario Series. ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 15:02, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Blaze The Wolf: I think we should rely on sources for the beginning or emergence of a subseries, which I think should be seen as their own entity if they have substantial commentary in their own right. For instance, Hyrule Warriors I don't think would count as its own standalone subseries, but Yoshi and Donkey Kong would. I think we should take Final Fantasy and Megami Tensei as a reference, which relies on branding and themes and/or story continuity to determine a subseries's independant identity. --ProtoDrake (talk) 21:24, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@ProtoDrake: Alright that makes sense. ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 23:24, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Alright so it seems we've gotten it down pretty good. ANything else that should be added before we make it a list criteria (or propose it, however the process goes). ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 20:12, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Adding to the List

[edit]

Hi everyone,

I am reading and writing this after making a few edits on the page.

One thing I did was add in missing information. I also did initially add in ports, but then removed them after reading into the article criteria.

I have added in a few remakes, such as Pokemon Mystery Dungeon DX, Mario and Luigi: Bowser's Inside Story + BJs Journey, and Mario vs. Donkey Kong, as these have been made from the ground up. Listing ports / remasters of games separately to the list would be nice, as we could see that some series are not completely dormant. Something Like: "Latest original entry: Metroid Prime 3: Corruption \n Latest entry: Metroid Prime Remastered".

Having games that are one-offs but have had supported updates and DLC could be added, such as Arms or Dragalia Lost, as there is a history of on-going development with these titles which places them above being a 'one-off'.

I have added a Fire Emblem Warriors sub-series, Swapnote series, Famicom Fairytales, Time Twist, and Princess Peach series. I would say the latter could be contested, but I would find it difficult to classify Showtime into the Mario series.

If I have messed up, please feel free to remove any edits I have made. Take care. Shnija (talk) 06:13, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, while I do think counting Princess Peach and Pikachu as franchises is a stretch, considering the only thing the games have in common are the main characters (who are derived from the parent franchise); the one I will contest most is Time Twist. It's not a franchise, but rather a game released on two disks; the release date is the same for both, too.
Finally, I believe Nintendo Game Seminar is closer to a brand than a franchise. I feel it's in the same vein as Touch! Generations or the series that "Black Box" NES games were split into (Light Gun Series, Sports Series, etc.; it's worth nothing that Robot Series is part of this list, and is considered a franchise by Nintendo). 181.231.238.92 (talk) 14:36, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Attribution

[edit]

what's going on?

[edit]

why is the article getting such a major overhaul without anything being discussed here? the list has been reduced from having something like ~150 franchises to now having only 85, with so many smaller franchises being removed by one editor for random, arbitrary reasons. there are many IPs and franchises where it's just common knowledge that they belong to nintendo that have now been removed for random reasons. how is this ok? the current list is just now incomplete because someone decided to add their own rules for what constitutes a nintendo franchise.

as for the source requirement, there are many many similar lists here on wikipedia that don't have a specific source that proves an entry belongs to the list. if you want, you can find and add the source but removing well known nintendo franchises and IPs because no one has added a source makes the list incomplete for no reason.

there should have been a discussion on this talk page before such a huge change was made, and what constitutes as a 'series' as well. Mazish (talk) 17:57, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  1. All of Wikipedia is required to follow WP:V. It's one of the core components of how the website works. The fact that other articles don't follow the rules is a problem for those articles, not a reason to not follow it here. WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS covers this logical fallacy. Observing wrongdoings elsewhere does not justify doing it wrong here.
  2. It was literally discussed on this very talk page, look a few sections up. The inclusion criteria is listed at the top of this talk page. It's not complicated stuff, its simply following website rules (WP:V) and the basic definition of the word "series". Sergecross73 msg me 18:20, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    i just think going for such a massive reduction from 150 to 85 as was just done, means a lot of the smaller franchises will just not get added because no one will bother to find a source, even if the franchise obviously qualifies to be in the list.
    it's not like there's any consistency in this version of the list that you want to maintain anyway. my edit gets reversed because there's no reference, but there's multiple entries here with no reference. series like 1-2-switch gets removed for only having two entries, but mario maker, 1080°, detective pikachu, etc are still in with just 2 entries. Mazish (talk) 18:41, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's not inconsistent. There being a reliable source calling it a franchise is the consistency.
    There's many ways to populate a list, you know. I know you, like many casual editors, prefer to cram a list with every instance of minutia and trivia. And that's really more of a fan wikia approach. There's plenty of those out there, if you want to work on that. There's one linked directly above this discussion even.
    In requiring sources for verification purposes, this article will represent more prominent/important franchises, rather than every single thing under the sun.
    Regardless, if you keep editing Wikipedia, you're going to need to change your approach. Everything needs to be sourced. The more articles you edit, the more edits you're going to get undone because you didn't provide a source. No article being maintained by experienced editors are going to allow it. Sergecross73 msg me 19:40, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    that's pretty condescending . you still couldn't explain why something like 1-2-switch does not qualify as a nintendo franchise worthy of being in the list. you not considering it a prominent franchise only would make sense if this was a lis of prominent nintendo franchises, but oh well. it's not like i'm gonna be able to convince a wikipedia admin that they're wrong. Mazish (talk) 19:53, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You're the one acting like the cleaned up version is somehow objectively wrong or something. I'm explaining there's multiple approaches, and the cleaned up version better fits Wikipedia. And I really thought my general explanation covered the 1-2 stuff. It was unsourced. Do you have a source that reliable sources refer to it as some sort of "1-2" franchise? Sergecross73 msg me 20:32, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    this is the issue, to me it seems more than obvious that 1-2-switch is a nintendo franchise, just like the other two-entry franchises that are currently in the list. the first game came out in 2017, has sold close to 4 million which makes it more "prominent" than a lot of the series included in the list, and got a sequel in 2023. not counting it as prominent just seems like it's based on one person's subjective opinion and nothing else. finding a source would be very easy, any article or review about the 2023 game would mention that it's a sequel to the 2017 game (hence, making the series a series), but what's the point when your opinion is what dictates what's prominent and worthy of inclusion? Mazish (talk) 20:57, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If it's more than obvious, then it should be more than easy to find a reliable source and re-add it. Sergecross73 msg me 21:02, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    well that's one series. because of this so called clean up now people need to do that for the ~70 removed entries. why is a source needed to prove something is a franchise, when it's just common sense that when nintendo releases a game, then later, releases a sequel, it becomes a franchise? what's the point in finding a source for something that's very obvious to everyone? you don't need a third party source calling something a series for it to be one. Mazish (talk) 21:06, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    WP:V and WP:RS. If you don't want to follow that, you're on the wrong website. I can't break it down any simpler than that. You may as well ask "Why doesn't this expensive steak restaurant serve cheap pizza by the slice?" Because it's a steak restaurant, not a pizza restaurant. It doesn't do that other thing because that's not what it is. Sergecross73 msg me 21:17, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_Nintendo_franchises&oldid=1259926994"