Talk:List of Virtual Console games for Wii (North America)/Archive 10

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 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

I restored the previous version that listed Cruis'n USA. The problem is that although ESRB is a valid source, I can't give a direct link. No matter what game you search for, the URL will always show as http://www.esrb.org/ratings/search.jsp. Is there any way to go directly to a game listing? CardinalFangZERO (talk) 07:47, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Just say ESRB in the edit summary. --Cheesemeister3k (talk) 16:34, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Where did Cruis'n USA come from? I've checked the list a lot these past couple of months and never saw that there before. I hope 1080 comes out before Cruis'n USA does. Neo Samus (talk) 19:30, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm at work so I can't check if this is the case here, but sometimes a years-old ESRB entry will just get "Wii" tacked on to the existing systems when the VC version gets rated. This has the unfortunate effect of forcing said games to "debut" at the very end of the list. (The most recent example off the top of my head is Breath of Fire 2.) -68.16.91.170 (talk) 20:54, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Would Harvest Moon be another example of a title debuting near the end of the list? Neo Samus (talk) 15:54, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

For direct links to the ESRB search, use a URL like this http://www.esrb.org/ratings/search.jsp?searchType=title&platformsCriteria=Wii&titleOrPublisher=Game%20name and replace the "Game%20name" at the end with (obviously) the game's name. The %20 code should be used in place of spaces. For example, a search for Phantasy Star II would be: http://www.esrb.org/ratings/search.jsp?searchType=title&platformsCriteria=Wii&titleOrPublisher=Phantasy%20Star%20II 207.134.103.122 (talk) 15:52, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

I propose we do not list ESRB as a source. For one, it's inconsistent to list some games on the announced list when others aren't that never got an ESRB rating until recently. These games include: Super Bomberman 2, Super Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back, Super Mario Kart, Super Return of the Jedi, Star Fox 2, and that's just to name a few. Also, I'm fairly certain there's at least some disclosure practices about the VC. So unless all those games listed on the ESRB that never got a rating before (it's understandable that they bumped their K-A rated games to E) are on the VC, then ESRB should not be considered a source.

ADDENDUM: Actually after looking at the link, it did list the game as Wii. However I still feel that Nintendo wouldn't really give out this information either this early or at all. - XenoL-Type 11:02, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

It was just announced that starting in February, Sega will be releasing Master System and Game Gear games on the VC (starting with "Fantasy Zone" for 500 points and "Fist of the North Star" for 600 points). It's been confirmed that they will release them in North America and Europe too (MS and GG games in general, I don't think the FOTS game was localized before). Here is the source (it's in Japanese though: http://plusd.itmedia.co.jp/games/articles/0801/25/news075.html). It says that they will be released under the Master System label. While this means we should just have one table like we do for TurboGrax-16/TurboGrafx-CD games, should we at least mention which ones are GG games? TJ Spyke 10:11, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Good question.. I think it'll depend on how they are on the Channel. If they are one channel, we put everything as they designate it. --LN3000 (talk) 10:41, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Any word on how many Wii Points we can expect to spend on each Master System/Game Gear title? Jeff Silvers (talk) 00:50, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Nope, they only listed the prices of those two games. It seems like the starting price would be 500 (which seems right considering that it's the equivalent of the NES, which also starts at 500 points). TJ Spyke 00:53, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

It is perfectly permissible for an editor to remind others that what should be being discussed is the article, and not the article subject. It is not the best policy to remove such discussion, however, as it is unlikely to prove productive. That said, ignoring the comment is not productive either, and may have repercussions for those who appear uninterested in contributing to the encyclopedia. Thank you. LessHeard vanU (talk) 20:39, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Well LessHeard vanU, I'm removing it anyways. Versus22 (talk) 12:27, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

All the unnecessary stuff TJ put on here (excluding the archives) are now removed by me. Please don't hassle me... Versus22 (talk) 22:10, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Before I get excited, is there any sort of source for Smash Bros. N64's March 3rd release date? (Edit: Meh, looks like it was just a vandal.) - Joshua368 (talk) 14:42, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

