![]() | 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. |
I was thinking: since the Commodore 64 was designed to be a home computer for the entire family, and was launched in 1982, 1 year before the NES, could it be that the Family Computer was named Nintendo Entertainment System in USA, Latin America and Europe, because the name "Family Computer" could cause the NES to be mistaken for the Commodore 64? If someone knows something, let us know. Da nuke 01:14, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Would it be a good idea to include photos of NES clones? I just purchased one and could submit a photo. just a thought Michael Ray 15:55, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
@Damian Yerrick:
For the second time now, i have corrected the PAL NES CPU speed from 1.68 Mhz to 1.77 Mhz. Like the NTSC consoles, the CPU speed is determined by dividing the Pixel clock by 3, which is 5.32Mhz / 3 = 1.77Mhz. The 5.32 Mhz pixel clock is generated by dividing the 26.58Mhz PAL master clock by 5. The 26.58Mhz PAL master clock is 4 times the 4.43Mhz PAL color carrier frequency. Is this enough proof now? FEB 7TH 2006(VIG) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.141.247.108 ( talk • contribs) 20:44, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
Sorry to burst your bubble, but the PAL NES CPU speed is not 1.77 MHz - numerous tests have been performed on the real hardware and the RP2A07 divides the PAL NES's 26.601712 MHz master clock by 16, not 15 as you expected. The proper PAL NES CPU speed is, in reality, 1.662607 MHz. --
Quietust
01:57, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
Since I happen to own an original PC10 arcade PCB, i can confirm that the video output are inverted RGB signals. That means, voltage levels @ 1V are dark and voltage levels at 0V are bright pixels. They probably did it to make service replacements with standard components harder. FEB 7TH 2006(VIG)
Hi. I'm just a wee bit late for this, nonetheless I thought it was crazy that it wasnt mentioned. The NES Sports Set--shouldn't this have information about that? Or the first of its kind controller AKA Nintendo Blaster? Power Glove? These are some big things that no one had ever done before and I think they should be added in this lengthy article. Bourgeoisdude 01:25, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
I changed the line: "Games like Gradius made heavy use of the NES's parallax scrolling capabilities." to: "Games like Gradius made heavy use of the NES's scrolling capabilities." because, although you can achieve parallax scrolling on the NES by changing the gfx content of tiles while scrolling (like Bucky O Hare), the hardware has no native support for it. You can only have 1 tile based scrolling layer. Besides, Gradius on the NES has no parallax scrolling (as the original arcade version) Feb 11th 2006 (VIG) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.141.237.211 ( talk • contribs) 23:30, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
I was only about 1 yr old when the console was released here in the US, so I don't exactly remember how the NES was sold. Can anyone add here or to the article about how the system was sold - i.e. Did the system come in "flavors;" A plain package with just the console and adapters, A game bundle with MB and the console, or a ROB bundle w/ the Robot and Gyromite, etc...? Also, I think this article could benefit from someone adding a pricetag at release to the system, or system bundles if that is how it was released. I believe the console alone was $200.00, but I do not know this. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.60.11.247 ( talk • contribs) 23:05, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
Anyone else notice that there is a "Nintendo" article that is different from this one (see here)? It'd be a nightmare to combine the two, but unfortunately I believe it needs to be done. They are one in the same, are they not? Bourgeoisdude 01:05, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
i was under the impression that thier was a third variant (i belive it was the US one) that loaded through the top but was different from the famicom can anyone confirm/deny?
I can't help but notice there's nothing in this article about the price of the system and games at launch. Does anyone actually remember what it was? Bdve 16:14, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
Wouldn't the predecessor for the Famicom be the Color TV game??? Just wondering... ( Bobabobabo 19:54, 12 May 2006 (UTC))
I don't know if it can be considered the predecessor but if you are wondering why it didn't show up in the article after you edited it, it's because you typed in "Predecessor" instead of "predecessor" (I noticed that when I clicked the preview button). Another thing I noticed in the preview is that since you put "game" instead of "Game", it wouldn't have linked to the article. SNS 17:44, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
Do we have a citation for this claim? It seems dubious. --
Daniel Davis
01:44, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
ok, try this for a citation http://cgi.ebay.com/1983-Square-Button-Famicom-CIB-Nintendo-Japan-nes_W0QQitemZ280099677014QQcategoryZ4315QQrdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQcmdZViewItem —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.181.253.122 ( talk • contribs).
