Talk:List of Nintendo Entertainment System games/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

About this

Shouldn't this list resemble the list at Nintendo's website? I see some games that are not on any list i have seen, or played. 192.153.163.61 (talk) 13:45, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Not necessarily. Some games are unlicensed but still available for play on the NES. Others were only released in a certain region, i.e. Japan-only or Europe-only releases. MuZemike (talk) 00:31, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Reworking Entire List

I am being bold and reworking the entire list. The new list will very much follow in the same design as the List of Nintendo 64 games. The new list will be greatly expanded (column-wise) and will include the following:

• Original Title
• Alternate Titles
• Year in the the first instance of the game was released; month is being omitted. For example, Baseball was first released in Japan in 1983, so the list will display 1983.
• Developer
• Publisher
• Regions in which the game was released (either Japan, North America, or Europe)
• Number of players (normally 1, 2, or 4)

Please note that this will take a while (there are over 800 titles), and I am using my sandbox to construct the new lists. I will edit each section complete by letter when I finish with a certain letter.

As usual, if there is a discrepancy with the information, i.e. incorrect regions, number of players, etc, to be bold and edit. MuZemike (talk) 03:53, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Note that I also am only including an alternate name of the game's title if there is a significant change between translations, especially in the case with games released in Japan. If the Japanese translation is the game's title matches the English title, no alternate title will be listed.

I have also decided to use wikilinks for the regions instead of flag images, as images take up more bandwidth and HTTP requests and may not all load on a slow Internet connection as opposed to simple wikilinks. MuZemike (talk) 02:46, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Are you planning on making the tables sortable at all or are you worried that the JavaScript might make the page load much more slowly? I'm looking for something to help with that I'd be interested in. Lumaga (talk) 01:34, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I haven't thought about it, yet, but it sounds like a good idea given the sheer size of the list. My plan right now is to finish expansion, get rid of the useless subsections, and then propose splitting the list further, separating the European-only releases as well as unlicensed games from this list. MuZemike (talk) 18:10, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

There is an unlicenced game called Free Fall that is not on the list and its quite good.I think you should add unlicensed games to the list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.175.71.71 (talk) 15:50, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Some unlicensed games are included, including those by Tengen, Camerica, and Color Dreams. If you can show that the game exists, then add it to the list. MuZemike (talk) 02:26, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Split proposal (unlicensed titles)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The result of the proposal was to keep as is. (consensus to keep together) MuZemike (talk) 04:03, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Because of the sheer size of the article, I propose that we split this article into a new article called List of unlicensed NES games. That is, all unlicensed NES games on this list will have a list of their own. It should be large enough to be self–sustainable as well as succeed in reducing the already–bloated size of this list. Please discuss here. (If no discussion occurs within five days of the sign date of this message, then the proposal automatically passes.) MuZemike (talk) 00:02, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

• Note — My intention is to keep the list of unlicensed games as is; that is, NES game mods or pirated NES games are still out. MuZemike (talk) 00:07, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Seems like a bit of a pointless endeavor, since it gives the wrong impression ("unlicensed" can easily be taken to mean "pirate" or similar). Also there isn't enough to really qualify an entirely separate list just for such titles or really the split itself.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 23:13, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I count about 77 total on the list right now. Do you think it's better that we just simply get rid of these? MuZemike (talk) 03:06, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I think all the unlicensed games listed there were indeed sold and merchandised, you can bet that much for Tengen, the "porn" games and Wisdom Tree's. I think they're fine there, the issue is the list has a little too much information for its size per game like discussed. It could really be simplified and streamlined to get rid of the bulk.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 03:46, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I got rid of the "Alternate Titles" and "Number of Players," and eliminated the wikilinks for "NA," "EU," and "JP." Article is now weighed in at 80KB (before it was at 115KB). MuZemike (talk) 04:52, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

The unlicensed games listed here were all sold in stores (with the exception of Cheetahmen II and a few others), and many of them have gained fame or notoriety due to their objectionable content, infuriating difficulty, or general mediocrity (The Angry Video Game Nerd has reviewed several of them for this very reason). This attention makes them just as valid for inclusion as any properly licensed game. They are a small portion of the NES library (less than 10%), and 810 games is by no means an unmanageable number. The list is only 80 kb at the moment, which is well within the recommended limits. Overall I think it's best to keep these games here. Garrett^Talk 05:06, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Split proposal (Europe-only titles)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The result of this proposal was to keep as is. (consensus to keep) MuZemike (talk) 04:04, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Again, because of the sheer size of this list, I propose that we also split this article into another one called List of Europe-only NES games. This one seems more iffy than my previous proposal, as there are not as many Europe-only titles as there seem to be unlicensed titles. The obvious pro would be that the size of this list would be further reduced and look more like the official list of NES games released by Nintendo. Please discuss here. (If no discussion occurs within five days of the sign date of this message, then the proposal automatically passes.) MuZemike (talk) 00:05, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

