Talk:List of Virtual Console games for Wii (North America)/Archive 3

Nintendo Power Issue 213 (Sonic Rings Cover)
Has anyone read this current issue of NP, it clearly shows DKC and Super Mario World and Streets of Rage. Obviously the games are due Febuarary-March since it is in the issue and that its Nintendo. Link to the Past showed up in this magazine and was suprised released a week or so ago. Pages 38-40. Nintendo puts VC stuff in every issue, no repeats ever. Can someone agree with me here that Q1 should be placed under all these games. User:draggomga;ale 01:49, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete that paragraph and the warning, I don't want to revert all those edits just to getbrid of them (since you made the Q1 change in the same edit). TJ Spyke 08:25, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

N64 and Genesis
Are we SURE Mario Kart 64 and those Sega games are coming out January 29, 2007? johnny&#39;s pizza 00:05, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't know about the Sega titles, but the official press release from Nintendo states that Mario Kart 64 will be available next week. TJ Spyke 00:30, 24 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Sega's own site says 1/29, so that's about as reliable as we can get short of Nintendo themselves saying something. Just check the Sega URL at the bottom if you want to see Sega's VC page. They have admittedly delayed the games this week, but they were reliable and accurate in the past, plus you can't just not list them due to a potential of being delayed. Eusis 01:26, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

okay, thanks johnny&#39;s pizza 23:09, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

January 29th Update Additions?
Obviously Mario Kart 64 is coming January 29th, along with a few announced Genesis games (see above topic). However, I just received the latest Nintendo Power, and in their latest Wii Channels article, they infer the list of games are all the ones for December and January. And I quote the opening sentence: "December and January brought a storm of activity to the Wii: our gutters runneth over with new Virtual Console games, a web browser, and some interesting nongame content." Now, the games in the article are all already released or released this Monday, fitting the assumption of it being the December and January list, but here's something interesting: two of the games listed are Donkey Kong Country and Super Mario World. If they are to be released by the end of January, and releases take place on Mondays, that means it would have to be released January 29th. This may not be an official announcement, but it's worth adding with a '?' at the end or something, looking at the evidence... I'll let someone else decide since I can't even edit the page, haha.

Shadow31 04:04, 24 January 2007 (UTC)


 * It's speculation. These magazines are also printed a couple of weeks ahead of time. I wouldn't use this as concrete proof. TJ Spyke 04:19, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Given the nature of online content, it's entirely possible they changed their minds at the last minute, or (somehow) ran into unexpected problems. Just look at how LttP came out of nowhere and the Genesis games were delayed to next week when they've been slated for the 22nd for weeks in advance. Eusis 04:59, 24 January 2007 (UTC)


 * TJ Spike, I don't believe Nintendo Power really speculates, considering they get the inside information from Nintendo Power. However, Eusis, you made a good point, and I considered that when posting this, I just thought I'd throw that out there and let others decide. Since it was published a little over roughly week and a half ago, maybe two weeks, it could very well change (they didn't mention Mario Kart 64), so I do agree it shouldn't be assumed. But I do know Super Mario World was in the news on GameSpot for having a first quarter release, and I wouldn't expect Nintendo Power to have reviewed it 6 months ahead of time or anything, so wouldn't a 1st quarter release be a safe assumption? Like I said, though, I can't edit the page, so you guys get the last say. Like I said, just throwing it out there, don't mind me. :) Shadow31 01:38, 25 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Server updates for Contra III and Comix Zone, in addition to Gain Ground and Super Mario World previously. It could be a very big Monday. --Cheesemeister3k 02:04, 25 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Has anyone found Mario Kart 64 yet? I know Nintendo has personally announced it, but I have yet to find its title screenshot. Anyone else find it? -- PsychicKid1 03:03, 25 January 2007 (UTC)


 * No sign of MK64 yet, but here's Bonanza Bros. -Arcanelore 23:25, 25 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Mario Kart 64. -Arcanelore 18:25, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Is it possible that when these are found, instead of posting them in the discussion forum, the links can be added to the actual article as others did before? Have we decided on what to do regarding "release date" when these are found? I would think it's safe to say that if Nintendo has them on their servers that they should be released within a month, however can't 'unknown' be changed to 'coming soon' if we'd prefer not to give a month or a vague "Q1 release"? Ryuzx 21:01, 26 January 2007 (UTC)


 * In fairness, all of this last batch of screenshots have been for games that had already been announced or found through other means (ESRB, etc.) so posting the links to the article wasn't really necessary. -Arcanelore 21:36, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I just found Vigilante for the TG-16. It hasn't been listed by the ESRB yet, so maybe someone should add it to the upcoming games list? 121.208.68.212 08:21, 3 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I was also just looking back through the games that have already been released, and I can't seem to find Alien Crush or Moto Roader. Anyone know their codes? 121.208.68.212 03:31, 4 February 2007 (UTC)