Now, if you really wish to cite a source, by all means, cite www.famicomworld.com, it is linked to in this article, and is a reputible site for information on the famicom. Or, you could check japanese wikipedia. Now, since you are so dead set on following the rules, im going to site JL's site since it's fact and repubtable, and linked to in other portions of this article, if you have a problem, let me know, but since the site is repubtable I do not see any issue. Also, I find your attitude to featherplucknfilms rediculous, because without him, half the information available to westerners about famicom wouldn't exist. Give the guy more credit.
This is Kris, aka featherplucknfilms and owner of the Feather Pluckn' Famicom Shop in Japan. I'm not sure exactly what the problem here is, the fact that they exist or that there isn't a webpage made by Nintendo that says they exist. I understand you want to follow rules and have citations for all information, but based on your strict guidelines it seems the only legitimate source would be an article directly from Nintendo, on their webpage, and in English. This probably won't happen. I don't see why pictures aren't proof of their existence. I have pictures of the system, box, and motherboard with serial numbers and copyright dates. I can take them from any angle or including any items to prove they are not manipulated. Many of those pictures are available on http://www.famicomworld.com or from myself. I realize I may be nobody, but I am knowledgable on the subject and have pictures to prove this early edition of the Famicom. Following are several webpages (including some auctions with pictures and Wikipedia Japan) that document this. http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%95%E3%82%A1%E3%83%9F%E3%83%AA%E3%83%BC%E3%82%B3%E3%83%B3%E3%83%94%E3%83%A5%E3%83%BC%E3%82%BF (This is the excrept that is important) 十字ボタン、A/Bボタン、START、SELECTボタンを備え、その後のゲーム機のコントローラとして標準的な形となったコントローラを2つ持つ。初期に製造されたコントローラーはABボタンが四角いゴム製だったため、連打がきかず、故障もしやすかったため、後に丸いプラスチック製のものへと改良がなされた。また、この四角ボタンの最初期の出荷分(発売日頃)に関してはコントローラーのケーブルとRFスイッチのケーブルが灰色になっている。コントローラを初めとして、赤と白を基調とした本体のカラー配置の基準は、当時最も安価な部材の色が赤と白だったことに由来する。[Basically means the square button controllers were on the first models, and that they were rubber and of poor quality compared to the circular buttons]) http://page7.auctions.yahoo.co.jp/jp/auction/g54800671 http://page4.auctions.yahoo.co.jp/jp/auction/d70684728 http://www.otakaraou.com/product/1405 http://page7.auctions.yahoo.co.jp/jp/auction/g49408218 http://news.ameba.jp/2007/03/3837.php Featherpluckn 04:18, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi there. I am overzealous when adding references to articles because it is what we must do: focus on quoting reliable sources. In the strict sense of the word, Nintendo itself would be a primary source and should not be quoted. It seems to me you are finally admitting you are overzealous. If you can't quote nintendo themselves, then who are you going to quote? And hell, why on earth would you quote BIASED publications such as IGN, gamespot, etc. I also find it amazing how you don't deny the existence of a square button famicom, which is arguebly impossible after all the information we have given you, yet you argue the sources are "unnaceptable". How is a picture, multiple auctions, and a REPUTABLE website featured prominantly in the links section of this article not good enough?? I think you need to get outside a bit more my friend, and stop lurking on wikipedia all day long. In addition, I was the one who added famicomworld as a citation, and I have no affiliation to that site other than the fact that I am a member. I do not own it, or claim to own that site. In yet another addition, you claim there are only auction sites, japanese wikipedia, and famicomworld backing up this information, yet I noticed kris also linked you to news.ameba.jp, which is neither an auction site nor japanese wikipedia.
How about the system in my hand, is that a reliable source? IGN, Gamespot, etc. don't focus on this sort of information and probably never will have any article about this. Even if it did, I doubt it would be as informative about http://www.famicomworld.com because they don't care. So, according to you, this item should never be acknowledged because it has very little information about it in the Western world. Seems a shame to deprive people of solid information because it's source isn't Gamespot. And we never mentioned anything about using an auction to determine the cost, we used multiple auctions to provide additional proof of their existence and availablility. Featherpluckn 01:54, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Kris has already taken numerous pictures of it, infact, that auction I linked you, and famicomworld.com, are both Kris' square button unit. If you want it on the page, then by all means we can place the picture on the NES article page. Infact, I just did. Now, don't worry, I followed regulations. I think we can all agree, that this picture proves the existence of the square button to the person reading the article. Arguement over.
what need is ther for a UK flag when the EU one is there? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 59.167.79.126 ( talk • contribs) .