This would be an honestly silly move given the number of games that fit that criteria. :\--Kung Fu Man (talk) 23:11, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, it seems like there are 16 total. I think you're right. MuZemike (talk) 03:03, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Merger proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The result of this proposal was to keep as is. (consensus to keep) MuZemike (talk) 04:05, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I propose that all titles in the List of Famicom games that have been released outside the Japan region be merged to the List of Nintendo Entertainment System games. My rationale is that both lists have redundant information; I think it's a better idea that the List of Famicom games contain Famicom–only titles, while those released for both the Famicom and the NES be listed here. It will reduce the size of the Famicom list, while at the same time, retain the Japanese naming of said merged titles in the NES list as alternate titles. Please discuss. MuZemike (talk) 18:17, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

You didn't seem to count in your rationale that a game on the Famicom needs an adapter for NES usage did you?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 22:06, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

We're talking native usage of the cartridges. Surely there exist adapters in which you can play NES games on the SNES. MuZemike (talk) 01:06, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

You missed the point. NES games will not work without an adapter for the Famicom, and vice versa. The cartridges won't plug into the other console, so its not a simple case of bypassing region locks either. Also to note said adapter was made by a third party group and not by Nintendo. In terms of native usage of the cartridge, a game for the Famicom is a game for the Famicom, and a game for the NES one for the NES. Unique case in the console world but that's Nintendo for ya.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 02:02, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, I mean, I must have missed the point, seriously. I didn't know that about the Famicom. MuZemike (talk) 03:01, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Additional sources

I have provided an updated URL for the official list of NES games published by Nintendo. I have also included comprehensive NES game lists from verifiable outside sources, such as GameFAQs, 1UP.com, and GameSpot. So hopefully every game on this list — which also contains unlicensed games — are also covered and can be verified. If anyone wishes to discuss any better usage of the references for this list, please discuss below. MuZemike (talk) 19:53, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Mortal Combat for NES?

Why there is no MC on this list? http://tabmok99.mortalkombatonline.com/mkfamicom1.html

HEY MC is for NES!

http://tabmok99.mortalkombatonline.com/mkfamicom1.html

regs----Comicspiotrus (talk) 01:13, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, no pirates. MuZemike (talk) 17:46, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Does that mean we can get rid of "Tetris (1989) by Tengen"? That game was declared pirated in a court of law. --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 00:39, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Tetris by Tengen is widely accepted as a released unlicensed game. I vote to keep it as is.Werrock (talk) 21:19, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Fewest citations possible

I suggest that we focus on lists of games as citations. For example, we could use GameFAQs' genre sorting system for NES games (which would be better than the Alpha sorting) to limit the citations, because the kb-size is getting far too high. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 05:22, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

I was planning to remove the GameFAQs links from those that are already mentioned in the NES list (Some would have to stay, however, such as those who aren't on that list but still is verifiable through GameFAQs.), but I am still working as to how I am going to reference each entry without having a super-clutter in the References section at the bottom. I have been trying to experiment with the older citation templates with a copy of the article in my sandbox. I was thinking about splitting the references by page and have them all linked to the bottom. I just have to figure out a good way how. MuZemike (talk) 02:57, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Or even simple parenthetical referencing may also be a good way to go instead of generating loads of "footnotecruft." The GameFAQs-only references are just simply external-linked. MuZemike (talk) 03:55, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Laser Beam Entertainment

Should this developer redidrect to it's parent company; Krome Studios Melbourne? Daniel Christensen (talk) 17:03, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Seika

Should redirect to Kemco? Daniel Christensen (talk) 17:11, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Death Race

Goes to disambig page; article on game non-existant. Daniel Christensen (talk) 17:10, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

OK, I'll change it. Next time, feel free to be bold and change it yourself, especially for trivial corrections like that. I'm sure there are plenty out there in that list! MuZemike 17:53, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Publisher links

