Talk:Seventh generation of video game consoles/Archive 3

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 7

In the Xbox 360 section it calls BioShock an “upcoming exclusive” however it has now been released, and is also available or the PC. Someone should fix this. 71.224.213.145 15:30, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Seeing as there is a "Top-Selling Games" row, I think it would make sense to add an "Anticipated Games" row. Thoughts? Laptopdude 20:33, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

What would be the threshold for adding an "anticipated" game?

Just64helpin

20:46, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

I'd say part of classic/best-selling series. - RoyBoy ⁸⁰⁰ 16:10, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, that's what I was thinking of, too. Only games of well-received and best-selling series exclusive to the particular console. Halo 3, Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots, and Super Smash Bros. Brawl are the ones I would choose. Laptopdude 19:16, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

I am still looking for any input of other users before I make this addition to the comparison table. I am positive that Halo 3 and Super Smash Bros. Brawl are perfect candidates for the Xbox360 and Wii, respectively, but I am not very knowledgeable about the PS3. Any suggestions/comments about the most anticipated game for the PS3 would be much appreciated. Also, any thoughts/feelings about the "Anticipated Games" row in general would be appreciated as well. Laptopdude 00:36, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Isn't it obvious(no offense)? God of War III for the PS3.--Kondrayus 21:40, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

If no-one has any objections, I shall add the row "Anticipated Games" tomorrow. It will have the criteria: (1) Native to that console (2) Part of a classic/best-selling series. It will be between "Top-selling games" and "Release date". The games will be: Wii (Super Smash Bros. Brawl), Xbox360 (Halo 3), and PS3 (Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots). Laptopdude 20:50, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

The row should be named "Anticipated games" per

Just64helpin

20:55, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't really see this as all that necessary. In any case, I'd wait until Brawl has an actual release date. Tehw1k1 03:15, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Both Super Smash Bros. Brawl and Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots are scheduled for release "TBA 2007". However, many games are "anticipated" without a release date. Not knowing when they will be released merely raises anticipation. Laptopdude 17:46, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

If no-one has any objections, I shall add the row "Anticipated games" tomorrow. It will have the same criteria listed before, and the same games. Wii (Super Smash Bros. Brawl), Xbox360 (Halo 3), and PS3 (Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots). Laptopdude 21:29, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

---

This row was deleted, the reason stated: "listcruft". What does everyone think? Should it be re-added, or stay excluded? I think that it makes as much sense having "Highly anticipated games" as it does "Top-selling games". Highly anticipated games are both likely to become top-selling, and subjects of notable importance to many people. Laptopdude 00:08, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

The article already contains a "Software" section containing "anticipated franchise titles", which makes the row redundant.

Just64helpin

20:12, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

You know, I never even looked at that section and had no knowledge of its existence. After looking, I completely agree that the row was unnecessary. Laptopdude 22:21, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Does this make sense? According to the GP2X page its only sold a few thousand and is only available in Korea. Is it really legit to compare it to the DS and PSP? Tehw1k1 03:17, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

the Units sold sold number is old also it seam that you did not read all the article when you say it is gp2x only available in Korea from the article during discussions in Seoul with the UK distributor it was decided to simply reverse the last two characters of the original name to give the final GP2X.--Andri12 19:07, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

It is stupid to have the GP2X on this page. The article itself states that it follows a completely different market strategy than the PSP or DS. It is Linux based and is closer to a handheld PC than a gaming system. Honestly, it should be taken off. There are only two real competitors in the handheld market. Everything else is a very distant third. --

K1000

07:10, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

if we use your reason then then we can remove wii be chose it follows different market strategy than xbox360 ps3 and if you forgotten ps3 also run linux --Andri12 21:37, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Then i'll give another reason. The GP2X has only sold 30000 units and only expects a total of 50000 by Christmas. The other two systems PSP and DS have sold over 10000000 (10 million) each. How can the GP2X be compared? 30000 is only .3% of 10 million. Not to mention that no gaming website such as IGN or gamespot has anything about it. TAKE IT OFF--