It seemed to good to me true, so I went ahead and removed it. I really don't think we will get two N64 games back to back. Neo Samus (talk) 15:09, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Neo Samus, please add it back on and change the release date to "Unknown". Joshua368, we don't know if this game is coming out next week until Friday or Saturday. Versus22 (talk) 15:13, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

So where's the source that says it is planned to come out sometime and merits a spot on the list? (even if we don't know the date) - Joshua368 (talk) 15:53, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

We usually get a source from NeoGAF and/or VC-Reviews. They announce games close to the weekend. Versus22 (talk) 16:34, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I've set this game to "Unknown" until we get a source about a release date.Versus22 (talk) 16:39, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

But there is no source that it is coming out at all. That's called using a Crystal Ball[[1]]. Nintendo has not announced it and it's not on ESRB. It can't be on there. Sorry. Neo Samus (talk) 17:14, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I, I understand... Versus22 (talk) 17:25, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I know how you feel. I want it too. But since there is no valid source it can't be on there. Cheer up. :) Neo Samus (talk) 18:48, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I've added this section in the article because the other regions have this. If someone could update the games added, that would be great! I don't have time right now to add all these, so I would like someone to help me do this please. Versus22 (talk) 17:01, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Sure I'll go ahead and do it. Neo Samus (talk) 17:14, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry to be Mr. Party Pooper.. but I am not quite sure that the counting thing is necessary for the article. It seems more like trivia than anything else. --LN3000 (talk) 18:19, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

then I'm guessing you haven't seen the other regions. They have had the table for almost two months. I don't know, it doesn't seem like trivia to me. Neo Samus (talk) 18:50, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Maybe we can put this on GamerWiki by creating a page of the Virtual Console if it seems to be a problem here. Versus22 (talk) 19:29, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

This doesn't need to be on my user talk page. No, I haven't payed much attention to the other reasons. And for the record, I wasn't the one who removed the section in this article, I only commented how I wasn't really comfortable with it, not knowing the purpose of it. Each system section has a count for games in that category, do we really need it broken down by how many were released each year? --LN3000 (talk) 22:36, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I'll remove this section from the other regions as well then. Versus22 (talk) 23:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't think Versus was blaming you LN. I was suprised how quickly Rob deleted it though, considering how long the other pages have had that info. Neo Samus (talk) 14:41, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

The other regions no longer have this section in their articles. Versus22 (talk) 01:56, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I wasn't going to delete it. Just not paying attention to the other articles, and seeing how fast it was added to this article without talking about it, was surprising. --LN3000 (talk) 04:07, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

When you sort it by release date, with the most recent at the top, King's Night is at the top. Yoshi's Cookie and Bases Loaded should be at the top. 76.126.29.36 (talk) 22:13, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

It looks fine the way it is (new release dates at the bottom of the list for every system). Versus22 (talk) 15:00, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Whatever the problem was, it looks like it was fixed.. probably just a wiki-glitch. --LN3000 (talk) 22:50, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Should there be a new policy on the future releases besides having an actual accessible source? Considering that most of the games on the Future Releases list have been sitting there for months with "unknown" as their release date, I suggest a new policy that Future Releases cannot be listed until they have an actual accessible source that has announced their release date. Having them listed the way it is becoming monotonous. 76.126.29.36 (talk) 01:47, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