I do not think the links are done right. If over linking is an issue then what rule should be applied here. Should only items grouped with the same publishers be left with only one link for the highest item or how far can you accept the link to be located. Today it is not very consistent so could we perhaps decide upon how linking should be done? Werrock (talk) 14:32, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Sachen games

I saw that some Sachen games made it to the list and I reverted those edits. I do not consider Sachen games to be part of the NES collection and most list out there do not count these games. It is however hard to say where to draw the line since the current list allows many unlicensed games and even really rare ones like the Panesia games. Please share your opinions on this subject. Werrock (talk) 08:46, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

The key aspect here is verifiability. I think if it's verified to exist in GameFAQs, then it should be on the list.

Allgame has this list of games developed by Sachen (GameFAQs obviously does, too), but also keep in mind that some of the games developed by them were published by other companies such as American Video Entertainment or American Game Cartridges. MuZemike 14:33, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

From GameFAQs' help page: "almost any commercial game release is acceptable for our database." I wonder to what extent the NES games on retrousb.com would count if someone submitted them. -Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 12:25, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Here's also a GameFAQs list of all applicable Sachen games. However, those that were never released in North America were not released for the NES but rather for the Supervision handheld device, which emulated NES games; I would say that those would not count. MuZemike 14:39, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Sachen games should be included. So what if they were primarily designed for some handheld NES emulator. If it will work on a North American NES, it should go here. Also, even if the game was released by other companies, it should still be included. Keep in mind, the list on this article is often used by NES collectors, to see how close they are from having every NES game ever made, so we need to make it as thorough as possible.Wikieditor1988 (talk) 02:37, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

A complete list

As a newly started NES collector (although been owning one as long as I remember) I came here with the simple goal of extracting a complete list of all NES games. This was however not that easy it seemed and everywhere you look there are different figures of the total amount of NES titles. As of 2009 you could have hoped (honestly I expected) that a complete list was well defined. Anyway, I do prefer the Wikipedia list and I try to make it accurate as my understanding of the NES library grows. There seems to exists some rules that can be applied to define what titles are allowed on the list. Werrock (talk) 20:04, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Please edit this list with rules and guidelines:

• Only released games. All games has to been released on a significant market for the NES and need verification.
• No pirates, home mades or prototypes. These were never released according to the above rule.
• One entry per game with regional differences. Some games have different titles and sometimes graphics (example: Contra and Probotector) but are essentially the same game.
• One entry for games with multiple publishers. Many games where published by different companies like the Tengen games.
• Same title can be different games and should have different entries. Tetris and Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade are examples of totally different games with the same title.
• Famicom is not NES thus are Famicom exclusives are not allowed. PAL exclusives can be played on the top loader or a modified NTSC-NES and are allowed on the list.

Exceptions from the rules:

Nintendo World Championships (competition game never "released" but kept for its holy grail status)

I agree with pretty much all of that. That is, I cannot think of any exceptions to pirates, homebrews, etc. MuZemike 16:31, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

How "modified" are you willing to go to mod an NTSC NES to play PAL Game Paks? If you mean just cutting pin 4 of the lockout chip to keep it from blinking, then PAL-only games that need all the vblank time such as Asterix won't work. If you mean desoldering the CPU, PPU, and crystal and replacing them with PAL ones, then you might as well include Famicom games through the adapter in the Stack-Up cart. --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 00:42, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

I was referring to disabling the chip as the top loader does not contain it. It may be unfortunate that one single or a few PAL games cannot be played on the NTSC system but they are still NES games. We could divide the list with a separate list of PAL exclusives but that was already voted down in a section above although there are not only 16 but 32 PAL exclusive games. Werrock (talk) 21:26, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

How many sales make a "significant market"? Or would post-Wario's Woods games like Battle Kid go in a separate list like List of commercially released independently developed Dreamcast games? --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 12:22, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Tecmo Soccer Games

I am too confused to sort this out. There is one game called "Tecmo Cup Soccer Game" and another called "Tecmo World Cup Soccer" on the list. They both link to the same article but has different source from gamefaqs. You can also play both here and they are not the same games. Not even close. On the other hand, the list at Nintendo only list Tecmo World Cup Soccer which according to the source is a PAL exclusive and I have not found Tecmo World Cup Soccer anywhere. Please help me sort this out. Werrock (talk) 17:26, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Tecmo Cup Soccer/Football Game is the NES version of Captain Tsubasa. It appears to be more different from Tecmo World Cup Soccer (the NES port of Tehkan World Cup) than Tecmo Bowl is from Tecmo Super Bowl. --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 17:59, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

