Talk:Nintendo DS/Archive 1

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.

GB(A) successor(s)

I removed the following, recently posted, information snippet from the article and put it here on the Talk page for further discussion; if the interesting part could be confirmed it would be relevant for the article: « In February of 2004, Nintendo stated that the Nintendo DS is NOT a sucessor (sic) to the Game Boy Advance and that Nintendo is currently developing a sucessor (sic) to the Game Boy Advance. »

The first statement (DS no successor to GBA) is already confirmed and part of the article, and so needs no repetition. The second statement, however, is potentially quite important, and should be included in the article if it can be confirmed by an external link. --Wernher 11:07, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)

This is absolutely true, an interview with Perrin Kaplan of Nintendo of America confirmed that a successor gameboy is also in the works. --Anonymous

Thanks -- I notice this is now reflected in the article. Also, during the period after my own previous edits of the article, I see that the GBA compatibility issue has been resolved as well. --Wernher 00:38, 30 Jul 2004 (UTC)

PictoChat ad

Who ever said PhotoChat DS, you're wrong! It's PictoChat DS! Too late to fix it! I already did. --Anonymous

I removed the PictoChat DS remark, that's like advertising.--naryathegreat 02:24, Jul 17, 2004 (UTC)

Information loss

How come all this info was removed in just one day? (see this link for the differances) Can anyone explain this?
--Fern 12:05, 17 Jul 2004 (UTC)

First, to be more precise: the info was actually removed in one minute (see diff). Second, it was done/perpetrated by the eminent Mr/Ms Anonymous from the above thread re "PictoChat", who according to the logged contributions haven't done much else on Wikipedia (at least not from that IP address). If we feel like it, we might of course go and see whether some of the removed stuff should be put back in. As for me, I'm not sure we should just put everything back -- some of it seemed to be (intelligent) ruminations on the possibilities of the DS hardware, which is no sin in and of itself, but which might not have a place in an encyclopedia. --Wernher 00:38, 30 Jul 2004 (UTC)

"64-bit graphics"?

An hour of so ago I corrected a statement of the DS being a "64-bit console" to 32-bit, based on the wordlength of its two ARM processors. However, some Googling left me slightly in doubt as to whether the DS should be considered a console with "64-bit graphics" (which might be the case, say, if its graphics hardware has 64-bit GPUs/datapaths). Anyone having read more about this? --Wernher 00:58, 30 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Bits of the processor have no baring on quality of the graphics. For example, GBA is 32 bit, its not capable of PSX/DS graphics, PCs are also 32 bit and largely outdo consoles.

Exactly. It seems a daft statement to me- however, it's not part of the 32-bit era, and while it has two 32-bit processors, it'd be a bit off to call that 64-bit hardware. So I nixed the statement. See ruminations on bit-counts/eras usage. --Sockatume 03:22, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Game Boy 2

I took out the reference to the Game Boy 2, because not only is it irrelevant, it's unsubstantiated. Where does anyone from Nintendo say "Game Boy 2"? Adding 2 to consoles is something that has come from PlayStation 2's dominance over mainstream games - all consoles from Nintendo have had codenames (Project Reality, Project Dolphin, Project Revolution, etc.) Back to the relevance point - whenever we get real information from Nintendo, it should go to the Game Boy article. Andre 04:12, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Should we use that 50-something list of DS releases?

Eh? Lockeownzj00 21:57, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)

You mean the one on List of Nintendo DS games? Maybe we should move it out of See also into a more prominent area. Andre 22:00, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I see someone's put up a list of launch titles. While that's fair enough for the time being, I'm probably going to remove it on launch day. It's too bulky and too slight to be worth keeping. Sockatume 01:23, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Update on pricing

Sept 24 AP article about Sony PSP at Tokyo Game Show, but includes pricing for DS: $149.99 in US and 15,000 yen ($135) in Japan. Link at http://www.usatoday.com/tech/products/gear/entertainment/2004-09-24-psport_x.htm Petersam 04:43, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)

This promotional campaign

Can someone clarify exactly what it is? –Andre (talk) 18:48, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

A series of heavily-photoshopped images from the folk at WarpPipe. In a recent interview, they've claimed they're working on something "different" for the DS which won't be packet-tunneling technology. Aside from that, they've refused to comment further (or on whether they're now working for Nintendo or have become an authorised thirdparty developer for the system). Sockatume 22:51, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Is the concept design of the Nintendo DS needed?

It doesn't add anything to the article besides a bias trying to make the Nintendo DS seem like a gimmick.

I don't think it adds much, but I don't think it's biased either, nor do I feel it takes away anything from the article. If you can think of another reason to remove it, I'll support its removal. Andre (talk) 22:51, Nov 16, 2004 (UTC)

It takes up space, but it's relevant as a historical footnote perhaps. On the other hand, there aren't pictures of the PS2 or XBox prototypes on their articles... maybe time for a "Games hardware prototypes" article? The "satirical" image should go, though.Sockatume 17:05, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I agree with Sockatume. The DS does not look like that any more. As a historical footnote, it is far too prominent on the page. Agreed on the satirical image as well - let's clean this page up a bit. -Armaced 19:57, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I actually think that the original creator of this section was referring solely to the satirical image, but I like the article as it is now. Andre (talk) 20:07, Nov 21, 2004 (UTC)

Much better. Thanks, Andre. -Armaced 20:14, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

DS Picture Link formatting

It was made into a link on purpose, as it makes a good footnote but it's considered unnecessary and cluttering as an image. Sockatume 20:23, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Whoops, sorry, didn't realize you could do that thing with the colon. >>;

Er... I'll leave it alone for now. That was a bit of a mess-up. --Shadow Hog 22:29, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

*chuckle* Well, that was confusing. Sockatume 22:31, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I think we've got it now. Andre (talk) 22:34, Nov 21, 2004 (UTC)

802.11b or 802.11n?