 * PA7E and PBEE, respectively. -Arcanelore 03:38, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

I've found Zelda II: The Adventure of Link and Donkey Kong Country through Europe's shop channel. As all other codes have been constant, its likely that these will both appear on these numbers, although they haven't yet, on North America's Shop Channel.121.208.68.212 10:00, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Um, you do know that is because both of those have been released in Europe and that's why they are there? Donkey Kong Country was a VC launch game for Europe and Zelda II was added today. TJ Spyke 10:01, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Edit: They've both been released in Europe and Australia by the way. Sorry if I didn't make that clear.121.208.68.212 10:02, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

That was quick. I was just noting that they should appear in North America's shop channel soon as they've been announced, and noting they'll appear on those numbers. Zelda II was hiding quite trickily...121.208.68.212 10:03, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
 * That doesn't mean they will be up soon, DKC has been available in other regions for months. Zelda II hasn't been confirmed for North America yet, although DKC has been (i'm sure Z2 will go up eventually though). TJ Spyke 23:04, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Not big news, but here's Kirby's Adventure -Arcanelore 19:37, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
 * It had already been confirmed though (at least on the ESRB site). Somebody put "February 2007" as the release date, so I reverted it since this does not confirm a date. TJ Spyke 23:02, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Three more (two of which Nintendo has announced for today and the third was already found at ESRB): Excitebike, Kid Icarus, and Ice Climber. -Arcanelore 13:26, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
 * And today brings us The Legend of Kage and New Adventure Island. -Arcanelore 22:10, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Donkey Kong Country. Like I said... Watch that spot... 121.208.68.212 06:52, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Streets of Rage 121.208.68.212 11:20, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Sortable Table
There was discussion about how to sort the list&mdash;whether by release date or alphabetically. A sortable table would nicely resolve this, and fortunately, sortable tables do exist on Wikipedia! An example can be found at Wikipedia talk:Pokémon Collaborative Project. It might be necessary to convert dates into numerical form (January 24, 2007 would probably need to be 2007-01-24). Here's a quick and dirty example in my Sandbox. --Brandon Dilbeck 01:51, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I remember seeing one of those once, on a football-related article. It's a good idea. :) —Disavian (talk/contribs) 02:37, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * That is awesome. I say lets do it as long as you are able to get the dates to sort correctly, but it sounds like you may have already solved that problem. Zomic_13 02:43, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Very cool. I'm going to add this to the article now. --Cheesemeister3k 03:02, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Beautiful. Is there a WP or Meta page that gives you a how-to on creating sortable tables? —Disavian (talk/contribs) 07:19, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * There's this. -Arcanelore 13:41, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, it looks nice. I never really researched how to do dates; I'm glad there's someone who knows how to research.  --Brandon Dilbeck 14:45, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * That's great!! I'm planning to implement a sorting table on the VC (Europe) page. Mausy5043 17:33, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I like how the Europe page has a everything in one table and sortable by the system also. What about doing that for the US page? Mconnolly 01:27, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree - having a separate table for each system is clunky. Instead, make the system a sortable column in a single, unified table. Msingerman 13:00, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Update: I have requested an RfC. I would like to focus this discussion in one location. Please join the discussion here  Mausy5043 11:52, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Semi-Protection
Isn't there a template that puts a lock on the top-right of a protected/semiprotected page, instead of the (comparatively) huge semiprotection template? —Disavian (talk/contribs) 02:37, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Signs point to yes. -Arcanelore 10:14, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