The problem of course is that there are currently no future releases that actually have a confirmed release date. Therefore if we were to require a source with a release date, we'd be eliminating the entire list. I think a better method would be to eliminate the "Release Date" field and perhaps asterisk any titles that do get their release dates announced (I'm pretty sure there won't be any more of those, Nintendo seems to be favoring to not announce them). Thunderforge (talk) 02:51, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I had the same issue, and I suggested, and still think is a good policy, that only games which have been announced through Nintendo or Sega or whomever is in charge of a system, should be in the Future Release section. But that idea was rejected, and now the list is completely filled with games that have some kind of ESRB rating, even though that does not guarantee a Virtual Console release. Just my two cents... --LN3000 (talk) 15:48, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I'd say having an ESRB rating definitely confirms that a VC release has been planned, otherwise they wouldn't bother to get old games re-rated. Of course, plans can change, as we've seen with Vectorman, ESWAT, and Crack Down (which, actually, have all been removed from the old press releases announcing them on Sega's site, so it's a good bet they aren't coming any time soon). Still, considering how many games get rated and then later show up as VC releases (probably 95% of VC games released since the beginning of 2007 fit this), it'd be foolish to discount the source. I don't mind changing it a bit (removing release dates is fine since no games besides TG-16 releases ever get dates, and obviously anything that disappears from the ESRB site a la Zombies Ate My Neighbors can be removed), but the core of the list should stay. The Crimson Shoe (talk) 05:41, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm liking the table without the release date. Looks a lot cleaner, not as messy. It might stop people from posting fake release dates too! Well, I can at least dream. :D Neo Samus (talk) 13:42, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

I restored the release date column due to the IGN news story with word from Aksys Games on release dates for 3 upcoming titles. --Cheesemeister3k (talk) 00:55, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Will the Column be removed again once these games have been released? I'm wondering if we should break the table into two? Make one with confirmed titles and the others with the release date column removed? Next to each other of course. Neo Samus (talk) 22:46, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Might as well just leave it, as there could always be occasion to use it. Splitting tables would just make it messier. --Cheesemeister3k (talk) 14:09, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I think it should be split, it wont be messy. RobJ1981 (talk) 19:14, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

What is the source for Pokemon Puzzle League 2008-05-05May. I look at the esrb but there is no listing. http://www.esrb.org/ratings/search.jsp?searchType=title&platformsCriteria=Wii&titleOrPublisher=Pokemon%20Puzzle%20League -Rob mc 1 (talk) 14:21, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

If the Master System currently only has games set at 500 points, then perhaps we should have it as "500 unless otherwise stated" until we find out what the normal price is. What does everyone else think? --LN3000 (talk) 21:05, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm starting to get suspicious myself, but... Sega announced these were going to be 400 points, we've got the citation for it. I'm not sure why they've started off with two games that run a buck more than the price they declared, but... maybe it was a mistake, maybe they changed their minds... for right now I'd say keep it because it's cited, but if a third title hits at 500 we need to reconsider for sure, or or if we get an official statement from Sega about this we'll obviously flip it. --Bishop2 (talk) 21:11, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

I believe we should change the Master System price to 500 Wii Points in the article. VC-Reviews is not an reliable source. Reliable sources are major game and entertainment companies (ex: IGN, Nintendo, Sega, Hudson Soft). The 400 point price was probably just a typo and likely false info. Vernon (Versus22) (talk) 05:28, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I feel the same way. I was going to post a discussion about this, but you beat me to the punch. Change it (which as been done already) and if the next game is 400 will change it back to 400 points. Neo Samus (talk) 18:47, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks for the feedback, everyone.--LN3000 (talk) 18:02, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Someone updated too soon with the April 21st NES games. 76.126.29.36 (talk) 00:43, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Um, no they aren't. It was announced by the publisher on IGN Wii. This week was River City Ransom, this coming monday is Double Dragon and the following Monday is Renegade. Neo Samus (talk) 22:05, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

The editor was referring to an edit that listed the April 21 games under the available titles section (way before they were officially released for download). I'm not sure which editor added it originally, but my undo is this: [2]. RobJ1981 (talk) 23:34, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh my mistake. I didn't see it in the history for some reason. I must have passed it up. Neo Samus (talk) 17:54, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Someone has vandalised the names of the Interplay games in the "Future Releases" chart. I seem completely unable to remove it. (EDIT) I've ended up reverting it. If this has messed up anything, please fix it.Chris16447 (talk) 20:00, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

