Talk:GameCube

Template:NESproj Because of their length, the previous discussions on this page have been archived. If further archiving is needed, see Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page. Previous discussions:

• Archive 1 (December 12, 2002 to December 7, 2005):

Third Party Opinion

After looking at both versions I have to mostly agree with GoldDragon's version. The problem with Brazil4Linux's version is that it uses statements like "which are all family-friendly" and "which the "hardcore" gaming market was not interested in". These statements are opinion and violate the POV rule. Jedi6 03:42, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Good job with your "compromise edit", Jedi. Hopefully this could possibly end this ugly situation that's cropped up and bring a little bit of peace back to Wikipedia. Remember everyone, that the spirit of Wiki isn't hostile revert wars and such, but a positive community effort. --Doom127

Looks like Brazil4Linux isn't willing to settle even for a halfway compromise. He's hiding behind a different IP (one that happens to still trace right back to Brazil) in order to completely undo the reverts you've made, Jedi. --Doom127

GoldDragon's version has the following problems:

1. "Key first-party titles": the actual rant is about market share
2. "unsuccessful ... mainstream market": undefined term, probably means whatever he wants it to mean. Nintendo could have been aiming at the 5-10 year old market and could have been completely successful for all we know.
3. "aging franchises": POV
4. "teen[-to-]adult age groups that now formed the majority of the gaming market": unsourced and almost certainly wrong, unless if "adult" means anyone older than a teen in which case this statement is so nebulous it is useless to the reader. Actually the entire market share rant is a "console wars" screed which is trolling for people to insert their POV and relies too heavily on personal opinion. I think it should be excised entirely.

Ashibaka tock 07:09, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Allow me to answer a few of your comments, Ashibaka.

First off, you state that the "mainstream market is an undefined term". On the contrary, it's a clearly stated demographic, one with quite a large majority. The mainstream caters to the majority group of gamers, which are males from 13-18 and males from 18-40. These are very specific tastes, which is where the game genres present in today's entertainment comes from.

And, as for "the teen-adult age groups that now formed the majority of the gaming market."

This is referring to the 13-40 year old male core demographic that forms the core of the majority of gamers today. According to the economist, without even touching the hardcore 13-16 year old segment of male gamers, the 18-40 age group makes up over 60% of the overall gaming market.

http://economist.com/images/20050806/CSF279.gif

There's your source. Hope this helps clear some things up for you. --Doom127

If I read the graph correctly, that figure is actually 43%, not 60%, and the age group is 18-49, not 18-40. See [1] for some more details. Basically you are describing a minority as a majority.

Please explain who defines "mainstream market" and where they do this. Ashibaka tock 01:04, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

My mistake, I was meaning to say "13 to 40+" male. Omission of a plus sign can make quite a difference. -- Doom127 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Doom127 (talk • contribs) .

As nobody else wanted to comment on this I simply made some quick changes which hopefully nobody will find upsetting. Calling the GameCube a "failure" is rather POV when it was financially successful, but that's just My Humble Opinion. Ashibaka tock 23:39, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

GoldDragon, thank you for your helpful rewrite; the market share discussion is much clearer now and I don't see any further reason to complain. Ashibaka tock 04:45, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Controller Buttons

A previous editor stated that the "number of buttons" on the Cube controller was a contributing factor in terms of low game numbers on the cube. He also stated that the controller has "three less" buttons than the PS2/Box. This is incorrect. The PS2 controller has six face buttons, the DPad, two analog sticks with click button and four shoulder buttons, for a total of 16 buttons. The GameCube has five face buttons, the DPad, two analog sticks, four shoulder buttons (L2 and R2 are accessable via "click"), and a Z button, for a total of 14 buttons. That's only two less than the PS2 controller, and those two extra buttons were underneath the analog sticks (meaning they weren't used often, and thus weren't a large porting factor). -- Doom127 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Doom127 (talk • contribs) .

Geez... 16 buttons! I left active gaming when consoles had L, R, X, Y, A, B, a pad, Select and Start. Talk about scaring people! -- ReyBrujo 14:55, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

There aren't "too many buttons" on controllers these days, for one. Get an Atari 2600 if you think so. as for the button info, instead of moving it, you removed it as if it wasn't true. Do me a favor Doom127, stop talking to me. You're clearly unwilling to listen to anything you don't like. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 206.162.192.39 (talk • contribs) .

