Jump to content

Talk:Seventh generation of video game consoles/Archive 5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1←Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7

Nintendo DS is NOT Seventh Gen.

I don't think the DS is Seventh Generation because first, it was made in 2004, and it's graphics are similar of the PSone. Yes, one. I think the DS belongs in Sixth Generation, because is is not 7th Gen. worthy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.62.215.236 (talk) 17:07, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

The distinction of whether it belongs in sixth or seventh generation is due to release dates and what it is competing against. It is not whether it is graphically similar to a previous generation console. Chan Yin Keen | Talk 18:48, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Exactly, otherwise the Wii would also belong in the previous generation. Nintendo even admitted up front the graphics wouldn't be significantly better than the GameCube's. The Seventh Taylor (talk) 21:30, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Graphical capabilities don't determine the generation of a console. Neither do motion sensing capabilities (that would put the Wii a generation past the 360). The release date is the only factor. Why do people keep bringing this up? Useight (talk) 03:29, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to think that release dates aren't the only thing that define generations either. It's worth noting too that the scope of the some of the older generations overlap in years. As it is I feel the DS is seventh gen mostly due to its attitude. 7th gen systems are all focused on socialability to some extent and the DS is certainly included in that trend. Of course release dates have something to do with it otherwise we'd include the original XBOX in the 7th gen under my classification too. I think maybe the generations are best defined as time periods in which certain trends and technologies are dominant. Under that model then yes, the DS is definitely 7th gen.70.171.212.60 (talk) 00:23, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Handhelds aren't consoles at all. Neither the PSP nor the DS really belong here.--72.200.213.177 (talk) 06:57, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

They're called handheld consoles, and as such, are consoles. Chan Yin Keen | Talk 17:28, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

To tell you the truth you DO have a point! But ya know what i mean Gameboy would be third gen Neo Geo Pocket would be forth and Advanced Pico Beena would be fifth so i guess that is how it works. Mcjakecool Mcjakeqcool (talk) 19:20, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

But still, it's got no 7th Gen technology. A touch screen isn't all that fancy. Plus, the old one is big and bulky and old. I still think it's not 7th Gen.

Don't be ridiculous. Wii is 7th gen and it's not got HD graphics. Dreamcast is 6th gen and it doesn't use DVD. The Saturn is 5th gen and it is barely even heard of.Ffgamera (talk) 11:17, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

If you're going by power, the Wii is in the same range of power as the Xbox (actually less powerful than the xbox) and thus should go with the 6th gen. However, as the consensus is that generation is rated by date, not power, the wii is a seventh generation console. This might run into problems in the future however, as the playstation 3 is stated to have a longer expected lifespan than the 360. Over time makers may have no direct link between release dates. This might want to be considered in defining generations. 24.187.148.32 (talk) 04:11, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

actually, ms hinted they want the 360 to have a long lifespan like the ps3.
generations will in the future be defined by when a second competitor releases, not the first (like the dc/360), as it may very well be that ninty to release a wii hd. itll stil compete with the ps3/360. however in terms of handhelds, they dont release often at the same time as home consoles. the ds was out in 04, which by time means it is 7th gen as its lifespan is thru that gen. anyone who questions a consoles' place in a generation over its power is simply wrong! power defines nothing - look at the old gameboy chocobogamer mine 12:23, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
We don't define generations, they are defined by the media. And the media considers the Wii and the Nintendo DS as seventh generation consoles regardless of their power. So, we won't run into problems in the future. To give you an idea, the PlayStation 2 had a third of the power of the original Xbox, and the Xbox launched a year later, yet it belonged to the same generation. -- ReyBrujo (talk) 16:03, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Without going into console wars, thats not a true statement. While the clockspeed of the PS2 was 1/3rd of the Xbox's that doesn't mean it has one third the power. The xbox was a superior system, but not dramatically superior, due to massive differences in architecture. Letting the media define a gen is a poor plan as the media feeds off the general consensus of the people. Is wikipedia not a place where the consensus should be made first, and then the media feed off of the people? If there is a predefined policy that states otherwise, I am unaware of it, but would love to be enlightened. 24.187.148.32 (talk) 09:24, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

I definitely believe we need a better definition of the generations and their standard. Time does play a factor, and so does the media and the populace. Power, graphics, formatting...these things are slowlyg mattering less and less with each generation. If you look at each system from each generation, you'll notice many similarities between the gameplay. From controller design to in-game interactions, these systems are virtually the same. What these new generations are doing differently to set themselves apart is the Gamer's interaction within the console. XBox has given a level of interaction between gamers and their games an unpresidented edge over the other systems with XBox live. PlayStation added motion sensing to their controllers to involve their players more and their decision to use Blu-Ray discs was not to make more stuff in the game, but more depth within the game to suck in players and give them more satisfying gaming experiences. Nintendo ignored graphics and power altogether and brought an insane level of interaction with the player and the game that older, younger, and non-gamer people go out of their way to buy a game console just to lean from left to right and swing a controller around. Even though the PSP doesn't have breakthrough technology or controls, but allowing the wi-fi connectivity to allow complete strangers to game together on the spot brings an independence unachievable through other systems. The DS may not be the latest greatest thing around and a touch screen is pretty ancient as far as technology goes. But using the touch screen to game allows the player to feel more involved with the game. The 7th generation of gaming consoles AND portable consoles all share the same desire and ability to change not the hardware or methods of a game, but to change the way we game. And this is just the beginning. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tren Frost (talk • contribs) 00:11, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

The Wii is an overclocked Gamecube and is not a 7th gen machine. The PS2, lower powered than the Xbox or not, still offered capabilities beyond the last console, which the Wii does not do because it is just an overclocked Gamecube with a controller. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.115.236.120 (talk) 21:51, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Other consoles

Should the Vii be included, or are there many other Famiclones in this generation that should then be included as well? The Seventh Taylor (talk) 21:40, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Console War?

MAybe we should include the console war... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.162.79.140 (talk) 23:06, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

There was no such thing. Three consoles were released, all three sold vast numbers and have a vast userbase. All three companies are doing very well out of it thankyou very much. Apart from banal online arguments between 14-year-old fanboys, I really am not aware of any console "war". Do you have anything that demonstrates otherwise? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.59.43.240 (talk) 12:38, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Archive?

The page is starting to get rather long, so I would suggest an archive up to and including "Sales Standings." If there are no objections, I will archive the page by Tuesday. Laptopdude (talk) 15:39, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

It has been archived Laptopdude (talk) 00:11, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Current price

I think we should add current price to the comparison table. It will give readers a better idea on how the consolemakers position themselves on the market today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blueblister (talk • contribs) 03:18, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

I think, the prices have not changed since launch. If there is variation in terms of price from the launch price, it is probably due to the retailers, not console makers. Can anyone verify any official price drops or price hikes though? Chan Yin Keen | Talk 05:09, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
The Xbox 360 in Japan is getting an offical price drop, although the article indicates only US dollars not yen. --Silver Edge (talk) 05:55, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Oh, my bad. The 60GB PS3 had a pricedrop in october of last year but it has been phased out since then.Blueblister (talk) 15:51, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

handhelds =/= consoles

Should this article not be called History of video game systems (seventh generation) ? Handhelds are not consoles. xenocidic (talk) 14:31, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

See handheld game console. --Silver Edge (talk) 21:35, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
Fair enough, but see http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/console
I guess I'm just not a fan of calling portable gaming systems "consoles", but I guess it's not a big deal. xenocidic (talk) 22:00, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
I believe that definition is meant when used alone, in speaking of JUST a "console" as a term, that someone often means specifically the home consoles, as opposed to all consoles, being both home and handheld consoles. Nottheking (talk) 01:30, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
I agree with Xenocidic. Handheld gaming devices are not consoles and really aren't competitors against the Wii, PS3, or Xbox 360. Also, they are not on their "7th generation" either. Why not toss in full size arcade games in the mix? 76.229.203.39 (talk) 18:10, 8 June 2009 (UTC) Anon

VG Chartz

Can someone tell me why VG Gartz is not a relaible source for sales figures? Thanks. Seanor3 (talk) 15:14, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Something about being self-published, I think. Zanfy (talk) 21:40, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
Check at WikiProject Video Games. VGChartz is just a little different from a self-publishing source that does make their numbers up. -- ReyBrujo (talk) 00:57, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

The beginning of XBox's article isn't showing up

It starts off with the headline about the consoles and the goes right into mid-article about XBox without the title or beginning of it. If you try to edit it you see that it's there in the editing section but there's nothing I can seem to do to make what appears in the edit section appear on the page itself. --67.165.141.239 (talk) 21:13, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, one reference was eating it all. It is already fixed now, thanks for informing that! -- ReyBrujo (talk) 23:18, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

What distinguishes Seventh Generation?