I noticed that there's been a bit of an edit war going on with the Crusin' USA publisher. While there's a comment next to that part saying that it was definitely Nintendo, not Midway, the Cruisin' USA article clearly states that the publisher is indeed Midway Games. So it seems to me that the comment about it being wrong needs to be removed. If anybody can shed a bit more light on this, I'd be obliged. Thunderforge (talk) 03:06, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

As far as I know, this article lists publishers according to what appears on the Virtual Console itself, regardless of the original publisher. So while Cruisin' USA was originally published by Midway, I assume the VC version says "Nintendo" and that's what should appear here. 207.134.103.122 (talk) 12:42, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

That article is wrong. If Midway had published the game on N64, the company's logo would've been on the box. [3]. --Cheesemeister3k (talk) 13:28, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I may not know if this game was originally published by Midway, but Nintendo published the Virtual Console version. I believe we have agreed to use the publisher for the VC versions of games.(oops forgot to sign)Mmark089 (talk) 02:56, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

But isn't technically Nintendo the publisher for all VC games? -Zomic13 (talk) 04:05, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

No. Nintendo is not the publisher for EVERY VC game (i.e. King's Knight, Sonic the Hedgehog). They just add them to the Shop. You can see the publisher for each game in the Shop or here.Mmark089 (talk) 04:59, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

EarthBound has been rated by the ESRB: http://www.esrb.org/ratings/search.jsp?searchType=title&platformsCriteria=Wii&titleOrPublisher=EarthBound

YAHOO!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.142.43.21 (talk) 15:23, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Now let's see how long it takes Nintendo to "actually" release Earthbound. Neo Samus (talk) 16:50, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Small nitpick: "Earthbound" goes to the redirect page; the game proper is "EarthBound" with a capital B. 207.219.176.227 (talk) 17:22, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

This makes me happy. --LN3000 (talk) 18:36, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Why was Ninja Turtles declared a foreign game when it was released shortly after its release in Japan? Retromaniac (talk) 20:45, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Where is it labeled a foreign game? -Zomic13 (talk) 21:37, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

If you are referring to the fact that the price is 600 Wii Points, please be aware that the price of a game is not indicative of whether it is an import game or not. There are several games that have non-standard pricing, but are not imports. -Zomic13 (talk) 21:38, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Here is the ESRB source: http://www.esrb.org/ratings/search.jsp —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.121.102.73 (talk) 17:19, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Here's a website that says Nintendo announced it. http://zeldawiki.org/The_Legend_of_Zelda:_Majora%27s_Mask#Ports_and_Remakes —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.61.222.72 (talk) 22:45, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

• I don't see an official press release.Roman619 (talk) 00:58, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Someone edited this to say Earthbound comes out tomorrow, May 12. No soure, not staying. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.121.102.73 (talk) 21:28, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Yeah I agree. It might come out tomorrow, but most likely not. But we haven't had a SNES game for months!AlexanderLD (talk) 21:34, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

What happened to today's update? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.121.102.73 (talk) 12:16, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

• It hasn't happened yet, I think? 24.58.143.68 (talk) 15:05, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

There were no new Virtual Console titles released today. This week was centered around the release of WiiWare. Now I shall go download Pop. --LN3000 (talk) 17:26, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

• I am slightly disappointed that Nintendo thinks WiiWare update / launch counts for this week's update. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.45.195.110 (talk) 20:51, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Since there was no update, it should be noted. They do it for the PAL and Australian VC releases!AlexanderLD (talk) 20:49, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

• Put that note on the Japan region article as well. Vernon (Versus22) (talk) 23:16, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I've entered it in myself (no Japan VC update for March 25, 2008). Vernon (Versus22) (talk) 18:31, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

The US Virtual console game list (this article) has a publisher column, but the Europe version of the list has a developer header. Surely the tables should contain the same columns? They're supposed to be regionalised versions of the same list! Digifiend (talk) 13:05, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

