Talk:Nintendo DS/Archive 3

Removal of redundant WFC Section

For some reason there was a second WFC section right at the bottom of the page. There was no unique or useful information in it, so I removed it. Now there's only the one at the top Noit88 14:56, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Headset

They have a slot for it; they've mentioned using it; when will it happen? I suspect it may be used in Tony Hawk's Downhill Jam, which is said to support voice chat. A headset could be used for in-game chat instead of the before-and-after-game chat in Metroid Prime Hunters. --Gaming King 07:40, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

There are unofficial headsets available- GAME do a third party one. There's not been any official first party ones or anything though, so it's a bit open-ended. Noit88 22:44, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Yeah. But I wonder when Nintendo itself will utilize the slot... --Gaming King 20:49, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

At a product fair in Japan nintendo revealed the headset. http://www.britishgaming.co.uk/?p=1075

If that doesn't convince you, just google "Ds headset" THis discussion is over. I also added it in the article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.205.65.68 (talk • contribs) 21:41, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

What DS stands for

This article makes out that DS officially stands for Dual Screen first, however I have never heard Nintendo officially calling it the Dual Screen, but the Developers' System. --The last sheikah 19:38, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

DS does stand for Duel Screen and was originally the code name used to describe the system. But Nintendo decided to settle with the name. Bendragonbrown47 19:44, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Actually, when the name was first revelaed, NIntedo even stated that it does NOT tand for DUal Screen, but Developer's System. Hwoever, fans SPECULATED that it was DUal Screen, and assimilated the name into marketing. Mishy dishy 22:13, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Nintendo did not settle with the name, that is pure speculation. Accourding to Nintendo DS stands for Developers system, never once have the stated that it stands for Dual Screens, dual screens is a fan driven name into the media. I say we remove this passage

"The letters "DS" in the name are meant to stand for both Dual Screen and Developers' System, the latter of which refers to the features of the handheld designed to encourage innovative gameplay ideas among developers." For it only officialy by Nintendo stands for Developers system, and thats what counts. Dual screen is completly fan made. The passage SHOULD be stated like this

"The letters "DS" in the name are meant to stand for Developers' System, which refers to the features of the handheld designed to encourage innovative gameplay ideas among developers. It's unofficial name however is simply put, Dual Screens."It can be cleaned up a little, but that's the main point. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.205.65.68 (talk • contribs) .

ComfortStylus SPAM Link?

The ComfortStylus isn't a "DS" accessory -- it's a generic stylus. The entry seems as though it might exist solely to drive folks to the ComfortStylus website. Shall we delete it? 69.104.41.102 15:25, 13 June 2006 (UTC)David69.104.41.102 15:25, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Wii Connectivity

It has been mentioned before that the DS will in some way connect with the DS. I dont know the specifics or have a link to anything very concrete but I was wondering if anyone that knew more about that would be willing to add that to this article as it is currently lacking any mention.Sir hugo 19:18, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

So far as I know they bounce radio signals off one another. 69.145.123.171 ^Hello!

Iwata confirmed in an interview that the DS and Wii WILL connect with each other and the DS is capable of recieving downloads from Wii.

One of a kind category

How can the DS belong to this category when there's also a DS Lite, therefore not one of a kind? --Oscarthecat 20:20, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

They're the same thing. The Lite is just a slight upgrade. 69.145.123.171 ^Hello!

Who decides which are "one of a kind"? This is an extremely POV category, and should be nominated for deletion. -- ReyBrujo 20:33, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Agreed... 69.145.123.171 ^Hello!

Please visit the talk page for this category to discuss its possible deletion.Sir hugo 20:51, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I Have A Question...can anyone help?