The page says the DS uses the N frequency right now, but that hasn't even been standardized. Shouldn't it be B?

I'm pretty sure it uses an early version of n. Andre (talk) 19:31, Nov 28, 2004 (UTC)

On the other hand, someone could've stabbed a bit too far right when aiming for their B key. ;) Sockatume 21:23, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Everything I've read has said it's 802.11b. K1Bond007 07:18, Nov 29, 2004 (UTC)

Playstation Portable link?

Why is a link to the Playstation Portable [sic] included in the links section? Regardless of the perceived war between DS and PSP lovers, links to information about the PSP are not relevant to this article. -

Nah, it's relevant enough IMHO. PSP and DS are competitors and in the same portable generation, and the DS was arguably conceived of to begin with to fight Sony's entry into handhelds. Andre (talk) 06:14, Dec 12, 2004 (UTC)

I disagree. I think that the link to the PSP is not needed. In fact, it seems to me that this is almost an act of Sony "fanboy-ism." I notice that the PSP article also has a link to this article. It seems to me that someone is trying to make it seem that there is a "war" between the PSP and DS. In my opinion, that violates NPV. Additionally, why is there a picture comparing the PSP and DS? They are different products from different companies, and there is no way to justify that picture. I mean, on the Playstation 2 page, is there a picture of it along side the Gamecube? No, there isn't. And like this, there shouldn't be.

I put the PSP link here to balance the DS link included in the PSP article. They represent a generation of hardware, they're possibly going to be sales rivals, and they've been heavily scrutinised and compared by the press, so it seems fair to me link them to eachother. Almost every console article links to the manufacturer's other products (GBA to DS and GC, for example), so I don't see why the system's competitors can't be represented by a link. As for the image, I'm not bothered whether it's kept or removed or split in two so there's just one console on each article. Socka tume 13:39, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

MiB versus MB

Please refer to Binary prefix. As a description of solid-state memory, both instances of MB in the article actually refer to mebibytes. UTSRelativity 06:15, Dec 12, 2004 (UTC)

My bad, somebody pointed out that I got my meanings of the prefixes backwards (I'd remembered Mibi etc. as the decimalised, round-numbers version), but I forgot to actually revert my revert. Will do immediately Sockatume 12:35, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Screen Manufacturer

There's an edit-war going on here between two anonymous users; it's quite likely there's a similarly heated discussion going on in a forum somewhere with each side seeking to use the Wikipedia as evidence. The issue is who built the NDS' screen; one claims it's Sharp (manufacturer of the PSP screen), one claims it isn't. As the only information I can trawl from Google regarding the DS screen's manufacturer is an unsubstantiated forum topic, I cannot say with certainty who is correct. I call for both parties to cease their editing immediately and resolve the dispute by posting any evidence for their case here. If not, I'll consider contacting an admin and having the article protected until such a time as the dispute can be resolved by third parties. Sockatume 20:12, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I don't recall where I saw it, but it was an article on dead pixels, it mentioned the screen being made by sharp. Sorry I can't be of much help, but I'm almost certain sharp makes the screen. [[User:GregNorc|-GregNorc (talk) ]] 00:56, Dec 23, 2004 (UTC)

I've seen a couple of other articles mention it as well, so I'd be willing to let it go up, but I'd be a bit wary until there's some evidence, lest there be more edit-war feeding. Sockatume 13:27, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

My edits

Mostly to improve NPOV nature and trim down a bit; I moved the DS-and-PSP image down the page, and removed redundant links (IIRC it's standard to only include one wiki link to a specific article in a page, so save overloading with blue text), and because the DS-and-PSP image just seems far more appropriate in a segment listing other handheld machines. Sockatume 14:06, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Removed speculation section....

It contained no references to substantiate the claims it made.

It contained links to interviews with the people in the company in question, didn't it? It should've, they're easy enough to find. [1] Sockatume 17:30, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Ping Pals

Ping Pals was not a US launch title...see e.g. [2]. Also the fact that I work in a game store and we didn't get it until the date listed on that page. ;) --Tubedogg 07:05, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)

That's not true. I saw it in the store on launch day myself, even debated buying it. GregNorc (talk)

I find it hard to believe that GameFAQs [3], IGN [4], and Gamespot [5] are all wrong about the release date. The official website says "December". [6] Nintendo says December 7. [7]

Also as I said before, the game store I work at got it on December 8 which lines up with when they all think it was released. (We get games one day after the official release date typically, except for very popular games.)