As far as I'm aware only the North American VC displays the Publisher. Unless any one from the other regions can tell us how games are catorgized?? Neo Samus (talk) 15:23, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Much of the recent vandalism has stemmed from people adding their "wish list" games to the list of future releases. I propose that we create a new column in the future releases table with the title of "Source" or something similar. Basically, this cell would state that the game is known to be a future release because it is "ESRB rated" or "Announced by [whomever]" (e.g. Interplay). This would make it easier to check the source and deter vandals (one check on a website would prove if the game really is coming or if it's just a "wish list" game) and would eliminate much of the confusion over why a certain game is included. A similar model can be found at this website. What do you all think about implementing this sort of change? And while we're at it, does Nintendo Power count as a valid source for announcing SimEarth coming to VC? Thunderforge (talk) 03:54, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I would support that. I know that some people will argue that the sources for those games are the general sites listed, but I would really prefer to have the column so that each game can be quickly verified. Yes, Nintendo Power is a reliable source for VC titles. -Zomic13 (talk) 09:47, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm all for it. Also, for the ESRB titles, I'd like to throw out the idea of adding a link directly to the search result for each game (you can see how this is done in the first EarthBound topic on this page.) This would make it easier to check if the games are indeed still listed on the ESRB site. -Arcanelore (talk) 00:35, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Like this. -Arcanelore (talk) 02:30, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

In light of this conversation (and several of the following ones about vandalized future releases), I see no reason why we should not add this. Since Arcanelore already began the process (thank you!), we'll use his version. Thunderforge (talk) 16:09, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about the Bio Miracle slip-up. I thought I had checked all my links but apparently that one slipped by. -Arcanelore (talk) 23:51, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

A lot of games in the future release section don't seem probable. It was vandalism, so most of those games need to go because there is no source for them.AlexanderLD (talk) 11:17, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

What's with Hudson being listed as the publisher for World Heroes? They have nothing to do with that game. Also, SNK Playmore themselves are not publishing the VC NeoGeo titles; D4 Enterprise is. (MoxManiac (talk) 17:51, 30 May 2008 (UTC))

I had noticed that too a few days ago. So I went ahead and changed it back to the proper publisher. Neo Samus (talk) 14:02, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Who took it off the list. It should have been discused first. Games have been on that list for months, and Earthbound has been only on for 1 month! AlexanderLD (talk) 00:38, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

It just got lost in the crossfire, along with a couple of others. -Arcanelore (talk) 00:44, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Did something strange happen today? On the Nintendo press website it doesn't say today's games. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.121.102.73 (talk) 12:08, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Nope everything normal, VC got updated with Ninja Combat for the Neo Geo for that week. --Dark Samus (talk) 15:45, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I visit this page quite a bit, and over the last week or so, I have noticed a ton of vandalism has been going on. Specifically, one person with the IP 24.205.31.239 has been vandalizing this page quite a bit. I hardly ever participate in anything in Wikipedia, but I was just wondering if there is a way to ban certain IP addresses if they consistently vandalize. 68.42.195.35 (talk) 23:25, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it is possible for administrators to ban IPs from Wikipedia. I went ahead and warned the IP you mentioned. I wouldn't really concern yourself with who the vandals are, they'll be taken care of. Thunderforge (talk) 04:15, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Earlier, I had asked if Nintendo Power was a valid source for predicting Virtual Console titles. I was told yes and therefore it made sense to add SimEarth to the list of future releases. The trouble is that I don't subscribe to Nintendo Power and I couldn't find an article about it online, so I don't know if all my details are correct. The best I could find was this website which I used to empirically determine the info about SimEarth coming to VC. I'm not sure if it's in the November magazine (the blog post was published in November) or the December magazine (if he received that one already). If anybody actually has a subscription to Nintendo Power and can confirm the info, that would be great. -Thunderforge (talk) 15:50, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Do you have a rough idea of what issue it was in? I can check my issues later today. -Zomic13 (talk) 18:16, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

It's either in November or December 2007. I have no idea what numbers those are. Thunderforge (talk) 03:53, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

The Nintendo Press Site no longer shows the game that should come out that day. What happened? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.121.102.73 (talk) 12:04, 9 June 2008 (UTC)