Oops

I've clearly made a number of mistakes. I have no proof the 1.5 gigabyte disc affected ports. Just because the other game systems had larger discs doesn't mean games used the space. For all I know, that space went to excess cutscenes or more music storage. I also have no proof that Nintendo didn't allow games with extreme language in them. As to the Panasonic Q, I've often heard people mention it, but never seen a picture, so I figured it should go. I have no proof it actually exists, sorry. Sorry I ruined your fun by trying to help. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 206.162.192.39 (talk • contribs) .

First, by pressing the Save page button you are releasing your text under the GFDL, so anyone is free to use your text as wanted. And second, Wikipedia needs sources. If what you say is true (which may be, as I don't own a GC), please cite a reliable source with the information so that anyone can verify it. -- ReyBrujo 21:57, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Well, instead of simply moving the fewer buttons info, some high-and-mighty full-of-himself poster simply chose to remove it, pretend it wasn't true in any manner, etc. So write up your own info. As for sources, you clearly want to pick and choose what facts are posted. Nintendo fanboys... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 206.162.192.39 (talk • contribs) .

206.162.192.39, it seems you have some anger problems here. Look, Wikipedia is an ever changing, ever evolving piece of work. Your contributions WILL find themselves changed to some degree by other users, that's just a fact of life. That is the nature of the Wikipedia community that we all chose to enter when each of us posted. Your information regarding the Panasonic Q, the GameCube DVD format is valid (1.5 vs. 9 is a significant difference). However, there is no conclusive evidence that the lack of two oftentimes-unused buttons was the sole mitigating factor that kept title ports off the GameCube. You need to calm down; an edit is not a personal attack, merely a clarification of the facts at hand. Slow down, take a deep breath, and think things out before getting angry. Fighting isn't what Wikipedia's about, man. Daniel Davis 00:51, 13 December 2005 (UTC) (Doom127)

206.162.192.39, I suggest you to read about the one-revert rule: if anyone reverts your edits then leave it in its reverted (ie, original) state and discuss it on the talk page. Remember that the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. With these two rules, just provide a link to a trusted site where your information can be verified. This is needed because someone has reverted your changes (that is, he does not believe you). Luckily, you don't need to probe it is truth, just that a trusted site already included that information. -- ReyBrujo 00:58, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

ReyBrujo, yeah, a link would be great. If the lack of those two buttons really was a mitigating factor, it deserves inclusion. Daniel Davis 01:05, 13 December 2005 (UTC) (Doom127)

Online?

A while ago I changed the a section to more acurately reflect the online situation (Only 3 of it's games were "officially" online compatable) I come back about a month later and it's back to what it was simply stating that "Nintendo eventually went online in late 2002" I beg to differ but like was stated in WP:Neutral Point of View it's not up to us to decide weather or not what they had was an online plan, we simply give them the facts and the fact of the matter was only 3 games were released for the console that were online. Deathawk 23:51, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

That's a level of detail that we don't need. The only thing we need to make clear is that Xbox Live was successful, PS2 less so, and GC had little online support. Ashibaka tock 03:57, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

"and GC had little online support" holy crap....talk about an understatement —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.11.135.130 (talk • contribs) .

Announced?

Im missing some information about when "Dolphin" was announced. Koopo 18:09, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Language Statement

The first paragraph of the market share heading speculates that Nintendo may disallow the use of profanity in Gamecube games. A quick search on the ESRB website has registered 20 games with the strong language warning, many of which are rated Mature:

1

I believe that the language statement should be amended.--Shawn.kehoe 15:48, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Several changes by 12.165.125.77

There are several changes made by this particular anon IP which I feel to be out of place. He/she removed information regarding the Gamecube's general populace userbase and afterwards added in a description of the soft reset feature into a critism of the controller's calibration for some reason. I'm going to go ahead and revert these changes unless anyone objects. Perhaps the soft reset feature could be placed elsewhere in the article? Daniel Davis 06:34, 15 January 2006 (UTC) (Doom127)

ESRB Ratings Numbers

Why were the ESRB numbers edited to appear so low? DMAJohnson 01:58, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Market Share

According to the end result of 2006, the Gamecube is now in second place

Please stop changing my edits and putting outdated data.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/2373399.stm

--- That box in the article containing "Console sales by 2006" appears to only be a projection. Given that the article was published in 2002, it could only be projected sales. --sodium_N4

720p?