new form confusing
it is hard to tell the games for what system and the relaease date form is odd isn't wikipedia all about a user -friendly interface?Marioman12 12:40, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually it should be possible to keep the old date format but still have it sort correctly. Hang on a bit... -Arcanelore 13:21, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * As to the complaints here and on the VC Europe page about the new format, how's this as a compromise? -Arcanelore 00:57, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Why not just sort the list by system? --Brandon Dilbeck 01:03, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I personally don't have any problems with the new format. But by default it's already sorted by system, and still there have been complaints (and more annoyingly, revert wars) about it being difficult to read. Perhaps that's just the way it's going to be, but I thought I'd suggest a compromise. -Arcanelore 01:20, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * You'd think that allowing the readers to sort the list themselves would have settled everything! --Brandon Dilbeck 01:33, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I have to agree, the new form is confusing. I used the form in Excel to tell me what games are on and coming to the Virtual Console.  Now with the new form, it's going to take longer to get the info.  Minker 01:53, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't know what this new organizer thing is supposed to prove. If you want my opinion, the original method was a LOT better and a lot less messy. This thing is too cluttered and hard to read. I say go back to the way it was. PsychicKid1 03:24, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * To be fair, we could easily ditch the controller support columns, as it's just redundant data already available on the Virtual Console page. --70.118.86.206 03:43, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * That can change, but until it matters, I think you're right. However, it could change with Comix Zone, so perhaps it should stay until the game is out and confirmation on whether it's playable with just the Wii Remote or requires the GC/CC controllers. Eusis 03:57, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * That compromise that Arcanelore made is pretty nice. What ever we decide, I really think we should keep the sortable tables as they provide greater functionality. Zomic_13 04:10, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Arcanlore, I prefer your compromise (although I had no problem with the page as it was when I created it). How about making that the actual Wikipedia article? Having the system as a category really doesn't work aesthetically and functionally I'm not sure why everyone would want the list clumped together like it is now. Ryuzx 20:43, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Here's a better idea, make 2 pages, one with the old table, and one with the new/current table (with a link to it on top of the page, with something like "Sortable List of Virtual Console titles (North America)"). Now everyone will be happy.  Minker 21:35, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * In the meantime I went with the compromise. Let's see how long it lasts. -Arcanelore 22:00, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Not long, apparently. —Disavian (talk/contribs) 02:00, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Always nice to see how people first discuss things here, before they revert a major change to the page. Mausy5043 06:46, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * He's responded to other threads on this talk page, just not this one. I'd think that between the major change and my urges to discuss the format on talk, he'd listen to consensus and learn to live with sortable tables. —Disavian (talk/contribs) 08:25, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Okay, his complaints are that:
 * yes and no shouldn't be linked
 * The controller columns shouldn't be colored
 * There shouldn't be a price column on the future releases section
 * I think that about covers it. I assume that once those things are fixed, he'll be happy. —Disavian (talk/contribs) 20:03, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Beat you to it. :) -Arcanelore 20:06, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm very curious what the outcome will be. On the VC (Europe) page we're having the same problem. I think it will be for the best if, in the end, all page layouts (Europe, America, Japan and Australia) are the same. I'm in favour of a single table, but I'm willing to listen to arguments that support multiple tables. So far I have not read a convinving one. In the single-table-layout the console is mentioned right after the game's title. When you find the game of your choice just move your eyes slightly to the right to find the console for which the game was released. Using four tables keeps the information, kinda disjointed. At this moment that might not be too big a problem. But, with on average two games added each week, imagine how easy a single sortable table will be in a few months time. Mausy5043 07:22, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I definitely prefer the way the European form looks, and I agree that there should perhaps be a uniform interface for all four pages. This is what the North American form looked like initially; however, it was changed a few days back.  I think it has the major advantage of allowing people to sort by either system or date, whereas the current one forces people to sort by system.  What do people think about switching over to the format used by the European page? Msingerman 14:08, 31 January 2007 (UTC)


 * No, this page looks a lot better (and is more organized). If anything, the European page should be changed to match this. TJ Spyke 21:06, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I beg to differ. Why do I think 4 separate tables are confusing? Personal views on taste aside, because, in about a year's time the first table will have grown so much that for the casual reader it may not be immediately obvious that there are three more tables further down the page. The heading (mentioning the platform) of the next table is also easily overlooked if one scrolls quickly down confusing the reader to think he is still watching the previous table and wondering why the sorting is all wrong. If you mention the platform in the table, I think, all the information the reader needs is right there and there will be no need to scroll up and down to find additional info. Mausy5043 12:06, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I wholeheartedly agree - it is already annoying, and in the next few months will become essentially unreadable. Can we please have a vote as to which form should be used? Msingerman 17:46, 1 February 2007 (UTC)