Well, look... the DS/DS Lite are non-reigonal, right? I, an American, can play Japanese games in my DS, right? So, when the Japanese Opera DS Browser comes out, can't I just buy it off the web, pay for the huge shipping, and use it to go on the web with my DS? I'm not sure if it would work... could anyone more knowledgeable on this topic help me? Thanks. aido2002 03:00, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

That's possible yes, but you may have to contend with the web browser only interpreting Japanese (I can't really know for sure until it comes out). --Thaddius 12:26, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

image

The DS image in the infobox has no source. It may be deleted on commons. Bawolff 05:33, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

This is a instruction howto that needs to be in the thingy

There is a way, however, to change batteries without losing the data mentioned above. The user will need a charger, the new battery, and the DS to have its batteries replaced. First, the user turns on the System, and then plugs it in. Making perfectly sure that the system is on and plugged in, the user changes the batteries. The user may take as much time as he/she wants. IMPORTANT: KEEP IT PLUGGGED IN! Once the new battery is securley in place, screw in the cover, and use the system normally.

That, is very helpful to the topic, as people will just see "Replacing betteries erases data" and not how to prevent it.

Howtos have no place on Wikipedia. Please see WP:NOT. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 02:30, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Thanks for discussing the matter. Also, remember to add ~~~~ at the end of your posts so that they are signed (and so others can identify you have been the one in making that comment). As for your information, that is not the focus of the encyclopedia. Otherwise, we would be adding opinions about screen protectors and how to install them, how to use the stylus to minimize scratching, etc. Also, note that the procedure is extremely hard (for a casual reader), as the user would need to open the unit, which may void warranty. -- ReyBrujo 02:34, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

There is virtually no difficulty involved in performing the procedure, and if it violated the warranty, the battery cover would have use a three-sided screw like Nintendo uses for other restricted areas. CrossEyed7 02:17, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

No-one calls it a NDS?

Recent edit removed this NDS alias. Sites such as amazon still refer to it as NDS in some instances. [1]. Also, google shows many sites using the name. I've reverted the edit, as a result. --Oscarthecat 06:59, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I suggest we remove the NDS thing. I have never heard anyone call it that, and DS is a much more common abbreviation. Indeed, look up DS on Google and loads of DS stuff comes up. Search for NDS and you get the National Dahlia Society. -- Steel 16:15, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm. IGN regularly refer to it as the NDS, see [2], as do Amazon [3] --Oscarthecat 17:36, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough then. -- Steel 17:41, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Never heard it called NDS by anyone, ever. Might just be an IGN thing. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.252.8.160 (talk • contribs) .

What's the unit called again? the Nintendo DS, don't believe me? Check your box or even better yet, check on back of the unit. It's NDS, period.

Is correct. I have access to the NOA media press page and they abbreviate it as NDS. You can't get more official than that. The Viper 04:01, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

"NDS" is the production-model abbreviated characters; Nintendo uses the same methodology for the GBA (it's referred to as "AGB" on model numbering), the GameCube ("GCN"), the GameBoy Color ("CGB") and the original Game Boy too ("DMG"). Ex-Nintendo Employee 07:23, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Adding a fansite

I was wondering if I could add my Nintendo DS Blog! It follows te news on the Nintendo dS and the Nitendo DS Lite! HEre is the adress: http://red.blogs.aol.com/imasmartguy/Nintendo+DS/ --64.12.116.72 13:07, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't believe it fulfills the requirements. Blogs, social networking sites and forums are not good external links per 12th guideline:

Blogs, social networking sites (such as MySpace) and forums should generally not be linked to. Although there are exceptions, such as when the article is about, or closely related to, the website itself, or if the website is of particularly high standard.

Also, per 8th point:

Sites that are inaccessible to a significant proportion of the online community (for example, sites that only work with a specific brand of browser).

I tried to access your blog, but it asks me for an AOL user and password, and won't let me access the site without one. Thus, anyone who does not have an AOL account will not be able to access your blog. Even if you can create an AOL account for free, casual users should not need to give user and password information to access any external site.