Anyone have evidence for this. AFAIK the cube only supports 480p Steady.eddie 22:28, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

480p is the "secret" option, the editor must have got it mixed up. [2] Ashibaka tock 23:54, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Have changed to just 480p. That recent article seemed to have gotten people a bit confusedSteady.eddie 00:45, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

External links

Can someone clean it up? Wikipedia is not a link repository. If nobody does, I will do it later. -- ReyBrujo 02:20, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

I cleaned it up a little, but it probably could use a bit more cleaning up.--Matteh (talk) 16:05, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Price History

No price history section? 149.99.169.252 07:56, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

There use to be one. What happened to it? Jedi6 00:49, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Gsod

Recently I occured something that looked VERY much like a Screen of Death on my gamecube. I'm going to add an area on that to this article. Everyone OK with that? --Moped 20:35, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Just remember — no original research. --Pagrashtak 01:13, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Proper Media Type?

I could have sworn that the correct name of the Gamecube discs was GOD aka Gamecube Optical Disc? This is somewhat supported on the Nintendo website, "Media : 3 inch NINTENDO GAMECUBE Disc based on Matsushita's Optical Disc Technology, Approx. 1.5GB Capacity" Link: http://www.nintendo.com/techspecgcn

So i guess noone is going to mind if i go ahead and change it? Sorry about not signing before. izret101 01:19, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Actually it is already in there, Nintendo GameCube#Media. Jedi6-(need help?) 02:55, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

I meant this: "Media 1.5GB Mini-DVD"that was in the top of the page. But I guess just having it listed further down in the article is fine... izret101 19:56, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Alternate startup sound

The alternate startup sound when you hold the Z button on four controllers is NOT jungle drums. It is clearly Japanese drums. It doesn't sound anything like the Jungle. Wikipedia is the only place I've seen this and it is not right.

It's a touchy subject because you can't go off citing sources but "jungle drums" are just one perspective. However, I am loosely relating this to the fact that the startup sound uses MIDI - one of Pokemon Stadium's minigames used the same japanese-man sound in their minigames. And the end of the sound is very distinctly asian. Why anyone thinks Nintendo would include "Jungle drums and monkeys screeching" after including a very obvious jab at the kiddie remarks with the other alternate sound is beyond me. Dynendal 10:01, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

• Also, if you hold L,R, and Z on Controller 1 when it boots up, there is a monkey noise and a giggling kid. Red71.145.208.158 22:02, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Article name

Why is the article title Nintendo GameCube? (It's the same thing with the Dreamcast.) I'm sorry, but it the title really should be GameCube.—thegreentrilby 03:20, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Actually the official name in Nintendo GameCube, just like Nintendo 64 or the SNES or the NES. Jedi6-(need help?) 03:42, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Crap. I wish I'd known about that before complaining.—thegreentrilby 03:53, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Na its fine. You were just being Bold Jedi6-(need help?) 03:54, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

I prefer to be bold when I'm right. ;)—thegreentrilby 00:58, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Merge!

Looking at Q multimedia console, it doens't pack with a lot of information. I know someone like me or someone, if they actually do have that console, they might give in some information. With els information, I suggest that article should be merged with the this article! It will have a minature section, under all the information about the Gamecube. What do you think? -->x<ino 03:17, 19 March 2006 (UTC) Support

1. I say YES >:):>x<ino 03:50, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
2. Merge per Xino La Pizza11 03:53, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
3. Merge-Basically just a variation of the cube Ac1983fan 19:38, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Object