 * IMO, only complete morons would not realize there are other tables. The European page is a cluttered mess and an example of how not to do tables. I will clean it up in a few days. TJ Spyke 22:16, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I will try to ignore your abusive tone. If you have a proposal how to improve the tables, I would very much like to learn more. But, please do not change the pages until we have come to some consensus. I prefer, if you could build your proposed layout in a sandbox or something (maybe on your personal talk-page just like Arcanelore did at the start of this topic), where we can all have a look at it. Then we can discuss or vote or whatever about which direction to choose and implement that for all four pages. Mausy5043 11:18, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Update: I have requested an RfC. I would like to focus this discussion in one location. Please join the discussion here  Mausy5043 11:53, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Stop citing wii-virtual-console.com
This site doesn't name specific sources for its data; it merely claims to list only official information. If you can find an official source for said games, then by all means, list a citation for the publisher's website, or mention the existing reference (ESRB, etc.) in the edit summary. Future releases claiming wii-virtual-console.com as their source will be removed. --Cheesemeister3k 20:27, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Wrong Links
For 7 and 8, the links are just pictures. They don't say that Super Mario World and Contra III: The Alien Wars are coming out soon. johnny&#39;s pizza 21:38, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Indeed, the pictures themselves don't say the games are coming soon. The fact that they're hosted on the Wii Shop servers, however, does. -Arcanelore 22:15, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Hagane, Tin Star, Uniracers
These are indeed listed at the ESRB, but for the ambiguous "Nintendo" system. Further, all three games were originally released just in time to have received ESRB ratings the first time around, so it's not clear these listings are re-ratings for the VC. Should they not then be removed as we did with the N64 games with similar issues? -Arcanelore 22:30, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm thinking if those N64 games are being removed for just being under "Nintendo" but no other concrete proof, then it should be so for all games under that. So yeah, I'd say remove Hagane, Tin Star, and Uniracers, and any others without concrete proof. Eusis 23:26, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't think so, why are some N64 games listed that way as well? TJ Spyke 01:48, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Given the general state of disarray (deletions, duplicates, listed unreleased games, unlisted released games, etc.) of the ESRB listings, who knows? -Arcanelore 20:08, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I think these 3 games should be put back on the list. The only possiblility is that these 3 are coming soon for VC. I dont see it any other way. And yes I do agree with the dissary of the ESRB page. Machinehead09 22:39, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Near future?
Would anyone object to listing 'soon' or 'near future' for upcoming games whose images have been found on the VC site? Every time this has happened, the games have appeared very shortly afterward. ~ Aero Leviathan 22:20, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * No objection here. -Arcanelore 00:04, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Same here. In fact, I suggested something similar earlier in another section; if you do it I think one qualifier for a "soon" listing should be the link to the Wii Shop Channel picture.  This way it is easier to verify if it is actually listed or if someone is just changing the date for fun. Ryuzx 00:08, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Soon is the perfect thing for the games that have popped up on the shop channel hack, but not 100% confirmed date. Great job people!Lamename3000 08:52, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * "soon" is not encyclopedic, if a date is not known, then it is unknown.TJ Spyke 02:03, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The information that the images have appeared on Nintendo's site is significant, and I'm sure people would like to know about it. ~ Aero Leviathan 03:24, 28 January 2007 (UTC)


 * All it does is confirm the game will be on the VC. Anything else is speculation and not helpful. TJ Spyke 03:27, 28 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Can someone change the "soon" entries back to "unknown"? I can't do it without reverting a good edit as well. TJ Spyke 22:34, 28 January 2007 (UTC)


 * There seems to be a clear division between the normal 'pedians for this page on this issue. While I agree with TJ, it seems quite a few people are in favor on this issue. Perhaps independent evaluation is in order on this issue?  I'll be posting a request on this subject on the wiki main talk for additional feedback before following thru on this or not. Aspect Of Shadows 23:50, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I've had a debate on the issue with the people on #wikipedia-en. It seems that while the method is acceptable based on wiki rules, the use "soon" is not. Yet, just because "soon" is inappropiate doesn't discount the citation itself. I'd like to suggest we classify this under a new term but still use it as a confirmation of sorts. I'm not sure if there's a precidence or not on this. If anyone knows of one, please post it here. Otherwise, lets come up with a new classification to use to replace "soon". The dialogue on IRC can be seen. Aspect Of Shadows 00:50, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I've gone ahead and restored "Unknown" for now. How about we reference the screenshots as they're found, and add a note somewhere that such games usually come out within a week or so? -Arcanelore 02:13, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me. —Disavian (talk/contribs) 02:20, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I still stand firm that "Soon" is better than Unknown. It IS known, as they have it on their servers, which means that it is up very soon (as history has shown, within 1-2 weeks.) If that's not Soon enough, without an official confirmation, than I don't think we'll be able to solve this 'problem'. Lamename3000 02:40, 29 January 2007 (UTC)


 * It's not encyclopedic though. It doesn't help the article. Just make a ref to the Firefox trick and that games appearing on it usually get added soon. TJ Spyke 02:52, 29 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I did a quick look up on a MS Thesaurus for "Soon", but most of the words I found also wouldn't work for wiki. However, I was thinking perhaps something like "indeterminate" (that might be a bit too long) or "undefined" would not be as strong language as "soon"?  In the end, I do feel we need to add a note about the firefox trick so that we have a point of reference for citations of this manner.  Aspect Of Shadows 14:54, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

"Soon" and its variants are not encyclopedic. If all we know is that a game has a page on the shop channel, then that's what we should say and cite the page. Elwood00 T 15:46, 29 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm guessing "Pending" is a variant of "Soon"? I notice that now there are no references on the page to the Wii Shop server finds.  Considering that the Firefox trick is far more reliable than the indeterminate "Nintendo" listing on the ESRB, or the disappearing ESRB listings, I'm not quite sure what criteria you guys are using for the concern of being encyclopedic---considering that it has to be verifiable and all.  If we can trust disappearing ESRB information, I don't see how it doesn't contribute to the article by listing "Soon" with a link referencing the Wii Shop picture.  Perhaps a new article section should be added explaining the trick and what the reference means instead of not mentioning them at all or having the finds clog up the discussion page instead of showing up in the article itself? Ryuzx 17:04, 29 January 2007 (UTC)