Therefore, rving. --Tubedogg 19:26, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)

I saw it, in the store, on the release date of the DS. I remember considering buying it. I don't care how many links you have, I SAW IT ON LAUNCH DAY. News sites can have erronous information, I don't. I haven't even been in a game store since I got my DS, so I know I'm not confusing two trips. GregNorc (talk) 19:38, Jan 8, 2005 (UTC)

You may have seen an empty "coming soon" box (which we do a lot at GameStop), or confused it with something else, but when every site (including the sites of the platform manufacturer and publisher of the game) disagrees with you, your "I'm never wrong" stance looks a little sketchy. THQ (the publisher) has a press release on their site stating they shipped the game on December 7. [8] Unless you are now claiming that the company that created the game doesn't know when they shipped it, please stop rving. --Tubedogg 06:53, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Here's a link, second result on google for "Nintendo DS Launch games" http://ds.ign.com/articles/554/554867p1.html GregNorc (talk)

1. The article is dated October 7, 2004, 6 weeks before the launch actually happened. Things change from day to day, let alone in 6 weeks.

2. Even ignoring that, read the article — it says "other third-party titles available during the launch period [include Ping Pals]..." (emphasis mine) and it defines launch period as "the first 30 days of the system's launch", not the singular launch date.

3. You didn't trust IGN when I posted a link to what they say is the release date, why do you trust them now?

4. Regardless of any of that, THQ, the PUBLISHER OF THE GAME, says it was shipped on December 7. I really don't care what you think you saw or didn't see, publishers don't accidentally issue press releases 3 weeks after a game is shipped stating the game was released the day of the press release. Stop reverting it, you are wrong. --Tubedogg 22:42, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

That's nice. It also mentions the rest of the titles. If you don't like it, tough. I have both the fact I saw it in the store, AND a link. If you want, I can remove the whole section, since all those games are cited as in the "launch window". I'll be reverting now. Also, why would that article show up second on google if it's wrong? The first site didn't refute my claim.

-GregNorc (talk)

This is your evidence:

1. You claim to have seen it in the store.

2. You have an article, written on October 7, that you claim says Ping Pals is a launch title.

My rebuttals, again:

1. I believe you are mistaken. You may have seen a coming soon box, or a promotional box, or some other empty box, but given that the publisher states without uncertainty that the game wasn't actually shipped to retailers until December 7, I have no choice but to believe you are mistaken. (Some games ship to stores prior to their release dates...Halo 2 for example was in the back room at my store by October 25. However, stores are contractually obligated, under penalty of heavy fines — $250,000 in the case of Halo — to not release a game until its' official release date. Even assuming it shipped to the store early, which given the publisher's statement I don't believe happened, it was not intended to be available on November 21 and therefore one store putting it out early would not qualify it as a launch day title.)

2. The article is correct, but you are misinterpreting it. The article states that Ping Pals would be released within the launch period, not on the launch day. The list of games on the DS page are those that were (officially) released on launch day. Since Ping Pals was not, according to numerous sources including the publisher, it does not belong on the list. Even if the article said "Ping Pals will be released on November 21", the article was written six weeks before the events actually transpired, and information updated after the events took place trump conjecture written prior.

My evidence is as follows:

1. The links I posted above to GameFAQs [9], IGN [10], Gamespot [11], Nintendo [12], and THQ [13], all stating December 7 as the release date (with the exception of THQ which says "December 2004"); and the link I posted to the press release, dated December 7, stating that the game had in fact been shipped on December 7 [14]. If you want an article written before the release date which states that Ping Pals would not be a launch day title, you can reference this other press release [15] on THQ's site (look for the section titled Handheld Leadership, about 1/3 of the way down the page).

2. You misunderstand how Google works if you are questioning why an article about DS launch titles shows up at #2 given a search for "Nintendo DS launch titles", and why it would be #2 if it were wrong. Google shows the pages that are most relevant to your query, and in some order of popularity - IGN is an extremely popular website, and an article about DS launch titles is relevant to your query; and the article is not wrong, again you are misinterpreting it.

Regarding your assertion that the titles listed were released within the "launch period", that is accurate - but as it happens, they also happen to be the titles released on November 21, and hence are called launch titles. Ping Pals, as shown by all of the information above, was not released on November 21, therefore it doesn't qualify.

Please stop reverting the page. I modified the language earlier to make it clear that the titles listed are from November 21, not the "launch period" that IGN invented. If you continue to revert, given all the evidence you are wrong, I will be forced to initiate dispute resolution. --Tubedogg 07:30, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Well, why would an erronous article have a high pagerank? Especially an old one. If this information was false, IGN would have issued a follow up article, and it would most likely be viewed more often than the erronous artice. I'm reverting, go ahead and initiate dispute resolution. Just leave me a link on my talk page, or here, so I can rebutt you please. -GregNorc (talk)

Actually, I can easily answer that one: because everybody wanted to know, before the DS came out, what games would be available for it at launch, hence the IGN article came up rather high. IGN doesn't usually edit articles (or if they do, I've never noticed it), so they might have made a mistake and never bothered fixing it, OR the release date was pushed back AFTER the article was written and therefore IGN ignored it (you can't spell ignorant without...).

