Jump to content

Talk:Wii/Archive 9

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Talk:Wii
(Redirected from Talk:Wii/archive9)
Archive 5←Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11→Archive 15

Please Remember

The purpose of a talk page is to help to improve the contents of the article in question. Questions, challenges, excised text (due to truly egregious confusion or bias, for example), arguments relevant to changing the text, and commentary on the main page are all fair play. Wikipedians generally oppose the use of talk pages just for the purpose of partisan talk about the main subject. Wikipedia is not a soapbox; it's an encyclopedia. In other words, talk about the article, not about the subject. If any discussion is about the topic and not the article it will be removed (see archives at right).. Jedi6-(need help?) 00:35, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Wii, not The Wii

First this article called Wii both "the Wii" and "Wii", but I changed them all to "Wii". Remember the line "Wii wil change everything"? 80.127.64.214 15:12, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Development Kits Price

Ok, In the article it says: "The development kits for the Wii cost $2000. By comparison, the PlayStation 2 development kits cost $20,000 at the console's launch, with the original PlayStation's SDK costing $4000-$5000 at launch." But, there's no comparison listing the price of the Xbox360 or PS3 Dev Kits. If the article's going to compaire prices then it should list a price for a competitor of the same Generation! Does anyone know the price for the Xbox360 dev kits? And I think the PS3 dev kits should be relatively cheep because their using open standards that are FREEly available! 68.183.43.191 05:56, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I think the point here is that (supposedly) the dev kits are cheap - and the 'facts' bear this out. However I'm not sure about the accuracy of this information. HappyVR 21:52, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Finding a source for the price of console devkits is difficult-to-impossible if you're not a licenced developer or publisher, as one of my professors in a game design program who's always looking into devkit licences for our school (www.uat.edu) can attest. But for comparison I can offer the PSP: it's a handheld device and will obivously be cheeper than it's console counterpart but it still costs $5000. (Source: Sony keynote speach, GDC 2006) That said, no one has been able to confirm or clarify the $2000 Wii devkit price from an official Nintendo source - that figure comes from other publishers and developers who got prototype devkits. 168.158.223.80 01:21, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Well, If the accuracy is questionable then shouldn't it be removed? Who cares about devkit prices if the price can't be confirmed. 68.183.43.12 15:56, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
I can't give a price but "It's easier to develop for at a fraction of the cost. The barriers to entry are quite low" from http://www.joystiq.com/2006/05/15/the-engadget-and-joystiq-interview-nintendos-perrin-kaplan/ when asked about independant developers and the virtual console - so although the absolute price is not known absolutely it's not specualtion either.HappyVR 20:47, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Just wondering if there is a policy on external links - what gets included etc.HappyVR 06:03, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

In my book only official links, and links to extremly important information, interviews etc. No fan sites, or blogs. Havok (T/C) 18:20, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
Just out of interest, does Wikipedia have it's own guidelines on this matter? -- Steel359 20:37, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
Yup. See WP:EL. --Codemonkey 20:44, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
Thanks a bunch. -- Steel359 20:58, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
Yes thanks, I was thinking about sites like 'theWiire' formerly 'RevolutionReport' - not a 'spam' site as it contains genuine editorial comment, own written articles etc
Seems to contain 'neutral and accurate material' but fails on 'Links that are added to promote a site' possibly? but then so do IGN and Gamespot links. Should these links be included?HappyVR 11:59, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
I think so, mainly so it will not seem as promoting one site but giving the readers a choice to visit decent to exelent site about the Wii.--DivineShadow218 18:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
I didn't remove GameSpot and IGN because they are "rivals" and as such people would moan about their site X not being included. They are both well notable in the gaming industry, and two of the biggest gaming sites in the world. Also, I think "cleaning" up the external links section once in a while is good practice, as many of the articles are void when time passes. Havok (T/C) 18:25, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
I agree with Havok. I keep removing the Wiire link because, as I've already stated in the History changes, first, it's in violation of the "Promotion of a site" guidelines, and second, if we allow that to stay, we have to allow Nintendojo, N-Sider, Nintendophiles and every other site under the sun that has a section for the Wii. Leave the 2 most established sites and that's it. I don't want to come to Wikipedia and find it overrun by every site linking to its own Wii coverage. If you want your site to be known through Wikipedia, let it become known by your actions.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.130.21.164 (talk • contribs) 08:10, 20 May 2006 (UTC).
My two cents: I don't really care too much either way about the Wiire link, but concerning that first point, I think it's unfair to assume that just because a site could stand to benefit from the exposure that it automatically counts as "promotion". Part of the reason why people have favored listing the site is because it has proven to be a very useful source of information, with a good deal of informative, original content. I have yet to see the Big 2 provide as much information as The Wiire concerning the Wii Remote and the issue of batteries. The second point seems to be a fair argument, though. Dancter 09:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
I do care, because of the second point. It's also noteworthy that DivineShadow didn't seem to care when I deleted any of the other non-notable sites, just the Wiire link. The fact that there have been 3 other sites that have added themselves to the external links area leads me to believe this is just going to get more and more cluttered if we don't nip this in the bud. In regards to the small amount of useful information you did fine there, what happens when the Big 2 do add that content? Do we just allow the link to stay grandfathered in? This adds all sorts of unnecessary distress. Until they're established as the premiere site for all Wii specific content, I say just leave it as links to the Big 2 and that's it. If we allow the Wiire, I see no grounds for us not just allowing everyone in on the party.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.130.21.164 (Anonymous) (talk • contribs)

I can't help feeling that the 'big 2' are there simply because of there size - not the relevance to this article - apart from printing the same specualtion everybody else does what do they actually contribute - I say cut them (ign and gamespot)HappyVR 10:06, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm fine with just cutting all the external links, and leaving a comment letting people know not to add anything further. I honestly don't think any of the external links add anything of an encyclopedic nature that isn't currently found in the article.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.130.21.164 (Anonymous) (talk • contribs)

I've done that - sorry to jump in - hopefully this will be ok. I've left links to nintendo's web page and to a video feed of the pre e3 2006 conference - hopefully a further added links will have some real justification for their inclusion.HappyVR 10:20, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Price

In the price section it says:

Satoru Iwata has said "the price won't be significantly higher than Nintendo's prices have been historically" ($199 for all previous consoles)

But I'm pretty sure I paid $250 for my Gamecube when it came out. -- 24.39.223.181 08:45, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

I remember paying 200 bucks for my Gamecube when it launched in NA. Dionyseus 11:31, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
If you paid 250 you prolly got ripped off, it cost 200.Qwerasdfzxcvvcxz 12:22, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
I suppose it depends on where you live. it cost $200 USD. Optichan 17:20, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
And if you got a bundle pack.--DivineShadow218 18:22, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Thinner Wii