Finally, your blog may also fail points 1 (A website that you own or maintain) and 3 (In general, any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article here would have once it becomes an example of brilliant prose.). -- ReyBrujo 13:19, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Special Edition Naruto DS?

http://www.takaratomy.co.jp/products/gamesoft/daikesyu_4/tokuten.html so, what's the word?-Malomeat 15:35, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

units sold

Okay, this has been eating at me for a while now, but how are getting the numbers for units sold? It doesn't seem to match anything in any of the linked references. Same with the Nintendo DS Lite article. I have a suspicion we're doing something we shouldn't be, but I'm not sure. Can anyone explain what's going on? Dancter 20:19, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Japanese units sold come from media play, while nintendo posts quarterly reports of it's sales numbers world wide. Sometimes things are common knowledge (DS being # 1 in july), and other times they are from NPD.Neozero497 20:40, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, my question doesn't apply as much to this article at the moment, but currently on the Nintendo DS Lite article, the Japanese figure still doesn't seem to match anything in the cited source. I'm just wondering if I'm missing something. Dancter 21:02, 21 July 2006 (UTC) I updated the figures in that article using Nintendo's first quarter earnings release. I still can't find a source for the "2,930,521 DS Lite units sold in Japan" figure, though. Dancter 19:02, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Citation Needed on Opera broswer

In the section on the Opera web broswer, there is a citation needed tag after this sentence:

"a cross-platform web browser which will take advantage of the dual screens for either zooming in on certain sections of a website or having a longer vertical view"

The part needed citation is the last part about the zooming in/long vertical view, right ? That was confirmed in an issue of Nintendo Power. I have a scanned image of the page on my computer, is there anyway it could be used to verify the sentence ? Correct me I'f I'm wrong. - ~Viper~ | talk | contribs 23:53, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

I believe that English magazine scans are not allowed on Wikipedia. - A Link to the Past (talk) 23:56, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

I added a citation that I think works. It's from the blog of someone who does PR at Opera. If anyone can find something better, they're welcome to change it. Also, about whether magazine scans can be used, they probably don't fall under fair use, and thus shouldn't be uploaded onto Wikipedia. Linking to them seems okay, but considering how easy it is to forge an image using Photoshop, it would be best to support them with thorough citations, complete with the particular issue, article title, author, and page numbers. I prefer using templates like {{cite news}}, but it isn't required. Dancter 01:45, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Hmm ... didn't think so. Oh well, that link looks good too me. - ~Viper~ | talk | contribs 02:44, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Dual Screen points to this article, but shouldn't it be a seperate article altogether?

I noticed that the article Dual Screen points to this article about the Nintendo DS, presumably because "DS" stands for "Dual Screen". However, it seems to me that "Dual Screen" as a phrase is a much broader term, including any technology or computer system that incorporates two screens. Nintendo DS is just one product that makes use of that technology.

I would recommend that someone with more expertise than myself on the issue put together a seperate stub article for "Dual Screen" that discusses in general what dual screen applications are and how they work. Within that broader article, mention Nintendo DS as an example of a dual screen application at work. Dugwiki 20:34, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Quick addendum. I just realized that there is already an article called Dual monitor. That article seems to be a more appropriate redirect for Dual Screen, so I'm taking the liberty of changing the redirect. Dugwiki 20:37, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Note that Dual monitor redirects to Multi monitor. People usually prefer doing a Google test to see which is the most common use for the phrase, I am fine with anything. The only thing you should do is add a disambiguation link at Multi monitor to point to this page as well. -- ReyBrujo 03:46, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

I went ahead and changed this to a disambigualtion page; hope this satisfies everyone. Karaken12 21:41, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Game Cards using Flash memory?

Could someone provide proof of this? This sounds highly dubious as Flash memory is generally re-writable, and I've never heard of Flash ROMs. I know save data is definately stored on Flash memory in the cards, but would assume just normal ROM chips are much cheaper to make and more reliable than Flash for the actual game. --Zilog Jones 19:23, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually, semantics aside, flash memory is often considered ROM memory, despite the fact that they technically aren't "read-only". But I agree: we needs a reference affirming that that the actual game software is stored on flash memory. I haven't had any luck. Dancter 20:43, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to remove any mention of this if no proof is given in the next week or so, as I cannot see any information outside WP that mentions the game data being on Flash memory. I think it may just be a misunderstanding of terminoligy - the author may have thought "flash memory" is any ROM/RAM in a small plastic card package, like SD, xD cards, etc., not the type of IC memory that it is. --Zilog Jones 21:37, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Triangles/framerate question