I came to this article expecting to find a clear explanation of what characteristics qualify a video game console as belonging to the "seventh generation." Instead, all I see are comparisons of various video game consoles that are generally deemed to belong to this group. Unfortunately, this does nothing to explain what sets these apart from sixth generation machines. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.37.23.57 (talk) 06:53, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

See #Nintendo DS is NOT Seventh Gen. --Silver Edge (talk) 15:27, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
The competition of the first released console, and then the next made one is the next generation. It is not necessarily the exact competition because the Dreamcast is 6th gen, but it competed against the PS1. eg. The PlayStation was 5th gen, the PS2 was 6th gen, and PS3 is 7th gen. Ffgamera (talk) 07:46, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Worldwide

Worldwide must mean Worldwide minus US and Japan, but it doesn't say that. In the worldwide sales for XBox 360, PS3, Wii the numbers can not be the worldwide sales. Is there anyway to change this without having to write too much? 142.165.59.39 (talk) 00:47, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, if I was trying to find a quick way to say the number included the entire world except the US and Japan, I'd probably call the area Europe/Australia. I know that doesn't include Asia, but they don't really sell too much in Asia (except Japan), unless I'm mistaken. And I'm not sure about the numbers you're referring to, just giving a possible answer for your question. Useight (talk) 00:55, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Are we saying that suddenly the US and Japan aren't part of the world?? Chan Yin Keen | Talk 01:50, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
I'm going to go in and edit so it makes some sense. Using the word "Worldwide" is illogical. Currently it would appear negative 1m copies of the Xbox have been sold outside the US/ Japan.--Zoso Jade (talk) 14:53, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Wii RAM

Well, my understanding of memory isn't that great, but the article currently says Wii has 91MB total of RAM. I think it may be in error. Someone please verify.24.180.171.1 (talk) 03:41, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
The Wii does in fact have 91 MB of ram to the best of our knowledge. Many of the specs of the Nintendo Wii are only estimates, as no manufacturer specs have been officially released. While testing has been done by third parties, it was anonymously done so the reliability of it is dubious at best. To the best of our knowledge, the wii does sport 91 MB of RAM, but no truly reliable source can be given for this, only the fact that Nintendo has allowed this to be believed.24.187.148.32 (talk) 06:20, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Specifically, the RAM is split between 4 different amounts; there is 64MB of GDDR3 plainly visible on the motherboard next to the Hollywood GPU, as the chip's package, as I recall, appears identical to very similar chips used in the Xbox 360 and PS3. (only that there is a single one for the Wii) Then, it APPARENTLY is the case that there is 24MB of MoSys 1T-SRAM that forms the bulk of one of the two components of Hollywood; for Game Cube games, this functions as the RAM for backwards compatability, and for Wii games, it appears to function as dedicated video RAM. Lastly come the holdovers from the Game Cube, which are still used in the Wii; it has a 2MB frame buffer, (hence why the Wii is limited to a 720x480 maximum resolution) and a 1MB texture cache. Since the Wii seems to use the exact same architecture overall as the Game Cube, these portions of memory are used for the same purposes. All together, this adds up to 91MB. Nottheking (talk) 01:42, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Update

I added an update template to the milestone games for a few simple reasons:

  • There is a complete lack of PS3 games. Although PS3 didn't do so well this generation, they've obviously produced some great titles.
  • Super Mario Galaxy is outrageously outdated. Quote "...sold more copies on its first week, including over 500,000 in the US, than any other game for the Wii..." See Super Smash Bros. Brawl.
  • I am almost certain that some new news has cropped up about Halo 3 besides its sales figures.

I'm really busy right now, but I might do some stuff to it tomorrow.--haha169 (talk) 05:42, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Ahh...yes, and also:

  • PS3 - I believe we may have to add Devil May Cry 4.
  • XBox 360 - Call of Duty 4, obviously. This article mentioned how this game helped Xbox tremendously in its opening week.
  • Wii - Wii Sports. Definitely. 17 million in sales, better than all other games this gen. Plus, you get to play sports by swinging around and not actually doing it! --haha169 (talk) 15:24, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
The fact that you will have to be constantly updating your Nintendo titles is a clear indication that it's way too soon to be "deciding" what the biggest games of this generation will be. It would be like going ahead and listing whatever presidential front-runner is currently leading in the polls as the 42nd President of the United States.pjh3000 (talk) 02:36, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
Why can't we just leave it as is and wait a year or two before we write the history books. Probably should take this section out all together. It's way too soon to track this unless someone is just trying to inflate their e-penis. pjh3000 (talk) 20:26, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Not really. Milestone titles aren't just titles that largely affected future games. They are also titles that have affected a large amount of modern events. For example, Halo 3 had been shown on various CNN and other TV network news stations. Super Smash Brawl had a midnight Gamestop tournament.

Technologically, Wii Sports created a whole new platform of movement while playing, while Call of Duty 4 is a breakthrough in graphics. --haha169 (talk) 21:57, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Call of Duty 4 is not a real breakthrough in graphics compared to other games such as Grand Theft Auto IV, or Battlefield: Bad Company. Ffgamera (talk) 07:46, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Screenshot

It says there is a request for a screenshot. What kind of screenshot are we looking for, here? --haha169 (talk) 23:04, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Good point, I've removed the argument from the vgproj tag. xenocidic (talk) 14:52, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

NPOV

I believe this article to be biased toword nintendo and the wii. For example:

If you notice, not one bad thing is said about any of the wii games, but non wii games are criticized. There are more examples besides just this. Sorry about bad format, (new) but we should clean this article up. 68.38.187.85 (talk) 02:23, 24 March 2008 (UTC)unregistered
It's definitely biased towards Nintendo. We should probably remove the Milestones section anyway. Until the next generation, we won't know what the big titles were for this one. Until then, it's just prognosticating, which has no place on Wikipedia.pjh3000 (talk) 02:32, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
Reformatted for readability. No comment as the bias. xenocidic (talk) 14:53, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey, if you want, you can add verified criticisms of the Wii games (but don't over-do it), and you could add some more positive things for 360, and maybe add an obvious PS3 milestone title. One whole reason why there are more Wii games is because of the Wii's nature of being the only console to be based on in-game motion. There isn't that much to talk about graphics, except that the graphics are "quite amazing". Remember, be bold and edit the article yourself. But its good that you pointed it out, I'll see what I can do. --haha169 (talk) 23:04, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Response to pjh The milestone titles section stays. Wikipedia documents current events as well as history. I was a main editor for Effect of the 2007–08 Writers Guild of America strike on television, and was there for the large remodeling of the article after it was over. Once the 8th gen comes out, we can re-format that section, but right now, we know which games are more influential than the other games in this generation. It's actually quite obvious. --haha169 (talk) 23:36, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
The way Wikipedia works is consensus, not just once person who edited some other articles' fanboy opinion. So far you're the only one defending the Nintendo bias.pjh3000 (talk) 23:54, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

As a nintendo fanboy I'd like to agree that this part is too biased toward Nintendo. I play Smash bros. brawl for hours each day right now and I still don't think it's influential to this generation - it's just a popular franchise brought to its next obvious iteration. Smash-brothers-now-with-internets might be tons of fun, but it's hardly influential. It might have broken a few wii specific sales records, but it hardly changes the way video games get designed (like Galaxy or Bioshock do), nor does it demonstrate a specifically earth-shattering market performance, (like Halo 3 does and GTA 4 probably will). On the other hand, I don't see the "controversy" statement about Bioshock as negative at all, but I'm the sort of person who assumes any popular artwork that also sparks controversy is a good candidate for "influential."70.171.212.60 (talk) 00:41, 26 March 2008 (UTC


Pjh3000, don't make stuff up if you're going to add titles to the "Milestone titles" section, like what you did with Gears of War, which was a blatant copy and paste of Halo 3's text and references. 90.9 million+ preorders for Gears of War? And when was Gears of War the successor to Halo 2? --Silver Edge (talk) 02:05, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Oops, the entry for Gears of War I recovered from an earlier version of this article. I did not write it, but I should have done a better job of proof-reading.pjh3000 (talk) 02:26, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
I'm not supporting the Nintendo bias. But I no almost nothing about PS3 affairs, so I'm not the perfect one to balance it out. If you read my previous comment, you'd see that I was asking you guys to fix it. --haha169 (talk) 04:22, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Oh yes, and I think Bioshock and Mass Effect should be removed, simply because the entry is short and it only says something along the lines of: "it sold 1 million units...". And I highly suggest someone in the PS3 field add some useful PS3 games. --haha169 (talk) 04:24, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Don't just remove content because it's too short. Expand it if you think it needs to be expanded. Removal just makes the problem worse.pjh3000 (talk) 14:29, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Update Actually, I took a quick scan through Bioshock and it seems interesting. But I think someone needs to expand it. --haha169 (talk) 04:26, 26 March 2008 (UTC) Response to the IP - the Brawl section actually says a bit about how it was influential to the seventh generation, not just sales numbers. --haha169 (talk) 04:32, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Where does it say anything about the games influence? All I see are sales numbers. That puts it on par with MotorStorm. Either we list both MotorStorm and Smash Bros or we take them both out.pjh3000 (talk) 14:42, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