The Wii shown in some of the E3 06 photos looks considerably thinner than the old models(maybe 1/2 inch). Can anyone find proof.Qwerasdfzxcvvcxz 12:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Looks the same to me. could be the 'light'HappyVR 12:33, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
When Nintendo first showed the Wii, they said it would actually be even SMALLER in the final version. Maybe the Wii at E306 is the smaller finished model. JayKeaton 18:19, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
There are a few other minor alterations to the system as well since the previous models, such as a relocation of the main control buttons(power, reset, eject) on the front and a slight reshaping of the optical drive slot. --Smoke 15:19, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
I think its because the drive slot is slightly wider that makes it look narrower. smurrayinchester (User), (Talk) 15:53, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
once Nintendo posts the specs on their page, that will be thje proof --DivineShadow218 20:48, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
The pic was on gamespot and still is, but I doubt i can put it here. its definately smaller.Qwerasdfzxcvvcxz 20:41, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
The last design released was a few centimeters bigger than 3 DVD cases, which would have been annoying. Since they said the final version would be smaller, it's probably exactly the size of 3 DVD cases now. However, the width was the measurement that was exactly right, so maybe now it's 2.75 DVD cases.
Its not thinner in all e3 pics. srry shouldve said that earlier.Qwerasdfzxcvvcxz 20:16, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

A Different Name Issue

So is the console called "Wii" and not "Nintendo Wii"? Is there proof, or is that speculation? From, HOL 12:39, 13 May 2006

I don't see Nintendo specifically addressing that issue anywhere, but they appear to always refer to it as simply "Wii" on nintendo.com madewokherd 16:58, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
We had edit wars all over this issue some time ago. The registered legal trademark is indeed "Wii", not "Nintendo Wii". (It's part of the marketing strategy, in fact) So... there's really nothing to debate. --Stratadrake 17:24, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
It's "Wii". Nintendo's official style guide explicitly said so. --Codemonkey 20:48, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
its actually Wii, from Nintendo--DivineShadow218 18:23, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm sure either is acceptable, as the "Nintendo" simply describes it. Officially, it's just the "Wii," but I imagine it's the same as with something like the Honda Civic. In that case, either "Civic" or "Honda Civic" can be used, and I'd imagine it's the same in this case --Danielkitchener1 18:39, 14 May 2006 (UTC)DanielKitchener1

I would keep it as it is. That last time this was debate about the two names the edit war was so large the title had to be put under protection for over a week to avoid multiple reversions. I don't think a change like this should be done unless there is evidence that the name was changed.


Someone just posted this up for a name change. This needs to stop, because we all know no one reads these pages before making the change, and it seems we have a general consensus here.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 17:38, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

SD Card Slot

There was a "Citation needed" mark on the SD slot. The SD slot has been confirmed on wii.nintendo.com —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.163.47.34 (talk • contribs) .

the citation needed is for how meny SD cards, it was 4 now one. Why?--DivineShadow218 18:25, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Don't remember that 4 sd cards were ever mentioned - do you mean gamecube cards or is it me? Also your reply is not showing on the page outside 'editing' not sure why..HappyVR 18:39, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
I thought it was 4... rechecked and saw it was 2, check on the page history before the 8th and you will see too--DivineShadow218 18:58, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Yes, vaguely remember 2, the info. now is 1? was 2 ever confirmed - maybe that was an assumption that was never checked?HappyVR 19:19, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Think I've found an answer - only 1 sd slot see talk:Wii#translated japanese page for wiiHappyVR 20:55, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
GameSpot says 2. [1] Havok (T/C) 06:55, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
Seems like nintendo has decided on 1 - the english Wii page says "A bay for an SD memory card will let players expand the internal flash memory."?HappyVR 16:45, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Wii does not read DVDs

Is it just me or does this article contradict itself? It claims that the Wii can accept DVDs, but later in the article it says that in E3 2005 Nintendo stated they will release an add-on that will allow the Wii to play DVDs. If the latter is true, then it should be made clear that the Wii cannot read DVDs nor DVD-RW nor etc, but that Nintendo is planning on releasing an add-on that will allow the Wii to read DVDs. Dionyseus 18:22, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Good point - one answer would be that the system reads dvd discs eg dvd binary data but does not have the software included to decode standard 'film' dvds - in fact I havent got any proof that the system will use the dvd fornat at all - and as for dvd 'film' playback - don't know if it will ever happen.HappyVR 18:32, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Most likely your take on it HappyVR, I remember some time last year (at the end) Nintendo saying that it would require an "addon", if that is in the form of a software CD, or hardware attachment I don't know. Havok (T/C) 18:40, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

According to the Nintendo website [2], the Wii can play single or double layered optical disks, but this does not necessarily mean that it can read DVDs, just something of similar technology, sort of like the Dreamcast disks were propietary (they allowed for higher storage than CDs, but less than DVD). Perhaps the article should say "single or double layered optical disks" instead of DVDs. Dionyseus 19:06, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
Good lord, did someone remove the "dongle" portion of the article? Licensing, my friends, licensing, that's what it all boils down to. In order to read standard film DVDs, manufacturers have to pay a fee. So... instead of having to eat the cost themselves, Microsoft and Nintendo have systems that CAN play DVDs, but require a "dongle" (a seperate, small chip that unlocks it) in order to ensure that the fee gets paid.) And yes, that is the actual hardware name of the thing. Up until recently, there was a cited article that gave information about the dongle on the Wii, but apparently someone removed it. Daniel Davis 19:20, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
Didn't the game cube use a different disc storage mechanism/format - constant linear velocity vs. constant angular velocity - can't remember which one. If the Wii is the same and uses it's own propietory storage method (even though it uses 12cm discs) then DVD's might not be readable at all (and the dongle could turn out to be an USB DVD ROM drive with nintendo branding of course) - either way I agree with User:Dionyseus in that we should consider meving the DVD and CD compatability references - anyone know more?HappyVR 11:35, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
The GameCube uses standard Mini-DVDs that are written in a different format than other MiniDVDs (similar to how the Playstation and PS2 use standard CD/DVD technology but use burners that create a unique method of formatting). Pirates have utilized this method in creating ways of playing illegal backup games with Mini-DVDs. The Wii uses standard DVD media and is also capable of utilizing GameCube's mini-dvd format as well. And "dongle" in technical terms never refers to a peripheral, FYI. It's always used in reference to a little extra thingy that is added to a system in order to enable functionality. Daniel Davis 11:42, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
I think nintendo referred to the dongle as a 'self contained attachment' - the dongle description must have come from a wikipedia editor or external site.HappyVR 11:59, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Daniel, if you were to place a mini-dvd in the Gamecube, the GC will not read it, the disc must be written in Gamecube format in order for the GC to read it, so in reality the Gamecube does not read DVDs. You see, the only difference between a CD and a DVD is that their written format is different. In order for a console to be able to read a DVD at all it must pay the licensing fees, and Nintendo apparently has chosen not to do that and apparently plans on releasing an add-on that will allow it to read DVDs. Check out [3] and [4], these sources mention Nintendo's statement that an add-on will be released that would allow it to play DVDs. So in conclusion, the Wii will use a new propietary format just like the Dreamcast and the Gamecube had their own format, and it can not read DVDs until the add-on is released. I'll fix the article. Dionyseus 12:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
"If you were to place a mini-dvd in the Gamecube, the GC will not read it, the disc must be written in Gamecube format in order for the GC to read it"- It's still a standard mini-DVD. Just because a PC can't read a Mac formatted floppy disk without special software doesn't make it any less of the same kind of disk, it's merely a different format. And there is a much bigger difference between a CD and a DVD than just their format, which makes your point on that end moot as well. Nintendo DOES pay the licensing fees for users that purchase the "dongle", but that doesn't make a Wii DVD any less of a DVD than a film DVD, merely a different format. It *can* read them, it is just *prevented from doing so* by the absense of the dongle. So, in conclusion, I think you had better do a little more research on the subject. Daniel Davis 12:28, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
What's the bigger difference between a CD and a DVD, other than its format? I thought they were merely optical discs, using different formats? Dionyseus 12:35, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
To answer that would span a good many paragraphs, which is altogether much more typing than I would like to perform today. May I suggest a compromise? Since we know that it uses a DVD format, but in its own proprietary way, why not have the section say "DVD-Based Wii Optical Disk"? That would cover both bases- allowing the user to know that its basis is in DVD technology but utilizes a prop format. Daniel Davis 12:41, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
How does the current version look? The only thing I changed was the infobox, I replaced 'DVD-Rom' with 'Wii Optical Disk.' Dionyseus 12:43, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

See archive8:Internal addon for movie playback for why (I) removed the dongle ref. - if I'd known it would cause so much discussion..