1. No There's information out there on the Q; it's just that as of yet, no one's put it in there. You wouldn't have merged the Nintendo GameCube article in 2001 with the video game console article just because there wasn't yet enough information in it, would you?—thegreentrilby 03:42, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
2. I say No. 04:08, 19 March 2006 (UTC)—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Eruption1978VHt2 (talk • contribs) .
3. I vote No as long as someone expands the Q article. CrossEyed7 18:15, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
4. Oppose. Q multimedia console could get enough info to be its own page and the GameCube page is already at 32 kb. If we merge it it would just be separated apart eventually. Jedi6-(need help?) 18:42, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
5. I agree if they are merged now they may just be split again later. The Panasonic Q page could easily be developed into a full fledged page. izret101 22:22, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
6. Oppose merge. They are 2 separate systems with their own histories. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 03:02, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Voting is evil. If you think the Q's article can be expanded, do so. If you think that the articles can be elegantly merged, do so. If you do a bad job of either, you'll be reverted. Be bold! - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:36, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Nintendo 128 true codename (you decide)

Recently i made a small change on the Gamecube page giving reference to nintendo's other code name Nintendo 128 please help me confirm this

I am soooo...reverting this!

Because there isn't anything like that!

>x<ino 21:00, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

The user already knows. Jedi6-(need help?) 21:01, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Market share again

OK. We need to be clear on market share, given how contentious the issue is and how many contributors want to use the highest numbers that have been published anywhere. We should only quote the latest officially released numbers from the manufacturers themselves as fact. There is an argument for quoting higher numbers if they are from respectable market analysts, but these must be treated as estimates and described fully as such in the articles. See Talk:Xbox for discussion. I've edited the article to do this, linking to all the latest official figures [3] [4] [5] and the Fortune magazine interview [6] with Steve Ballmer about the Xbox 360 which states that "worldwide in 2005, Sony sold 101 million Playstation 2 units, while Microsoft sold 24 million Xboxes and Nintendo sold 21 million Gamecubes, according to UBS" without any further detail, as this is most often (currently) quoted for sales numbers. Gormanly 12:24, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

The Gamecube had the fastest single day sale upon release...this was stated on CNN and various other news programs at the time.

Opening logo video

I highly doubt this would belong here, but it seems metroid2002 has a video of the BIOS loading sequence here, MP4 format (QuickTime). I don't think it would be necessary to include; nor do I think it would be fair use (no clue about fair use on video, though). --SheeEttin 20:08, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Link cannot be accessed! It is forbidden

>x<ino 20:23, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Unless it is a free video, videos are usually not linked to articles, as they are usually copyright violation. -- ReyBrujo 20:35, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Didn't think so. However, what about recordings of the boot sequence, as in the normal sound, one-Z sounds, and four-Z sounds? I think that OGGs linked to from the end of the Overview section would be quite useful. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SheeEttin (talk • contribs) .

I am not sure... it would be useful to check the Wikipedia Commons guidelines. -- ReyBrujo 22:07, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Infobox image

Well, it seems there's some conflict over the image to use. The former image, Image:Gcn_system.jpg, appears to be from here, but with the controller cropped. The current image, Image:NGC_Gamecube.jpg, appears user-taken, as it's GNU-licensed. There's some other images I found, here and here, but those are copyrighted by Nintendo. The original from nintendo.co.jp would appear to be the best, but it also is copyrighted Nintendo.

A whole bunch of color schemes for the GCN can be found here, but, as usual, they'd appear to be copyrighted. (There's no copyright notice on the page, but there is on the main page.)

Anyone know which to use?--SheeEttin 22:34, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Always use non copyrighted images when available. Jedi6-(need help?) 22:38, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Indeed. I have already told VG Cats Tipe 2 in his talk page that the "freer" version should be used, even if it is not the best looking one, see the first guideline of Fair Use usage. -- ReyBrujo 22:51, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

True, true; but I prefer the images without the cables cluttering the image. Personal preference, I suppose. --SheeEttin 22:59, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

You are right, it isn't the best looking but we must obey Wikipedia image policy and use the free image. Jedi6-(need help?) 23:01, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

'Nervous Investors'

WTF is with this 'nervous investors' crap? This should be removed. Dumb forum kiddies might not be able to get their little brains around this due to the Gamecube being in 'third place', but Nintendo are one of the most sure-fire guararntees in the financial market. Get this rubbish off of here.

I have frequently tried to tone down this article but a large number of people want it to reflect the "console wars". Ashibaka tock 03:56, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Maybe some kind of semi-protection? --SheeEttin 19:46, 8 May 2006 (UTC)