Jump to content

Talk:Nintendo DS/Archive 6

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 ← Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6

post-merger assistance

I've done the bulk of the merging but obviously theres a bit duplicated, unneccessary etc so if people could help that'd be great. the page is actually 4000bytes smaller already lol. chocobogamer mine 22:02, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

I thought people were generally against the merger? Rehevkor ✉ 22:05, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
don't know what planet you're on but there were only two realistically against - both coming up with nonsensical comments, like its completely different hardware-wise and that the original was genrrally a flop, and the third guy who only wanted it split coz he 'needed it for work' - these are not real arguments for keeping a split article. the exact same thing was on the DSi page and there was overwhelming majority, and a lot more feedback, for merging. for the exact same reasons - you cant have one split with 2 products with the same hardware and one merged, there needs to be consistency through the 'product family' chocobogamer mine 22:12, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
That is a matter of opinion. There was no consensus to merge. Rehevkor ✉ 22:14, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
if you've got such a problem with it why didn't you put up your arguments? chocobogamer mine 22:53, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
I don't have a problem as such.. I'm just pointing out you performed a pretty major merge against consensus. Or are you denying that? Rehevkor ✉ 22:58, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
I would argue that it was with concensus - as the arguments the opposing members used are basically pretty much soley the "i like it" argument - which Wikipedia themselves don't consider valid arguments chocobogamer mine 23:03, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
That is a matter of opinion. You can't just decide your opposition's arguments are simply invalid and go ahead with the merge, that is not how consensus works. No one else has chimed in here so I guess people aren't that fussed though. Rehevkor ✉ 23:10, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

i understand what you're saying there, there are reasons i thought their arguments invalid so i thought i would explain my actions to show that it was in good faith and not to be controversial. here are some of the arguments used to disagree

"It can be argued that the DS Lite is the reason behind the DS' success, and that the hinge problem being irrelevant and somewhat significant warrants the split"

  • "it can be argued" is opinion that can start a flame war, complete OR as there is sourced information that the original could have sold more had stock been higher
  • claiming a single design flaw can warrant a split is also opinion and its not as if it couldn't be included in a combined page.

"I strongly disagree with a merger. The DS Lite was such a drastic change from the original DS in both design and sales that I can't support it being merged. Something like the DSi XL being merged into the DSi is understandable but this is completely unnecessary" and "The reason I suggested that the DSi XL be merged into the DSi is well first it has DSi in its name. Second there were no drastic changes in the hardware or design except making everything bigger. Whereas the DS Lite had an update in design, hardware and rejuvenated the DS's sales. I see where you’re coming from with the PSP and PS2, but I feel the DS Lite needs its separate article"

  • contradiction in itself - arguing that the DSi should be merged with XL despite also being only a size change too, EXACTLY the same as the DSlite - no internals changed etc (PSP and PS2 arguments were that there WERE hardware changes but still one article)
  • The DS lite rejuvinated sales - nonsense comment, opinion and unsourced - there was a valid source, in the header, stating the DS was constantly at low stock levels
  • using the phrase "i feel" is not an argument - pure opinion

"i need ds lite (article) for work"

  • no need for comment there, he also put this on the dsi page

we both look at these opinions differently clearly (i am certain these go against that rule), but as you said there haven't been any arguments yet regarding the merger so i'm willing to let this drop and just say we have a different of opinion :) chocobogamer mine 23:30, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

You are supposed to wait until an administrator closes the discussion from further comments & states the results of the discussion. Here's an example of what I'm talking about [1], here is a much shorter one [2]. SNS (talk) 02:43, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure why this was merged when only yourself chocobo and one other person were suppporting it. I don't think there was nearly enough consensus here. BW21.--BlackWatch21 16:29, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Pressure sensitive touch screen not mentioned

I'm not sure why, but the fact that the bottom touch screen is pressure sensitive was not mentioned in the Technical Specifications. I'm at a loss for finding a super reliable source for this information, but I know it to be true. - Bkid My talk/Contribs 23:23, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Odd firmware bit about the DSi and flashcarts

