Talk:32X

Final release

I've removed the following phrase: "with the add-on's final release being Darxide in PAL territories." I'm not completely sure whether this is meant to essentially say

a) "In PAL territories, the 32X's final release was Darxide, though it was not the final release globally."

or

b) "The 32X's final release was Darxide. It was released only in PAL territories."

but either one has problems. (a) places a peculiar focus on the PAL realm, since the article makes no mention of what the final 32X release was in North America or Japan. (b) is, as far as I can tell, flat-out incorrect. All the sources I've seen indicate that Darxide was released in 1995, while the North America-only Spider-Man: Web of Fire was released in 1996. Those are the dates they were copyrighted, and a review in GamePro confirms Web of Fire didn't come out until 1996. The cited source does indeed say Darxide was "the last 32X title released worldwide", but I find the source's reliability concerning release dates highly questionable given that it says Darxide was released in 1995 at the top and 1996 in the body of the article.--Martin IIIa (talk) 19:11, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

GameFan award

In regards to this statement: 'The add-on won GameFan's "Best New System" award for 1994.' Please correct me if I'm overlooking something, but wasn't the 32X the only new system in 1994? A non-contested award doesn't seem notable.--Martin IIIa (talk) 01:58, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

@Martin IIIa: Technically PC-FX, Sega Saturn and PlayStation were all released in Japan very late 1994. (Of course PS1 and Saturn didn't hit NA till 1995). Amiga CD32 also saw its NA release in 1994 (But was in EU in 1993). GameFan gave overall best system to 3DO, which while released late 1993 in NA, was released 1994 for JP and EU. The only truly fresh 1994 release in North America does appear to be 32X though. -- ferret (talk) 02:07, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

I don't think the word "non-contested" applies, considering that award was contested in other years. Firstly, as with all awards created by gaming magazines, the awards from GameFan were held at a certain time annually. Because of that, any new system released prior the awards will have great chance of winning. Anyway, it's not that GameFan was trying to deny other systems their awards. 2605:E000:2E54:800:3041:92C6:5FCF:5A52 (talk) 03:34, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, I should have clarified. I know there were consoles which debuted in 1994 in Japan (and in the case of the Amiga CD32, in Canada), but while it of course doesn't say so, I would assume that the award was for new system(s) in the U.S. Looking over the other categories, all of the awards, and even all the nominations, seem to have gone to U.S. releases, as one would expect given that GameFan was a U.S. publication.--Martin IIIa (talk) 15:57, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

I don't think it matters wether a system is released in the U.S. or another country. The thing is the system has to be tested in the country of which magazine's reviewers are based in for a chance of the award. Therefore it's not like there's any bias from the magazine. With that said, I think the award is worth adding in the page. Mentioning an award from a media is no different from mentioning a review from a media. 2605:E000:2E54:8F0:F1FC:30DB:83DE:BF3 (talk) 23:59, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

I didn't say anything about bias. I'm saying I don't think they were including systems not released in the U.S. in the awards. I didn't say we shouldn't mention awards either. However, we do have to differentiate between notable awards and awards like Best Hummingbird-Based Shooter for the 32X. While the name "Best New System of 1994" may not immediately sound funny, once you take into account that there is only one system in the running for that title it is just as humorously meaningless an award.--Martin IIIa (talk) 04:40, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

There's probably nothing wrong with an award involving only one candidate, especially there's nothing else available to be a candidate. As to why systems not released in the U.S. aren't in the awards, perhaps it's like this. If a system does not get released in the U.S., the U.S. reviewers can't test it for review. If you're going to review something, you don't read or listen to someone else's review, you need to actually test it. 2605:E000:2E54:8F0:F043:1166:E4CE:6546 (talk) 04:40, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Wrong, no. But not notable either. As to the non-U.S. systems, as exemplified by the GamePro review in this very article, U.S. reviewers not only got to test systems before they were released in the U.S., but before they were even finished. But I don't think they'd expect most readers to be happy with an award going to a system that they can't buy yet.--Martin IIIa (talk) 18:14, 3 February 2018 (UTC)