WWF WrestleMania (video game)

Was it released in 1989, according to the GameFAQs source, or was it in January 1989, according to the official Nintendo source (http://web.archive.org/web/20070317023021/nintendo.com/doc/nes_games.pdf)? There seems to be conflicting dates here. Can anyone else here shed some light on this? MuZemike 05:20, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

I think Nintendo is the best source here or Acclaim if available. GameFAQ or other sites has to retrieve the figures somewhere too. IGN for example states that is was released February 1, 1989 (http://cheats.ign.com/objects/006/006943.html). Werrock (talk) 08:59, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Battle Kid: Fortress of Peril

Would Battle Kid: Fortress of Peril be allowable on the list as an NES game, despite the fact that it was released by a video game company (albeit a one-man operation) this year with its cartridges being made by RetroZone [1]? I'm kind of wavy on this, as I know it's verified by reliable sources, but the process of making new NES games for the NES specifically (unlike Mega Man 9 or Mega Man 10 which weren't made specifically for the NES even though they were "8-bit") has long passed? –MuZemike 02:24, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

I'll note that if we do keep it, we may have to consider also adding in most of the games here; we'd be opening a door (could be good, could be bad) as a result IMO. –MuZemike 02:41, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

I think it is allowable on the list, on List of Game Boy Advance games there is game Blast Arena Advance which is homebrew which could be downloaded and was made available on cart. --Robixen (talk) 20:55, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Licensed and unlicensed NES games list separately in one article

I separated licensed from unlicensed games, should unlicensed games be in this article or in separate article?--Robixen (talk) 14:06, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

If the "licensed games" can be verified by Nintendo's source [2], then there might be a way to greatly reduce the size of the list by condensing citations.

That being said, I would keep everything in one article. Given the number of games (just under 800) and the size of the article (only 97KB with room for improvement), this is pretty good compared to other video game lists. –MuZemike 14:57, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

I removed reference column from licensed games, and verified them with Nintendo source, now it takes up only 60KB.--Robixen (talk) 17:19, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

We're going to need to find some better reliable sources for the unlicensed games, though, as GameFAQs' reliability is questionable. –MuZemike 17:57, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

You know what I forgot? That Nintendo list is North America-only. That doesn't account for the games released in regions other than North America or games published by different companies outside of North America. –MuZemike 17:59, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

I'll try to find some reliable sources for pal only and unlicensed games.--Robixen (talk) 18:40, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Do you think that Gamespot is reliable source? Also, could we do it like I just did with Aladdin on the list?--Robixen (talk) 19:17, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't think that would necessarily work either, because they take their release information from GameFAQs, which doesn't do much as far as fact-checking on user-submitted content is concerned. This was brought up at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Archive 80#Desperately seeking Mega Man 7 release date. This would likely get shot down as far as WP:FLC is concerned because of that, even though for many of these titles we have nothing else to go by. –MuZemike 19:50, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

I added Gamespot and IGN lists as sources, List of Nintendo 64 games also used them, also now we can take off reference column from unlicensed games list, especially if gamespot takes their release dates from them.--Robixen (talk) 19:59, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

That's true, it hasn't been challenged on that list yet. –MuZemike 20:00, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

I removed reference column from unlicensed games list.--Robixen (talk) 20:29, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

The game "Bee 52" is listed under both licensed and unlicensed games. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.180.172.150 (talk) 11:01, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Fixed.--Canyq (talk) 00:33, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Featured list candidate

Can I nominate this list to featured list candidates?--Robixen (talk) 14:46, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Missing Game

Missing from list “Punch-Out!!” - I don’t know the details or procedure for adding, please verify and correct. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.22.159.95 (talk) 01:38, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Full title of the game is Mike Tyson's Punch-Out!!, the game is present on the list.--Robixen (talk) 18:54, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

sorry i was not clear on my original post - but there are two games one called Mike Tyson's Punch-Out!! and another without Mike Tyson's endorsement called "Punch-Out!!", Though similar they are separate games with different labels, production runs, and boss character —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.22.159.95 (talk) 17:42, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

They're the same game. Nintendo re-released the game as Punch-Out!! (with Mr. Dream as the final character) during their series of NES re-releases (along with Metroid, The Legend of Zelda, and a few others) because their contract with Mike Tyson was not renewed. There is nothing else that is different. –MuZemike 17:55, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