Well i belive the EU flag is used to represent Europe, weather or not that is correct i'm not sure. As for the UK, it is part of the EU. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 59.167.66.54 ( talk • contribs) .
Reybrujo, the united kingdom was admitted to the european union on the first of january 1973. Go back to school and stop spreading false information please.
A new section called Notable Games has been added by an anonymous user. I don't follow this page, so I don't know if I should remove the section. But it seems to be very POV to claim which games are "notable" at the expense of all the others, especially when the critera for "notability" are not established by a reference. Certainly the section is not wiki-linked and is placed oddly in the article. But it doesn't seem necessary to have such a section at all. Other thoughts? - Phoenixrod 17:07, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
If the size of screenshot images was a bit larger, they would display in their original format (without scaling) and the page would look alot better. Is there a reason why they are scaled down? Rossy Miles 09:32, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
I tested the images at full resoultion and it seemed fine. The only problem was, if the page is viewed at a smaller screen size, the text is not eaisly readable. This could be fixed by moving the images further apart. - Rossy Miles 10:07, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
83.171.147.125 has added a link to a list of emulators. I'd remove it myself, but I've already removed the one that they added to Amstrad CPC, and don't want to do anything that could be seen as harrassment. -- StuartBrady ( Talk) 11:42, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
A reference link added by Seancdaug on January 5, 2005 to the Regional Differences section, "darkwatcher.psxfanatics.com/console/nes.htm" , has been blacklisted by someone. I've removed it so people can continue to modify the page.-- Poshzombie 00:23, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Maybe the possible cartridge sizes(meaning game memory, not physical size) should be added like on the SNES page. I would do it, but I don't know how big the largest games were. TJ Spyke 17:28, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Dear Friends:
Recently, the article titled Sega Mega Drive/Sega Genesis was renamed simply Sega Mega Drive with the reasoning that Sega Mega Drive is the correct name because it was the name that came 'first' and any other branding that came later should simply be a redirect to the initial name, regardless of which name is better known or more popular (Google Searches come up with more results for "Sega Genesis" than "Sega Mega Drive").
Therefore, I am making the proposal to move Nintendo Entertainment System to the name of origin, Famicom; the Super Nintendo Entertainment System to the name of origin, Super Famicom; and Resident Evil to the name of origin, Biohazard. Please comment on this below. Thank you. 71.244.180.131 23:02, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
How angry you all seems to be! The man made the right thing proposing the move first. He didn't even followed the move procedure, opting first to see the impressions of the community. He has a point. He may be right to some extent. I don't understant why did many of you flamed him? We should always assume good faith and be courteous to other wikipedians. Remember these rules (... guidelines...) when responding. The fact that the Mega Drive got discussed here is collateral because he used the Mega Drive naming as an analogy to the NES. I oppose the move because the naming conventions state that the name should always try to be the most well known name (sometimes it's hard to figure out which one is). The Tom Cruise analogy was funny but pointless, his baptism name (was he baptized? are scientologists baptized? :-) has nothing to do with an article that aims to be a bio of the actor which is known as Tom Cruise. Using this analogy is the same as proposing to name an article about any software with his project name rather than it's final product name. But, in the end, I think this is all settled now: NES stands because it's more common in english speaking world. (by the way, if you search google and try to compare results for Famicon and NES, please ensure you sum up the results for 'NES' and 'Nintendo Entertainment System' not only the latter). Regards Loudenvier 15:57, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
The Famicom and the NES were not just different versions of Nintendo's home console in the 1980's. They were completely different systems with different games, features, and designs. They also have a different development and release histories, and were geared towards different audiences.