I noticed that there is an odd bit at the end of the "Firmware" section that says "One of The Nintendo DSi's Firmware 1.4 had sent a piracy update to block flash carts like R4, Acekard, TTDS and more but failed to stop them. Though constant OS updates improve anti-piracy coding hackers continually work around them for the sole purpose to continue to allow piracy devices such as the R4 and other flash cards." This really shouldn't be here as this article doesn't include the DSi. Kasm279 (talk) 03:05, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Probably shouldn't be there without an reliable independent source.. Rehevkor ✉ 03:21, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
This has been backed up for a while now: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/103342-Nintendo-Blocks-Flash-Carts-With-DSi-Software-Update Indrora (talk) 21:45, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Backlight

Why is there no mention of the differences between the backlights? being that the dsl and dsi has a normal backlight just like any modern device or phone, where as the original ds backlight is worse than a damned candle.. it barely lights the screen at all, its awful, this should be mentioned.. -Anon —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.2.86.229 (talk) 21:49, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Article says 2D where I think it should be 3D

See this diff: [3]

I thought that really is 3D? --62.140.137.126 (talk) 19:11, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

I've changed it. I am not sure why it was changed it may have been undetected vandalism of the person who changed it may have been comparing it to the 3ds which can create actual 3d images. Either way I don't think we should be calling this a 2d system since it is capable of 3d rendering. Games such as the soon to be released Okamiden are not made with 2d srites.--76.66.180.54 (talk) 05:30, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Battery Life

The body of the article says the following regarding the battery life of the DS: "Nintendo claims the battery lasts a maximum of 10 hours under ideal conditions". However, in the comparison table later in the article, in the Battery Life row, it says "10 to 14 hours". Perhaps one of these bits of information is wrong; or maybe the discrepancy should be commented on. Karadoc** (talk) 11:13, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

I think this is mentioned elsewhere in the article, but the discrepancy is due to the difference in battery life between the vanilla DS and the DS lite, which has a longer battery life. Still, clarification is probably warranted. Eldamorie (talk) 13:46, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

DS Option Pak

What is a DS Option Pak as that page is linked to from console wars and redirects to this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.121.39.234 (talk) 02:41, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure, as I've never heard that term before, but from it's context in the "console wars" article, it kind of sounds like it's referring to how some games used the GBA slot on the DS/DS lite for things other than GBA games. For instance, I think some games were compatible with putting a "rumble pak" in there. And there were the DS Guitar Hero games that had you put in the "guitar part" in there too. Sergecross73 msg me 14:25, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 August 2021 and 9 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jigolay.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 05:19, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

DS lite specifications

I believe the DS lite specifications section should be reviewed. Firstly, I found that some part of it was confused with the specs of the DSi (CPU). There may be more. Also, it seems that apart from size, battery life and weight, they are the same with respect to hardware. Maybe it should be considered to change the section to something like "The Nintendo DS lite has the same hardware specifications as the original Nintendo DS with the exceptions of..." Would do you think? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.156.126.106 (talk) 20:33, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Model comparison

Nintendo 3DS needs to be added to the model comparison. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quadrplax (talk • contribs) 02:12, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

The 3DS does not need to be added, as it is not a DS. This would be equivalent (for example) of showing the PS3 in a comparison table of PS2 models. Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.θɒn/ (talk) 05:44, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
It's within the same series. I think it needs to be added to the comparison. Just because it supports 3d and a whole bunch of other features does not make it not part of the series. It takes the same game cartages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.36.5.200 (talk) 18:53, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
Yes, and launch PS3s could play PS2 games, while all PS2s and PS3s can play PS1 games; that does not make them variants of the same console. Similarly, the GBA could play Gameboy and GBC games, but wasn't simply a "type of Gameboy". The 3DS is the successor to the DS/DSi. It has very different hardware and 3DS games are not compatible with the original DSes/DSis. It is in "the same series" as the DSes/DSis, but isn't a form of the same console (A good comparison would the the PlayStation article, which is about the series, so covers PS1, PS2, PS3, PSP and PSV. This article is equivalent to PlayStation (console), which is about the PS1.) Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.θɒn/ (talk) 19:31, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
As a side note, technically this article isn't even about the DS in general, but about the original DS model. The DS Lite and DSi have their own articles. Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.θɒn/ (talk) 19:35, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Region Lock