K1000

23:57, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

like i sade the sales number is old and also it was just from uk and germane distributor GamePark Holdings have not announced any sales figure and also IGN and gamespot do have something about gp2x also this is seventh generation article so all game console need to bee in this article --Andri12 19:41, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually the sales number is relatively new. It is less than a year old. This is usually acceptable. IGN and gamespot both have two or three articles total on the GP2X. I wouldn't count that. Also, if it had sold 50,000 units by christmas then it still is not in the same league. If sales continued to grow exponentially then it still would not even be close to the other two. Also, are there no other handhelds that are part of this generation, or even non-handhelds. Is it really just Wii, PS3 and 360? Somehow I don't believe that.--

K1000

20:38, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

The comparison to the Wii strategy is poor. You're missing a salient point-there is no dedicated software support from any major first or third party software makers for the GP2X like there is for the Wii, the PS3, the DS and the PSP. I dont have a huge problem with it staying, I just want a good discussion of whether or not it should be included. Perhaps it belongs in "other". Its also completely absurd that the paragraph covering the GP2X is larger than the one covering both the DS and PSP. Tehw1k1 14:51, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I am not saying that the GP2X should be taken off the page, it just shouldn't be in the comparison chart. It actually looks bad to have it in the chart because their is so little information on it. It is a tiny column and it looks unimportant in the chart itself. Maybe it should be included elsewhere.--

K1000

16:46, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Removed; the existence in the comparison chart and the oversized paragraph have for this minor console have no place in an article about the major, most recognisable contenders in the seventh generation. The sales figures also vary vastly, as mentioned above. Haipa Doragon 18:44, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I am aware of several online sources that give rough estimates as to the number of consoles sold. Although they update whenever a new sales figure is officially released, they keep an ongoing counter that adds the approximate number of consoles bout every so many seconds. I am wondering if sites such as nexgenwars.com and vgchartz.com are truly reliable and can be used in Wikipedia, especially since their numbers vary largely from each other. Laptopdude 20:14, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

They are unreliable for the exact reasons you state. The sites approximate, not report.

Just64helpin

20:51, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Just by looking at the discrepencies between the figures on nexgenwars.com and vgchartz.com, one can see that they can't both be accurate. Personally, I prefer to look at vgchartz.com because it shows a smaller gap in sales between the Xbox 360 and the Wii. However, it has already been decided that neither of these sites should be used as sources. Useight 02:22, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

My question was prompted by an edit citing nexgenwars as a source for the Xbox360. However, I see that someone has already reverted to the previous number (10.4 mil), so everything is good. Laptopdude 23:53, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

PS3 sales have jumped from 5 to 13 million, I assume this is untrue. 16:32 29/07/2007, GMT

Not only do I strongly doubt that, but there is no citation. I am changing it back to 3.6 million +. Laptopdude 16:11, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out.

Just64helpin

16:11, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

On the Playstation 3's page and on here http://www.pro-g.co.uk/news/26-07-2007-6094.html it says the sales are 4.28 million as of June 30th, 2007. Please change the figure. Thankyou. Nello85 21:40, 14 September 2007 (UTC) 21:34, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

The 'Lost in blue' franchise is the same as the 'Survival kids' franchise that already existed on GameBoy. Maybe it should be moved to Revived franchise. 81.244.229.205 13:18, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I saw in the home systems comparison chart that someone has added that up to 8 wiimotes can be connected. I have heard nothing of this, and completely doubt it. I will replace it with 4 unless someone can give me a concrete citation.