 * A listing on ESRB is verifiable (and if the listing disappears, we can remove the reference to it), as is a listing on the Shop Channel. "Soon" is not verifiable, since we don't know for sure what "soon" means, and we don't have a source that will tell us.  Elwood00 T 17:08, 29 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I see. Still, I think that the information gained from hacking the Wii Shop should either be integrated somehow or stated outright that it isn't to be used.  Do you have any idea on which and, if necessary, how?  Ryuzx 17:26, 29 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Ignoring game images posted on the VC server would be downright silly, akin to sticking one's head in the sand. Dollars to donuts Super Mario World and Gain Ground will be released next week. --Cheesemeister3k 18:46, 29 January 2007 (UTC)


 * "Pending", "Indeterminate", "Undefined"? To me, that sounds more like a type of "The game might come out, we dunno if it will or not", even if it is in the release date column.  I vote that 'Release Date: Unknown' is kept, but possibly we could add a little asterisk to it and write "Title expected to be released in the near future" and the reason why that is.  Or something.  Just my two cents. :) Jaron99 20:25, 29 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Cheese, Gain Ground has been on the server for over a week and was supposed to come out last week. Unknown is more accurate than "soon" (or similar words). TJ Spyke 21:00, 29 January 2007 (UTC)


 * True, Gain Ground has now been delayed twice. Yet, the preparedness of it and SMW to be released seem obvious, held back only for the marketing reason of spacing games out. I'd be inclined to mark games posted on the VC server as being Certified, Approved, Gold, or merely Pending. (Add whatever notes to fully explain.) Any of these labels would signify that such games are closer to a state of being released without implying any specific release date. --70.118.86.206 00:11, 30 January 2007 (UTC)


 * It might all be a moot point. It looks like NOE, at least, may have wised up. Check out this image for an upcoming Mega Drive game. --Cheesemeister3k 00:45, 30 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I am highly amused :p —Disavian (talk/contribs) 02:17, 30 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Could someone delete those two useless paragraphs (and the warning) in the Future Releases section? Friday can't come soon enough for me (my computer will be working again and I can these edits myself). TJ Spyke 22:04, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Two Items
I've found two things that could adjust the Upcoming Virtual Console List, and I just sorta need clarification on them.

Number One) That the games listed as Nintendo do not have an original listing on their own console on the ESRB Website (This includes games such as Aero Fighters Assault and Beetle Adventure Racing). I believe that the ESRB just screwed up their listing somehow, and they should not be listed (just my little take on the argument earlier, which is now in the archive).

Number Two) There are no valid sources for some of the games on the List (including Super Mario Bros. Lost Levels, SMB3 and Super Mario RPG. The topic paragraph does say that games have been listed at Nintendo's Press Room site, but if there was an article about it, it has now been shuffled away, as it is out-of-date. Could someone find a source for those and post it? Trying to be helpful, these games are listed on the ESRB under "Wii":

NES

Chew Man Fu Mighty Bomb Jack Pro Wrestling Punch-Out Kid Icarus Kirby's Adventure Galaga

SNES

PilotWings Super Ghouls 'n Ghosts

And, that should be it! Thanks in advance! 121.208.68.212 08:03, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

The games you listed appeared on ESRB awhile back, which, like you brought up, may not be a valid source since they were taken down. Of course, it seems likely that ESRB put them up and Nintendo got upset because the games aren't supposed to be announced yet. Most likely all these games will appear at some point, some sooner than later, and besides, ESRB doesn't just randomly rate games; the rating system has changed since many of those games (any of you been in gaming enough to remember K-A) and they would have to re-rate them, and so they'd only rate a game if it was submitted. It seems to be a valid source that nobody can confirm, since all evidence has dropped off the face of the planet. I say keep them on with an unknown date, since, chances are, they'll appear at some point in time, whether it be next week or two years down the line.Shadow31 21:52, 2 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Alrighty, I found a source for many of the games having appeared on the ESRB, although, a few still have no sources.