At least on PAL Systems, one cannot play any American DS Games on the DSi, DSiXL or 3DS. They are still compatible with DS and DS Lite. The article is a little vague on this subject, opining that only DSi-enhanced software is region-locked. I don't know whether American or Japanese Systems feature a similar lock. Anyone know about that? Just a thought, Samjohn95 21:07, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Merger discussion

Another editor pointed me to an orphaned article on the launch of the Nintendo DS. Apparently it was AfD'd four years ago with the result being Keep. Instead of deleting it, this information should be incorporated into this main article, with the exact amount of content to be determined by consensus in this discussion. Again, the suggested article to be merged here is considered an orphan, since nothing links back to it, and its information would certainly not be out of place here. --McDoobAU93 15:53, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

  • Support merge As noted above. --McDoobAU93 15:53, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
  • Support merge As per McDoob; (I am the editor who "pointed him" to the article.) Salvidrim (talk) 16:38, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
  • Support merge I am new to the edition of pages. What's the procedure to merge that article?--Darkeagle7x (talk) 05:59, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Support – It will definitely need trimmed down, but I don't see the need to keep it as a standalone article. Good catch, Salvidrim. --GoneIn60 (talk) 17:08, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Oppose merge. There's quite a bit of information on the launch page and there are only two options for dealing with that content, neither of which I find appealing:
Cut out some content. It would be unfortunate to cut the list of launch titles for each region, for instance.
Keep all the content. Would make the main article very long.
CaseyPenk (talk) 23:01, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Has the DS outsold the PS2?

The PS2 article says that it sold 150 million units, less than the DS' nearly 154 million.75.63.51.171 (talk) 16:02, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

List_of_best-selling_game_consoles states 155 million, perhaps the PS2 article needs to be updated. Яehevkor ✉ 16:11, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Ah, the 150 figure was "as of January 31, 2011". Some time ago. Яehevkor ✉ 16:12, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Ah, but less than a year after the 150 announcement by Sony the PS2 production ended, and it's then assumed that the previous fiscal year of 4.1 million were eclipsed by the final year. Something given the last official announcement by Sony was PS2 SHIPPED 150 million units. By official manufacturer numbers, the Nintendo DS is the highest selling console that can be verified by its manufacturer. Sony fanboys who often influence Wikipedia articles then change them by using sources who error by using Wikipedia as its source. If you use a source who used Wikipedia as ITS source, then how reliable a source is it? Yeah, it's not! Again, the Nintendo DS is the ONLY CONFIRMED SYSTEM to reach a CONFIRMED 154 million units. Reliable sources have to say the PS2 sold "approximately 155" as there is no reliable source to say one way or the other, because only Sony knows, and they are not releasing that information.2602:304:CFD3:2EE0:E42C:7D5E:31CA:82A0 (talk) 06:03, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Series

There should be an article about the DS line as a whole.--occono (talk) 02:26, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

DS does not stand for Developer's System

Sheesh, don't you understand that he was joking when he said that? It was a remark about how developer friendly it was, not a serious remark about what the initials DS were for. Someone please remove or at least clarify this76.226.197.184 (talk) 22:27, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

There's a source from the official site saying so in a FAQ. I don't see any sign that what is being said is a joke. TheStickMan[✆Talk] 22:31, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
Because you have to use common sense, which is apparently in too short supply on the internet, I guess there needs joke font or something... (that was a joke, btw, since you can't tell, apparently)68.51.193.141 (talk) 20:31, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
First, please watch your tone; that could be construed as a personal attack. We comment on content, not on editors. Second, I reviewed the source, and there's no suggestion that a joke was implied. If Nintendo is publishing this on their own site, they mean it. --McDoobAU93 20:40, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

“Dī Esu”?