On Nintendo's website itself ([1]) it says that "...Four Wii Remotes can communicate with Wii...". I do not think that there is any question, but if someone has something let me know. Laptopdude 23:03, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

If no-one can prove that 8 wiimotes can connect to Wii, I will correct the mistake tomorrow. Laptopdude 21:47, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Good luck connecting 8; they only have 4 lights on them, anyway. Maybe they meant 4 wiimotes and 4 Gamecube controllers?? Useight 05:57, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Hmmmm....I still don't think so. However, two interesting links: [2], [3] Laptopdude 18:17, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

No offense, but this should have been changed immediatly. For one their are many official things from Nintendo that say only four and there are only four lights on each Wiimote. Even if it might be able to connect 8 through a hack or glitch, it is obvious that Nintendo only intended four. I think I read on some Wikipedia introduction page that you are supposed to be bold in editing. Again, no offense.--

K1000

23:17, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

No, I see your point. I was just getting really used to posting on the talk page. Something like that can just be changed. Laptopdude 20:58, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, until someone actually manages to connect 8 and play a game, it's not fact. Useight 22:12, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I'd say it's about time to archive the talk. I would suggest going to the end of May. That would mean all topics from "wheres the bits??" to (including)

00:38, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Do it. This talk section is huge.--

K1000

17:06, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

It has been archived. Laptopdude 21:20, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't think that slightly updated games that have been released in the XBOX live arcade or the Wii/PS3 equivalent should be included under franchises that have been revived. That section should be reserved for actual new games that are sequels or prequels to old games.--

17:04, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I respectfully disagree. I don't think the method of delivery, whether its a download or a retail game should have any bearing. It seems like you are using the criteria of recent games to determine what constitutes a "true sequel". However, in the arcade days, sequels amounted to little more than adding some extra modes and features. Ms. Pac-Man could be categorized as just a slight update of Pac-Man. The original Jetpac was a shallow game by today's standards, but using the old school game design metric, JPRF is indeed a sequel. In any event, it shouldn't be about value judgments, but the significance of Rare bringing that IP back for modern audiences. Tehw1k1 17:40, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok then they should be included, all of them. I do not really use XBOX arcade or anything of that sort so I can't update it, but that list of revived games should be updated to include more games of that sort then. (I know there are more than just Jetpac). --

19:51, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I think we should fit it in somewhere that they slashed the price for the 60GB by $100 USD Source: CNN Article—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 99.246.83.240 (talk • contribs).

I suppose a new row could be made for "current price" or something to that effect.

Just64helpin

16:11, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Absolutely we need a new row, since the current tag of "recently dropped to XXX.XX" is really inconsistent with the layouts of the other console generation articles. 76.237.132.203 02:30, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, I looked at one of the cites for the Wii's units sold and found that the website also gives a list of top-selling games, three for each console. Check out [4] (scroll down a bit). What do you think? Laptopdude 22:05, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Inside the table that compares the three consoles, the PS3's section says, "All of the services on the Playstation Network are free" under each of the three SKUs. I'm going to be bold and remove those three sentences because they really aren't included accessories, probably just some fanboy's addition. Besides, the Wii's network is also free, but that isn't mentioned. If you guys don't agree, feel free to put it back. Useight 03:04, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Again, in the table comparing the three consoles, in the PS3's box about included accessories, it lists an

03:07, 12 July 2007 (UTC) Cat5 is a type of ethernet cable; therefore unless the PS3 comes with 2 cables, one of the references should be deleted. anonomous —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.91.171.42 (talk) 19:05, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

It would be nice of the "generations" documented gave specific criteria of what makes each generation distinct from the prior or succeeding generations, outside of release date. --76.203.126.95 23:50, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

If you can think of any other criteria that logically divides the consoles into generations (such as some internal specification), maybe. But I can't think of anything, because there's a wide range of hardware specs (Wii vs. PS3), plus Nintendo lists their "Max Polygon Count" as maximum in a normal game, while Sony and Microsoft list the theoretical maximum. They used to use bits (such as 8-bit and 16-bit, but the Nintendo 64 was the last major console to do so). Other than that, I guess there's clock speed, hard drive space, etc, but good luck getting everyone to decide on something like that. It' be too subjective, I think, to say, "Console ABC is Generation 5 because it's only 485MHz while Console XYZ is Generation 6 because it clocks in at 525MHz. Useight 19:53, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

what do you think of my generation list here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:History_of_video_game_consoles_%28sixth_generation%29 ? Zhulien 13:25, 6 August 2007 (GMT+10)