Anyone else's thoughts?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.236.208.26 ( talk • contribs)
Sorry to be pedantic, but there seems to technically be a contradiction here. It says that the developer only had to pay a fee, then it goes on to say that they had to pay a fee, submit to qa and manufacture through Nintendo. While you can quibble whether or not that has anything to do with quality, I don't think you can say that the only thing the developer had to do was pay nintendo off.-- 144.131.67.249 10:15, 28 October 2006 (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. |
I was thinking: since the Commodore 64 was designed to be a home computer for the entire family, and was launched in 1982, 1 year before the NES, could it be that the Family Computer was named Nintendo Entertainment System in USA, Latin America and Europe, because the name "Family Computer" could cause the NES to be mistaken for the Commodore 64? If someone knows something, let us know. Da nuke 01:14, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Would it be a good idea to include photos of NES clones? I just purchased one and could submit a photo. just a thought Michael Ray 15:55, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
@Damian Yerrick:
For the second time now, i have corrected the PAL NES CPU speed from 1.68 Mhz to 1.77 Mhz. Like the NTSC consoles, the CPU speed is determined by dividing the Pixel clock by 3, which is 5.32Mhz / 3 = 1.77Mhz. The 5.32 Mhz pixel clock is generated by dividing the 26.58Mhz PAL master clock by 5. The 26.58Mhz PAL master clock is 4 times the 4.43Mhz PAL color carrier frequency. Is this enough proof now? FEB 7TH 2006(VIG) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.141.247.108 ( talk • contribs) 20:44, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
Sorry to burst your bubble, but the PAL NES CPU speed is not 1.77 MHz - numerous tests have been performed on the real hardware and the RP2A07 divides the PAL NES's 26.601712 MHz master clock by 16, not 15 as you expected. The proper PAL NES CPU speed is, in reality, 1.662607 MHz. --
Quietust
01:57, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
Since I happen to own an original PC10 arcade PCB, i can confirm that the video output are inverted RGB signals. That means, voltage levels @ 1V are dark and voltage levels at 0V are bright pixels. They probably did it to make service replacements with standard components harder. FEB 7TH 2006(VIG)
Hi. I'm just a wee bit late for this, nonetheless I thought it was crazy that it wasnt mentioned. The NES Sports Set--shouldn't this have information about that? Or the first of its kind controller AKA Nintendo Blaster? Power Glove? These are some big things that no one had ever done before and I think they should be added in this lengthy article. Bourgeoisdude 01:25, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
I changed the line: "Games like Gradius made heavy use of the NES's parallax scrolling capabilities." to: "Games like Gradius made heavy use of the NES's scrolling capabilities." because, although you can achieve parallax scrolling on the NES by changing the gfx content of tiles while scrolling (like Bucky O Hare), the hardware has no native support for it. You can only have 1 tile based scrolling layer. Besides, Gradius on the NES has no parallax scrolling (as the original arcade version) Feb 11th 2006 (VIG) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.141.237.211 ( talk • contribs) 23:30, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
I was only about 1 yr old when the console was released here in the US, so I don't exactly remember how the NES was sold. Can anyone add here or to the article about how the system was sold - i.e. Did the system come in "flavors;" A plain package with just the console and adapters, A game bundle with MB and the console, or a ROB bundle w/ the Robot and Gyromite, etc...? Also, I think this article could benefit from someone adding a pricetag at release to the system, or system bundles if that is how it was released. I believe the console alone was $200.00, but I do not know this. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.60.11.247 ( talk • contribs) 23:05, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
Anyone else notice that there is a "Nintendo" article that is different from this one (see here)? It'd be a nightmare to combine the two, but unfortunately I believe it needs to be done. They are one in the same, are they not? Bourgeoisdude 01:05, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
i was under the impression that thier was a third variant (i belive it was the US one) that loaded through the top but was different from the famicom can anyone confirm/deny?
I can't help but notice there's nothing in this article about the price of the system and games at launch. Does anyone actually remember what it was? Bdve 16:14, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
Wouldn't the predecessor for the Famicom be the Color TV game??? Just wondering... ( Bobabobabo 19:54, 12 May 2006 (UTC))
I don't know if it can be considered the predecessor but if you are wondering why it didn't show up in the article after you edited it, it's because you typed in "Predecessor" instead of "predecessor" (I noticed that when I clicked the preview button). Another thing I noticed in the preview is that since you put "game" instead of "Game", it wouldn't have linked to the article. SNS 17:44, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
Do we have a citation for this claim? It seems dubious. --
Daniel Davis
01:44, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
ok, try this for a citation http://cgi.ebay.com/1983-Square-Button-Famicom-CIB-Nintendo-Japan-nes_W0QQitemZ280099677014QQcategoryZ4315QQrdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQcmdZViewItem —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.181.253.122 ( talk • contribs).