Either way, IGN themselves list a different release date, so if I had to pick a side in this irritating little debate (seriously, the reverting upon reverting is getting annoying), I'm with Tubedogg; he has several sources to prove his point, while you have one that's already contradicted by one he posted. Consider it two against one... just so we can get this thing over with. x_x; --Shadow Hog 03:08, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Two points in response to GregNorc:

1. The article is not wrong. Again, you are interpreting the article as stating that every game listed would launch on November 21, when the article clearly says otherwise.

2. Even if the article was erroneous, it was correct at the time it was written. Just as all of the articles written on IGN's site prior to the announcement of Halo 2's actual release date state what turned out to be an incorrect date or time period, this article was written prior to the actual release of Ping Pals and therefore may state information that is later made incorrect. Just because they didn't create an article saying "OK, here are the actual release dates for all the games we listed in the DS launch article" does not mean the information contained in the original article is either correct or timely.

Oh, and 3. the article has such a high pagerank because IGN has a very high pagerank, because of their popularity. --Tubedogg 04:05, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I don't understand why you insist on saying your edit is correct when you don't offer any other evidence. Tubedogg has offered plenty of evidence in his position, yet your stuck on a high rated page from Google? Don't you think it is kind of ignorant to say "see talk page, this version is correct" when you don't offer any more evidence than hear-say? How about you find a few other sources that explicitly calls Ping Pals a launch title? I'm reverting. Ritz 03:20, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Could that "ping pals" vandalism by 64.8.81.232 be related to that stubborn fool? I think so. Socka tume 17:49, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Get an admin to check my IP, it wasn't me. Anyways, I'm off to RV the article AGAIN. -GregNorc (talk)

Apologies. Socka tume 23:46, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I'm changing the article's text to say launch "window". Now both of us can be happy. I'll add ping pals, and change it to say "These titles launched in the launch window". I think this is more than fair. -GregNorc (talk)

I don't think anyone really cares which games launched in the first 30 days, they care which games launched on the first day, so I don't really think it's "fair". But if you insist on going this route, there are more games than those listed that were released within the launch window, and the launch window according to your IGN article is actually the first 30 days, not 11/21 to 12/31. I've edited appropriately. --Tubedogg 23:08, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Did you notice you didn't add Ping Pals to the list after you made the first edit? I think GregNorc's compromise is fair, though. I'll edit it back in and see if I can make the statement a little more concise. Ritz 21:43, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Why not say "The following titles were available on the system's launch..." and "The following titles also arrived during the "launch window" of 30 days from the launch..."? Socka tume 23:46, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Fine by me, but GregNorc can't agree on whether Ping Pals was launch day or launch period. That's what brought about this whole ruckus in the first place. --Tubedogg 23:49, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I've offered a compromise. If you can't accept that, I'll be the one initiating dispute mediation. Almost every site I found mentioned the launch window, and not just what was available on launch day. I suggest you back off. -GregNorc (talk)

Have I reverted the page? Have I changed it back to launch day? No, no I haven't. What precisely are you going to tell dispute resolution? "He won't revert my changes!" I suggest you lose the attitude - you're wrong about Ping Pals, and when confronted with evidence, you offer a "compromise" of replacing the whole launch day section with "launch period" which was invented by Nintendo's marketing department. The reason you found repeated mentions of it was because Nintendo put out a press release containing those words (launch period). Historically, though, no one gives a crap about whether a game came out on the 2nd day or the 50th day, they care about what was available on day 1. --Tubedogg 01:42, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Reverts from "vandal"

I had made changes to the article changing US refrences to North America as appropriate. Then it was reverted back because the IP was from a school proxy that has been known to contain vandals. I can see why it was done, however, in error. I would just ask that you check the changes to the article before you revert it. It is a school proxy and therefore is used by anyone in the school... some are vandals, yes, but some (like myself) are trying to improve it. Please check for vandalism before you alledge it. Thanks. Ritz 22:56, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I must note that some Americans seem to attribute things that apply to both the States and Canada or all of North America to only the US. It is very inconsiderate. I am not saying that all Americans do so, but I have half a mind to put POV check notices on articles with that problem as I find them.

-- UTSRelativity 05:50, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

About DS media

Should a comment be made that talks about Nintendo's decision to use Flash media to avoid moving parts in thier system? I think it is relevant, as I see the danger of having moving parts jarred out of place when dropped... however, that might be a biased or ignorant statement. I tried making the edit, but I had it removed and named "bull****", interestingly enough by the same person who reverted my US to North American edit "vandalism"...

Any suggestions as to what might be a more valid or complete entry of the subject? Ritz 02:56, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

IMHO, it is relevant too. My problem with the way it was originally stated is that I do not know whether Nintendo made that decision for this reason to any degree at all. There should be no problem with adding the fact that flash media does not have moving parts, etc. and noting the benefits of that simply as commentary.

-- UTSRelativity 04:01, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

That's exactly why I removed it the first time. It wasn't specifically designed because of that, and it sounds SO much like one of the trolling "strawman" arguments that pop up between the PSP and DS articles, particularly recently. Ritz's re-write of it is excellent. In addition, there have been a lot of edits from the same IP (Calgary Board of Education) that has contributed 50 acts of Vandalism in the last two weeks, many of them on this page (also the reason why I reverted the North America reference on site, because of that IP). Ritz went the extra mile for that IP and verified the info for that. Terrapin 16:07, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I understand now, I shouldn't have been so defensive. I should have realized that using that IP (in innocence or not) isn't such a good idea when it has this vandal stigma around it. I'll make sure I'm logged in when I make edits out of the school... Ritz 16:40, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Is 128MB the maximum size of DS cards, or will there be bigger ones in the future?