You can take them both out if you want, but it says, and I quote: "Super Smash Bros. Brawl (Wii) is a product of a landmark joint cooperation between former rival companies, Nintendo and Sega, along with the help of Konami...and is the first Wii game to strongly support online play." The second one probably isn't too important, but a joint cooperation between Nintendo and Sega, when they were bitter rivals in the 3rd-6th gen consoles is quite an important factor. --haha169 (talk) 22:11, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, no. Don't remove it. Sega+Nintendo partnership is a major event in the seventh generation video game history. --haha169 (talk) 22:14, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

You're right, I forgot they used to be bitter rivals. How times change.pjh3000 (talk) 00:42, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
I can't believe you forgot "Genesis Does What Nintendon't". Useight (talk) 00:50, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Bioshock still needs expansion. Anybody up for it? And I still need to watch that commercial with audio...--haha169 (talk) 03:07, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Guys were getting off the topic. the point is, weather or not brawl should be in it is not really the point. The point is: this part of the article is biased and favoring nintendo. Not one bad thing was said about nintendo games, and i know their not perfect. How about putting in how some wiis needed to be fixed when brawl's double memory disc didn't work in it. Yet for some reason, the non wii games are critizcied. That's not bad, but in comparison of the wii milestones, biased. I made this NPOV violation announcement for a reason. Lets try to fix it.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.38.187.85 (talk) 02:49, 30 March 2008

I'm sorry, but I'm afraid I can't answer easily to somebody who doesn't even know how to sign their signature. (Its ~~~~, by the way). I'd really like for you to point out any faults listed in the other games. Please, do so. Plus, its milestone titles, so we aren't really supposed to be writing negatives about games, are we? And finally, if you were the person who added that horribly written piece about Brawl's disc error, I suggest you put it here and let other editors correct your grammar before actually posting it. --haha169 (talk) 02:10, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

NPOV (cont.)

Also, I'm quite curious as to why you singled out Brawl. It is perhaps the one game on the list with least POV. It states only facts, and why it is important. Landmark joint cooperation, first Wii game to fully support online gaming, and sold dot dot dot... Why did you single it out? I'm curious. --haha169 (talk) 02:28, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll answer both questions. First of all, I signaled out brawl because i just chose one as an example. Second, I didn't sign my username because i hadn't logged in(had to eat dinner fast) and didn't think it would be that important. Third, ANY game, even legendary games, have some faults. Fuorth, brawl was not the landmark join cooperation. It was the SECOND one. Mario and sonci at the olympics was the landmark joint cooperation. True, Brawl was the first wii game to support online gaming, but does that make it a milestone title? Brawl shouldn't be on it. Fifth, I guess I should've posted the sentence about the disc error(i did put that there) but i figured peopel dont have to write down every single sentence. At worst, I thought you might just fix the grammer instead of deleting it. (I'll still take the blame) For faults in the games, the disc error in brawl effected alot of people's wiis. In gears of wars, the story is noted for not being very deep, and not developing it's characters. Super Mario Galaxy was noted for being too easy. And while these may seem not important, i think it's as important as saying Halo had some allies that were "poorer in inteligenece" characters. Finally, this article is finally at least a bit more neutral, so thank you to everyone. PandaSaver (talk)PandaSaver

"Versions" of consoles.

Not a lot needs to be said about it, but I think it's significant that this generation is the first to see major consoles offering different versions of themselves at launch and beyond. We might not think too much about it now, but I think it will be remembered that this generation is the first to see widespread acceptance of all demographics, and the fact that the consoles have been parsed to meet different practical and economic uses is indicative of that. (My analysis, of course, shouldn't be part of the article - I'm just trying to convince you all that is IS important). 70.171.212.60 (talk) 00:00, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, last generation, there was the PS2 and the PS2 Slim. Useight (talk) 00:15, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Sure, but I think the key phrase in my post was "at launch." There were also multiple versions of the gameboy advance, nes, snes, genesis, etc, but those were mostly just ongiong manufacturing changes.70.171.212.60 (talk) 00:23, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

You did say "at launch and beyond." I do agree that this is the first generation where multiple SKUs is prominent, but I was just bringing up that it had happened before. Useight (talk) 00:26, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Lets just say this is the first generation where different versions of consoles have been released at the same time, and not just with different bundled games, but actual variations of the hardware. This is the first time it's happened that I can think of (and I started out with Pong).pjh3000 (talk) 02:49, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

I think that there is already some mention about this in the article. If you want, you can go find more to add from the PS3, Xbox 360, or Nintendo DS articles. Just don't fluff it up too greatly.--haha169 (talk) 04:33, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Resistance: Fall of Man

hey, pjh, the section with Resistance uses "publicity" in the intro, though it doesn't really make much sense in the sentence. Do you mean "publicly" or something of that nature? Or do you mean it helped publicity due to ....? --haha169 (talk) 03:06, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

In any case, unless something besides the Cathedral thing is mentioned, this title should be replaced by the new Final Fantasy when its released. (I know I'm speculating here, but virtually every FF title made it to the milestone titles, so I think the same will happen here.) --haha169 (talk) 03:10, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Gears of War removal?

I say we get rid of Gears of war on the milestone list. It didn't do that much that would have a legacy(hence milestone). All it did was get on the top ten list and ON THE DAY IT WAS REALEASED ONLY was it the number one played on xbox live. ANy objections? If not I will remove it soon PandaSaver (talk) 00:26, 3 April 2008 (UTC)PandaSaver

You're mistaken, it held the #1 spot for quite some time. While I personally am not a big fan of Gears of War, it's obvious that it has made an enormous impact on the 360 and it is certainly a legacy title. xenocidic (talk) 03:22, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Sorry if I was mistaken. It obviously was not clear in the artcle( someone or me will have to make it clearer) but just to be save you can't just say it had an enourmous impact. Would you give me some examples? 68.38.187.85 (talk) 20:45, 3 April 2008 (UTC)PandaSaver
Just from a personal experience, I have never been near a 360, i never played one for any length of time apart from a few seconds in games stores. I have no real interest in that machine and yet if someone was to ask me to name a game, it would certainly be Gears Of War. Obviously, I am only one person but i am sure i'm not alone on this matter.. (rab random (talk) 22:23, 21 June 2008 (UTC))

WP:VG/A Assesment

Hi there. Just responding to the request for assessment for this article at WikiProject Video Games. There's a lot of work that's gone into this article that's clear to see. There are some recommendations that I've made below that I think will improve the article further.

  • Lead - needs expanding. Possibly look at two or three paragraphs summarising the article. This could include information on critical acclaim or reception, sales standings, or further information that you feel is appropriate. Currently, the lead only informs the reader that three consoles were released, while the article covers so much more.
  • Xbox 360 - There's several references that need to be tweaked using the cite web template. It may be worth checking back through the main Xbox 360 article as well, in order to summarise the content here at an adequate level. In particular, it may be worth summarising the console's main features and services before presenting the timeline of events in order to provide the reader with more context. I'm not talking about wholesale copy/paste, just the key points.
  • Playstation 3 - as with the 360 section, have a look at bringing in more summary of the main Playstation 3 article to provide the reader with more context for the timeline. Also, have a look at redoing Phil Harrison's quote as it's quite cumbersome. Possibly try summarising the quote instead of using the quote.
  • Wii - As before have a look at bringing in more summary of the main Wii article. In this case though, it's probably only worth bringing through a bit about the hardware used, ad you already refer to development choices here.
  • Comparison - get some citations for the HD video section.
  • Handheld Systems - consider spinning out into History of handheld video games consoles(x generation). Summarise the content here, while placing the comparison table, development and reception information in the other.
  • Software - Possibly look at renaming Software as Milestone titles, instead of having one subsection in a section.
  • Other systems - possibly include a paragraph on each?
  • Remakes - same as Other Systems - possibly include a paragraph on each?
  • References - go through all references, wikilinking publishers where possible.