What about, Peter Pan and the Pirates (video game)? It was not a great video game (to be polite) but it was released in the United States. Great cartoon series (that it was based on), but horrible game. Browned79. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.123.38.190 (talk) 21:05, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

I have reverted this, explaining the same reason as above. The only differences between the two are the featured fighter and a palette-swap. Otherwise, they are identical. Unless you want to also include the re-releases of the other NES titles later in its lifespan as mentioned above, we should only include the original release date. –MuZemike 03:52, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

you should add re-release game. OR AT LEAST Punch-out featuring Mr. Dream. This game has not the same name, not the same label, not the same boss, not the same graphic. In some way its a new punch-out game. i own the both games and it count for 2 differents games in my head . Its two different data. they dont have the same value. they dont have the same original box. a game with Mike tyson is completly different with a game without it. its my opinion and i bought all of them wen they were released. As long as a few data has been changed , like fighters, its a new game. otherwise list street fighter ii and street fighter ii turbo at the same game. Nintendo has changed the title name game, so it has to be see at 2 different game. For have the complete nes collection games, you need the 2 games, or you cant say you have the entire collection. Renejr902 (talk) 04:50, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Still i understand your point. But i dont have time to edit all re-release game. But i think punch-out is the only re-release nes game that have his data modified included the graphics and the title. we should add this re-release because the list if somehow missing information, its not complete. IMPORTANT NOTE: im sorry i think i messed up some title , im really sorry. im new here. sorry Renejr902 (talk) 05:09, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

But this is not intended to be a collector's list, but rather a list of games that were released. Also, your comparison to Street Fighter II is incorrect; as I said above, everything is same except swapping out a palette and character description. –MuZemike 05:18, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

i understand, you seem right, but the title is different, isnt ? is nintendo really changed the title ? if not maybe the game Title is only: Punchout!!, and not Mike tyson Punchout. anyway im not sure anymore about anything about this game. LOL Renejr902 (talk) 05:27, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

anyway someone must add all the nes re-release games. this way the list will be complete. Maybe in a separate list. Renejr902 (talk) 05:29, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Putting back release month?

I know a good while ago I removed the month of release date from all the entries due to size issues. However, since we're only at about 56KB and that we did do some streamlining not too long ago to save some space, would it be worthwhile to add that back in (assuming it would only bump the size up by around 10-20KB or so)? –MuZemike 04:10, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Month release for each nes game will be a good improvement on the list. and more complete list. in the nes game list pdf from nintendo all month release info is there. Renejr902 (talk) 05:43, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Gun.Smoke or Gunsmoke?

As far as I know, and how about every source has it, the game is Gun.Smoke and not Gunsmoke. The NES game (and its arcade counterpart) has no connection to the TV series of the same, and that has been the name of the game. There is no reason for it to be Gunsmoke. –MuZemike 01:57, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

R.B.I. Baseball

From what I gather, with regards to this edit, R.B.I. Baseball was released by Namco but only in Japan for the Famicom; this is already accounted for in the list of Famicom games. It was released in North America but only for Tengen if I recall correctly; I know there were games such as Pac-Man that were originally were released by Tengen and then rereleased by Namco after the Nintendo/Tengen lawsuit, but I don't think R.B.I. Baseball was one of them. I don't know what 76.121.35.94 exactly means by what version he has; AFAIK, it could be the Japanese version. –MuZemike 02:02, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

R.B.I. Baseball was released by Tengen in both Licensed and Unlicensed versions in the USA (as opposed to later games in the series which were only released as unlicensed versions). Rom lists verify this fact, as well as the wikipedia article on Tengen. The only difference between the carts was the casing used on the cart, (the licensed one has a grey case, the unlicensed had a black case) and aside from the license disclaimer, gameplay was identical. I apologize if I didn't include enough information or formatted this statement wrongly, as this is the first time I've used a wikipedia talk page, but I was using this page to research the NES library, and found the lack of R.B.I. Baseball cartridge duality something that deserved mentioning. 70.118.5.12 (talk) 04:50, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

ALERT.