The article currently announces that "The system is theoretically capable of rendering 120,000 triangles per second at 30 frames per second." Does this mean to say, as is later implied, that the system can do at most 30 fps and, in addition, at most 120,000 triangles/second? The "at" doesn't make any sense. — 84.66.235.49 09:56, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Official Nintendo information seems to contradict this. According to Nintendo's Australian website, the DS can do 3-D at 60fps.[4] I tried to find out where the 120K triangles/30fps info came from, and as far as I can tell, it came from a purported leak of a spec sheet in 2004. Dancter 20:43, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, that is a bit confusing, and I'm pretty sure Mario Kart DS runs mostly at 60fps. --Zilog Jones 21:40, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

It would be best if they were noted as maximums individually. As in 120,000 tringles per second maximum, 60 fps maximum. Because the game environment varies between games so much, saying it's limited to both a triangle limitation AND a frame rendering limitation at the same instance is impossible to determine. Also to note, triangle and polygon counts aren't the same so if it's listed officially as one or the other, use it but the two are not interchangable. I can explain if needed. 17:31, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Main Photo Should be Lite?

Perhaps the main photo should be updated to the Nintendo DS Lite as that is now the official 'image' of the Nintendo DS. Artimuszeln 00:22, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

The Game Boy Advance article shows the original GBA, despite Nintendo not even making them any more. I say we keep the image of the original Nintendo DS. There's already a section for the DS Lite. That's where the DS Lite photo should go. --Optichan 17:09, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Of course, some other opinions would be nice as well. --Optichan 13:53, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, this article is about the Nintendo DS and not the Nintendo DS Lite. Seems pretty clear to me, keep with the pic of the original, but by all means mention (and link) to the DS Lite article. --Oscarthecat 14:00, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Reaction section

It's completely awful, has no relevance, is not referenced and is littered with weasel words that slightly bias it against the DS. I think it should be removed; it's obvious from the sales section was people's reaction was. Trip: The Light Fantastic 00:26, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Indeed it is, and clearly written from one perspective. I recall at the time, from reading no doubt different publications, a very positive reaction to the innovative direction Nintendo had chosen to take. Naturally, that's just another view, but I've edited the section to make it more balanced (eg "some journalists" rather than _everyone_). Yes, there was criticism, but let's highlight the criticism of learned gamers rather than whimsical reactions by generic pundits. Those who've followed the games industry since the '80s had cautious reservations but equally respected the novel ideas in the machine. 86.131.31.5 21:01, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Is the Game Boy comparison accurate, or even necessary? I haven't researched it thoroughly or anything, but didn't the Game Gear come out significantly later than Game Boy? How could the Game Boy be initially perceived as inferior to a console which hadn't even been released yet? Dancter 21:14, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Top Selling Game

Last time I checked (a few minutes ago) MKSD was in SECOND and Nintendogs in First. Personally I like MKDS better, but oh well. Still needs to be accurate. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 60.227.69.157 (talk • contribs) . Nintendogs is only top when combining all three(soon to be four) versions. I don't like grouping them together, just like I don't like the Pokemon games being grouped together since it's not accurate as to what the top selling GAME(and not GAMES) is. TJ Spyke 04:31, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

They are to be totalled toegether since they are still the same game, just which dogs are available from the onset differs. It can be compared to adding sales of a Directors Cut, Special Edition, Platinum/Players Choice/best seller SKU, etc... The 4th is more questionable as we don't yet fully know the differences between it and the initial 3 versions though most likely it too will be added together in official sales PRs. How much difference is there between the Pokemon titles? Does it work the same way as Ndogs whee the game is exactly the same just different starting Pokemon or do the titles actually differ in other areas? If they differ beyond just initial Pokemon, they yes they need to be split into specific sales.--The Viper 17:49, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

The 4th one(Dalmation & Friends) is already out in Europe and is basically the same except a Dalmation is one of the starter dogs. Pokemon is different in that there are Pokemon specific to each version(like how Caterpie was exclusive to Pokemon Red while Weedle was exclusive to Pokemon Blue) and that you have to trade with someone to who has the other version in order to collect them all. TJ Spyke 20:50, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

DS?