Other than these issues, it's some good work. I'm happy to regrade to B-Class. With further work, it'd be worth getting a peer review before pushing for GA or A-Class. Well done! Gazimoff (talk) 20:08, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. The previous articles didn't do anything to remakes, so we'll leave it as that. I'll take a look at the rest, though. Maybe not today, however. --haha169 (talk) 04:04, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

GTA IV

Should Grand Theft Auto IV be added for a milestone video game? It has sold countless copies and was given 10/10 by many reviewers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.233.7.176 (talk) 10:12, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Where'd it say countless copies? I can see all the 10/10 but I haven't quite followed up on whether it has earth shattering sales or not. Personally haven't gotten a copy yet actually. Chan Yin Keen | Talk 13:16, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure about "Countless Sales" but I do think GTAIV should be added. GTAIV is the first game in 9 years to get a 10.0 on IGN, and the first game in 7 years to get a perfect 10.0 on Gamespot. Plus, if you check out gamerankings, it's currently dethroned Orcarina of Time for the top game of all time. PrinceLionheart (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 20:15, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
The sales are quite amazing, but its not "countless". It has surpassed none of the sales of the games currently on the list. However, I have no doubt that it will, sooner or later. As for the ratings, yes, that is quite amazing. First perfect from IGN since 1999 and first from Gamespot since 2001. (Check its article). You may add it, but use appropriate ref tags and use encyclopedic style. See WP:MOS. Check the discussion above to avoid NPOV. Remember to keep alphabetical order and uniformed format.--haha169 (talk) 17:21, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Misleading prices chart

The top row of the chart comparing the PS3, 360, and Wii has misleading prices. It shows prices at the launch of many derivative SKUs that were launched 1 or 2 years after the initial launch of the console. Therefore it's actually not conveying any useful information. IMO the only prices shown in the top row should be the configurations that were available at the initial launch of the console; a big part of the story of this generation of consoles is price differential between the 3 systems; and listing every single SKU that has appeared since the initial launch just totally obscures this important aspect, since the prices are now all over the place. Probably best solution is to create another row in the chart for the *initial* versions that were available and their prices. Then another row can have subsequent versions. Sorry, not time to fix it myself right now. Tempshill (talk) 16:01, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea what you're talking about. Either you fix it, or it'll stay the same way, or you can find someone who understands this and change it. Either way, I'm pretty much the only person who visits this article often. --haha169 (talk) 00:56, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
I used to come here frequently. Just came back from my wikibreak, so I'll start back up again soon. What (s)he means is that the launch price section includes the prices of console varieties that were released AFTER the launch date. Sure, there was a 'launch' price of the new variety of console (with more GB or the Arcade 360 thing) but they weren't available at launch. Having them all together there makes it seem as if all those version were available on the launch day of the console itself. clicketyclickyaketyyak 01:06, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Oh, alright. --haha169 (talk) 22:04, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

GA review

The GA review of this article is currently taking place at /GA1, and is transcluded below.

Talk:Seventh generation of video game consoles/Archive 5/GA1

Please leave a note on my talk page when you're done with these comments. Cheers, dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 09:51, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

All looks good so passed. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 01:12, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

This GAN has passed, and this is now a good article! If you found this review helpful, please consider helping out a fellow editor by reviewing another good article nomination. Help and advice on how to do so is available at Wikipedia:Reviewing good articles, and you can ask for the help of a GAN mentor, if you wish.

Cheers, dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 01:12, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I see that this is a first for all video game history articles! :) I like being part of stuff like this. --haha169 (talk) 00:48, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

PS3 audio output

PS3 now supports DTS-HD Master Audio and DTS-HD High Resolution Audio for Blu-Ray discs since the release of system software update 2.30. You can use this site for reference: http://www.us.playstation.com/PS3/About/SystemUpdate --LF2 (talk) 00:56, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Please, you can add it yourself. If there are mistakes, I'll will correct them. Don't worry. "Be bold'. It is a really great way to learn about Wikipedia and its codes better. --haha169 (talk) 00:55, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Sorry about being late. I just updated it. Sorry if I didn't add references. --LF2 (talk) 22:00, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
You just gave one yourself, above. It is perfectly reliable, coming from the playstation site itself, please add it! --haha169 (talk) 02:44, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Cited source--LF2 (talk) 17:00, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Added audio output for PS3 v2.40 before it even came out. I added a little footnote stating this is as of 2.40 and my citation refers to the ps3 systme software article.--A. Rafey (talk) 00:08, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Gizmondo/N-Gage

Shouldn't the Gizmondo be on this page somewhere? Even if it is just under the "other systems" section... and while we're at it, what about the second-gen N-Gage, which is listed on its article as seventh-gen? - rst20xx (talk) 13:17, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Don't trust all the articles on Wikipedia. I don't even think N-Gage should even have an article at this stage. But since this is the main article on a FTC, I'm thinking about keeping the article full of verified facts. --haha169 (talk) 21:44, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Well look at it this way, they should be mentioned in SOME generation. Now N-Gage is mentioned in the sixth generation article and you say its article is unreliable so that's fine... but Gizmondo is mentioned in neither sixth nor seventh - which should it be in? Seems to me to be seventh. Further, I don't see any more verification for the generations of the systems which ARE currently in the "Other systems" section, so I'm gonna go ahead and add the Gizmondo - rst20xx (talk) 10:49, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
OK, done that. But why is Evo: Phase One commented out? Because it doesn't have an image? I think that needs fixing... - rst20xx (talk) 10:55, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Added a new image for Evo and readded it to section - rst20xx (talk) 14:49, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Well yes, i agree! Gizmondo should definitely be on the Seventh Gen, but the N-Gage is definitely a sixth gen console. Unless your speaking about the QD? But then Game Boy Micro, GBA SP. Sorry can't help you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcjakeqcool (talk • contribs) 19:26, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

No, N-Gage and N-Gage QD are Sixth Generation, the second generation of N-Gage is seventh generation but has many devices. N-Gage is currently available on the Nokia 5320 XpressMusic, 6210 Navigator, N78, N79, N81/N81 8GB, N82, N85, N95/N95 8GB & N96. I suggest putting 2 or 3 of the devices in specs, probably the most popular. The N81/N81 8GB, N95 and N95 8GB seem to be the most popular of the devices, so it's probably best to put them down. For specs on them, go here: N81, N95 and N95 8GB —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.100.107.179 (talk) 21:31, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

360 DivX/Xvid

Since when does Xbox 360 play DivX/Xvid???? 76.69.168.223 (talk) 05:12, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

See [1] ChimpanzeeUK - User | Talk | Contribs 09:19, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Introduction DS bias?

The intro talks about the PSP's connectivity with the internet, PS3's and other PSP's, and how the DS has outsold it despite lacking these features. The DS's connectivity to the Wii, other DS's and the internet (through the DS Browser and Nintendo Wi-Fi Connection) is completely left out. Maybe it's not a bias, but it's definitely lacking important information. -69.121.179.87 (talk) 14:08, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Also, the information is incorrect regarding the Nintendo DS!! Which is paramount considering this is supposed to be a good source of information! For starters, the DS DOES have internet capabilities. I played Mario Kart against someone in Japan today- does that not count? Just in case it doesn't count, there is a web browser cartredge for sale at all good high street game sellers. (rab random (talk) 22:15, 21 June 2008 (UTC))
Yeah, I've played online with the DS several times, so seeing how it's so blatantly obvious to anyone who's ever owned a DS, I'll get to editing it now. -69.121.179.87 (talk) 18:39, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

MGSIV a milestone?

I'm just wondering should MGSIV be considered a milestone. It's now one of the few titles to get a perfect score on IGN, Gamespot, and Famitsu as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.189.26.155 (talk) 02:15, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree, it seems to fit the criteria for a milestone title. -69.121.179.87 (talk) 23:46, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
I also agree. An additional arguament is that it has also now sold 1m copies in europe in it's first week http://kotaku.com/5019089/mgs4-ships-a-million-in-europe ChimpanzeeUK - User | Talk | Contribs 13:31, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
If you can find a ref that's not Kotaku, then I'm all up for it. One day, I am going to seriously trim that section, but I guess an "adding spree" could do for now. Also, not every game that sold 1m can make it to the list. Wait a bit. --haha169 (talk) 01:07, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Why's that? Kotaku is used all the time for refs and is considered a reliable source. There are already at least 10 Kotaku refs in this article. ChimpanzeeUK - User | Talk | Contribs 09:01, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
Is there? Interesting...then this article can't hope to pass FA. I guess its OK for GA, but FA assessors generally dislike Kotaku. I was once able to slip it through because Kotaku was hosting an interview, and you can't fake interviews. Nonetheless, fine. This article isn't going through FAC anytime soon, anyway. --haha169 (talk) 17:35, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Bestselling Games

This should be updated. Wasn't Grand Theft Auto IV the bestselling game for one of the consoles? --71.225.85.57 (talk) 20:50, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

It was a best selling game, period. Someone can look around for a reference to it selling a fair bit, but I do believe there has been nothing specific over how many have been sold on either the X360 or PS3. Just so you know, I'm not to thrilled about the fact that you did this, but really no skin off my back :) Chan Yin Keen | UTC 10:54, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

360 1080p?

I just reverted an edit on the High definition video section which implied that the 360 can't output 1080p. Having just re-read the cited article, I've realised that nowhere does it say that the 360 can output 1080p. It does say that it supports "up to 1080p" TVs (this is not the same thing), and that it can output up to 1920 x 1080 (p/i not specified) but not that it can actually output in "1080p". I'm not saying that it's not true, but I can't find a reliable source confirming that the 360 does this. Can someone please update this? ChimpanzeeUK - User | Talk | Contribs 15:18, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Good revert, it smacked of PlayStation fanboyism. Here's a citation for 360's support of 1080p: http://kotaku.com/gaming/xbox-360/shane-kim-talks-360-1080p-game-output-201816.php . cheers, –xenocidic (talk) 15:26, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
Fanboyism was my first thought too. I have added your link as a ref and also one for the PS3. I think it should be mentioned that only the PS3 can render games in 1080p though?ChimpanzeeUK - User | Talk | Contribs 16:16, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
Yes, 1080p is possible on both consoles. PS3 is just famous for its 1080p capability and the Xbox 360 isn't as famous for its HD. Ffgamera (talk) 11:28, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
For what it's worth, a similar edit just popped up again, and I reverted it. There is a list here that suggests that there are six native 1080p games (four DLC and two retail) and another here. I don't think they fit cite guidelines, but this link (announcing the first two native 1080p Xbox 360 games) looks usable. Jcholewa (talk) 17:01, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Galleries

These final 2 sections need to be much more than simple galleries of products. I can't even imagine why they were added like that.--221.143.25.19 (talk) 10:51, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

They were added like that due to precedent set by previous "history" articles. --haha169 (talk) 00:39, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Milestones for portable games.