Eleven generations? I think not. And it would have to start at 1, not 0. Haipa Doragon (talk) 10:35, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

So you'd say a Sega Mark 1, a Sega Mark 2 and a Sega Mark 3 are all the same generation? I think NOT! Zhulien 13:15, 8 August 2007 (GMT+10)

I removed Pokémon from the "Franchises revived during the seventh generation". The first Pokémon game released for a seventh generation console was

18:58, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Why is the Wii in this article?

I have noticed, GP's, that the Wii has completely forgone the usual requirements for being a next-gen system. It is right now confirmed that the Wii is a Gamecube with an overclocked processor and a new look. Quite comparable to console redesigns like the PS2 Slim, but I don't see that in this article. Therefore, I propose that we move the Wii into the sixth generation article as a subsection for the Gamecube. Thanks to Nontendo, we can no longer classify consoles by the time that they're released. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.188.50.113 (talk • contribs).

What? where did you find the requirements for a next gen system? Did you make them up? And it is easy to classify consoles by the time they are released. I will rephrase that sentence for you. " Thanks to Sony fan-boys we can no longer classify consoles by the time they are released". And it is easy to say the Wii is just a gamecube with a new look. If you think about it, (which is probably impossible) the Xbox 360 is just the Xbox with an overlocked processer and a new look. The same goes with the PS2 and PS3. And the reason the Wii is always pared with the PS2 because Sony is too scared to stop PS2 games and lower the PS3 price. If the Wii should be moved to the sixth generation (because of the reasons you suggest) than so should the 360 and the PS3. And who confirmed that the Wii is a gamecube with a newlook, Sony, or did you? All of the reviews of the Wii have been extremely positive. It has to be Sony getting pissed off because the Wii is beating the PS3 in sales. Anyway, I'll answer your stupid question. Obviously, the Wii is the successer to the gamecube, with features that the gamecube doesn't have like motion sensory. How much brainpower does it take for someone to figure out? Honestly, the comment you have posted is unnecessary.--Kondrayus 21:36, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

It is considered a seventh gen system because the Wii is entirely new system that is not a Gamecube redesign which also competes directly with the PS3 and 360, contrary to Nintendo try to claim. Misterkillboy 09:51, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

The Wii is seventh generation because it competes with the other consoles that count as part of the seventh generation, as opposed to those in the sixth; it also supports different software to the GameCube, most of which require the Wii's functionality (i.e. motion sensitivity, emulation software (Virtual Console) etc.) to run. Haipa Doragon 15:18, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

If a Wii is the same generation as a GC, then I'd concede that a Sega Mark 1, a Sega Mark 2 and a Sega Mark 3 are all the same generation. If a Wii is a generation after a GC, then all 3 Marks fo the Sega must be different generations. Anyway, the whole wiki Generation thing is based on opinion, not fact - many peoples opinions <> fact. Zhulien 13:20, 8 August 2007 (GMT+10)

Is this frankly very non-notable console really needed in the Comparison section and chart? It really just seems like a waste of space to me, and deserves no more than just a line or two at the end of the section's paragraph. Haipa Doragon 15:26, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

• you are right actually. But its worth analyzing a little bit. I mean it was supposed to be launched as a competitor to Wii xbox360 and PS3 and it probably failed or something. dunno maybe ur right.

--Mysterious Spy 06:54, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

How come for the PS3 and Wii the numebrs put are for numbers sold, and yet for 360 it is for how many are shipped? This seems unfair in my eyes. I think it should be one or the other...or both. What do you think? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.43.44.158 (talk • contribs).