Also I think 'Wii Optical Disc' is good for now - it's pretty much what nintendo describes it as - although it's almost certainly a DVD in all but name if it doesn't conform to one of the standards laid down by the DVD forum (or similar body) then to be absolutely correct we shouldn't say DVD.HappyVR 12:51, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Since it contains a link to Wii Optical Disk (which no doubt after release will be filled with info about the Wii's media) it should be fine- anyone confused can just follow the link. Daniel Davis 12:52, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Cheap remote:P

This article states that the remote will be charge via bluetooth. When was that!? I don't recall any creator, editor, fans or anybody saying this console/controller supports bluetooth accept for ps3

>x<ino 20:03, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
Umm... The mention of bluetooth in the article even has a reference link to it. And you can find it in Nintendo press releases, on gaming sites, and in interviews. And this has been known since they unveiled their controller, at TGS '05.--Codemonkey 20:47, 13 May 2006 (UTC)


Nah, sorry son, I only heard the bluetooth with ps3. They said you have to connect it to the console or wire to recharge the battery, not by bluetooth

>x<ino 20:18, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
I don't see anything in the article that says anything about anything being charged via Bluetooth. In fact, I don't know of any device that can be charged with Bluetooth. But the Wii Remotes use it to communicate. Check the official web site.[5] Dancter 20:25, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism by anons

How often is this page getting vandalized by immature anons who want to make vulgar jokes about the console's name and wireless controller? Is it worth a request for semi-protection? --Stratadrake 21:25, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

It's not really a problem anymore. -- Steel359 21:31, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Wee

Seriously Col. Hauler, everyone contributing to this article has all stated that they do not want "or wee" at the beginning of this article. Why do you keep re-adding it? Havok (T/C) 07:41, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Name

Does anyone else have a view on where the name section should be in the article, what it should be like, or whether it should be there at all or have a separate page or any other view ?HappyVR 09:31, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Another comment on the name, how many of you "Nnintendo Boy's" prefer this name? I can see it both ways. It's "Wii" which honestly is wierd and will really get annoying due to confusions of Wii/We. On the other hand it's new and fresh and probably the oddest name for a console. Being a 360 fanboy, I honestly cannot buy this console if it's called "Wii". If it was called "Revolution", however I would buy it. Hieros 18:13, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

User:Col. Hauler

User:Col. Hauler has issues with the name section. For some reason he/she/it keeps reverting my talk page as well and amusingly has called me a sockpuppet, I left a message on User:Col. Hauler's talk page but that was deleted with no response. If this user will not respond the could something be done about it?HappyVR 10:44, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

The changes to this article constitute an edit conflict; if either of you go over the 3RR you could be blocked for it. The personal attacks, "vandalism" claims and sockpuppet accusations extend the conflict beyond the article- Col. Hauler has been politely requested to stop at this time; hopefully he will calm down slightly and realize that blowing up is not the best way to resolve this. Daniel Davis 10:49, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
This seems relevant to the name issue - http://www.usemod.com/cgi-bin/mb.pl?ConflictParadox

HappyVR 10:52, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Have a look at the following vandalism edit by Col. Hauler... -Numbnumb 20:59, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Wii Orchestra

It says Wii Orcestra is a launch title on the game page but not on this page. Which page is correct?? Adam Y. 13:29, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

It hasn't been confirmed as a launch game yet. I've heard rumors that it may be bundled with the Wii, but Nintedo hasn't given a release date for thie game yet. Spyke 23:10, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

From all indications, it may have simply been a tech demo for E3. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 01:27, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Is it just me, or does Wii Orchestra sound like something you'd hear in a Multipurpose Room? ;) RadioKirk talk to me 01:43, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I've removed it from the list. There's nothing that indicates it was anything beyond a demo. The section is for confirmed launch titles only. and Wii Music is neither a confirmed game nor a launch product. Ladlergo 13:54, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Wii Connect 24

I'm not really good at editing wiki files, so I will post this news here:
A guy in Opera wii forum asked in a topic [6]:
1. Will it support flash and/or java?
2. Is it built in to Wii system?
3. What kind of features can we expect?
4. Will it use Opera 9's rendering or Opera 8's?
5. Will it have tabs? (aka pages or windows)?
and a guy named Brian [7] from opera responded:
1. No comment yet.
2. It will not be sold as a game cartridge like it will be for the Nintendo DS.
3. Wait and see The system was code-named "revolution" for a reason.
4. Opera for Devices is currently based on Opera 8.5x, but we cannot say what the final delivery to Nintendo will be based on.
5. No comment yet.
If someone wants to edit the main file with those informations...


I've been reading a lot of articles, and I'm starting to wonder if WC24 is the download service, and not the online service. It seems to me that the Nintendo Wi-Fi Connection will still be used for online gameplay, but the WC24 will be used for downloading content while the system is on or off. Can somebody confirm this? Third Strike 12:45, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

You could well be right - 'Nintendo Wi-Fi Connection' originates with the ds - my explanation would be that 'WiConnect24' covers all Wii 'internet' stuff (including the 'Virtual Console') but that it may/might use the 'Nintendo Wi-Fi Connection'. ie 'WiConnect24' would be one service (the other being the ds service) of the 'Nintendo Wi-Fi Connection' or I might be wrong. I suppose that users will be able to internet connect without using WiFi - anyway I tend to agree. Perhaps should be 'WC24 includes the download service and the online service'?HappyVR 17:04, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
If you watch a video of the press conference, Satoru Iwata talks about WiiConnect24. A quick summary is that the console is "always on": when it appears to be off, it's in a standby mode of sorts, but some functions are still active. WiFi will be active in this standby mode, and Mr. Iwata said that a game developer could push a new weapon or level to you while you sleep (so that equates to automatic updates without the console being on). In Animal Crossing, that even with the console sleeping that a friend could visit your village and leave you a gift.
I downloaded a video of the presentation, and the section I just referred to starts at 52:06. If I can't find a transcription I'll type up that section. Barrakketh 02:47, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
Edit: Here is my transcript. There were two words I couldn't understand, so someone who could cut through Mr. Iwata's accent would be appreciated :)
And, let me describe one more hardware feature:
No game console, no matter how powerful, serves any purpose when it is turned off. So, we designed a machine to provide owners a variety of services even when it seems like it is turned off. Wii will become the system that never sleeps.
Using a design called "WiiConnect24", the console automatically enters standby mode, without the fan running, but still operating key functions. And using about the same power of a minature light bulb.
Importantly, this means that Wii console can be constantly connected to the internet. For you hardcore gamers, this means developers can push a new weapon, or vehicle, or level to you, even while you sleep.
For beginning gamers, just starting with something like Animal Crossing: anytime the console is in standby, they may return to find that a friend has visited their village and left a message or a gift.
And other developers will configure their games so that players will receieve game elements or information that the designer wishes. And programmers won't need to write a single line of code. Networking software is included in the hardware. And developers can decide to add these functions at any time.
What we are aiming for is a system that is new, everyday.
Barrakketh 03:03, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Compromise