If possible, (it is getting a bit crowded down there) but there are three game for the DS that could be considered milestones at the moment, Nintendogs, New Super Mario Bros., and Pokemon Diamond and Pearl versions (also the 3 or 4 (depending on how you view Pokemon) best selling games on the system.) I don't really know the PSP but I'm sure that someone can think of some 71.164.201.42 (talk) 01:38, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Nintendogs definitely, Pokemon also quite useful. I'm not sure about Mario, since that article's reception section gives little more than a random list of awards. And, no offense, but I don't really think any of the PSP games stand a chance against the rest of the milestone titles. --haha169 (talk) 00:38, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
One of the complaints from reviewers about Pokemon D/P was how little it had changed from previous versions, aside from the online play and voice chat. --Tehw1k1 (talk) 09:19, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Hmm...Pokemon has been slapped on pretty much all previous milestone titles. Lets leave D/P out for now and write one for Nintendogs. --haha169 (talk) 04:42, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

PS3 - Bioshock

I don't see the reasoning behind the PS3 not being listed with the available platforms. It is being released on the PS3, therefore it should be there. I don't why there's a dispute. The reasoning behind it being a "milestone title" is because it is "considered a major influential and artistic game of this generation" and because it has a "plot that quickly created controversy with the decisions the player makes during the game". Why would this be any different on the PS3 version? The article makes no mention of it's graphics or control system which could be the only difference on the PS3, if there are any. Please discuss here before making the edit again, which smells suspiciously of fanboyism ;) ChimpanzeeUK - User | Talk | Contribs 18:02, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

For chrono reasons. The milestone was set by the 360/PC version and the PS3 version isn't even out yet. Makes no sense. –xeno (talk) 20:45, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
But like I said, the PS3 version is the same game. It makes no difference when the article was written. The brackets merely state which consoles the game is not. Not listing PS3 would be inaccurate. ChimpanzeeUK - User | Talk | Contribs 23:10, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
If its not out for PS3 yet, why not wait until it is out and then add it? --haha169 (talk) 04:41, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Pandora

There is some talk of whether the Pandora (listed under "Other Systems") will be 7th or 8th gen. It is viewed as being the successor to the GP2X, which is 7th gen, and will have hardware considerably more powerful than any of the other handhelds. And considering the fact that it has not even been relased yet, I'm removing the reference. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PlopperZ (talk • contribs) 12:15, 24 August 2008 (UTC) Well yes, you do have a VERY good point! The Pandora has been releaced in the middle of the Seventh Gen era but it still could be Eighth. Let's think back a while TG-16 in 87 FM Towns in 91 well it could cut it as eigth. Good thinking! mcjakeqcool Mcjakeqcool (talk) 19:30, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

The GP2X Wiz is the successor to the GP2X (7th gen) and should be considerably more powerful (533Mhz with 3D accelerator compared to 2 200Mhz processors & no 3D accelerator). Is it also a 7th-gen console? It is being released at the same time as the Pandora. Really, you could argue that both of them are the successors to the same handheld (GP2X), with the GP2X Wiz being designed by the original company based in South Korea and the Pandora being designed mainly by a group of European GP2X distributors with heavy consultation from the GP2X community on Gp32x.com. The GP2X Wiz is lower-cost but not as much of an upgrade, while the Pandora is far more powerful and has more features but is also much more expensive. Esn (talk) 04:05, 15 September 2008 (UTC)


The Pandora shouldn't be listed yet anyway, it's an upcoming system, not a current one. Masqueofhastur 20 December 2008 —Preceding undated comment was added at 15:39, 20 December 2008 (UTC).

Agreed that it shouldnt be listed. The gizmondo should also be listed if this is.--Deathtrap3000 (talk) 05:29, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Upcoming consoles can be listed as long as there is no crysal balling, E.G you can put the Gizmondo 2 down, but not the Wii 2, because it has'ent got a releace date. mcjakeqcool Mcjakeqcool (talk) 13:07, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Europe Sales Figures

I think that it would be useful to have sales figures for Europe, Does anyone know a reliable source to get this data from? m-surtees (talk) 08:43, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree, the data can be found at http://vgchartz.com, and the Eurozone is a big enough market to deserve a mention, with sales comparable to those in the USA (Wii 10341858, PS3 6189818, Xbox 360 5837109 - Source http://vgchartz.com/hwtable.php?cons[]=Wii&cons[]=PS3&cons[]=X360&reg[]=UK&reg[]=France&reg[]=Germany&reg[]=Spain&reg[]=Italy&reg[]=Scandinavia&reg[]=Other+Europe&start=38662&end=39698). However, I have no experience of altering sortable tables in Wikipedia. If someone could modify the able it wouldbe appreciated Colostomyexplosion (talk) 14:03, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Update on Xbox 360 sales?

There has not been an update on the 360 since 25th April 2008. Why? Surely the 360 has extended it's lead on the overpriced ps3, and caught up on the dominant Wii. Mcjakeqcool (360 all the way) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcjakeqcool (talk • contribs) 19:15, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

I updated the figure. As you can see, the Xbox 360 has done neither of those things you asserted. Dancter (talk) 20:49, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Upcoming consoles

What are some upcoming consoles that have yet been released? I currently have listed PlayStation 3 (160 GB) and PSP-3000 series. –Wiki131wiki (talk) 21:56, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

For handhelds, Pandora (console), GP2X Wiz. Esn (talk) 19:13, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

The image Image:Evo.JPG is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --00:04, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Edited several PS3 things

There are two 80 GB versions of the PS3, so the earlier one is now identified as the 80GB (2007 version) and the newer one is identified as the 80GB (2008 version). I have also added some bits from the 160GB PS3. And MGS4 shipped 3.94 million rather than just 3 million. I also added Life with PlayStation with Folding@Home in the Network section, I wonder why Folding@Home wasn't added before?Ffgamera (talk) 11:26, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Xbox S/Duke Controller Adapter

   * Xbox 360 controller (up to four controllers; any combination of a maximum of 3 wired [4 with the use of a USB hub] or 4 wireless)
   * Xbox 360 Wireless Racing Wheel
   * Scene It Trivia Controller
   * Xbox S-Controller/Duke Controller Via Adapter


I was wondering who put this in, after seeing this I got fairly excited because i'm planning on getting a 360 soon, and I was fairly sure original xbox controllers weren't compatible with Xbox 360, ANYWAY...

I did some google searching (very light, mostly shopping websites) to see if such a thing existed, all I found was either guides for modding the controller to work with a USB cable or pre-modded cords for the use.

I would like to challenge the validity of this accessory, because it looks to me not to be an official Microsoft product (which are the only products we should list on the 360 page or the comparison chart)

If anyone has anything to prove that Microsoft creates such an accessory, or it is an official third-party accessory (such as Madcatz, Pelican, Etc. Etc.) then please reply to this, if enough time passes without any solid evidence, I recommend deleting that part.

Respectfully submitted, Alec92 (talk) 19:36, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Percentages compatible

Unsure whether percentages claimed in this edit are accurate. Unsure of remaining changes done in edit also. --Oscarthecat (talk) 19:37, 14 October 2008 (UTC)


Nintendo DSi

The stats need to be updated for the nintedo DS.

The japanese nintendo site has most of the specs there already. http://www.nintendo.co.jp/ds/dsi.html (go there and pick the rightmost tab and click a little button on the flash that says specs in Japanese. -- penubag  (talk) 05:08, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Highest Selling PS3 Game

The link we have is way out of date for Motorstorm. Off-hand, MGS4 came to mind.

http://kotaku.com/5033383/metal-gear-solid-4-is-a-giant-angry-sales-pac+man-ships-394m-copies

What do you think?70.131.211.219 (talk) 13:40, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

This has been raised before. The problem is, it has only been stated how many copies of MGS have been shipped, not the number sold. ChimpanzeeUK - User | Talk | Contribs 13:50, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Proposed addition to "Milestones"

  1. Nintendogs - Best-selling DS game and best-selling video game of this generation.
  2. Mario Kart DS - Best-selling and rated Mario spin-off title, and one of the best-selling titles released in Japan (having been released since November of 2005, and still in Japan's top 30).
  3. New Super Mario Bros. - Best-selling standalone title in Japan.
  4. Animal Crossing: Wild World - One of the best-selling online title in Japan.
  5. Brain Age: Train Your Brain in Minutes a Day! - Springboarded an entire genre of games, one of the best-selling titles of this generation. On the subject of the above five games, with the exception of Wii Sports and Wii Play, all of these games have sold better than any console game of this generation. - A Link to the Past (talk) 21:25, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

iPod Touch

I feel the iPod Touch should be included under other consoles. I have tried this before, but someone removed it saying "The article is for devices with the main purpose being games.