Now, if you really wish to cite a source, by all means, cite www.famicomworld.com, it is linked to in this article, and is a reputible site for information on the famicom. Or, you could check japanese wikipedia. Now, since you are so dead set on following the rules, im going to site JL's site since it's fact and repubtable, and linked to in other portions of this article, if you have a problem, let me know, but since the site is repubtable I do not see any issue. Also, I find your attitude to featherplucknfilms rediculous, because without him, half the information available to westerners about famicom wouldn't exist. Give the guy more credit.
This is Kris, aka featherplucknfilms and owner of the Feather Pluckn' Famicom Shop in Japan. I'm not sure exactly what the problem here is, the fact that they exist or that there isn't a webpage made by Nintendo that says they exist. I understand you want to follow rules and have citations for all information, but based on your strict guidelines it seems the only legitimate source would be an article directly from Nintendo, on their webpage, and in English. This probably won't happen. I don't see why pictures aren't proof of their existence. I have pictures of the system, box, and motherboard with serial numbers and copyright dates. I can take them from any angle or including any items to prove they are not manipulated. Many of those pictures are available on http://www.famicomworld.com or from myself. I realize I may be nobody, but I am knowledgable on the subject and have pictures to prove this early edition of the Famicom. Following are several webpages (including some auctions with pictures and Wikipedia Japan) that document this. http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%95%E3%82%A1%E3%83%9F%E3%83%AA%E3%83%BC%E3%82%B3%E3%83%B3%E3%83%94%E3%83%A5%E3%83%BC%E3%82%BF (This is the excrept that is important) 十字ボタン、A/Bボタン、START、SELECTボタンを備え、その後のゲーム機のコントローラとして標準的な形となったコントローラを2つ持つ。初期に製造されたコントローラーはABボタンが四角いゴム製だったため、連打がきかず、故障もしやすかったため、後に丸いプラスチック製のものへと改良がなされた。また、この四角ボタンの最初期の出荷分(発売日頃)に関してはコントローラーのケーブルとRFスイッチのケーブルが灰色になっている。コントローラを初めとして、赤と白を基調とした本体のカラー配置の基準は、当時最も安価な部材の色が赤と白だったことに由来する。[Basically means the square button controllers were on the first models, and that they were rubber and of poor quality compared to the circular buttons]) http://page7.auctions.yahoo.co.jp/jp/auction/g54800671 http://page4.auctions.yahoo.co.jp/jp/auction/d70684728 http://www.otakaraou.com/product/1405 http://page7.auctions.yahoo.co.jp/jp/auction/g49408218 http://news.ameba.jp/2007/03/3837.php Featherpluckn 04:18, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Hi there. I am overzealous when adding references to articles because it is what we must do: focus on quoting reliable sources. In the strict sense of the word, Nintendo itself would be a primary source and should not be quoted. It seems to me you are finally admitting you are overzealous. If you can't quote nintendo themselves, then who are you going to quote? And hell, why on earth would you quote BIASED publications such as IGN, gamespot, etc. I also find it amazing how you don't deny the existence of a square button famicom, which is arguebly impossible after all the information we have given you, yet you argue the sources are "unnaceptable". How is a picture, multiple auctions, and a REPUTABLE website featured prominantly in the links section of this article not good enough?? I think you need to get outside a bit more my friend, and stop lurking on wikipedia all day long. In addition, I was the one who added famicomworld as a citation, and I have no affiliation to that site other than the fact that I am a member. I do not own it, or claim to own that site. In yet another addition, you claim there are only auction sites, japanese wikipedia, and famicomworld backing up this information, yet I noticed kris also linked you to news.ameba.jp, which is neither an auction site nor japanese wikipedia.
How about the system in my hand, is that a reliable source? IGN, Gamespot, etc. don't focus on this sort of information and probably never will have any article about this. Even if it did, I doubt it would be as informative about http://www.famicomworld.com because they don't care. So, according to you, this item should never be acknowledged because it has very little information about it in the Western world. Seems a shame to deprive people of solid information because it's source isn't Gamespot. And we never mentioned anything about using an auction to determine the cost, we used multiple auctions to provide additional proof of their existence and availablility. Featherpluckn 01:54, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Kris has already taken numerous pictures of it, infact, that auction I linked you, and famicomworld.com, are both Kris' square button unit. If you want it on the page, then by all means we can place the picture on the NES article page. Infact, I just did. Now, don't worry, I followed regulations. I think we can all agree, that this picture proves the existence of the square button to the person reading the article. Arguement over.
what need is ther for a UK flag when the EU one is there? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 59.167.79.126 ( talk • contribs) .