I have made an edit in an attempt to find a compromise to this situation. Let me make clear that I, for one, do not see any vandalism in this content dispute; however, several editors have violated WP:3RR. I also find accusations of sockpuppetry to be unlikely after reviewing the users' contributions. I would ask all of the editors involved in the dispute to read (or reread) WP:CIVIL and WP:POINT, and let's get back to writing an encyclopedia. :) RadioKirk talk to me 16:52, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

I should also note that, after having read the article before my attempted compromise, under no circumstances should the "Name" section be at the top. It is not nearly the paramount issue or data to be presented, and moving it topside suggests POV-pushing. Its current location seems correct. RadioKirk talk to me 16:55, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for doing something about this. I will look at the edits you have made and give feedback on it. Havok (T/C) 17:00, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
I agree about keeping 'name' in 'miscellaneous' in terms of its relative importance. However I'm not too keen on having 'what people think of the name' in the article - lots of reasons.. It's more 'bloggy' and not very 'encyclopaedeic', also what internet sites report is not necessarily a true reflection of what people think - I saw a poll of what people thought of the name and the results were very approximately 30% don't like, 20% like, 40% not bothered, 10% don't care. (I could try to find a url for this if it's relavent but I can't even guarantee the accuracy of it), also I'm not questioning the authority of 'Forbes' but the article seems very much of the type to fill a little space on a page - ie not exactly cutting edge journalism, also I think the issue is not important enough for inclusion on the page - after all (to quote inexactly - 'wikipedia is not a repository of everything ever written on a subject')
In general I am thinking do news items claiming 'the name has not be well received' really have any basis in truth - I honestly believe they are just written for something to say on a minor news item. Additionally does the Xbox 360 have any reference to it having a 'dumb' name or the PS3 article contain references to the name utilising the 'spiderman font' - there were edits like this but they are no longer in those articles. Sorry for taking so long - but I think I have now included all my points for keeping the name section as short as possible and not including references to 'consumer reactions'.Thanks.HappyVR 17:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
I hear what you are syaing, but I would have to dissagree, the reason I started removing the "or wee." part of the article is that it has no place there. Then we could as one editor said, insert "or weee or wiiii, or weeeee" etc. It's the same sound. I also rewrote the section about the name which was removed and edited to death aswell. The thing is, the fact that people think of it as "wee" is encyclopedic, seeing as it is a branding name which Nintendo most likely have and will spend billions on. And as such it has some merrit to be in the article. But as Kirk said, it has no place at the top, and should not have several paragraphs written about it. One consistent sentence is enough, just to recognize that the name is a strange one for a company to chose. Havok (T/C) 17:31, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
I understand your concerns, and I, too, disagree, if I may. Primarily, if the choice of the name is newsworthy, then the reaction thereto is equally so—in other words, the entire "Name" section would have to be purged. Of nearly equal importance, Forbes is either the preeminent business magazine on the planet, or awfully close; we're not linking to a blog, but to a business analysis by a recognized expert (the magazine)—filler or otherwise. Finally, this entire section may someday be deemed irrelevant to Wikipedia; since, however, this is a living document on a fluid subject, I (for one) find the information important. RadioKirk talk to me 17:44, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Yes - ok - your second to last sentence sums it up for me - that is that it (the section or parts of it) may/might not stand the test of time - my philosophy would be (and is in editing) - if so remove it now. I get your point though.HappyVR 17:59, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
I agree with "if it won't stand the test of time, remove it now" in principle, but there always exceptions; the largest one being, "we don't yet know for sure." I personally find this to be one of those cases. :) RadioKirk talk to me 18:12, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
The new "compromise" copy reads well to me. My objection was opening the article (which has substantial actual facts) with what's turning out to be a short-lived internet meme. Sphivo 17:47, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

To follow up: The closest Featured article approximations to this issue include Apple Macintosh, where Advertising is well into the article; and Commodore 64, in which Winning the market war places relatively high in a chronological narrative. In any event, as one reads the best of the best at Wikipedia, the lead text should always answer the reader's question, "(what/who) is this?" and, since this is an article about the product, not about its name (which would likely be merged here, anyway, unless somehow a controversy ballooned), "Name" is unquestionably not that text. RadioKirk talk to me 18:08, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Please note that I have invited User:Col. Hauler to take part in this discussion, as all parties should be involved. Please read the invitation here. RadioKirk talk to me 18:23, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Optional wired internet

Not sure about:Optional USB 2.0 Ethernet LAN adaptor - as I remember this has been in discussion before - I thought this optional extra was an USB WiFi adapter that allows the Wii to connect to the internet (or other) via - say - a PC with wired internet connection - the adapter plugs into the PC - making it a 'WiFi node or hub'. Is this right or have I got mixed up/information changed at E3 2006?HappyVR 19:58, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

We used to have : http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wii&oldid=50946897 an USB connected WiFi 'dongle' (apologies for use to the word to those who are stickly about it) that converted a PC (or Mac maybe) into a WiFi node - is this the LAN nintendo's site mentions - a wireless LAN - I can't find any reference to it being wired ethernet.HappyVR 20:10, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Wi-Fi connectivity is built-in. The peripheral you're talking about is the Nintendo Wi-Fi USB Connector. The USB LAN adaptor is different. The Japanese Wii page mentions Ethernet. Dancter 20:07, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Oh! (Yes) ok. Sorry.HappyVR 20:11, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
No, it's good to ask. If you didn't, someone else would've. Plus it's important to know if some of the article text isn't clear, especially to someone who may have heard some other thing elsewhere. Wikipedia is to inform, is it not? Dancter 20:17, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Finally found it - http://world.altavista.com/babelfish/trurl_pagecontent?lp=ja_en&trurl=http%3a%2f%2fwww.nintendo.co.jp%2fn10%2fe3_2006%2fwii%2findex.html for a translation - your right. Also confirms only 1 sd slot - talk:wii#sd card slot

Virtual Console

There is a picture displaying the Virtual Console. It wasn't even shown in the damn conference. Now I know it is fan made!

>x<ino 20:17, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
The virtual console was actually playable at E3, with its own demo station showing off Super Mario Bros, Super Mario World, Super Mario 64, Sonic the Hedgehog and Bonk's Adventure. See also http://www.gamespot.com/news/6150678.html --Smoke 20:23, 14 May 2006 (UTC)


Nevermind, I saw the cheapness already, still no price about how much the download with cost!