This page has been vandalized by a no-lifer creature from Phillipines. --Hydao (talk) 06:02, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Vandalism or no, refrain from dehumanizing people like this. Ringbang (talk) 16:30, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Ermmm... Yes, you are kinda right, but you didn't know what happen. I'm just going to show you this link, which is only one example of his (or her??) lameness: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MLBP%27s_Revenge ... you can also check my user page. It was never vandalized until that "whatever creature" noticed that I spotted the MLBP's Revenge's uber-lameness and so on. The term "no-life creature" was too soft. It was a little bit hilarious though... :)--Hydao (talk) 17:49, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

No. Ringbang (talk) 04:23, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Providing Useful Reference Material in the Study of Nintendo's International Entry in the Third Generation of Video Game History

I for one am really for merging this with the Famicom lists. The issue of hardware differences has been raised before. Most of these differences however are slight, many of them simply a matter of form factor. However, the real point of comparison should be the ROM image. Most NES games are essentially the same as their Famicom (or FDS) counterpart. In some cases the conversion from (U) to Pal regions is in fact more significant ( (魂斗羅) versus Contra versus Probector for instance) so why should (U) and Pal regions be arbitrarily lumped together as "the same game" when both are simply modifications to the (J) ROM? Need I mention that the NES and Famicom hardware pages have already been merged? Likewise, the N64 list includes all regions together. Furthermore, the separation of the two lists makes them useless as a tool for tracking the library across all relevant regions. This list should serve as a useful reference point in the study of Nintendo's international entry in the third generation of video game history; not as some kind of a hit list for North American collectors. If Famicom must remain separate it certainly makes no more sense leaving (U) and Pal merged when those are likewise entirely separate markets with hardware differences that effect the cross-region compatibility of games.

Furthermore, the decision to delete the "Alternate Titles" field strikes me as an extremely poor one. For one thing, it shows regional bias to assume that readers will be familiar with the (U) name if they go looking for a PAL title. It already introduces a bias to make the (U) name the default (acceptable in my opinion simply because of the larger library), but to completely remove the pertinent PAL information in these cases makes the list a poor resource for individuals from those regions and violates the principal of neutrality. The SNES and N64 lists already set a good precedent for how this should be done.

Also, this list really ought to include the depth of information of similar lists. For example, it ought to include developer as well as publisher information (which is more important anyway in my opinion), number of players and... Well I'm mostly against including subjective categories like genre but I wouldn't mind someone taking a stab at it. Frankly, I wouldn't mind seeing game size included like on the Japanese list, and even mappers (Both of which are probably more indicative of a game's actual structure and capabilities than simple dating). That's about it.

--24.212.153.174 (talk) 06:36, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

First off, size would be an issue to begin with. Both this list and the Famicom list are already large enough as-is as separate stand-alone lists; keep in mind that the NES has about twice as many games as the N64, and the Famicom about three times as many. To that extent, we can be selective on what we can include in order to best benefit readers. Stuff such as number of players or ROM mappers are not very important to most readers and are normally left out of such lists. --MuZemike 07:12, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Does a table of text strings really put that much weight on modern connections? As Wikipedia moves into the future I'm sure this will be of much less concern. For now though, is there any guideline specified to cap page bandwidth at some reasonable limit?

I would disagree that number of players is an uncommon field of not of use to general readers. The Sega Master System list is in the process of implementing it and the Sega Mega Drive and N64 list already have. Number of players provides a very concise overview of what kind of gameplay a product allows and is very useful to those looking for new games they might be interested in (For instance, when sorting the list by a publisher or developer they enjoy). Which brings me to the next point. All other lists that I'm familiar with include developer information. Although it is generally assumed that game publisher's are better known, I'd argue that those interested in classic consoles (enthusiasts) are familiar with developers themselves and understand that a game's Developer is a better indication of a game's quality or style.

I will agree with you that mappers and ROM size provide a far more marginal case as only a very technical minority are familiar with their capabilities. However, I will point out that this information is of encyclopedic interest. Namely, for ROM dumpers, archivists, ROM Hackers, home brewers, collectors, and others interested in the study of this era of gaming history. Furthermore, this information is already well documented by external sources (http://tuxnes.sourceforge.net/nesmapper.txt). Such information might not be found currently on any other list, but then, it's not relevant to most other lists as few other consoles made use of expansion chips in cartridges to the extent that that the NES did, if at all. Thus, I argue that for completion's sake, and to provide a useful reference for an interested general community, this information should be included somewhere (this being the page that comes first to my mind).