IGN:Virtual Console Gets Updated Again

The games which still have no sources are:

NES

Super Mario Bros.: The Lost Levels, Super Mario Bros. 3

TG-16

Bonk 3: Bonk's Big Adventure, Bonk's Revenge, Dragon's Curse

And while I'm around. How do you do linebreaks? As you can probably see, I'm having trouble with making lists without them.121.208.68.212 03:56, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The two NES games appeared on the ESRB site. To do a break, type  . TJ Spyke 04:21, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Same with the TG16 games. They were there, now they're not. -Arcanelore 04:51, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

feb 5?
do we have no idea whats supposed to be coming out on monday yet?

its already friday! no one has found anything? Pandapatrol 15:23, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

According to the Wikipedia article, Super Mario World... kinda ironic, using that as a source. No source is given for this, though, and I've yet to hear it anywhere else. I'd like to put my money in that either that or Donkey Kong Country (or both) come. Keep in mind some Mondays, the games aren't announced ahead of time. Two words: A Link to the Past. Actually, that was five words. I just can't count in my head.Shadow31 21:08, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Super Mario World
I noticed that Super Mario World says a release date of February 5th, but the source given is Nintendo Power, which doesn't say a specific date. Now, though it doesn't seem that unlikey, where is this information coming from? A more specific source should be given or else it should just say 1st Quarter.Shadow31 21:06, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
 * That was vandalism since the only confirmed release dare for it is Q1. I wouldn't be surprised if it does show up on Monday though. TJ Spyke 00:57, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Tin Star and Uniracers
Why aren't Tin Star and Uniracers up there? They ARE confirmed, aren't they? (P.S. I am using my wii to type this so I can't post my IP) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.223.187.119 (talk) 20:28, 3 February 2007 (UTC).
 * Not really. See previous topic. -Arcanelore 01:57, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

vc-pce.com
This does appear to be an official site; Hudson's main Japanese site links directly to it. (Once on the left side, again on the news blurb announcing Vigilante.) -Arcanelore 01:49, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Earthbound?
When describing the Virtual Console, somebody said something along the lines of "Imagine playing old classics like Punch-Out!! and Earthbound on your Wii." So could we say Earthbound is a confirmed launch title? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nintendorkus (talk • contribs) 02:49, 4 February 2007 (UTC).
 * What? The launch was several months ago, and he said imagine. That is hardly confirmation. TJ Spyke 03:00, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I have doubts that was anything but hypothetical. Though I'd also be willing to place a bet that it will come out eventually. (At 10+ games a month, we should have well over 150 games out by the end of this year alone, not to mention, what, at least 3 more years of Wii's life?) Either way, this is definitely not confirmed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Shadow31 (talk • contribs) 14:03, 4 February 2007 (UTC).
 * Satoru Iwata mentioned them during the E3 2005 presscon when the virtual console was unveiled. I'm sure they'll come eventually, but NOA has been weird about the Earthbound franchise lately.Tehw1k1 00:12, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * One of the localizers at NOA said there are currently no plans to bring Mother 3 or Mother 1 & 2 (the compilation pack) to North America, despite the fact that they know how much the fans want it. TJ Spyke 00:14, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Super Smash Bros. 64 50% Chance may come
Now I am thinking it will come in the virtual consloe. But it may take a boatload of space. It may be very hard to put it in the virtual console and the price may be above 1000 because of popularity.Pendo 4 04:21, 4 February 2007 (UTC)Pendo 4


 * I have doubts about increased price. It's sorta scary, but I know quite a few people who haven't heard of the first one; Melee made it famous. Plus, the first one is pretty bare compared to Melee, which, if you have a Wii, there's no excuse not to own. I don't think it'd take much more space than any other N64 game, and I think there's a high chance it will come at some point. Please note that the only game that was priced above it's usually amount was a TurboGrafx-16 game, meaning that Hudson may have wanted that price increase. We've yet to have a Nintendo published game that was increased in price. At this point, I wouldn't jump that far to a consclusion. Shadow31 13:59, 4 February 2007 (UTC)


 * The reason why the NA release of R-TYPE cost 800 points instead of 600 points was because R-TYPE was originally spread across two game carts (or whatever medium the TG16 uses). The R-TYPE released for NA was both of these combined into one, thus the extra 200 points. Japan had both of them released seperately, and each of them cost 600. So we actually ended up getting the better deal. So far only Japan has been charging extra for more popular games, such as LttP for example. As far as space is concerned, probably no more than a typical N64 game, and I don't think it will cost over 1000. If so, maybe a few hundred points, just because Nintendo knows it will sell. They're sitting on a goldmine with the VC and they know it. - PsychicKid1 15:52, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Melee may have made it popular but this is the one that started it all.Pendo 4 23:36, 5 February 2007 (UTC)Pendo 4
 * Space is not an issues since SSB wasn't very large. I suppose it's possile it could be more than 1000 in Japan, but unlikely in NA. TJ Spyke 23:42, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * If OoT's pegged as a given, SSB shouldn't be an issue whatsoever in space. Eusis 23:50, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

YOu guys are taking about the memory right? Because That is what I am talking about.Pendo 4 21:14, 6 February 2007 (UTC)Pendo 4
 * I am, and I know that memory is NOT a problem. The largest N64 game was 64MB, and only 3 games were that big (Pokemon Stadium 2, Conker's Bad Fur Day, Resident Evil 2). SSB was nowhere near that big. TJ Spyke 22:06, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok...But now do u think this game will come?72.144.20.10 03:08, 7 February 2007 (UTC)Pendo 4