>x<ino 16:40, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

translated japanese page for wii

http://world.altavista.com/babelfish/trurl_pagecontent?lp=ja_en&trurl=http%3a%2f%2fwww.nintendo.co.jp%2fn10%2fe3_2006%2fwii%2findex.html

Confirms many things that have been discussed in talk previously: Including dual layer optical disc

Only 1 sd slot

and for the gpu '90 nm DRAM mixed loading CMOS process'?HappyVR 20:55, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Appears to mention the same info as http://wii.nintendo.com/hardware.html --Smoke 22:01, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Yes - the gpu info. is unique though.HappyVR 22:03, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

when I tried a search of wii or nintendo wii, I got zero resultsTehw1k1 05:05, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

That was just a hiccup in Wikipedia's programming. Jedi6-(need help?) 05:24, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Key first-party titles

Can you please explain why you think we need this section? If people want to know what games Nintendo makes, there's Nintendo's notable software and franchises. In addition, if people want to see what games are being made for the Wii, there's the really big list of Wii games. Please remember that Wikipedia is not a collection of lists. Ladlergo 16:56, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

The Key first-party titles is a small list of notable games just for the Wii, even though there is a huge list, that is just it, its a huge list. The Key first party titles section is notable and popular games just for the Wii--DivineShadow218 20:04, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Except that if it's a list of notable titles, all of the second- and third-party titles are missing. If it's a list of popular titles, how are we supposed to know what should be listed until the sales figures are in? I suggest that we remove the section for now and add a "best-selling" section once the system has been released, when we know what the key titles actually are. Ladlergo 20:21, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
I say that if you can account for notability than its worth including. That will be very difficult, though there are a couple possible ways: If it is part of a previously well-recieved franchise or the followup to a previously well recieved game (such as anything Mario or Zelda related would probably be, among others), or if it can be established that gamer anticipation is far above the normal reaction (such as articles from high-traffic news sites or neutral game sites citing explicitly such). One more possibility is that if Nintendo itself has put a lot of extra effort into marketing a specific game or has specifically referred to a game as key that it should probably be considered as such. I strongly doubt that any of these things will be supportable but if it can be done, best of luck.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 20:26, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
How about a slightly extended version of the paragraph we already have?
The Nintendo Wii software library will contain such staple Nintendo series as Super Mario, The Legend of Zelda, and Metroid. Other Nintendo franchises supported on the Wii include Pikmin and WarioWare.
No list, but the franchises are mentioned for people who want to know (can Duck Hunt be considered a franchise?). Opinions, please Ladlergo 18:00, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
If we're going to start adding second and/or third-party games to the list, can we please talk about the "key titles" section? As mentioned above, I think it leads to an arbitrary list. Ladlergo 20:11, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Please stop inserting non-noteable references

Just because it's got a link to Forbes doesn't automatically make it noteable. If you actually visited the link, you would notice that it merely talks about message board postings. Message boards are, by their very composition, filled with a large segment of the younger population, Nintendo's boards especially. Thus, it would stand to reason that a name like Wii would cause a group of the more immature population to react in this way. It's not a noteable thing, anymore than it would be noteable to mention a post on GameFAQs, or on another message board. -- Daniel Davis 18:11, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

You have yet to prove non-notability. If you would like I can add other references from widely published media which showcase its criticism.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 18:15, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
You have yet to PROVE noteability- it's a "news" story talking about a group of children calling a game system pee. That's about the most un-noteable thing one could imagine on wiki, and it's unencylopedic too. What's next, a dissertation on the poetry of said rhyming word? -- Daniel Davis 18:17, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
By the way, Daniel Davis is correct about this: It is incumbent on the editor including the data to demonstrate its notability and reliability. See WP:V and WP:RS. RadioKirk talk to me 18:54, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
This is just a value judgement. We don't need to make value judgements. We're just reporting what Forbes said. Where's the problem? Friday (talk) 18:18, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Because it's not neccesary or useful to post about everything that children on message boards say- you know, if you really want it in there that badly, why don't you do that? I mean, put in some references to developers, or reviewers or whatnot and their reaction to the name. That might change th tone of the paragraph away from the "some kids called it pee" appearance. -- Daniel Davis 18:21, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
I refer you to this post on this page. RadioKirk talk to me 18:21, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
It doesn't matter that "Forbes is big"- the extent of their reporting was on the content of children on a message board, as was stated earlier. You're elevating Forbes content merely based upon name, and not upon noteability of the articie within. As I suggested earlier, why not replace the message board stuff with actual noteable quotes? Oni Ookami says he has other published sources, so why not use them? -- Daniel Davis 18:23, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Forbes needs no elevation. This article was a business analysis by one of the world's most respected publications that included information from Nintendo's own message boards, not some random board. I have no issue with Oni Ookami adding information, but I for one find the current information relevant—for the moment. As you'll see in my comments above, this may eventually disappear, but its purpose in a living document is clear to me. RadioKirk talk to me 18:27, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Oh come on - you can't seriously call the article 'a business analysis'.HappyVR 19:24, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
"One way or another, Nintendo will hope that gamers and techies alike will eschew the tongue-in-cheek rhetoric and open their wallets for the next-generation device. Profits will depend on it, and that's no wee matter." Yes, I do. :) RadioKirk talk to me 19:32, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Sorry I'm starting to find this funny - so 'Nintendo are hoping people will buy their product' is business analysis - it's not a bad article (at all) - almost worth reading.HappyVR 19:45, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Well, with all respect, this is a value judgment. Light and fluffy (as it's called in newsrooms) though it may be, it's still a business analysis. RadioKirk talk to me 20:32, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

The public reaction to the name "Wii" is very clearly relevant to the article. So relevant, in fact, that Forbes magazine mentioned it. So, we report what they said here. We're not using message board postings directly as a source- we're using Forbes magazine. Sure, we can find other sources talking about reaction to the name also, but that doesn't make Forbes a bad source. Please, stop repeatedly removing sourced info. Friday (talk) 18:24, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Again, It doesn't matter that "Forbes is big"- the extent of their reporting was on the content of children on a message board, as was stated earlier. You ARE using message board postings as a source- just because you're for some reason hiding behind the fact that a minor Forbes article was the one who first noted it doesn't make it any better of a source. -- Daniel Davis 18:25, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
To explain this another way- if you don't like what Forbes is saying, take it up with Forbes. Here, we use reliable sources- and Forbes is certainly a reliable source. We don't make value judgements on what our sources are saying- we report the facts, objectively. Friday (talk) 18:27, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm starting to think that this other user, this Joe Muz may be a sockpuppet of yours... its edits have a noticeable trend towards reinforcing your arguements out of nowhere, starting today. I cannot myself add the other publications at this time due to the 3RR rule, since adding them would constitute another reversion on my part. If the section were put back in however I could add to it in effect not breaking it.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 18:28, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Don't make accusations. I'm willing to keep it a certain way until we work out this argument, and I don't know who Joe is- most likely related to the anon who keeps vandalizing this page. -- Daniel Davis 18:30, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I think the quote should be put back in while it's being discussed. Removal of sourced information typically requires good consensus, which we certainly do not have here. Friday (talk) 18:32, 16 May 2006 (UTC) I see this is already done, thank you. Friday (talk) 18:33, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I think the extent of my concerns towards this article lean towards the fact that the assistant editor who wrote the Forbes article relied entirely on message boards, instead of using the space to mention a few more reputable sources. If you or Ookami could add in some links to a few more reliable media or public statistics or whatnot, I think it might very well fix this debate. -- Daniel Davis 18:36, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

