Talk:Project64
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 15 March 2012 (UTC). The result of the discussion was merge to List of video game emulators. |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Project64 article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 |
Links from this article with broken #section links : You can remove this template after fixing the problems | FAQ | Report a problem |
New version
-I added that PJ64 1.7 should have a memory editor. Also, the second reference is dead, could someone find a live link for it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nairanvac (talk • contribs) 18:17, 20 May 2007
The statement "Project 64 is charging for a new release" is completely wrong. Version 1.7 appears to be development software, and the creators do not seem to want to share it at all. It seems like they have just made it available to donators as an incentive to donate - not a "sell the product" scheme. -psych787 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.33.200.201 (talk • contribs) 16:36, 19 February 2007
- Yeah, I reworded it to be a little less NPOV and a better description of what it really is (a donation). Mudlord 12:07, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
- I added the part about the previous versions of Project64 and the latest stable release. --Julioenrekei 11:44, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
- Added the system specifications.. been a while since i've seen this article. 04:44, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
If version 1.7 is showing any promise, they should have, by now, released a public beta to spur some interest or renew and add donations. Almost 6 years without a public update is as close enough to suggest the project publicly is dead and not being updated. They sported a release date of mid 2010 for 1.7 as claimed by their website . It's now almost spring 2011 and 1.7 is still unreleased. At this point being past their own claimed deadline they would release a new version and possibly the final sources, however as being almost a year over intended release, no updates, no news, nothing at all... then it's dead and showing all signs of it. --whitetigerx7 00:13, 11 February 2011 (PDT) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.235.224.75 (talk)
SM64 Machinima
You all should see this, this is why I love P64. Go on youtube and type in megaman765,mariomario54321,bml42,kford2017, or Lgame2 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.121.205.118 (talk) 00:09, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
Bad link
removed link to justroms.com... reason should be obvious —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.102.196.3 (talk • contribs) 07:03, 27 April 2006
Screenshot
Does anyone else think that the screenshot they have there is utterly unnecessary? If it isn't going to be removed entirely, wouldn't the space be better suited for a screen of a game, running on Project 64? I guess I'll do it myself - later though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.71.42.197 (talk • contribs) 06:07, 15 June 2006
- I think it should be the full interface with some roms in the list, show all options in the menu should be enaled. KingCoder 00:46, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
- added a new screenshot :) --Dabean 03:18, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
Video card compatibility
I added the section about video card compatibility and corrected some grammar stuff Julioenrekei (talk) 05:44, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
tagging
I understand the tagging of the page with needing more sources, but there really aren't any real 3rd party sources. The only 3rd party sources come from emulation sites and forums, nothing notable really. Julioenrekei (talk) 07:58, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
- Where else are you going to get info about emulation? Best Buy's web site? Obviously not. I'm not sure how firm the policy is for sources, but I don't think you'll run into any reliable information except on actual emulation sites. I know that not all of them are reliable, but someone with a lot of Wikipedia experience on determining reliable sources, fill us in. Shouldn't there be at least some that are reliable? What constitutes a reliable source, and are there multiple issues to factor in? 98.202.38.225 (talk) 18:43, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
add a list of game
shouldn't we add a list of games avilable and do the same to the others —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.90.196.72 (talk) 02:05, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
- Nope. There's no complete list of playable games for ANY emulator, and no point in making one. 65.33.206.108 (talk) 16:02, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
- I agree with 65.33.206.108 on this matter. Besides in order to make such a list we would have to do original research, since finding a Reliable source on this matter would be very tough. Without reliable sources, it can't be verified Vivio TestarossaTalk Who 17:27, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Notability
I've gone and slapped a WP:Notability tag on this here article. This has something to do with that fact that the only sources are from online emulating sites. Which doesn't cut it. Thanks, Aaron ► 08:42, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
constant development ?
The article saids:
Project64 is currently still under constant development. This upcoming version will possibly include net play, which includes LAN and internet play.
But given the fact that there hasn't been any new version in 4 years and the home page look mostly abandonned i don't think that's true anymore. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.153.118.241 (talk) 22:16, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Website change
I changed the website link because the other one was invalid. The source of the website is from the "Logo" link. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.197.211.243 (talk) 22:14, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
- It's just down right now. You changed the link to the old location. The site's no longer hosted there. The URL just redirects to the Emulation64 website now. Dancter (talk) 22:55, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Project64k Merge
It was proposed in the Project64k talk page that it be merged into this article, which seems completely reasonable and would protect both that content and Project64 from getting hastily deleted by some rogue mod. There are few differences, and I think that perhaps everything in the other article except for the: SysReqs, some stuff under Issues, and some of the other wordings.... can all be saved.
To keep it out of the way of the original version, I think perhaps this stuff could be placed under the Reception section. If possible, the infobox could be put there with any links, and then just dedicate one section to it all to keep it contained. - usucdik 03:09, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
Remove Use of LSR templates
I think it's fair to say, after 5 years without a stable release and 4 without a preview release, that Project64 is no longer a "frequently updated" project which needs to use this template. If anyone knows how to remove the LSR template and go back to using the infobox alone, please do it. Avindra talk / contribs 21:23, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
project64k
Is an old piece of crap that fails to meet notability standards. I vote for removing this clutter. What say ye? Avindra talk / contribs 03:02, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
complete survey??
back when i downloaded all versions, i was having trouble getting to them because some spam was interupting. if this is the survey thats referenced, i used peerblock & blocked advertising, & downloading them became easy:) if this is the case, by all means add it!
- i collected 28 balloons on diddy kong racing before it became too hard
Failed merge
The "merge" failed to maintain any content from this article, turning a 12,210 byte article into a single line in a table that already existed on the other page. It wasn't a merge, it was a deletion and redirect. 173.34.28.208 (talk) 11:26, 21 April 2012 (UTC)