The thing is, they are advertising it as a gaming device, Apple executives refer to it as the future of handheld gaming. If the iPod Touch cannot be on this list then neither can the Sega Vision, which exists as a PMP, not with the main purpose being games.

I am adding the iPod Touch to the list again. Anyone who disagrees can talk to me about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikizeta (talk • contribs) 04:45, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Nothing (to my knowledge) in the gaming world was, or is, quite like the iPhone/iPod touch. I, at least, am OK with leaving it in the article (or at least mentioned somewhere within it), but it needs to have more background information than just randomly surprising people reading the table, and then crawling back to the shadows whence it came ("iPhone" is mentioned twice in the article as of this writing). --174.130.36.91 (talk) 22:10, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
I disagree with the iPod being a gaming device. It's an MP3 player. Either the whole iPod article should be revised or it should be off the list.


The itouch is a system with multiple purposes just as the PSP has multiple uses. Its architectures is powerful and sophisticated enough to put it in the same league as the DS in terms of capability. It belongs with the consoles.24.187.148.32 (talk) 06:51, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

How many phones have a more powerful and sophisticated architecture then Iphone? Include them all or remove the Iphone84.39.114.68 (talk) 15:45, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

It's completely stupid to put Iphone here. It's a PHONE not a portable gaming console! wow it plays MP3... How many phones have the ability to play mp3? I known thousands of them. How many phones have the ability to play games? Thousands. Why is just Iphone listed? marketing? publicity? Iphone fan boys work? If you put Iphone in this article you have also to put every other phone with similar features like the nokia nseries for example. They have a LOT more games available. In fact they can even use emulators. I use my N95 like a portable gaming console. Yes it has limited capabilities compared to the portable gaming consoles because it's a MOBILE PHONE not a gaming console! In fact I have both Iphone and N95 and I have hundreds more games for the N95. But that's just ONE example. REMOVE Iphone or include every other phone capable of playing games like thousands of Symbian OS phones. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.39.114.68 (talk) 15:37, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Whoever added that is doing it Wrong, specially for the OS part, learn to edit the Wiki, guys —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.119.103.190 (talk) 03:11, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Wait, if the IPod touch can't be included as a 7th gen gaming system because it plays movies, then the 360 and PS3 should be taken out because they can stream Netflix or play Blu-Ray! Jdkessler (talk) 18:02, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

I think the key point is that most in production phones have similar features to the iPhone, so if we put the iPhone in, we should include every similarly equipped phone too. I think maybe a line in the handheld section about how some of the market has been taken over by other media players or something would be the most mention the iPhone deservers.86.171.28.48 (talk) 15:57, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

I agree. The iPhone, while new and very advanced, has very similar features to just about every modern phone today. One cannot justify adding the iPhone without adding the rest. I think adding a section or at least a comment in the handheld section about the gaming similarities of cell phones, but they themselves are not handheld consoles. The main argument though is how the product is advertised. The iPhone is a cell phone that just happens to play games. When was the last time you went to GameStop or EB Games to buy an iPhone of iPod? Same with consoles. Do you look for a PS3 in the DVD player section or a laptop computer in the video game section? The important thing is how the product is marketed and advertised, not its capabilities. If we classified by uses and capabilities, then MP3 players, cell phones, computers, consoles, handhelds, and even many DVD players would all be classified under the video game console section. Tren Frost (talk) 01:45, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Major game developers are creating video games designed around the architecture of the iPhone, which differentiates it from other cell phones or similar multi-use products such as palms, blackberrys etc. The games being developed are not run of the mill standardized games which have been ported to mobile devices in every generation but rather fully fledged games in their own right. Both the Spore and SIMCITY series have iterations on the iPhone. In addition, it has a significantly faster clock speed than either the PSP or the DS. Its capabilities and the fact that game developers see fit to develop games for it (not just ports) justify it's inclusion as a 7th gen system.155.246.142.129 (talk) 23:57, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Major game developers have been releasing games on Nokia N-series since, well, a year ago? Yet as someone stated above the N95 is not regarded as a handheld games console for the sake of this article. Clock speed is irrelevant when defining whether or not the iPhone is a handheld games console. The iPhone is a common-or-garden smartphone. If you seriously believe the iPhone is a handheld games console, then I think you should also put your point across on the smart/mobile phone articles to propose the iPhone is deleted from them. Until then, it will be deleted from the video game console article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.59.43.240 (talk) 13:45, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Not the iPhone, but the iPod Touch. Feature-wise the iPod Touch and PSP are nearly identical. Both play music, videos, games, have built-in WiFi and a browser. No reason to not include the iPod Touch, nothing major, just mention it. 89.147.0.109 (talk) 11:01, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
What's important to note here is that if anything is going to be argued as a video game platform, it'd be iPhone OS, and NOT iPod Touch nor iPhone, as these are simply hardware specifications. In the video game world, we're used to lumping both hardware and OS together in the same lingual swoop, but it doesn't make sense to do that here. Since this section is getting messy, and I think it should be refocused on the OS, I'm going create a new section for discussing the inclusion of that into this article in a new section on this talk page - "Inclusion of iPhone OS". Brianreading (talk) 18:46, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Own part for DSi

Since the DS has many new features that not Original Style DS or DS Lite had, like audio file playback, video playback, in-built download function for games, a interface, the removal of the GBA-port etc., I think that it's notable enough for it's own "part" and not it's details being included in the DS/DS Lite one, since DSi has, as mentioned, many features, own games, and has changed drastically. More drastically than Game Boy to Game Boy Color. But before I go ahead and change the article, what do you think? 90.228.241.157 (talk) 17:01, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't see a reason not to. The DSi to the DS what Game Boy Color was to the Game Boy. --89.147.0.108 (talk) 10:51, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Milestone titles

Metal Gear Solid 4 and LittleBIGplanet must be included on "milestone titles" section —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.100.203.152 (talk) 23:02, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Why? Whats so special about LittleBigPlanet? --Deathtrap3000 (talk) 06:21, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

?-Bit processors

Can we talk about 64, 128 and other bit processors in seventh console generation like we could in previous generations? --Artman40 (talk) 17:41, 21 December 2008 (UTC) Back then processor power was largely based on what bit the processor was. These days that's simply not true, and most processors are 32 bit.

8th Generation????

The NDSi is not an 8th gen console, but when will the 8th gen come out, rumors for the xbox 2010, a whole new handhelled! And PS4. Rumors stated E3 will announce something at its E3 09 Press Conference. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.112.42.93 (talk) 07:45, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Ps3 RSX is 500Mhz not 550

http://www.pre-order-ps3.co.uk/ps3_specification.asp http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=46782 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ariex (talk • contribs) 07:43, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

The links you provided are not considered reliable sources under WP:RS. ChimpanzeeUK - User | Talk | Contribs 09:45, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
What's more, the already sourced information comes from manufacturers of the chips. 24.187.148.32 (talk) 06:55, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Also, that article is full of flaws, such as asserting that the RSX somehow had 28 pixel shaders... And then there was the perrenial lie included on one of those, in claiming that the RSX's math capability reached 1.8 TFLOPS, when it was only recently, with the GT200b, that nVidia was able to break 1.0 TFLOPs; 52.8 GigaFLOPS is more accurate for the floating-point power of the PS3's RSX; i.e, about 1/34th what they claimed. Nottheking (talk) 01:07, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

BBC iPlayer

Why is this listed as an online service in the comparison table??? Its like having youtube listed. I vote for removing it from the list.--Deathtrap3000 (talk) 05:56, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

What defines 7th generation?