Re this reversion, why are we romanizing an unwritten Japanese phoneticization of Roman letters? I find this very confusing. Unless the lead has the Japanese name wrong, t’s not the ディーエス; it’s the DS. As I understand it, we use Hepburn romanization on WP, and I can’t find anything about “romanizing” Roman text like “DS” either in our Hepburn article or in MOS:J#Romanization. Did I miss where it’s addressed? Or was this a community decision somewhere, and could someone point me to where it was made? Thanks. —174.141.182.82 (talk) 03:47, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

External links

Under "External links" would * DSiBrew be acceptable? Thanks, ... PeterEasthope (talk) 15:25, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Nintendo DS launch

Based on the current sourcing, the launch can be adequately covered within its parent section. There isn't any element of the sourcing that makes the launch separately notable from the handheld console. czar 20:29, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

  checkY Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 21:59, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

"Citation Needed" Predecessor

In the table, at 'Predecessor', Game Boy Advance is specified, as correct. But it says 'Citation Needed', for some reason. What kind of citation would be needed here? For 'Successor', no citation is given either. 607 (talk) 14:56, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Synthesizable?

The specification of the CPU includes programmable macrocells (programmed in Verilog). FPGA is usually heavy on power usage so is the CPU actually programable OR did the Nintendo team build the extra instructions and the production model replaces the macrocells with regular silicon gates? The former opens up game-specific instruction-set while the latter will be cheaper and draw less power. My experience of Nintendo CPUs dates back to the NES and they always seem to be derived from existing cores. The early ones had the analog sound chip and CPU on a single piece of silicon. I think the GBA wasn't a standard ARM core, but I'm now as well up on the DS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.99.74.135 (talk) 16:27, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Game Boy DS?

I've noticed that you redirect Game Boy DS here. That's interesting. Because that's what I remember the original name for this system being. And even though I find no evidence today that it was ever called that, yet you still have that redirect in place. If it was never called that, what's the purpose for the redirect? If my memory is flawed, I'd be the only person to even consider looking up, "Game Boy DS."