The point is that both Forbes, the Grauniad and even the [BBC] have all covered this story. It doesn't matter that the news may be coming from small forums; the big news networks all think this is notable enough news to mention. There are no other sources because the forums are the news! Smurrayinchester 18:38, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Exactly. ANYone who's talking about public reaction to the name is likely to use public sources- message boards, man-on-the-street interviews, etc. We don't use these things as sources ourselves, but if Forbes uses them, so be it. We are not in the business of second-guessing our sources. Friday (talk) 18:40, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Objecting to "what Forbes said"? I'm not sure where you got THAT from, I just don't believe that message boards are a proper news source, no matter who uses them. I've seen the kinds of things said on forums- the anonymity gives people an arena for crude behavior they otherwise might not utilize. The best representation is a source that can provide a concrete foundation for its arguments, and forums are at best a soft clay foundation, prone to shifts whenever the mood hits. -- Daniel Davis 18:44, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
...as is the man-on-the-street-interview-to-get-reaction format used by newspapers and television and radio stations the world over. Your objection still strikes as a value judgment of the data presented, and that's not what Wikipedia is here to do. RadioKirk talk to me 18:46, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
A message board is going to get a less representative reaction than a "man-on-the-street" piece (although neither are as good as randomly picking people out of a national phonebook). People with little or no reaction are less likely to comment than those with strong feelings on the subject. Ladlergo 18:52, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Well, as noted above, that landscape is changing. :) RadioKirk talk to me 18:55, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I know that when the name was first revealed, Google News picked up quite a few articles published by gaming sites, and some of those had comments by various game developers. Someone can try hitting GN with "Wii name" or any other word combination that might pull up those articles. Ladlergo 18:49, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I found this on the PS3 talk page : "Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of items of information. That something is 100% true does not mean it is suitable for inclusion in an encyclopedia." In addition - various new agencys 'have' to report notable news items - such as the naming of a new computer console - that doesn't make what they say/have written on the subject of any value - in this case it seems clear to me at least that this reference adds nothing to the article. Also I would assume that readers can think for themselves - to supply them with a list of possible responses to the name is insulting to them as well to us. Also where is the prood/information that shows what they have printed represents in any way a significant or majority response to the naming? Frankly saying 'forbes is a major site' shows lack of judgement - similar to saying 'Nixon is (was) the president of the united states..' or 'my big brother says' etc. This link can't be seen as more than a minor response to a minor news story - it's just not significant enough to merit inclusion. (I understand this was added in response to a edit conflict previously as a 'compromise' but I think we can do better). I would however be interested to see a more measured response to the name as a link - perhaps a poll of some sort?HappyVR 19:24, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm quite familiar with WP:NOT, and I (for one) don't find this to apply. Meantime, the addition by User:Dannybu2001 makes the passage even stronger. RadioKirk talk to me 19:46, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Yes the new sub-section 'reaction' seems to make it a lot better - a lot more balanced - thanks for listening patiently (I assume) to us/me and improving it. ThanksHappyVR 19:49, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Preferred 'potty' over 'toilet' though - could this be changed back.HappyVR 19:53, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Used the direct quote from Forbes instead (mostly because the Wiki article is entitled "toilet humour"). Good job by everyone, I think, keeping with the spirit of Wikipedia and working together toward a solution. :) RadioKirk talk to me 19:58, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
That is probably for the best. It is unfortunate when things degrade to this point. I've watched it happen many times in the past, and this time I decided it might be worthwhile to step in and try to prevent it, but to no avail. In any case, an interesting thought crossed my mind. I considered adding references to several of the more notable webcomics that had made references to the wii reaction since they are high-traffic and generally gauge a large portion of the gamer demographic's responses to these kinds of things. I figured it wasn't going to be encylopedic enough no matter how it was approached so I didn't. I just wanted to make sure that the general feeling is simmilar to mine before I drop it entirely.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 20:17, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Agreed. :) RadioKirk talk to me 20:33, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Widescreen games?

So if the Wii will not support HD, at least all the games will be widescreen? 201.129.179.159 21:43, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

If this is not directly related to article content and if its more of a question about the console this probably isn't the place for it. But to answer your question I would surmise so. Hell, there were N64 games that supported widescreen. But don't forget regardless of hardware support a game is not going to support either widescreen or HD unless the developers choose to well... develop it that way.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 22:22, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess is in widescreen on the appropriate TVs. I believe that several other games are as well. Ladlergo 13:05, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Why Wii?

I'm just wondering why Nintendo named the system "Wii". Did someone need to take a leak at the time? Does it have Wi-Fi capibilities? I think that "Revolution" had a sort of ring to it that had a certain spark of hope in its name. Not Wii... and talk about a poor excuse for names... no offense to Nintendo, but making a pun of "we" wasn't their best idea. Words that actually exist and make sense to the thing they're describing are good names. The Revolution is a "revolution" in gameplay with their "revolutionary" controller and catolouge of old games. "Wii" can't really describe anything about the console unless they're talking about the thing you have to do every couple of hours in the bathroom. (Oh yeah, and if Nintendo named the controlers "ners" then you'd have a wii-ner! :P) --CherryT 00:41, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

They had a reason, something to do with a meaning or abbreviation of sorts. But the Revolution was a better name though. 24.188.203.181 01:18, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Horray! Another question that is barely article related. Wikipedia's articles do not account for speculation so the talk pages really have no need to either. All the information is available in nintendo press releases. Some of which has been quoted here already.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 02:17, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

I question the validity of this section. Is there anything in the manual of style about this? As far as I can tell this seems way to fancrufty and probably doesn't really need to there. I have yet to see an article that needs such a gallery. And no such console article that I have seen so far has one. --Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 03:51, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

This is being discussed everyday. Some people delete the gallery because it is an infraction to the Fair use policy (images should be used to showcase a certain point of the article and not only as decoration). However, others reinsert them as they provide a quick overview of the console capabilities (so that with a simple look you can determine a NES console has better graphics than an Atari 2600). My own opinion is that a small gallery may be accepted. When more than 8 images are being used (especially when the object hasn't yet been released), I tend to agree with the people who think it is just decorative. See PlayStation, Xbox, Xbox 360 and SNES in example. Note that PlayStation Portable has a very small screenshot gallery.
In those edits, it is stated that the images are under fair use in the game article but not in the console. -- ReyBrujo 04:21, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
I am concerned that fair use or not (and I do believe this is stretching fair use a bit far), its also somewhat of a vanity play that is not really needed. Perhaps since this issue is coming up on all consoles it needs a batch discussion/survey. If anyone feels its would be appropriate I will create a project page, probably through the Videogame wikiproject, and invite users from all console pages to partake in the discussion. Hopefully by handling this with appropriate consideration it will be dealt with once and forall. With a consensus community outcome it would be easy to establish a standard of style for the future. Unless anyone objects I will get around to this best case today(5-17 UTC), worse case friday(5-19 UTC). Here's one for the wiki process. --Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 07:59, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
The article is to describe the Wii - both the inards, what it does and also what it looks like - in terms of what the thing looks like the gallery is indispensible - I can't imagine trying to describe in words any of the components of the system - with pictures people will be able to recognise a Wii when they see one - so in the absence of detailed technical drawings I would suggest the gallery needs to stay - "a picture tells a thousand words" HappyVR 17:10, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
In any case a style precident needs to be set. I am going to get something moving on Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer and video games. I will post on every Major Console talk page requesting people to come debate this issue at a central article since this is by far not the only page to have this problem. Per ReyBrujo's provided links, this is an issue that is not going to be settled until all related articles are considered.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 03:06, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
Until a need AND a fair use qualification is established in at least one article, or a heavy enough debate arises, I am keeping a version of the would-be project page on standby in my userspace. User:Oni Ookami Alfador\Console gallery page please do not make edits to this page, I will move it to the project space if the time comes to use it. In the meantime I am removing the gallery here as no other articles have seen a fuss from there removal and I am inclined to agree with ReyBrujo's views on the issue of vanity. As I see the matter, it is also far from the established fair use policies. Those would need to be tackled before using it here is even to be considered. If this is questioned I will provide the relevant text from image use tags and so on.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 03:36, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Requested move to Nintendo Wii