What does DS stand for? Dual Screen? --D-hyo 20:42, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

It can.[5] An explanation was offered a little further up. Dancter 20:47, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Publically, it stands for Dual Screen. Internally, it stands for Developers Sytem. 05:56, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

predecessor

shouldn't there be no predecessor since it's been said by nintendo the ds is NOT part of the game boy family but a totally different system —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.166.212.145 (talk • contribs) 00:23, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

I was just coming to post the same thing. Nintendo considers the DS a "third pillar" to go along with the Game Boy line and the home console line. this has been Nintendo's stance since it first launched the DS. Really, the DS has no predecessor. source 209.216.93.104 15:55, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Does anyone object to Game Boy Advance being removed from the "predecessor" section, replaced instead with "none?" If not, I will make that change. Thanks. 209.216.93.104 19:59, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree. I've read elsewhere that the DS is a separate system from the Game Boy and consoles. Te DS Lite is, of course, a sucessor, but the DS itself has no predecessor.--WorldsCollide 01:46, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Hold on there for a second. We all agree that the DS isn't a GameBoy, yes. However, the DS is part of Nintendo's lineup of handheld games. We all know that the "Game and Watch" handhelds isn't considered part of the Game Boy line, but the devices ARE considered predecessors to it. In the same manner, the GameBoy series (more specifically the Game Boy Advance SP) contributed to the design of the DS and preceded it in the line of Nintendo handheld games. It IS the predecessor.

the fact remains is NOT A GAME BOY. there is no need for it to be there. maybe someone can call nintendo and get a quote then change it. keeping it there just gives people information that isn't true.

It doesn't have to be a Game Boy for the SP to be the predecessor to the DS. The GBA SP preceded it and clearly influenced the system's design. As was stated before, just because it's not neccesarily part of the same line doesn't mean it wasn't a predecessor. This is why the Game and Watch line is considered a predecessor to the Game Boy line, despite the fact that the Game and Watches aren't Game Boys. Ex-Nintendo Employee 07:14, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Good point. If that's the way we're interpreting the use of predecessor here, I have no objection to it. Anyways, I don't believe that Nintendo will produce any more Game Boys systems. So, then the analogy stands: The Game Boy family is a predecessor the DS the way Game & Watch family is a predecessor to the Game Boy. I do have a question though, does the article make the distinction, that the DS is not part of the Game Boy line? If not, I think it should.WorldsCollide 16:15, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

The Marketing section says "Nintendo has placed the Nintendo DS outside of its highly successful Game Boy line, which is targeted at the pre-existing gaming market", denoting that it's not part of the GB line. So yes, it makes the distinction. It is unknown whether or not Nintendo will eliminate the GB line, but we don't have any sourced info either way. Ex-Nintendo Employee 01:02, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I realize that it's unknown whether or not Nintendo will eliminate the Game Boy line. I was stating an opinion, not implying that we should include that in Wikipedia. Anyways, I believe that we have established that the Game Boy is a predecessor to the DS, thus that portion of the article is accurate.WorldsCollide 15:51, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

The GameBoy line is not a predecessor in that Nintendo established the DS line as a "3rd pillar", not a replacement. Until it is publically noted by Nintendo that the GameBoy line is the predecessor to the DS, we cannot claim it as such. It's not different than Ford making a new car model and ending an older one. That doesn't automatically make the old car model its predecessor.The Viper 17:36, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't see Nintendo Virtual Boy having predecesor. -- ReyBrujo 17:39, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Calling the Game Boy Advance a predecessor implies that the DS was designed to take its place. The two systems are fully co-existing, as opposed to the difference between the Game Boy Color and the Game Boy Advance for example, where the latter is clearly a replacement for the former. Besides, the fact that Nintendo itself calls the DS a third pillar, separate from the Game Boy Line, should be enough for us. We do have sourced info of this. See the second post in this discussion, or this:

"I'm sure because we've provided backwards compatibility with Game Boy people will see it as the next Game Boy. But really this is our third pillar." -Shigeru Miyamoto. Nintendo's stance of the DS and Game Boy being separate is well documented. Search "Nintendo third pillar" or something similar and you will see the stance documented many times. The only place that calls the GBA a predecessor to the DS is Wikipedia. 209.216.93.104 17:10, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Nothing is implied at all. Just because the DS line was preceded by the GB line doesn't mean they can't coexist. Ex-Nintendo Employee 19:51, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Following that idea, then the Wii's predecessor should be listed as the DS. It came before the Wii, and the Wii's design was influenced by the DS. It doesn't matter that they coexist, and it doesn't matter that they come from separate product lines.  ??

I agree with Viper. Nintendo itself says that the DS is not the successor to the Game Boy Advance. We have sourced information of this fact. We do not have sourced information of the opposite. Wikipedia's guidelines, therefore, say that it be changed to reflect our verifiable information. WP:V 209.216.93.104 15:50, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

These arguments are the most spurious that I've seen in a long time. It's obvious to anyone that the Wii is the successor to the GameCube, being the next system in Nintendo's main console line. The design of the DS Lite and the Wii were created concurrently to match asthetically, as everyone can see. The DS, on the other hand, was preceded by the Game Boy line; this is easily noted by nearly every aspect of its design, from the control layout to the compatibility. As I already stated earlier (which has been completely ignored)- just because a system is preceded by a system, it doesn't neccesarily mean that it's the successor at all. In terms of design, The Nintendo DS was preceded by the GB line; more specifically, the GBA SP. It was succeeded by the Nintendo DS Lite, which doesn't have a successor. Concurrently, the GB Micro was ALSO preceded by the GBA SP, and it too does not have a successor. They are two seperate items that share a common ancestor. The GBA Micro will likely be succeeded by whatever system Nintendo decides to name a Game Boy next, the DS Lite will be either succeeded by that as well or Nintendo will continue its third pillar platform.

Here, I created a diagram that explains it better, I think.

http://home.comcast.net/~shademask/linedesign.JPG

Ex-Nintendo Employee 20:29, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I understand your position, I just do not agree with it :). I think our disagreement really stems from how we each define predecessor/successor. The Wii/DS connection was meant to sound silly. But extending your position, the SNES is a predecessor to the GBA. They both share a common design (the GBA is essentially an SNES controller and processor with its own screen.) Many products are influenecd by others, but as you said yourself, that does not make one a predecessor of the other.

I have dug up another quote for the discussion: "The Nintendo DS is not the successor to any of our existing game devices." - Craig McClure, Nintendo of America. source

Seems pretty cut and dry. Again, Wikipedia is the only source that calls the GBA the DS's predecessor. We are stating the complete opposite to what is documented, which means we are deciding this fact for ourselves, which is not what Wikipedia is supposed to do. 209.216.93.104 21:03, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

It's only cut and dry when you confuse the meanings of successor and predecessor. Just because something shares a common predecessor does NOT mean that it becomes its successor; the SNES thing is just ridiculous- the two systems aren't anything alike in technical design or form. The DS, on the other hand, contains not just asthetic design holdovers from the GBA- close to half of the DS itself, such as the sound circuitry, the 33Mhz ARM processor, one of the screens and the power circuitry, are pulled directly from the GBA SP itself, which is why it can play GBA games. To nullify your linked quote, the DS isn't the successor to the Micro, and it was never argued that it was- the GB Micro's successor is whatever Nintendo calls a "GB" next. But the DS DOES share a common predecessor with the Micro- the original SP. In both influence and in technical design, the DS evolved out of the GBA SP, which is why the GBA SP is the predecessor to the DS. Ex-Nintendo Employee 02:06, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