Metroid
...is on the Upcoming Games List. Sauces/Sources? 121.208.68.212 07:58, 5 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Once again, it's one of the early ESRB game leaks. It was rated on ESRB and then disappeared, along with most of these upcoming games. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Shadow31 (talk • contribs) 14:34, 5 February 2007 (UTC).

do you think that maybe the reason these games are dissapearing is because nintendo has caught on that people are using that to predict what games will be coming out next and so has told esrb to take them down so they can keep it more of a suprise. eh? anyone? Pandapatrol 15:33, 5 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I really think Nintendo could care less. There's no trickery and anything going on with this, it's just information put out by the ESRB that was later recalled, maybe due to some sort of weird mistake. I think it's safe to say all of those games on the list will be released sometime, especially the first party games. PsychicKid1 16:07, 5 February 2007 (UTC)


 * My opinion on the matter... ESRB slipped. The games weren't supposed to be announced yet. ESRB rated them and then realized they were posting the ratings for games not yet announced, so they removed them. I think Nintendo probably doesn't care much, but ESRB is trying to stay up to date with them.Shadow31 04:50, 8 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Alrighty, why doesn't it have an ESRB rating on the Article? Its supposed to be E, not Unknown, unless they changed it since original release. Shouldn't whoever have recorded that Metroid is upcoming have also got the rating?121.208.68.212 07:51, 8 February 2007 (UTC)


 * That is a good point. Somebody should probably figure that out. It was given an E at the time it appeared on ESRB. I'll fix that. Nice catch.Shadow31 02:47, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Add total numbers?
Some people who visit this page might want to know the total number of games available to DL without having to count them. Would it be a good idea to add them? Should it be in the opening paragraph, or at the bottom of the list, and maybe a total for each platform also?Tehw1k1 20:36, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * It's mentioned on the main Virtual Console page, but I will add it here as well. TJ Spyke 21:05, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Wave Race 64
isn't it supposed to come outMarioman12 23:04, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I haven't seen anything official. TJ Spyke 23:08, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Super Mario World and GCN
It's me again, I guess I'm just a troublemaker ;) Super Mario World is 'compatable' with the GameCube controller, in that the buttons will function, but the button mapping is basically unusable - how can you hold Y to run while pressing B to jump? (Ref: ) I thought it was worthy of note. Thoughts, anyone? ~ Aero Leviathan 07:21, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Technically you can jump with the A button (although that does a spin jump). I don't mind hearing what others think, but I don't think it's worth mentioning. TJ Spyke 07:27, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I think most people are going to be using that column to determine whether or not they need to buy one of the classic controllers, and in this case, the answer is that they probably should. Doing a spin jump will kill you in too many places to mention, and shouldn't be regarded as the same thing as a regular jump.  I straight "Yes" answer without an accompanying note that run-jumping is compromised with the GCN controller would be a disservice to readers. -Todd ( Talk - Contribs ) 10:47, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * However, I think most people can realistically expect a game to match it's old buttons. If anything, what should be a note is that SNES games /will/ match the same letters they did on the SNES - and as such, some games may or may not be comfortable to use. In fact, the Virtual Console entry states this already, minus the 'may not be comfortable to use' bit. If you're going to do junk like 'somewhat', you'd have to do that for quite a few SNES games in the end, I'm sure. Eusis 12:10, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