Porsche997SBS filed a request on requested moves to have this moved to Nintendo Wii:

I'm just completing the request :). Please comment below :). It is as it always was T | @ | C 07:38, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Survey

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
  • Oppose - Thus far, Nintendo has not attached their company name to the console's moniker and not a single Nintendo employee has referred to it as the "Nintendo Wii". buckeyes1186 18:36, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose I personally was confused by the lack of "Nintendo" at first as they really didn't make it clear that they were using a new naming convention... they have since been very specific in interviews and at E3 2006 that there is no such title as "Nintendo Wii", there's just "Wii" (just as there is no "Microsoft Xbox 360" or "Sony Playstation 3".)Dannybu2001 21:18, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose Nintendo has stated that the offical name of the console is "just Wii" a change for Nintendo but not that big of a change for conusmers, most people call a Nintendo Game Cube, just Game Cube for example. (Hypernick1980 21:24, 17 May 2006 (UTC))

Discussion

Add any additional comments
  • I have chosen not to vote yet for the following reason. User verbally withdrew this request in a talk page discussion with me [8]& User talk:Porsche997SBS#Criticism. Unless I am mistaken misinterpreting he said he would take my advice and withdraw it from the request. Perhaps the user has simply not gotten around to it yet. Also, it has been discussed several sections up on the 14th I believe. If you feel a vote it still necessary I will vote but I don't thinkl it will be necessary.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 07:52, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
I want to point out that the user completed the survey petition after having answered. I am thinking he may have changed his mind since he posted the reply in your page. -- ReyBrujo 18:58, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
Okay, thanks. I voted.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 03:02, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Same slot accepts BOTH Wii discs and GCN dics??? I don't think so.

Look closely at the front of the Wii console. There's a small flap below the illuminated blue slot. I'd wager a very large sum of money that Gamecube discs are inserted in a slot behind THAT flap rather than the DVD sized, illuminated slot. If anyone has proof that the same slot accepts both formats, please link it. If not, the section needs edited. --buckeyes1186 07:45, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

  • You'd lose that bet. http://wii.nintendo.com/hardware.html You can clearly see in the photo to the right of the "The Look" section that GameCube disks are 1.5x bigger than the slot. The slot is already known to contain an SD card reader, anyways. Also, on the same page, it is stated by Nintendo that, "A single self-loading media bay will play single- or double-layered 12-centimeter optical discs for Wii, as well as 8-centimeter Nintendo GameCube discs." Cosmos 11:47, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Good to know. Thanks for the link and the clarification! --buckeyes1186 18:24, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

games

I understand what first party titles are (is this common knowledge) but what are second and third party titles and what is the distinction?HappyVR 18:19, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

A first party is the console manufacturer themselves or a wholly owned subsidiary. A second party is generally partially owned by the console company and/or has a contract with them, and develops games exlusively for that company. A third party is seperate and can develop games for any console, even if they choose not to. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 19:46, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
As examples:
  • Intelligent Systems (Fire Emblem) is a division of Nintendo, even though they go under a different name. IS is a first-party developer.
  • Retro Studios (recent Metroid titles) contracts exclusively to, but is not owned by, Nintendo. RS is a second-party developer.
  • Capcom, though it has produced well-known titles for Nintendo's systems, is not bound exclusively for Nintendo and has developed for Sony and Microsoft as well. It is a third-party developer.
Hope that helps. Ladlergo 20:19, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
Good explanation. :) Just one thing, Retro is first party. They are 100% owned by Nintendo. If you want a good example of a (former) Nintendo second party, try Silicon Knights. They were GCN exclusive, due to contracts. But they weren't owned by Nintendo, so when the contracts ran out and Nintendo decided not to renew them, they changed over to Xbox 360 development. --Codemonkey 01:49, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
Hrm. Yup, that changed at some point. Silly me. Ladlergo 14:45, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Someone removed two sites from addition links section - however I have readded Wiispot - as it seems (at first sight) to be not that bad..HappyVR 18:26, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I didn't see your comment about Wiispot. But the whois info for wiispot.com says: "Creation Date: 27-apr-2006"... I think the links section should be limited to sites that have an existing traffic base. Wikipedia shouldn't be used to build one from scratch. /Ritarri 09:08, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
One thing to note is that the name Wii was only revealed on April 27th. Filtering out all the sites and leaving only ones that have been around for a year would be unfair. Not that I'm saying that any of these sites should be included, but if you are going to include some you may want to double think about why you are filtering others out.

I actually agree to this, I don't even think TheWiire should be there, a good site maybe, but if people want to find websites about Wii, they will search for them. Because, who decides if a site is noteable enough to be included, and not. A personal blog might be just as good or even better then a commercial website. Havok (T/C/c) 09:12, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Is it possible then that none of these sites - The Wiire, Wiispot, IGN and Gamespot should have links to them in the article?HappyVR 17:32, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
Gamespot is definitely a well known source, and The Wiire has been around for at least a year. I think we should keep sites that have already proven interesting, while getting rid of newly registered domains that are trying to get some eyeballs for their ads. I say definitely keep Gamespot, but I'm not going to kick and scream if we remove The Wiire... /Ritarri 08:11, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm removing Wiispot but leaving TheWiire in there. Reason: Wiispot is a completely new site which was added apparently just to drum up traffic to the site. TheWiire on the other hand has been around for a long time, is widely quoted, and also has original content/exclusive interviews. There's no original content at wiispot.com is there? Numbnumb 22:30, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

I also agree with the inclusion of TheWiire.com. It is a site that contain neutral and accurate material not already in the article, and has a level of detail which is inappropriate for the Wikipedia article. --Maxamegalon2000 05:41, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
Suggest removing ign and gamespot - they don't need 'adverts' on this page - if they wan't a link let them introduce some content relevant to the Wii.HappyVR 10:06, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
Ok, the current external links section looks nice. The official Wii page, the media briefing at nintendo.co.jp, and the video from E3. I'll support that. Numbnumb 10:44, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Excitetruck reference?