Well i belive the EU flag is used to represent Europe, weather or not that is correct i'm not sure. As for the UK, it is part of the EU. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 59.167.66.54 ( talk • contribs) .
Reybrujo, the united kingdom was admitted to the european union on the first of january 1973. Go back to school and stop spreading false information please.
A new section called Notable Games has been added by an anonymous user. I don't follow this page, so I don't know if I should remove the section. But it seems to be very POV to claim which games are "notable" at the expense of all the others, especially when the critera for "notability" are not established by a reference. Certainly the section is not wiki-linked and is placed oddly in the article. But it doesn't seem necessary to have such a section at all. Other thoughts? - Phoenixrod 17:07, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
If the size of screenshot images was a bit larger, they would display in their original format (without scaling) and the page would look alot better. Is there a reason why they are scaled down? Rossy Miles 09:32, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
I tested the images at full resoultion and it seemed fine. The only problem was, if the page is viewed at a smaller screen size, the text is not eaisly readable. This could be fixed by moving the images further apart. - Rossy Miles 10:07, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
83.171.147.125 has added a link to a list of emulators. I'd remove it myself, but I've already removed the one that they added to Amstrad CPC, and don't want to do anything that could be seen as harrassment. -- StuartBrady ( Talk) 11:42, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
A reference link added by Seancdaug on January 5, 2005 to the Regional Differences section, "darkwatcher.psxfanatics.com/console/nes.htm" , has been blacklisted by someone. I've removed it so people can continue to modify the page.-- Poshzombie 00:23, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Maybe the possible cartridge sizes(meaning game memory, not physical size) should be added like on the SNES page. I would do it, but I don't know how big the largest games were. TJ Spyke 17:28, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Dear Friends:
Recently, the article titled Sega Mega Drive/Sega Genesis was renamed simply Sega Mega Drive with the reasoning that Sega Mega Drive is the correct name because it was the name that came 'first' and any other branding that came later should simply be a redirect to the initial name, regardless of which name is better known or more popular (Google Searches come up with more results for "Sega Genesis" than "Sega Mega Drive").
Therefore, I am making the proposal to move Nintendo Entertainment System to the name of origin, Famicom; the Super Nintendo Entertainment System to the name of origin, Super Famicom; and Resident Evil to the name of origin, Biohazard. Please comment on this below. Thank you. 71.244.180.131 23:02, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
How angry you all seems to be! The man made the right thing proposing the move first. He didn't even followed the move procedure, opting first to see the impressions of the community. He has a point. He may be right to some extent. I don't understant why did many of you flamed him? We should always assume good faith and be courteous to other wikipedians. Remember these rules (... guidelines...) when responding. The fact that the Mega Drive got discussed here is collateral because he used the Mega Drive naming as an analogy to the NES. I oppose the move because the naming conventions state that the name should always try to be the most well known name (sometimes it's hard to figure out which one is). The Tom Cruise analogy was funny but pointless, his baptism name (was he baptized? are scientologists baptized? :-) has nothing to do with an article that aims to be a bio of the actor which is known as Tom Cruise. Using this analogy is the same as proposing to name an article about any software with his project name rather than it's final product name. But, in the end, I think this is all settled now: NES stands because it's more common in english speaking world. (by the way, if you search google and try to compare results for Famicon and NES, please ensure you sum up the results for 'NES' and 'Nintendo Entertainment System' not only the latter). Regards Loudenvier 15:57, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
The Famicom and the NES were not just different versions of Nintendo's home console in the 1980's. They were completely different systems with different games, features, and designs. They also have a different development and release histories, and were geared towards different audiences.
Anyone else's thoughts?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.236.208.26 ( talk • contribs)
Sorry to be pedantic, but there seems to technically be a contradiction here. It says that the developer only had to pay a fee, then it goes on to say that they had to pay a fee, submit to qa and manufacture through Nintendo. While you can quibble whether or not that has anything to do with quality, I don't think you can say that the only thing the developer had to do was pay nintendo off.-- 144.131.67.249 10:15, 28 October 2006 (UTC)