I have added a note that lists Nintendo's official warning and elaborates on it for clarity. I hope this will be found more palatable and accurate than previous efforts. ~ Aero Leviathan 22:53, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I have no problem with Nintendo includes a warning on the Shop Channel that gameplay "may have been optimized for the Classic Controller". However, the rest is unsourced, so I'm removing it. TomTheHand 23:02, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Wait, I didn't see the link you posted above. What is Nintendo World Report?  A major site?  Would they be able to be considered a reliable source per Wikipedia's guidelines? TomTheHand 23:06, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes. However, it is more of a personal issue (I haven't had any problems with it), and all VC games use the same buttong control that they did before (so if a Super NES game had you shoot with the X button, you will have to use the X button on the Classic Controller and GameCube controller). I think your note takes care of the issue. TJ Spyke 23:21, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Column for size?
With the List of sizes of virtual console games (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sizes_of_Virtual_Console_titles) being listed for deletion, I am thinking that it may be a good idea if we listed the sizes in a new column on the table. What do you guys think? Mattyatty 19:24, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't think it's all that relevent really, making a column to list how many blocks a game takes up? That isn't listed on any other article on Wikipedia. TJ Spyke 22:08, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * What would probably be more useful is figuring out just how much memory a single block equals. While certainly not a guarantee of how big it'll be on the VC, people can just do their own research from there and figure out how many blocks a game would probably take if they downloaded it. But then, they always list the maximum amount in the store anyway. Eusis 22:30, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I really don't think size is relevant to this. You can find out the size of a game when you go to purchase it before you finalize your purchase, and I don't think people will be that concerned except in rare circumstances, where, like I said, they could just check on the Virtual Console. If they're worried about size, they already are considering the game, meaning they probably aren't going to search this list. Point I'm making... it seems irrelevant. At least to this topic.Shadow31 04:47, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Just to point out an assumption you made: The size that Nintendo list when you purchase is not the final size. They highball it and allocate the maximum that "platform" will actually take up, only to re-adjust it once you have completed your download.  --AlphaTwo 04:56, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I realize that, I've downloaded plenty of games so far. That's completely straying away from my point. I am fully aware that is not the final size.Shadow31 02:45, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Kirby's Adventure
Kirby's Adventure was recently found on the Wii Shop servers today. Seeing how everytime a game shows up on the servers it almost 100% comes out in 1-2 weeks, I'm giving this game a February 2007 release date. Don't worry I'm citing. Machinehead09 19:30, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I reverted it, no CONFIRMED date has been announced. All you have is confirmation it will come out, not confirmation of the date. TJ Spyke 00:49, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
 * EDIT: Stop changing the release date. Keep it set for February 2007. Machinehead09 20:38, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Please stop vandalizing the page. No release date has been announced. Also, now topics go at the BOTTOM of the page. TJ Spyke 01:52, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I have proof its coming out this month. The release date should be February 2007. I'm NOT vandalizing. Machinehead09 22:03, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
 * That is not proof. That pic just confirmes it will come out on the VC, not when it will come out. TJ Spyke 03:07, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Its not proof of a February release. While it is very likely, it is not proof and thus cannot be used as so. Many people were convinced that we were going to see Donkey Kong Country in January because it was listed as having been released in Nintendo Power. As you know, it did not come out. Zomic_13 05:14, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
 * As likely as it is, proof of a February release is a credible source saying it will be out in February, or something along those lines. A credible source is NOT an assumption based on past experiences. It must actually have some sort of indication of the actual release date. Though I would be suprised if it wasn't released in the next couple weeks, it nonetheless cannot count as a credible source for anything but proof of the game's eventual release. Shadow31 15:52, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Kid Icarus was listed at 46424445 and Ice Climber was listed at 46424545. Cute. --Cheesemeister3k 18:35, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

SNES games to come out this year
According to IGN all of the confirmed SNES games will come out in 2007, right? So can you change them from Unknown to 2007? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by WikiLoco (talk • contribs) 18:24, 10 February 2007 (UTC).
 * IGN has talked out of their ass before. I seem to recall several games that weren't even confirmed for the Wii's Launch at the time being listed by them as being ready for such, and ultimately they didn't come out. Some, like FF:CC really haven't even had anything shown yet. Plus I've heard about this Metal Gear Solid Triology business. Eusis 21:15, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, somebody on the GAF forums made a fake press release and IGN posted it thinking it was real (even making a page for Metal Gear Triolgy.). Not to mention the "Star Wars Rogue Squadron X" game that no one else had heard of. TJ Spyke 23:18, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't think this one is a joke, I put up the source on the article with proof of the release dates of the games. I also put up the release dates just saying 2007 since there's no accurate release date in 2007 for them. WikiLoco 00:10, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Using Internal Wii Shop Channel Links
If pages found on Nintendo's servers are going to be used as sources, they should be freely accessible for everyone to view and confirm. However this requires a slight modification to one's web browser. Can someone please post here how to do this, so that everyone may check out this links for themselves? I installed the User Agent Switcher extension for FireFox (which can be found on Mozilla's site, ). Then I went into the Options of the User Agent Switcher and created a new one with the UA as Opera/9.00 (Nintendo Wii; U; ; 1038-58; Wii Shop Channel/1.0; en). This allows me to view certain Wii Shop pages, but none of the newer ones or any of the ones on this page. Is there an updated setting? Zomic_13 17:11, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Any URL that starts with ccs.shop.wii.com seems not to require user-agent modification. However, the server sends incorrect MIME types for these, resulting in a 'Download where?' dialog on some browsers (I've only tried it with Firefox, and that's what I get). You can view the image by saving it and adding a '.gif' file extension to the name. They all seem to follow the same pattern: FFFD0001 is the main screenshot, usually of the game's 'press start' screen, and FFFD0002 and FFFD0003 are gameplay screenshots which would appear on the details screen on the Wii shop channel. ~ Aero Leviathan 22:23, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Isn't using the Wii Shop Channel Links in violation of WP:OR? Mausy5043 18:18, 18 February 2007 (UTC)