Japan releases?

Does anyone know the Japanese release games (within thirty days) ? If so, please add it to the article or contact me.

Wi-Fi

The text in the article was slightly incorrect.

Old text: The unit features wireless networking capabilities for multiplayer games or chat, which can use either a proprietary short-range wireless link (supporting up to 16 players), or Wi-Fi. The proprietary link is capable of a range up to 40-100 feet (30 metres), depending on conditions. This link is also coined as Ni-Fi. The DS uses the IEEE 802.11b standard for Wi-fi, slightly modified for the proprietary link.

I changed this to:

The unit features wireless networking capabilities for multiplayer games or chat using Wi-Fi. The current software does not use IP, thefore preventing Internet play features and use of Wi-Fi routers with the DS, however future games can implement an IP stack and therefore support online gaming.

Reasoning: Darkain was one of serveral people who worked on cracking the wireless communications of the DS. There is a thread on this that is over 30 pages long. It descibes the progress of hacking the DS's wireless. They were successful in capturing and decoding Pictochat packets, and were even able to progress to the point of making the DS beilve that nonexistant games were available for ds download play.

They succeeded in doing all of this using normal (although highly specific) Wi-Fi hardware. They had to use specific Wi-Fi hardware because some hardware has a nasty habit of modifying packets, and the DS uses short preamble. Short preamble is an optional Wi-Fi feature so some (many?) devices do not support creation of packets using it.

Darkain explains that the DS uses only wifi on a page at his site. (Pedantics may note that the DS deviates just a tiny bit from the 802.11b in some areas, but this makes no difference to the argument as a whole.) Of some note is that based on his description, while a Wi-Fi *router* will not work with the DS's Layer 3 Protocol, a Wi-Fi *hub* (I don't think these exist) would work as a range extender by repeating the raw MAC packets.

Please feel free to help rephrase my replacement as appropriate. Tacvek 23:28, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

It seems as though the wording for the online multiplayer is a bit unclear in terms of home users. It is mentioned that you can purchase a USB wirepess adapter from the Nintendo online store, however, there seems to be no mention at all that standard 802.11B/G routers will also work for online multiplayer (for the games that support this). This also seems to be a large misconception on quite a few sites that I've read lately. It seems at though everyone thinks that only Nintendo's wireless adapter will work, when in fact any stardard router will also be acceptable. I will also be re-authoring my article on Wi-Fi vs Ni-Fi that all of these places are referencing to help clear things up for everyone. -Darkain Dragoon 06:41, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Demasked and its relevance

I have deleted the section on Demasked, as an interview with Chap Paulson has revealed what it is, and it has little to do with the DS or Nintendo. A Man In Black 10:15, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the info, for those wondering, the critical entry is probably:

N-S: There have been rumours flying around that Demasked is not solely for the Nintendo DS any more, if this is indeed true, how will the software interact, and what platforms are they planned for?

Chorx VaccieneCP : As stated earlier, Magellan was slated to debut with the Nintendo DS. We are obviously very respectful of Nintendo and we enjoy their products. As it stands, Demasked is very heterogeneous. Demasked could be used in all three next-generation consoles including the two current-generation handhelds. Socka tume 11:06, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Regarding Recent vandalism

Don't give up your day job, Mr. Would Be Reviewer. Socka tume 00:18, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, seriously. Wikipedia is not a place to put out personal opinions. Other websites cater to that end much better. --Shadow Hog 01:13, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Rumble pack feature in Metroid Pinball

I think someone whould note some of the E3 news. Firstly, it has been reported that some kind of GBA cartridge with a rumble pack in it was used with the Metroid Pinball demos at E3. Also, apparently Nintendo have made some kind of talking system that can be used with the DS's wi-fi. It used a head set, and I think it's meant to be some kind of a voice over system..

Doesn't surprise me; what DOES surprise me is that they've not made a GBA cart for DS saves yet, since that could mean multi-card cames, such as large RPGs (and if Squenix's in tow, FFVII anyone?). --Shadow Hog 15:01, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

Metroid Demo

If the Metroid demo is not bundled with the Nintendo DS as of May of 2005, I have a question: I bought my Nintendo DS yesterday, and it was bundled with the Metroid demo. So, is it still bundled or is this a rare case? --WikiFan04^{ß 1:36, 9 Jun 2005 (CDT)}

It's not rare, you just bought an old box that the store still had in stock. DS systems shipped in May and afterwards no longer have the demo. --Poiuyt Man ^talk 10:57, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Size

It looks like the weight and color of the unit are described, would it be possable to get the size posted? 66.173.192.96 03:47, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC) Never mind, lifted size from this page [[16]] 66.173.192.96 01:55, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Touch screen

Someone removed the "First touch screen gaming console." Could somone elaborate as to which console had touch screen before the DS? Just curious. Havok 29 June 2005 09:11 (UTC)

Both the Game.com and the Tapwave Zodiac. - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 30 June 2005 06:07 (UTC)