I believe this is because Microsoft financial information reports sold units of Xbox 360 to retailers, similar to PlayStation 3, while Nintendo reports sold units to consumers. This has been since time ago, and is generally accepted. -- ReyBrujo 03:21, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Expected shipments for Wii are estimated around 72 million. [5]. Preety good! PS3's shipments are expected to reach 10-11 million to March 2008 [6]. Preety bad. Dont want to conclude somewhere but Nitendo will probably be 7th generations winner. Wii will end up with 70-80 million shipments and 65-75 million units sold. PS3 will end up with 15-20 million shipments and 10-15 million units sold. Reminding: im just presuming right now. Dont you think that this scenario is preety potential?!\

--Mysterious Spy 06:51, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Right on! I agree 100%. But I don't think it is safe to say the Wii will dominate just yet. Remember, the 360 is still in the picture here.--Kondrayus 21:36, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

While that would be nice, this is not a forum for discussing the topic, but rather discussing how to improve the article, and Wikipedia is not a

crystal ball. But I hope that happens, too. Useight

07:09, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

6,000,000 PS3s sold?

http://www.psu.com/Playstation-3-hits-6-Million-Sales-WorldWide-News--a791-p0.php

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/808/808656p2.html

http://www.ps3fanboy.com/2007/07/28/playstation-3-jumps-up-to-6-million-worldwide-sales/

and People discussing it:

http://www.ps3forums.com/showthread.php?t=88330

Hopefully we will find out if these numbers are true or not soon enough Jon God 00:29, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Somehow I doubt it, it's quite a difference from how they were doing earlier in the year. I think they're faked, to some extent. Haipa Doragon 12:25, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Alright, until we see any proof on either side leave the main page the way it is. Jon God 08:57, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

100 million % wrong, as of August 15 2007 - Animal91X 09:33, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Some IP addresses keep changing the launch price to $449.99. Just FYI, regardless of current prices and sales, the launch price should remain unchanged at $499.99. Useight 22:56, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, but an editor's note should explain this, rather than shoo people away.

Just64helpin

23:42, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I had placed a comment next to the launch numbers asking editors to refrain from changing them, because it was being changed nearly every day, but it was removed due to apparent "bad faith" when I was only trying to keep the article credible. If an editor's note should explain this rather than shoo people away, there still needs to be an editor's note. Useight 17:16, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

It would be easy to stop people from editing this by just adding a current price section. Most people just see the number and not the label about what the number is about so if we had the current price people wouldn't bother editing the launch price number.--

talk

) 23:47, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

I have grown tired of this and have applied for semi-protection of the page. Tehw1k1 06:45, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Putting the current price seems kind of close to spam-like advertising. Other articles about items currently in retail don't usually have the price. Useight 07:47, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Semi protection is probably the best thing since most of the annoying changes have been by unregistered users. That warning at the top of the page should stay for a little while too.--

talk

) 01:44, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Taking the prices out entirely might make things easier. Then again, articles on generations usually focus on the horse race between the consoles, and price plays a role in that, especially in this gen. Tehw1k1 03:44, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Prices are too big a role in this generation to just leave it out. Let's just leave it as it is now with the semi protection and the warning on this page and see how it goes. Hopefully the annoying edits will slow down.--

talk

) 03:54, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Nokia has announced to relaunch the N-Gage. But this time, as a platform, which will run on various of Nokia's Symbian handsets, although, which handsets will be able to play the games are still in dark. But N95, N93 etc. handsets are likely to be included. Several first and third party titles have been announced (including ONE and System Rush Evolution, Asphalt 3, etc.). The platform is to be launched in fall 2007, as Nokia's futurewatch website reveals. Like the previous N-Gage, online features will be available. Shouldn't we add this to the handheld section?