I remember seeing this as a launch title, but I can't find the reference. Would someone who has a copy of the press conference mind checking it for a launch announcement? Ladlergo 20:57, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Release date

Could we PLEASE stop adding any type of month, or speculation about the release date. Non has been given by Nintendo other then 2007. When Nintendo gives a date, we'll put it up. Havok (T/C/c) 00:05, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

"Before Thankgiving 2006". http://rev.vggen.com/news/news.php?id=295 Someone might want to add that. Shaun Eccles-Smith 00:33, 18 May 2006 (UTC).
Actually, during E3, Reggie Fils-Aime stated the Wii will be out Fourth Quarter 2006. Or, at least that's what the presentation screen said during the Press Conference for Nintendo...:) Just check Gamespot.com for the press conference, and you'll see. -- Darknut Slayer 02:00, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
I know that. Before Thanksgiving is just further narrowing that "Fourth Quarter" period down. Shaun Eccles-Smith 02:25, 18 May 2006 (UTC).
That link is a tertiary resource. According to gamespot... Iwata told a news paper.... Better to get the link from gamespot. Also whatever the anticipated release date is, it needs to be prefaced with a word like "anticipated" "announced" "working" because we all know how often these things change. In any case don't put any release date unless a proper rreftag can be placed to accompany it.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 03:00, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
Link to gamespot is in the article; http://www.gamespot.com/news/6142572.html . It's not a release date, it's just further info on when exactly in the 4th Quarter; Before Thanksgiving. Shaun Eccles-Smith 03:23, 18 May 2006 (UTC).
While it'll probably prove to be correct, I'm against the more specific description. That article is a few months old, and things tend to change, especially where Nintendo and release dates are concerned. The description of Q4 2006 is the most recent official word. I say stick with that. Dancter 03:40, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
Changed back to the basic Q4 description accordingly. --Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 05:11, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
Better then the "Oktober, November or December" that was there before. :P Havok (T/C/c) 07:52, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

IGN Horsepower article comments

In the hardware section, it says <!--- DO NOT PUT IGN Horsepower Article INFO HERE. See comment at top of section. ---> in a number of places (3 to be exact). However, these appear to be the only references to the IGN article in question.

Anyone still have a copy of the comments? I mean, other than that the information from the article is unconfirmed rumours/speculation/&c. g026r 07:28, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

The info was cited before, and turned out to be wrong. As a result a point needs to be made to keep it out. If you don't have the article anyways than what is the point in worrying about it?--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 07:46, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm a little tired. I think my point is getting lost among that. What I'm interested in is the comment that the 3 comments say is supposed to be in this article, but appears to have been removed at some point in the past. As is, the 3 comment blocks around the hardware stats now direct editors to read a comment that no longer exists. (That last bit being the point I'm trying to get at.) g026r 07:50, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
It may be worthy to remove them then, or at least investigate into that original comment. If you don't have the time or don't want to I'll see if I can get into it.--Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 19:30, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Do you mean this

'--- DO NOT PUT IGN Horsepower Article INFO HERE. See comment at top of section. ---'

and you want to read the IGN article?

This is from a version of the Revolution (Wii) page from what seems like a long time ago:

  • IGN.com claims to have received information from third-party game studios regarding the hardware specifications. Among their claims:
    • The Broadway CPU runs at 729MHz according to Nintendo specifications.
    • The Hollywood GPU runs at 243 MHz and is actually an integrated "system-on-a-chip" that includes "GPU, DSP, I/O bridge and 3MBs of texture memory."
    • The system RAM is divided into 24MB of "main" 1T-SRAM and 64MB of "external" 1T-SRAM; access speed for both banks is the same.
    • The console runs on an extension of the Gamecube Gekko CPU and Flipper GPU architectures.
      http://revolution.ign.com/articles/699/699118p1.html

If this isn't what you were asking please could you ask again differently because it's not altogether clear what it is you want.(This was contained in a section entitled 'Rumours and Specualtion')HappyVR 19:39, 18 May 2006 (UTC) The article 10.59 28th April 2006 contains this, as do many other similar versions of the article from that time - the 'Rumour and Speculation' section was removed in its entirity some time ago.HappyVR 19:44, 18 May 2006 (UTC) The IGN article was put in the rumour section because it wasn't officially confirmed - if true it suggests that Wii is not next generation truly but more 'this generation' with a next generation remote.HappyVR 19:44, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Launch window

I removed that section on the following premise:

There is already a list article for other Wii games. The article is already cluttered enough with game information and really doesn't need a couple more. Just Because a developed has a timetable for release doesn't mean it is any more notable than a game with an unnanounced release date. --Oni Ookami AlfadorTalk|@ 07:46, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

We could add this as its own article once the list with releases goes out to retailers. Havok (T/C/c) 08:18, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
Fair enough. I wasn't quite sure if it was a good idea myself. I'm fine with just leaving it out, for now. Unless Nintendo switches to a public 'launch window' strategy, like MS did with the 360 launch, I guess it's better to just list the games that are confirmed for launch day in that section. --Codemonkey 08:35, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
Indeed it is. Havok (T/C/c) 08:38, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Re controller / dvd etc

I reverted because the controller is unique (it does more than the PS3 controller), I would change 'same resolution' to 'same vertical resolution' if that is needed (we must also take into account widescreen modes which complicate the situation). As for monitor compatability - I agree - but so far we only have a suggestion that Wii will have a VGA output or similar - from a long time ago - which has not since been reconfirmed. Personally I have no problem with your addition 'jokes based on the obvious similarity of the name to the English word "Wee" , meaning urine or to urinate' except that it lengthens a section whose validity in the article at all has already been questioned. Finally as to ' has been greatly derided by gamers' doesn't take into account gamers who liked the name and hasn't much basis excepting a few comments on talk pages.HappyVR 20:07, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

I posted some comments on the user's talk page but I'll re-comment on some of them here. I wanted to point out that changing it to 'same vertical resolution' is redundant because that's precisely what 480p itself references whether 4:3 or 16:9 and we don't need to say the same thing twice. Plus, even though a monitor is capable of displaying HD doesn't mean the content will be HD. That's no different than computer games displayed in 640x480 on monitors capable of much higher (and most HDTVs are basically big computer monitors technology-wise.) I think mention that Wii can equal 'something else' may be in order but it must handled delicately so as not to in and of itself further the controversy, and I believe the current state works well (referencing the forbes article, etc.) And yes, for reasons that should be obivious, the Wii-mote and PS3 controller are significantly different.Dannybu2001 20:37, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Virtual Console

I rewrote this a bit to avoid the crystal ball effect but I have one question is that will only nintendo-produced games be available? It was ambigious before - I'm assuming since genesis games will be available maybe it is no, but I'm not sure. Yet another lame sig I came up with T | @ | C 00:59, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

No. At GDC 06 Mr. Iwata stated that games specifically designed for Sega Genesis and Hudson/NEC Turbo Grafx 16 were also available. -- ReyBrujo 03:03, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
Much of the info in there was redundant - based on speculation from 'a long time ago' I've cut to the basic info - if I've missed anything please add.HappyVR 06:58, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

E3 Discussion of reactions?

Something definatly can be added about E3 2006's reaction to the WII. From my understanding they had 3 hour lines instantly and it grew to 6 hour lines in subsequent days. Almost everyone who had hands on time were very impressed with the controller and even the minor demos that weren't going to be games. Just the extreme amounts of attention it got is noteworthy.

Not unless there's also a counterpoint put in. I've seen a lot of people trying to spin this (i.e. the Kotaku video) as Nintendo having THE dominant presence at E3, when there is a very strong case that can be made that the line is only there due to Nintendo's ineffecient booth design, the Wii only being in one location on the show floor, etc. I honestly don't think this piece of information can be put in with neutral tone, so I'd probably just leave it alone, and let the sales numbers do the talking and post those.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.130.21.164 (talk • contribs) 08:15, 20 May 2006 (UTC).
Understood. Good points too. Though I still think if it was spread out you'd see lines as well. It would be helpful if someone compiled all comments about the game and saw how many positive comments there were on a Wii (which was abundant) though since there's no such link I'll drop it.--Kinglink 22:38, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Wii/Archive_9&oldid=1087185433"