Pictures of colors messes up page in IE

When viewing this page in IE, the "Red", "Purple Pokepark", and "White" images from the "Colors" section float to the top of the article, making the text unreadable. The page works fine in Firefox. I tried using an HTML table to resolve the issue, but that just floated the rest of the pictures to the top as well, so I reverted. Anyone know how to fix this? -Armaced 30 June 2005 18:18 (UTC)

People who still use IE should be shoot. :P Havok 30 June 2005 18:36 (UTC)

It's fixed now, made it a gallery, should look good in IE aswell. Havok 30 June 2005 18:46 (UTC)

Much better. And cool trick, by the way. Of course wikipedia users would be firefox users, and Linux users, etc... :) -Armaced 30 June 2005 19:58 (UTC)

I refixed it, works perfect in IE. Havok 22:37, 9 July 2005 (UTC)

Battery

Someone had added info on how the battery is interchangable. While it can actually be removed, it is not meant to be interchanged with other batteries like a cell phone. After much use, the battery will only fill to about 75% of a full chage, and after about 500 charges the battery will need to be replaced. Removing the battery, however, will cause the loss of all of the DS's stored memory, and the owner will need to add all of it after the new battery is inserted. Atomic Cosmos 04:46, 4 Jul 2005 (UTC)

Opposition to NDSUpdates.com?

Why do you oppose adding ndsupdates.com to the links list? NDS Updates is a news website for the Nintendo DS that is updated daily when something new regarding the DS arrives. It also has a large download center with all homebrew related to the DS.

I notice that you have a link to an SNES emulator for the DS. Why not allow a link that has that emulator, and all other emulators for the DS, such as the GB/GBC, Genesis, NES and more? Xizer

Because it's just a blog, and there are hundreds of them. Possibly thousands. If NDSUpdates was significant in the homebrew community, it'd be above the bar, but until then, it's not.

If you want to flesh out the links to the emulation sites themselves (which are significant, as long as they're functional or notable in a technical sense), go for it. - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 00:52, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

As A Man In Black said, there are thousands of links to blogs, which we don't need. This site is not a link depository and as such all links should be discussed her first. Havok 09:11, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Subtle POV towards PSP in both this and the PSP article

Problems

Complete lack of reference to Nintendo DS in PSP article (compare to the references to PSP in DS article).
Lack of comparison picture psp_and_ds.jpg in PSP article.
No mention in overview of PSP article of supposed "competition" between DS and PSP.
No linked words in PSP article to DS, as opposed to great amount in the DS article.

Immediate action taken

Inserted mirror paragraph in the PSP article of mention of PSP in DS article overview.
Added NPOV tags to DS and PSP articles.

Possible solution 1

Delete all references to PSP in DS article, and revert PSP article to before I added DS mentions overview.
Change DS comparison picture to a GBA/DS picture
Remove (bottom of page) links to PSP and DS in both articles.

Possible solution 2

Mirror every mention of PSP in DS article with DS in the PSP article and ensure that any edits relevant to this issue on both articles are replicated.
Include comparison picture psp_and_ds.jpg in PSP article.

Possible solution 3

Include section in both articles/seperate article on supposed "competition", include psp_and_ds.jpg there, and perhaps some sales comparisons.
Delete all references outside of these sections/page, treat all edits that try to defy this as vandalism and revert.

--Trip: The Light Fantastic 11:22, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Maybe we should make a page, something like Nintendo DS and Sony PlayStation Portable rivalry. Then we can move all this to there, and add links from both articles. --Carl 07:06, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

I don't think that's a good idea. Wikipedia does not side with anyone. And all that does is fuel that fanboys. It would be better to remove all mention of a rivalry and any reference to any type of comparison between the two. As I said in the PSP talk page, it's like comparing Chocolate and a Ham sandwhich anyway. Havok 08:02, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

"I don't think that's a good idea. Wikipedia does not side with anyone."

Of course it doesn't. However, the article would simply present facts and figures, statements by the companies and by the media etc;, remaining neutral. I dont think the idea should simply be dismissed. However, it has its faults, as do all the solutions. Trip: The Light Fantastic 10:04, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

I see nothing wrong with either article, they both discuss the capabilities of each system and do not flaunt that they're better than the other. You're just looking for an excuse to complain.

I would prefer the line "Nintendo is currently competing against Sony with their PlayStation Portable, although representatives from both companies have denied this, stating that each system targets a different audience. The Nintendo DS is currently the leader of the two in total unit sales." be removed. This is only speculation and has nothing to do in this article at all. The same goes for the PSP article. Havok 01:19, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

That's likely not going to happen. Speculation my eye, it seems EVERYBODY feels there's a rivalry going on here, and it had dang well better be mentioned. It is very much on-topic (as it pertains to the DS), so your "nothing to do with the article" argument doesn't hold water, either. --Shadow Hog 01:41, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Much better. The paragraph you've made is much better then the one I removed. Good job. Havok 01:51, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Good. Andre (talk) 02:45, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

Excellent. The paragraph is very neutral. I think. However, the comparison picture psp_and_ds.jpg still remains unresolved. Why does the DS's size need to be compared to the PSP's? It is akin to comparing the size of a mp3 player and a minidisc player. I think it would be better should the DS be compared to its sister systems, such as the the GBA or SP Trip: The Light Fantastic 13:40, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

What the hell is wrong with you? The Nintendo DS and the PSP are competing, it is just a picture that shows them both side-by-side. What's wrong with that? When someone goes to buy a new handheld these days, they are either going to get a DS or a PSP. The DS should NOT be compared to the GBA, as it is an old handheld. If you want proof, what is the DS backwards compatible with? The GBA! That means the GBA is OLD. The picture is neutral, as it shows the PSP and DS both equally.