But, you don't mention that it was ever called that anywhere in the article. Are we just pretending like Nintendo called it that? Is that what we're doing?68.53.153.55 (talk) 16:26, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Redirects are to help users find topics under a different name generally, or plausible search terms such as alternative names, regardless of whether they were ever official. The redirect in question was created 9 years ago in 2008 and has never been edited since. -- ferret (talk) 16:30, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
Interesting... 2008, you say? That fits with the silent name change, rectify the old name theory. I found a discussion forum from 2007. Most of the text was gone, and this was only the first line of text from each post in it, but from what I could gather from context, it was about the fact that Nintendo was going to retire the Game Boy name, and the name, "Game Boy DS" was mentioned five times in the thread. Three of the times, the text was below the first line of text, but I was able to gather from context that people were talking about what they would call that system if the Game Boy name were retired. I guess Nintendo DS. Why rectify the name though? Why not admit to changing it? If only I could get my hands on a launch copy that still says, "Game Boy DS" on the packaging. Probably they've all been destroyed though.68.53.153.55 (talk) 16:38, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
Sounds like unofficial fan speculation/rumors as far as the forums go. Unless you can find a reliable secondary source that says Nintendo originally planned and developed it as "Game Boy DS" and renamed it, there's no evidence it was ever official with Nintendo, and was just a fan name. -- ferret (talk) 16:47, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
Unfortunately, it's all been rectified. But you remember it, don't you? You remember it was called Game Boy DS for approximately a year after release before it was rectified and then officially it had always been Nintendo DS... You remember it too. Don't pretend you don't. But why? Game Boy was a very popular brand. Why drop it from the DS at all? And, why go round up all copies and marketing and replace them with the new name? It doesn't seem cost effective, does it? Why is nobody investigating this?68.53.153.55 (talk) 17:04, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
I don't remember it at all. Please be aware of WP:NOTFORUM. This talk page is for discussing improvements to the article. If there's no sourcing for this, then it was likely just a fan name before release. -- ferret (talk) 17:18, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
Nope. It was the official name for nearly a year before it was rectified. Everybody was calling it that, including Nintendo. It was printed on the packaging and everything. I find it very hard to believe you don't remember it. And, it seems whomever put the redirect on this page knew about it too. Rectifying this had to be a big deal, considering the sheer number of units out there that had the, "Game Boy DS" name on them. An investigation would definitely turn up some evidence. A cover up of this magnitude is impossible to achieve flawlessly. Somebody made mistakes. Somewhere. You just gotta find them. 68.53.153.55 (talk) 17:22, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
Ferret, OP isn't changing the page. He's allowed to bring these concerns up here. It's not vandalism or trolling just because you disagree. OP, if the DS was ever released under a different name, there should be a record at the patent office. If you're sure you're right, that's a good place to look for evidence.107.77.249.8 (talk) 19:01, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
  1. I don't recall it ever being named "Game Boy DS" in any official capacity at any point.
  2. If no reliable sources (websites like IGN, Electronic Gaming Monthly, GameSpot, etc), verify this name, then it should not be mentioned at the article. (Messageboard and forum posts are not usable as sources/evidence on Wikipedia.)
  3. The fact that it was created as a redirect means nothing as far as the credibility of this argument goes. People make erroneous redirects all the time, and because so few people would ever search for such a thing, few people would ever come across it, and thus, it goes unnoticed, and never gets deleted. This strikes me as rather likely - as you even suggested, few people would type such a name in the first name, so few would even be aware of its existence, let alone fix/delete it.
  4. Please read WP:BURDEN. If you wish to search for evidence to prove this claim, then it's up to you to find it. Sergecross73 msg me 19:12, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
You guys sure are putting forth quite a bit of effort to quash discussion here. If course anyone who put this information into the article would be required to provide a valid source, but I don't see where anyone has done that. They've meerely brought it up here on the talk page. I fail to see how deleting a section from the talk page or banning anyone was warranted here.73.58.147.125 (talk) 22:37, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
  1. In addition to what Serge and 73.58.147.125 has already said. These video game websites are reliable sources to the articles on Wikipedia. Gameboy isn't part of the name from Nintendo DS.
  2. This is not Game Boy DS. Nintendo just renamed into Nintendo DS to which DS isn't a Gameboy console
  3. Nintendo DS is the official name for nearly a year before it was rectified. The name Game Boy DS is just a fan name. 45.247.153.10 (talk) 00:30, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
I imagine Ferret deleted the discussion because of the implausibility of it all. To suggest that, in the internet age, that a company released an extremely popular product under a different name during its first year of availability, without there being a shred of evidence, is simply ludicrous. It's hard to imagine someone who believes such a scenario in good faith. Sergecross73 msg me 01:27, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
I understand, I saw on the revision history. The edit says "Trolling and/or hoax." It was deleted the discussion by Ferret due to having disruptive edits that appears to be a troll or hoax. Ferret blocked this IP because of "Disruptive editing, hoax/troll edits to talk page". 45.247.153.10 (talk) 01:39, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
I must admit, it's rather bizarre that one of someone's first acts on Wikipedia would be to look into another's block log, or to look into the page history. Not sure what would compel someone to do that right off the bat. Not sure how this discussion has randomly pulled in like five random new anonymous editors all interested in discussing this insane hoax either. Sergecross73 msg me 02:21, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia doesn't entertain conspiracy theories; Only acknowledges them if they've been discussed by reliable sources. Even then, Wikipedia's editors should not lend credence to them until it's officially acknowledged. Nintendo likely never will, because frankly, the idea that Nintendo would cover up the working title of a game console is complete nonsense, considering Nintendo has been very open about working titles in the past. Nobody is trying to stomp out discussion of this topic; Wikipedia simply isn't the place for it. Talk pages are for discussing the content of the article, not topic forums, and we all know there are plenty of those on the Internet for you to have this discussion. BruzerFox 06:12, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Nintendo DS. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:46, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

DSi status

The DSi is more of its own system than a redesigned DS, so I think it makes more sense to say the successor is the DSi (not the 3DS), and remove the DSi(XL) from the redesigned models. Hallowizer (talk) 00:01, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

No, it's just a revised version of the DS. We don't generally classify revisions as successors. Just like, with PlayStation 4, we use Playstation 5 as the successor, not Playstation 4 Pro. Sergecross73 msg me 01:42, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
In my opinion, the DSi isn't necessarily just a new revision, but it also is definitely not the successor. Owning a DSi myself, it does have some improvements over the normal DS and even had a few exclusive games (only because they used the DSi camera), however I wouldn't really say it's enough to make it the successor to the DS. ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#0001 13:13, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Nintendo_DS/Archive_6&oldid=1160935268"