The article doesn't explain what defines "7th generation" and what authorities use this term. The only reference I can see which for the term "7th generation" is the first reference in the article (this one[2])... which in turn references this wikipedia article!! So that's a circular reference and doesn't count as a WP:RS. So... the article has no reliable sources for the term "7th generation", and obviously needs some. p.s. other "generation" articles have the same problem: There is no cite in the 6th generation article either. The 5th generation article does try define 5th generation, but the section is entirely unreferences and is written like WP:OR. Peter Ballard (talk) 02:01, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

That is pretty much a given for these kind of articles. You won't get many references saying this is the "seventh" generation (although I once read at a pretty big newspaper that this was the "third" generation because of PlayStation 3). You only get articles with "this generation" or "next generation" before this one started, but nothing too specific. So, in the end I think of this as a "section title", much like some biographies have sections like "Early days", "Comeback", "Retire", etc. -- ReyBrujo (talk) 04:00, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
If that's the only rationale for the article titles (that they are convenient, made-up generation numbers), then they should be changed to generally recognized names (e.g. "History of video game consoles (2006-2009)". We use common names on Wikipedia for article titles, not made-up ones; see Wikipedia:Naming conventions. Peter Ballard (talk) 09:26, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
It is widely referred to as "seventh generation". This IGN article: (http://wii.ign.com/articles/835/835333p1.html) gives the reader a thorough understanding of the concept of "seventh gen". IGN is reliable enough - and in any case, these generation names are not made up. They are widely used and understood within video game circles. --haha169 (talk) 05:21, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
Then someone should fix the references in the articles. Peter Ballard (talk) 06:26, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
There's no need for a citation to verify the name of an article. --haha169 (talk) 00:20, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
But definitions (1st, 2nd, 3rd... 7th generation) need to be cited properly in the respective articles, and they're not. There are 7 articles on the generations, plus an overview article Video game console. In those eight articles I can only find ONE external cite defining these generations (this one), and that cite doesn't count because it's a circular reference - it refers back to Wikipedia to define "7th generation". That isn't good enough. The citations need to be found and added, or the articles renamed. Peter Ballard (talk) 00:42, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Thats like asking a dictionary to add citations for its words - they simply cant.--Deathtrap3000 (talk) 01:15, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
No it's not. "7th generation video game console" is not a dictionary word or phrase. It needs to be defined in the article (which it is), and properly cited (which it isn't). Peter Ballard (talk) 01:40, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
As per WP:SOFIXIT, I added a citation in the lead section that does a decent job of defining the seventh generation as the 360, PS3, and Wii. Useight (talk) 02:00, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
That's a duplicate of the reference I've already complained about[3] - it refers back to this Wikipedia article as its authority, so it is not an independent source. WP:SOFIXIT is a reasonable complaint, but I'm no expert on video games, I just surfed in here and noticed some very poorly sourced material (in all 8 video console articles). Peter Ballard (talk) 02:29, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
So keep looking for a source, and I'll do the same. Useight (talk) 02:34, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
The IGN source is a source! It explicity states "current-gen" in its Wii branch, and it compares "Seventh-gen" together at the end. If that's not a source...--haha169 (talk) 03:41, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Up to date unit sales

Current cumulative unit sales for US are listed up to beginning of November, but NPD Group (the recognized source for this sort of sales information) released unit sales for all of November. These releases, though, only list the sales for each given month and not the cumulative sum. Is it okay to keep the up-to-Nov/01 citation and add a citation that references the new month's sales and then just change the number to the sum of the two?

That probably sounds like a dumb question, but doing the above becomes a bit of a problem wrt sales in Japan. This article currently lists sales up to early October, but there are two primary recognized organizations reporting unit sales every week (Media Create and Enterbrain/Famitsu). Using these (and, as with NPD, this data is the source material for the press releases and articles written by the console makers -- including their quarterly reports -- and the various news organizations covering game sales), we have verifiable data up until the 4th of January. But this would require adding twenty-two citations (from the currently-listed August 1st 2008) unless newer "up until now" recap articles are found.

What's the cleanest way of handling this?


(also, should there be a "Handheld sales standings" section? Or is the Handheld section still being considered for its own article?)

Jcholewa (talk) 18:28, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Sales? PS3, Wii?

Altough the Xbox 360 sales were last updated on the 5th Jan, it appears that the PS3 and Wii have not been updated since the 30th September last year, can someone please update this, thankyou mcjakeqcool. mcjakeqcool Mcjakeqcool (talk) 13:04, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

There seems to be no joy with the PS3 and Wii worldwide sales figures, can someone please try and update this as it is pretty important. Thankyou, mcjakeqcool. mcjakeqcool Mcjakeqcool (talk) 16:28, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
This is information that the public is not often privy to. We are given sales numbers for the US, Canada, Japan and some other countries, but actual worldwide shipment numbers are generally given out at quarterly financial reports. Worldwide sales is even more elusive. The good news is that Nintendo's report is tomorrow, and Sony's report is probably also this week (their last Q3 report was on Jan. 31st '08), so you'll get updated shipment numebrs shortly. -Jcholewa (talk) 21:58, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Evidence that 50 million Wii's have been manufactured http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ati-hollywood-nintendo-wii,7249.html And evidence that 100 million DS's have been shipped. http://www.tomsguide.com/us/Nintendo-DS-100-Million,news-3603.html Jab416171 (talk) 01:50, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

8th generation consoles

This has been bugging me for some time. Is there any credible information on 8th generation consoles? I understand that there have been discussions about a Wii2 and the the PS4 is already being designed, but has there been any realeased information thats completely viable, or at least some information on when the concept designs of the 8th gen. consoles will be reavealed?--TheNuGai (talk) 04:26, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

There has been no information released beyond analyst quotes along the lines of "We expect an announcement by 20XX" or company PR reps saying things like "We are already pouring R&D into our next generation product", which is fairly meaningless since that's generally assumed to be true for any company in this industry. Under the current environment neither Sony nor Microsoft have turned an overall profit on their current home console offerings (web forum citation, sorry) -- their first profitable years in this gen (of their gaming divisions) were this year and last, respectively, and they both would need to clear multiple billions of dollars to attain this goal. This isn't a necessary prerequisite for starting a new generation, but costs are somewhat front loaded in a generation, so the latter years' profits tend to make up for the losses at the start (excepting the Nintendo strategy of usually selling their products at a profit early on). This may lead them to stalling a bit to get an extra profitable year or two. On the other end, Nintendo is doing so well that it would be to their benefit to stretch out the cycle as long as possible.
But I don't dictate the policy of large companies, so their strategies could be completely different from my personal expectations. It is not unexpected for information on upcoming consoles to be unveiled at one of the major Category:Video_game_trade_shows, such as E3, GDC, TGS or the Leipzig Games Convention
-Jcholewa (talk) 15:39, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
I heard that Microsoft have been working on their next Xbox ever since 2006. Im expecting some news at E3 2009. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.112.104.160 (talk) 18:09, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Same here. My question is, what would they call the new xbox...the xbox 720?--TheNuGai (talk) 03:33, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

More like 2003, the new xbox was releaced in November 2005! mcjakeqcool Mcjakeqcool (talk) 11:00, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
207.112.104.160 wasn't referring to the Xbox 360. Dancter (talk) 20:12, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

360 * 2 = 720 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.112.72.242 (talk) 19:19, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Seventh Gen Handhelds?!

The PSP worldwide sales have not been updated since 20.8.08 surely that's a cause for concern, because with the 2008 holiday season unless it has been discounied, it would have had more units sold, and also the Gizmondo 2 is a concern as I feel it should be listed upon the upcoming less popular handhelds section alongside with the GP2X Wiz and Pandora, this should be changed, I will atempt to change it but if what I've changed is wrong, than someone else sould change it. Regards, mcjakeqcool Mcjakeqcool (talk) 18:49, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I have made my edits, so If anyone has noticed changes to this article, I have done the edits, though I do promise that they are well sourced. mcjakeqcool Mcjakeqcool (talk) 19:05, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
You might want to take a second look. You put your source inside an existing citation tag with incorrect syntax, and now that table cell is a bit messed up (it doesn't even show the Worldwide sales you're talking about!). -Jcholewa (talk) 21:07, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Yeah I've sorted it, I hope. mcjakeqcool Mcjakeqcool (talk) 19:56, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
I think you need to actually preview the changes before you make edits. Now, the PSP Units Sold table cell is completely blank, and the code for it is in the DS Units Sold table cell. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jcholewa (talk • contribs) 14:58, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Good article

I am very happy with this article, in the past couple of months it has improved greatly. mcjakeqcool Mcjakeqcool (talk) 13:04, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

quantity and quality of titles

I'm a bit concerned about the statement "The Xbox 360's advantage over its competitors has been its quantity and quality of titles." This seems partly inaccurate and partly subjective.

With respect to quantity, is there a citation for this? I did a quick grep of the List of Wii games and List of Xbox 360 games articles (just a dirty accounting of every table row, not exhaustively looking for currently released titles), and I came up with 579 for the Xbox 360 and 797 for the Wii. Surely, if we have a conflict with another Wikipedia article, we either have to revise/remove/qualify the above statement or add the missing Xbox 360 titles.

With respect to quality, we're heading into subjective territory. Even aggregated review scores are subjective, given that certain games that are considered of the highest quality by the most mainstream market segment were given comparatively low scores by gaming publications (Nintendo's own Wii Sports, Wii Fit, and Wii Play come to mind, scoring 76, 80 and 58 respectively on metacritic), and even in the dedicated gamer audience, there are some niche games for any systems carrying labels such as "game of the forever!", games which those players would consider superior in quality to the entirety of competing systems' libraries combined.