Calm down. Andre (talk) 21:55, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

This goes to show just how little you know. Nintendo have stated that the GBA will continue to live on and is still their "Game Boy" flagship. The Nintendo DS is something completely different that they created for "fun" and to open a new type of handheld market. If you want to be completly anal about it, the PSP is actually competing against the GBA SP/Micro, not NDS. They do capture two seperate sides of the market. Also, the NDS can't play all GBA games, and it can't play GB games at all. Also, please try and stay civil, no need to "explode" like that. Havok 08:10, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

I find it amusing, Havok, that you believe everything a company says. The GBA will live on, but Nintendo is focusing their efforts on the Nintendo DS - The GBA is only around as a budget system. It is clearly meant to be the GBA's successor. The PSP IS competing against the DS - people are not going to say "Hmm, it's either this system that came out in 2001, or this system that came out in 2005." People are going to be saying "Hmm, it's either this system that came out in late 2004, or this system that came out in early 2005."

Wow, everyone, calm down. Things are getting too heated when people are saying "What the hell is wrong with you?" or "This goes to show just how little you know." This is something that can be resolved with a cool head; please don't lose yours. - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 12:27, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

Okay, anonymous contributor, if "The Nintendo DS and the PSP are competing, it is just a picture that shows them both side-by-side", then I am sure we will receive no complaints if we truly "show the PSP and DS both equally", and insert the picture of the DS and PSP side by-side in the PSP article? I think not. The Sony fanboys will scream blue murder that we have desicrated their article with a picture of the DS.

To those less, shall we say emotionally attatched to this argument, my gut instinct is to demand that the psp_and_ds.jpg comparison picture be included in the PSP article. However, I am not demanding that, for the following reasons.

I feel that it is critical that this issue be resolved quickly, and certainly not expand back into the PSP board, to minimize the likelihood of fanboy rants and vandalism, especially because of what we have already seen on both boards relative to the small amount of time spent on this debate. The quickest way to do this is to change the PSP and DS comparison picture to a DS and GBA picture. As an afterthought, the current picture is far too dark anyways. Trip: The Light Fantastic 21:06, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

As a footnote, I see the PSP_and_DS.jpg picture has been inserted at the bottom of the PSP article. I know it sounds hypocritical, but my own arguments and those of others have persuaded me that it only fuels fanboyism to have said picture in any of the articles, although a GBA one on this page may be useful though. And plus, it's too dark anyways...

And another thing(!)- I put a DS and GBA comparison picture on the article to try and get a concencus. There is an easy way out now from all the competition debate - delete the psp_and_ds.jpg comparison picture from both articles. Whether it worth taking? Another matter.

Ahem. A DS and GBA comparison? Please. Who is considering getting either a GBA or a DS? Children, who know no better, perhaps. But most people are considering getting either a PSP or a DS. The picture is just what the two systems are like next to each other. You mean to tell me that a handheld system from early 2001 is competing with a handheld system from late 2004? Hah! The GBA and DS are not competing, it is the PSP and the DS, and as such, the DS and PSP should be compared. Xizer 05:01, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

We don't make articles to help people decide which system to get, we create articles to fill it with facts about it. So using that as an argument is void. The GBA and DS are not competing, and the DS and PSP are not competing. Why do you want to compare the two? If you want to compare them so much I would sugest creating an entirely new article that discuss the technical differences between all handhelds, not just PSP and DS. Havok 09:35, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

You're right when you state the GBA and the DS are not competing, but the PSP and the DS are. They're the two hot portables right now, just like the Xbox, GC and PS2 are the 3 hot competing consoles right now. You mean to tell me the GameCube, PS2 and Xbox aren't competing? It's the same situation between the DS and the PSP, they're just handhelds, not consoles. Xizer 17:26, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

You're also right in that we're not helping people decide what system to get (that would be POV) but mentioning the rivalry isn't really helping people decide, it's just informing them of the rivalry that exists. But then, we have a paragraph covering this already, so why are we still arguing?... --Shadow Hog 17:32, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

I'm sorry, when exactly did I say there was competition between the DS and GBA? And childish comments like "Ahem. Who is considering getting either a GBA or a DS? Children, who know no better, perhaps.". What I'm trying to say is: why on earth do we have a comparison picture between the DS and some (to those who know nought about the supposed "rivalry") random system? We may aswell slap in a picture of the DS vs the Gizmondo, or DS vs N-Gage for all the good it does to the reader. We should have a picture of the GBA and the DS because it shows the comparison between the size and shape of Nintendo's systems, showing how the company has progressed in it's system design. Like when the Revolution come out, it could be shown with a Gamecube, its predecessor, or when the PS3 comes out, it could be shown with a picture of the PS2. Why have a picture of a technically unrelated system? To satisfy fanboy demands for "rivalry", that's why. And "we have a paragraph covering this already, so why are we still arguing?", thanks for that but if we somehow a paragraph covering a picture, I think things are getting overly subliminal for your average Wikipedian. So, in response to the last comment, lets not try to gag this debate, eh, Shadow Hog?