If you mean add a column onto the handheld comparison table, plus lots of other information on it, then, judging by the sales of its previous iteration, no. This article's purpose is to mainly cover the major consoles of the seventh generation, not every one in great detail. Seeing as it's not even released yet (and unsourced, for that matter) I don't think anything more than a brief note in the paragraph above the handheld comparison table would be needed.

P.S. Note to sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~) every time you leave a message in a talk section. Haipa Doragon (talk) 19:20, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I actually meant adding a proper note in that paragraph only. It's not yet released, why should you put it in the comparison table? If you judge the sales of Gizmondo, and its mention in the hanheld section, N-Gage deserves a mention (if I am not wrong, the previous Gen sold about 3 million). And the news is not at all unsourced, the Symbian world is well aware of that. In fact Nokia maintains a regular blog at http://blog.n-gage.com.59.162.182.2 06:16, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

I would say a note would be enough, then, considering it's somewhat relative success compared to other minor consoles. Make sure to source what you're saying when you edit the article, otherwise it may get reverted, though. Haipa Doragon (talk) 12:40, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

I erased that paragraph before I read this page. Perhaps I was hasty, but it read very much like marketing. Please phrase it in a more neutral, encyclopedic tone. Tehw1k1 16:55, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Try to cut it down, as well, and as part of the same paragraph instead of one of its own. It needs to be more like the brief synopses for the existing consoles, not nearly every small detail available. Haipa Doragon (talk) 17:09, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

what happened to not using vgchartz or nextgenwars? someone just replaced some sales statistics and changed the sources to vgchartz. Should we change this back?--

) 23:16, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Why are they used? they need to be removed ASAP! They are widely mocked as inaccurate and can't even use NPD numbers for america anymore.. Most are just guesses. They need to be removed and a more reliable and respect source used. There was nothing wrong with the old sources.

I don't know if you noticed, but the discussion directly above this one is about this exact same thing.(oh, and make sure to sign posts using four ~~~~)--

talk

) 00:42, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Information floating around the Internet is flooded with rumors and speculation about the eventual eighth generation. For ideas, would it be worth while to set up a place to get the real information, and forcasts about the future systems and games. This can be the bridge for the times they are released.Gopherwood 13:19, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. ♦^TH1RT3EN _{talk ♦ contribs}

13:27, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Xbox 360-HD

Is it possible to hook an Xbox 360 to a regular TV, because I've heard people say you need an AV cord or something like that.--Kondrayus 16:48, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Absolutely, you can hook an xbox up to any tv with Audio/Video inputs. These can be HD (when you have green, red and blue cables for video and white and red cables for audio) or they can be standard definition (just red and white for audio and one yellow cable for video). THe Xbox comes with an A/V cable that has all of the necessary connections. --

talk

) 23:18, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks.--Kondrayus 14:14, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Microsoft has recently stated that instead of 500 MHz, the Xbox 360 will now have 526 MHz. I think someone should add this to the article, and if not I will.--Kondrayus 23:27, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

When I look at the references I see some sites I've never heard of, and I want to ask which sites are considered accepted. To me, it starts with any of Sony/MS/Nintendo's press releases or financial statements, Gamespot and IGN. Others are up for debate. Tehw1k1 04:29, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I believe NPD is also considered acceptable, while vgchartz.com and nexgenwars.com are not. Useight 04:55, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Right. I should have specified more about which specific references I have doubts about, rather than recount the good ones. Unfortunately the edit page is glitching out on me so I guess I'll have to do it later. Tehw1k1 07:58, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