The statement would be better if "quantity" was removed and "quality" replaced with the more literally accurate "higher average review scores", such as "The Xbox 360's advantage over its competitors has been its games' higher average review scores." -Jcholewa (talk) 15:53, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

The sentence should say "The Xbox 360's advantage over its competitors has been its quantity of quality titles."--Deathtrap3000 (talk) 23:43, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Total amount of games

On a article like this, It's not the review scores of the games that counts, but the amount of games that counts. mcjakeqcool Mcjakeqcool (talk) 10:58, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Best selling PS3 game (MGS4 figures)

Just wanted to point out this discussion which is taking place at List of best-selling video games. Essentially, there is not currently a reliable source which states that MGS4 has sold more than Motorstorm and therefore Motorstorm is still the PS3's best-selling game. If you wish, please join the discussion there instead of replying to this comment as the result of the discussion may affect several articles. It's easier to keep all discussion in one place. Cheers. ChimpanzeeUK - User | Talk | Contribs 09:20, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Curiosity

The article states that the wii is compatable with most Gamecube accesories. So which ones is it not compatable with? 69.151.242.190 (talk) 22:50, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

For one thing, you cannot connect the Game Boy Player to the Wii because it lacks the port on the underside of the Game Cube. -Jcholewa (talk) 16:35, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

PS3 Progamming Difficulty

This is mentioned in the final statement of the 3rd paragraph in the XBOX 360 section. However the 2 referencing links (19 and 20) don't seem to support the argument. 19 is an article about how the PS3 is not more difficult to program on, and 20 is mostly speculative and written 8 month before the launch of the console. If this statment is true, is it possible to get some proper references? `Urseye —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.236.25.194 (talk) 15:31, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes I would imagine this issue is true, as the PS3 appears to have the same problem with third party devolpers that the Atari Jaguar and Sega Saturn had, the console is powerful, but diffcuilt to program, so therefore most of the games don't have the graphical power that the console is capable of. mcjakeqcool Mcjakeqcool (talk) 18:37, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

I am not sure if it is true or not. I am just pointing out that the referenced sites don't support the argument. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Urseye (talk • contribs) 07:32, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Inclusion of iPhone OS

This section is primarily to discuss as to what extent the iPhone OS should be included in this article. Someone had posted a section to discuss the inclusion of the iPod Touch here, but the discussion was in the absolute wrong direction because it was never focused on what the true gaming platform is–iPhone OS. Why is it important to differentiate? Because both hardware and operating system are not one in the same here. In the video game world, we're used to lumping them into the same category because of the highly proprietary nature of the OS these game systems run on, but again it's not the case here. The iPhone/iPod touch and iPhone OS combination is something that the video game world has not really seen yet, and that's why we're having problems classifying it. There are both arguments for the inclusion of the iPhone OS as a video game console (albeit a virtual one, maybe more similar to the current iteration of N-Gage), and there are arguments against it. I want to present some signs of both to get the ball rolling. Sorry it's so long, but it's really a deep subject.

So what are some of the signs we're seeing that would disqualify it from being considered as a video game console? Some arguments I've seen are:

  • Apple did not originally create the operating system with the intent to play games on. In fact, at the launch of the iPhone OS with the iPhone in 2007, there was no official way to even write native software for it.
  • There is no means of physical distribution for games such as in brick and mortar video game retail stores.
  • The iPhone nor iPod Touch which are the sole hardware platforms for the OS aren't sold in the same location as traditional video game consoles.
  • The iPhone OS feature-list is too expansive to be considered a console.
  • The market is flooded with games that are non-characteristic of a traditional game console (a side-effect of the iPhone SDK being available to everyone)

How about arguments for the iPhone OS as a console? These are signs that we've not seen on other mobile platforms besides the DS and PSP:

  • The iPod Touch is being marketed as a gaming device. [4], [5], [6], [7]
  • The iPhone and iPod Touch have been referred to specifically as a "game console" or mentioned as a threat to the Nintendo DS by Apple executives such as John Geleynse and Greg Joswiak respectively. [8], [9]
  • Most major video game developers have released games for the iPhone OS. This is unlike any other mobile platform besides the DS and PSP. The list is extensive, but here is a list of some companies involved:
  • Games or major franchises that have mostly been on traditional gaming consoles have been ported or released nearly simultaneously for the iPhone OS. Some examples are:
  • Many technology and video game journalists have written articles about this. Google "iPhone game console" to see more of what I mean. (Links courtesy of haha169) [10], [11], [12], [13], [14]
  • Original iPhone OS games are being compared in the industry to games on the DS and PSP. [15]
  • Game coverage for the iPhone is being covered by traditional game news sources such as IGN, 1UP.com, and G4.
  • Game development companies and news organizations that are specifically created with the intent of iPhone OS gaming are rising and making tons of money. Check out companies like Ngmoco, Tapulous, Slide To Play, and Touch Arcade. Some of these guys are also veterans of the more traditional gaming market.
  • Apple developers are expanding the capabilities of the OS as a gaming platform. [16], [17]

Again, I'm sorry for the length of this, but it's a long topic. Please post your thoughts. Brianreading (talk) 20:33, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't think there is any doubt that iPhone OS is becoming notable gaming platform, but I don't see any other operating systems known for video games represented in these "history of video game consoles" articles, like Microsoft Windows or Mac OS X. --Mika1h (talk) 21:23, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
I think you're missing the meat of the argument, which is that this article is about game consoles, and the iPhone OS isn't one, nor are the devices that run the iPhone OS. (Being compared to consoles is not the same as being a console.) The iPhone is not particularly different from any other phone (J2ME or BREW) in terms of gaming emphasis, and those games have received coverage from press also, and companies supporting iPhone games are ones that have been supporting mobile games all along. So, really, I think mobile games are an entirely separate market, and trying to cram them into existing markets is short-sighted. The proper topic for the iPhone is mobile gaming. Ham Pastrami (talk) 00:24, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
I see the point regarding the idea of it being like Windows or Mac OS X, but there is one major difference, and that is a centralized first-party distribution service that is more akin to the current iteration of N-Gage, which I understand that most don't have a problem including here. Ham Pastrami, I know you're easily saying that it isn't a game console, but that's why this conversation is deeper than that. It's about understanding what a console really is. I'm honestly wondering if you checked out all I had written above. I mean have you read sources like this one? [18] Of course there is much more emphasis in gaming here especially for the iPod Touch. It also seems short-sighted to say that the iPhone is not particularly different from J2ME and BREW. It's like comparing a block breaker style gameplay in DOS to Doom III in Windows. Like I said, so far it seems the best argument against including the iPhone OS in the article is because we're not including similar phenomena in PC gaming. Brianreading (talk) 09:31, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

I do not believe that the iPhone, iPod Touch or even their OS can be classed as a 7th generation video game console. Their primary purpose is that of a mobile phone and a media player respectively. The difference between this platform and "traditional" games consoles, such as the Xbox 360, PS3 or Wii, is that those devices are primarily for playing games; the media capabilites all deliver added value and a better consumer experience, but ultimately the core purpose is gaming. I will agree that Apple's approach represents a milestone, but I think that the same can be said of previous iPod iteration - Apple are managing to do what everyone else has been trying to do, and doing it a lot better than the competition. However any other modern mobile phone platform is capable of achieving the same (albeit with a lot of money behind them). Take Windows Mobile Pocket PC phones as an example; the hardware is of comparable power to the iPhone/iPod Touch, if not more powerful, and many devices feature dedicated 3D graphics hardware. The operating system is not nearly as intuitive, but is much more mature. But because the market is so fractured and diverse, it makes it very difficult to find good content - especially games - which is where Apple have excelled. Having said that, that is only the current situation; Microsoft's plans for the next iteration of the Windows Mobile platform includes a distribution system similar to that of the App Store for the iPhone/Touch or Google Android. It remains to be seen whether or not it will be as successful however.

I think we are starting to reach, or approach, that Holy Grail of digital convergence (much as I hate the term). I believe that the lines between what a device "is" or is designed to do are going to almost disappear in the coming years, and arguments such as these are going to become more and more difficult. Blcollier (talk) 08:34, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

This is especially true if you look at the DSi and what it can do, and the rumors surrounding phone functionality for the next PSP. --94.97.202.150 (talk) 08:31, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
I would argue for the inclusion for the iPhone/iPod Touch platform in this article. Who says it has to be primarily a gaming device to be a handheld game console? It's without a doubt a gaming platform. As long as it is a significant function of the system and has sufficient support and userbase, it's a game console. the iPhone is included in the Handheld game consoles article, though it says "could be considered as handheld gaming devices." I don't see why we can't add a brief paragraph and then a statement saying it's debatable whether it's a handheld console. MahangaTalk 20:09, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Exactly. With all of this discussion going on both here, and around the world about this, I think it would be wise to develop a section that would at least acknowledge this. Brianreading (talk) 01:07, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

PS3 3 Million mark

I changed it to that since its shows on the IGN article for the 360 selling 1 Mil in Japan. link is here P.S. Who changed the 360 to 8 Mil? Thats biased. --CeAH (talk) 18:31, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

PSP Backwards Compatability?

How is the PSP's ability to be used as a PS3 controller "Backwards Compatability"? Shouldn't it be re-classed as something else? Doomphil (talk) 17:54, 17 May 2009 (UTC)


Archive 1←Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Seventh_generation_of_video_game_consoles/Archive_5&oldid=1190130335"