We are not here to interpret our own meaning into the design and component influences as to ascertain if the DS has a predecessor especially when it's officially stated by Nintendo that it most certainly is not. Besides, if anything were to be its predecessor, it would be the Game and Watch series and even that has not been officially declared by Nintendo as such. The mere act of preceding something does not make one a predecessor in the context we are debating. Either the badging must continue such as Gameboy to Gameboy Advance or be in line with a company's sole flagship piece of equipment such as Gamecube to Wii. The recurring use of technology from one product to the next is a common practice in the electronic industry and is crucial for the backwards compatibility feature. Think of how much shared technology is used in TV's, vehicles, stereos, etc... Does that make each a predecessor? No, unless they continue a specific model line or badging, for example the 2004 C5 Chevy Corvette is the predecessor to the 2005 C6 Chevy Corvette yet it is not the predecessor to the 2006 Cadilac CTS despite the fact it has the same engine as the 2006 C6 Chevy Corvette.The Viper 03:45, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Your arguments stay the same but, as before, fall apart under any sort of scrutiny.

First off- your much vaunted "quoted statement". As was already stated before, Nintendo has never in any way, shape or form stated that the DS doesn't have a predecessor. What they have clearly stated, and what is in the link you have given, is that they said the GBASP does not have a successor. There is a massive difference between what you are attempting to insert as the link's meaning here, and the one that was stated. A successor is chosen- defined, it is a specific thing or person that immediately replaces something or someone prior. As was clearly already explained to you before, the Nintendo DS was never intended as a replacement for the GBASP, and there isn't anyone who is attempting to make that argument. So quit trying to use that link, because it is irrelevant in this discussion.

Secondly, you keep trying to insert irrelevant technology into the mix in an effort to push the argument into the theoretical. Whether it's a SNES, a car or a Game and Watch, we're talking about plain and simple facts here- The Game and Watch served as the inspiration (and was the direct predecessor to) the Game Boy line. The GB line continued to the SP, which then served as both design inspiration and technical basis (in other words, the parent, predecessor) for the DS. The GB line then continued onward, with the GB Micro and GBASP Lite succeeding the original GBASP. Those are simple facts, not speculation. The DS line continued as a third pillar, incorporating the DS Lite, and the three pillars of Nintendo's system lineup continue that way to this day. You state "recurring use of technology", but you completely ignore the fact that when you strip away the DS additions (such as the 66Mhz processor and touch screen), you still have a relatively intact (save for the Z80) Game Boy Advance sitting inside there. It's not merely a matter of "similar technology", it's the matter of a system being the basis for another system's design.

Ex-Nintendo Employee 05:58, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Predecessor removed. Until it is claimed by Nintendo to be otherwise, we should not state as such, esp when Nintendo themselves have stated before the GB line was not the predecessor.--The Viper 05:23, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Predecessor re-added. Nintendo has NEVER stated that the GB line is not the DS' predecessor, something repeatedly told to you over and over and over again. Ex-Nintendo Employee 11:50, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Arstechnica only posted what Reuters claimed, not written by themselves, the other sites are wrong. I was at the E3 media briefing conference when it was stated as much. Notice how the big sites nor Nintendo themselves never say predecessor/successor? In fact, they state the opposite. What your links show is supposition from the authors. Mine clearly state it's from Nintendo themselves. Predecessor removed.--The Viper 16:10, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14]

I have reverted you, again. Those are some lovely links there... but they all DO NOT SAY what you are claiming they say. AS YOU WERE ALREADY TOLD, NOBODY IS CLAIMING THAT THE DS IS THE GBA'S SUCCESSOR. They do say that the GBASP is a predecessor to the DS, which is an entirely different thing. None of your "links" specifically say "The GBA SP is not the predecessor to the DS", they say "The DS is not the GBA SP's sucessor" and nobody is attempting to argue against the latter statement. Considering you've trotted out what is quickly becoming a baseless argument no less than three times, I consider the matter settled.

Once again, in case anyone's just joined us- A successor, defined, is a chosen person or thing established to REPLACE what has been created prior, as the GBA Micro and SP Lite were created to replace the original GBA SP. A person or thing can be the predecessor to multiple people or things, but in order to be something's successor, one has to be specifically chosen.

The DS is not the sucessor to the GBA- this has already been proven, and was never part of the argument.

The GBA SP is the predecessor to the DS. This has been proven by links.