Trip: The Light Fantastic 13:13, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

I have removed the comparison picture, it's silly and it's like comparing cheese to milk. Havok 13:26, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

The problem with that analogy is that cheese and milk aren't widely considered to be going head-to-head in competition by most accounts. ;P

The removal's really uneccesary, especially when it appears a majority here want to keep it. Frankly, I think we should just leave it; I mean, really, WHAT harm is the thing doing? --Shadow Hog 14:02, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

Metroid Prime: Hunters - First Hunt Bundle

I do not think that it is true, the idea that it's not bundled with it anymore. I bought my DS in July, and I got it with Super Mario 64 DS. -- A Link to the Past 21:31, July 16, 2005 (UTC)

Are you referring to the European, U.S., or Japanese DS? We know the Metroid Prime Hunters demo is no longer packed in with American DSes, but I am wondering if that is the case with European DS units. Xizer 18:14, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

I'm just going to assume that if my DS was packed with it two months after its cancellation, then it's NOT cancelled. -- A Link to the Past 13:20, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

Might have been older stock. Havok 13:23, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

Fine, put it on, but put a note saying that there may be old stock in some stores. -- A Link to the Past 22:45, July 23, 2005 (UTC)

Put a note saying there may be old stock in some stores? Of course there might be. Putting a note is not necessary as it states the obvious. Xizer 00:10, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

When people read that, they're bound to assume that it's just gone now, period. -- A Link to the Past 10:29, July 25, 2005 (UTC)

From a retail perspective, it is gone forever. If someone finds it on eBay or what not is not something we can take into consideration. If someone wants to find that pack, they will check for it regardles of what we say in the article. Havok 10:35, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

I can confirm it is still in the box with DS's in the UK. • Thorpe • 11:14, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

And I can confirm that there were many of these at Wal*Mart. -- A Link to the Past 18:09, July 25, 2005 (UTC)

Poll

Here's a poll - should the DS and PSP comparison picture be included in some form in the article?

Yes, as an image in the article

Andre (talk) 15:06, July 22, 2005 (UTC)
Shadow Hog 16:15, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
Of course, the PSP and the DS are the two main handhelds at the moment. You'd have to be smoking crack to think that they aren't competing. I see nothing wrong with a picture of both handhelds side-by-side. If you want to remove it because some lame ass fanboy might bitch and moan, then you are only giving in to them. Xizer 00:11, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Yes, as a link in See Also to the image

Ideally, it'd be a picture of as many handheld game systems as possible. - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 05:08, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

No

They have nothing to do with each other, and only serves as fodder for fanboys. The picture should be moved to Comparison of Handheld gaming consoles, seeing as it has no place in either the PSP or DS article. Havok 23:08, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
Same as above. And in the interests of fairness, I seriously hope this poll applies to the PSP article also. Trip: The Light Fantastic 15:22, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Comparison of Handheld gaming consoles

I've created Comparison of Handheld gaming consoles, feel free to add other handhelds and correct faults. Havok 11:37, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Nice. I believe I suggested this as one of the possible solutions. Could this be developed into a more far reaching comparison table, perhaps incorporating all games consoles? Trip: The Light Fantastic 21:32, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

DS Wi-Fi trailer out now

IGN has a DS Wi-Fi Trailer video that will be appearing in theaters. Here is the link to the article. Here is a link to the video. -Hyad 07:28, July 31, 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw it today while seeing The Wedding Crashers. It's definitely in theaters. Andre (talk) 08:00, July 31, 2005 (UTC)

I saw it a day before you posted, not that that's a bad thing. Are these ads in Australian cinema's?--Sultn 08:56, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Colors

I made a small addition to the Colors section. This is my first edit, so I'm sorry if I did something terribly wrong. Also, I wasn't sure where to post my source... --Wraith 19:07, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Picture caption incorrect

Just a quick notice, as this is my first change on any article:

Previously, the Green special edition DS was labelled as Jay Mohr's, however according to this article: CBS News it was Poppy Montgomery's. Jay Mohr's is described as swirling blue metallic.

Price drop

Nintendo is reducig the price to $129.99 in North America. [17] I was looking over the article for somewhere to add this info., but I can't find a good place. Thunderbrand 16:34, August 16, 2005 (UTC)

Table of Contents on left/center

I don't like it. The main thing it has going for it is that it removes the white space between the intro and the next section, which isn't a big deal to me. What I do find distracting is that the main text is now condensed into half the width of the page, which affects readability. I'm using 1152x864 resolution, too. At 800x600, it's extremely cramped. I'm removing Template:TOCleft for accessibility. --Poiuyt Man ^talk 06:24, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

I agree. Andre (talk) 18:43, August 31, 2005 (UTC)

Definitely agreed. TOCleft and TOCright only work with relatively small TOC tables. - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 19:15, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

I also find the recently-added TOCcenter template unappealing, but purely out of aesthetic preference. Anyone agree? --Poiuyt Man ^talk 02:51, 11 September 2005 (UTC)