--24.212.153.174 (talk) 21:44, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

I agree with MuZemike that size will be an issue. When pages get too large they are hard for some computers to load and difficult for readers to navigate. With that said, though, I definitely agree that the Japanese Famicom and NTSC/PAL NES lists should be merged as the current division is semi-arbitrary and quite needlessly duplicative. I also agree that an alternate title field would be useful although I don't think it makes sense to have separate entries for Contra, Probotector, and Kontora (魂斗羅). The single name that is used should be the title in the country of first release and, in the case of a simultaneous release, the greatest number of units sold. Alternate titles should remain in the alternate title field. To waylay goodfaith additions of duplicate entries, I suggest we insert commented out notices in the alphabetic position where all alternate titles would belong along the lines of: "<!--PROBOTECTOR (see entry for "Contra" above)-->"

On the topic of additional fields such as number of players, ROM mappers, etc. I again agree with MuZemike. This sort of detailed information belongs in the article on the game, but not on a masterlist of all titles. The only way to accommodate such a list would be to set up a parent list with offspring lists similar to what was done for List of legendary creatures. I'll also say that this sounds like a load of work. Good luck to anybody that decides to tackle it. -Thibbs (talk) 20:40, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm not entirely sure that having alternative names in a whole other field is an optimal solution. For one thing, doing so would be useless for sorting unless complete fields were provided for every region (Which would be nice, but far too impractical to implement. It's a really a shame there isn't an option for dynamically generated tables with selectable options for which fields to display.) As it is I think the solution found on other similar lists (Namely the SNES game list) of listing the alternative title as a simple, non-linking text string under the wikipedia main entry title for the game would be the ideal solution. I do agree that providing comments for potentially reduplicated games would be useful (This would also be true in cases like "Mike Tyson's Punch-Out" versus "Punch-Out."

For my response on the topic of additional meta-information, see my reply to MuZemike above.

--24.212.153.174 (talk) 21:44, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

You're right about the alternate title field. It would work much better as you suggest as an unlinked text string in the main entry title (ala the SNES article). I think the same rules I outlined above (primary title = country of first release; ties broken by deference to sales figures) would be the best way to handle which title is listed, though. Does that sound good? -Thibbs (talk) 23:53, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

I understand that the usual policy for game lists is to use the title used to index the actual entry. For instance, Contra is known under at least four different names (Including the arcade versions) but the article title is still "Contra" so we should use that. I'm not entirely sure how entry headers versus redirects are chosen myself. I assume though that that an English language title is generally preferred, at least for the English language wikipedia entries. In any case, the easiest thing to do is just follow the link and see what you get. --24.212.153.174 (talk) 06:09, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Well fair enough. -Thibbs (talk) 12:44, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Red links banished... except for Sivak Games?

As of today, the article's only remaining red link is the one to Sivak Games. Sivak doesn't seem to meet the notability guidelines yet. We could unlink it, but that matters very little either way.

In any case, documenting NES software to this extent was a lot of work! To everyone who contributed: Thank you. The lack of red links in this list is a reflection of the diligence of many volunteers. Now, maybe we can improve the quality and accuracy of these articles! – Ringbang (talk)

(For the record, your edit was posted on April 5, 2012.) Is a red link to a topic without clear notability better than no link? --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 19:58, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Mixed-up games ("Spot" not "Cool Spot")

I'd like to point out that the list currently lists the game "Cool Spot" as a NES title, which is incorrect. The only game to be released on the original NES with the Spot character is simply called "Spot".

The page linked proves this, as the whole article is about "Cool Spot" for the Genesis and SNES, except for a mistaken link at the bottom of the page for the Mobygames page of both "Spot" (External Links) and "Cool Spot" (References).

Spot: http://www.mobygames.com/game/nes/spot Cool Spot: http://www.mobygames.com/game/cool-spot Series: http://www.mobygames.com/game-group/7-ups-spot-licensees

I'd fix it myself, but it seems the list is currently protected against vandalism, so someons must confirm this and do it for me. Thanks. Raven-14 (talk) 04:44, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

It should be Spot: The Video Game, as the NES version is a four-player Othello-type game. Cool Spot is a Genesis platformer. --MuZemike 06:52, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 17 June 2012

The Metroid link should link to Metroid_(video_game) i.e. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metroid_(video_game) not Metroid, as that is the general Metroid page and not the NES game Kennethcason (talk) 18:36, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Done Thanks, NiciVampireHeart 19:40, 17 June 2012 (UTC)