These two jump out at me as questionable, especially since they both cite different numbers for PS3 sales. http://www.n4g.com/industrynews/News-54730.aspx |title=Updated: Worldwide PS3 Sales @ 0 http://www.pro-g.co.uk/news/26-07-2007-6094.html |title=Worldwide PS3 sales only 0 Tehw1k1 20:54, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Exukvera, you are putting in a link to a wikipedia page as a reference: "cite web |url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ps3". References are supposed to be from sources outside of Wikipedia, not Wikipedia itself. (Not to mention that "article" is spelled "artical" in your most recent edit.) All the numbers I fixed in the article are THE ACTUAL NUMBERS WRITTEN IN PLAIN ENGLISH ON THE CITED SOURCES. WHY ARE YOU REPLACING THEM WITH OTHER NUMBERS? I invite anyone interested to look them up. If you are going to replace the numbers, find a good source for them. And Animal91X, please do not accuse me of fanboyism after I've edited the article so that the numbers reflect what's ACTUALLY WRITTEN IN THE CITED SOURCES. The reference that you edited back in "http://www.efluxmedia.com/news_US_PS3_Sales_Surpass_Xbox_360_Sales_But_Nintendo_Wins_07211.html" cites Vgchartz as its source, and VGChartz is not accepted, so why should a news article that cites its info be allowed?

Also, I sincerely believe that the way I've formatted it with the dates on the bottom is easier to read, but feel free to disagree. There are some other beneficial things about your edits that I need to take a closer look at, specifically cleaning up the outdated refs and so forth. Tehw1k1 19:41, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

http://aussie-nintendo.com/?v=news&p=16365
http://www.gamepro.com/news.cfm?article_id=130468
http://kotaku.com/gaming/retailed/wii-passes-xbox-360-in-worldwide-sales-292442.php
http://www.gamingtarget.com/article.php?artid=7437
http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/10810.cfm
http://www.maxconsole.net/?mode=news&newsid=20020
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/multimedia/display/20070822235444.html
http://news.punchjump.com/article.php?id=4717
http://www.dailytech.com/Report+Wii+Overtakes+Xbox+360+in+Worldwide+Sales/article8573.htm
http://www.digitalartsonline.co.uk/news/index.cfm?NewsID=8561
http://www.nintendojo.com/infocus/view_item.php?1187841008
http://gonintendo.com/?p=23493
http://www.g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/678699/Wii_Overtakes_360_In_Total_Sales.html
http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,136319-c,gameconsoles/article.html

I noticed that a few of the above sources have been cited in our article (Kotaku and PC World, particularly). Since we do not trust sources that cite VGChartz, should we take them out as soon as possible? Ultraflame 18:39, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

By the way, speaking of home console sales, BBC has some numbers at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6960575.stm - Xbox 360 10 million, PlayStation 3 4.5 million, Wii 9.27 million. Ultraflame 18:58, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=201802114

http://www.n-galaxy.com/news/587

Ultraflame 19:55, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

It's a bad trend. Its not hard to see why they get quoted though, since so much of NPD data stays proprietary. Tehw1k1 00:32, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

The worldwide sales figures for the Xbox 360 have been "N/A" for a while now, but I think it should actually say "unknown" or "undetermined" because "N/A" seems to imply that Microsoft is shipping consoles but not selling them. Not that they are trying to sell them, but have sold zero, but "N/A" just seems like the 360s aren't being made to be sold, just to be shipped. I tried to word that as clearly as possible, but I don't know if that makes sense to the other editors out there. My point is, I think we should change "N/A" to "Undetermined". Any thoughts on the matter? Useight 23:59, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't quite see what you mean that n/a makes it seem like 360's aren't being sold. Since N/A means not available(correct me if i'm wrong) it just is saying that the info is not available which it is. Undetermined and unknown seem to sound the same to me so if you want to entertain your own brain, go ahead and change it. It doesn't make much difference to me.--

talk

) 02:49, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, I always thought that N/A meant Not Applicable, but I could be wrong. That's why it sounded to me like it wasn't being sold. Not Available makes sense in the table. Useight 17:07, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

The abbreviation can mean both, but I'll edit it to say the full phrase, just for clarity. Haipa Doragon (talk) 17:24, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

"Not Available" in the table seems a lot better. To me, anyway. Useight 14:43, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.