The GBASP Lite and Micro are the successor to the GBASP. Again, proven. Ex-Nintendo Employee 22:07, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

The GBA Micro IS NOT the successor to the GBA or GBA SP as per link 13 I gave, "Game Boy Micro represents the latest evolution in the image of the Game Boy Advance line, but it is not a successor to any current system." That's from Nintendo.com. The mere act of coming before something does not make something a predecessor in the context Wiki is portraying. If it were then every game system before the DS is its predecessor. There is a direct correlation between successor and predecessor in the context that this is being viewed. The DS DOES NOT continue the Gameboy lineage. Recall the vehicle example I previously stated. You CANNOT claim the GBA SP as the predecesor to the DS when Nintendo themselves have specifically stated it is not the successor to the Gameboy series and if the mere act of being the precedingly released handheld makes it a predecessor, then so must be all handhelds/consoles and the list then becomes pointless. You're an ex-Nintendo employee, Call Golin Harris and ask them yourself. Removed again based on suspicion of crediblity of sources and defining characteristics of debated subject matter.--The Viper 23:31, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

One by one-

"The GBA Micro IS NOT the successor to the GBA or GBA SP as per link 13 I gave, "Game Boy Micro represents the latest evolution in the image of the Game Boy Advance line, but it is not a successor to any current system." That's from Nintendo.com."

Irrelevant- this has nothing to do with our current discussion. An attempt by you to try to take the discussion off track.

"The mere act of coming before something does not make something a predecessor in the context Wiki is portraying. If it were then every game system before the DS is its predecessor."

Incorrect. The DS is built directly upon the specific components of the GBA in such a way that everything technical- from the power sockets to the screen to the cart slot 2, with the exception of the Link Port and Z80 chip, is directly tied to the design of the DS' predessesor, the GBA. As well, in terms of asthetic design, the system, from the silver clam to the design of the buttons and logos, is a direct offshot from the previous GBA SP. "every game system" does not contain the entire game system of the GBA in it.

"There is a direct correlation between successor and predecessor in the context that this is being viewed. "

Incorrect. Besides the fact that a direct correlation has already been shown in both asthetic design and in technical design, as was already stated before, a successor is designed to replace a person or thing that precedes it, but nothing about a predecessor states that a thing or person that it births has to replace it. On the contrary, procession lines are filled to the brim with examples of where multiple offshoots were created from a single source, but only one of those offshoots was chosen to be the successor of that source.

The DS DOES NOT continue the Gameboy lineage.

Irrelevant. The DS does not have to be a Game Boy in order to be preceded by the GBA SP. This is why the Game and Watch, which is not a Game Boy, is considered the predecessor to it.

"Recall the vehicle example I previously stated. "

Irrelevant and Incorrect- neither of those cars are built directly upon the base of another car. If you could remove the components that make the Cadillac and end up with the other car underneath after the removal of said components, then a connection could indeed be made that one vehicle was the inspiration and predecessor to the other.

"You CANNOT claim the GBA SP as the predecesor to the DS when Nintendo themselves have specifically stated it is not the successor to the Gameboy series."

Incorrect- Nintendo has stated that the GBASP doesn't have a successor. As was already stated before, and which you can't seem to comprehend, is that a successor is a chosen offspring of the predecessor that is selected to replace the earlier version. A successor is chosen, a predecessor, on the other hand, is not. Nintendo has never, EVER stated that the GBA is not the predecessor to the DS, they have said that the GBA doesn't have a SUCCESSOR. It in an instrinsic difference that dooms your argument.

Given that I have already provided clear sources that specifically state that the GBASP is the predessesor to the DS, and all you can do is scream about cars and try to trot out a shredded argument that "Nintendo doesn't call it a successor" (when that has nothing to do with the discussion at hand, I am again reverting you. Ex-Nintendo Employee 03:34, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Viper, that in your links, the use of the word "predecessor" comes from the mind of the writer, not the writer citing fact. The links on the other side of the argument are citing Nintendo, which are much more relevant. The words "successor" and "predecessor" are very much linked. Webster defines predecessor as "one that precedes, especially a person who has previously occupied a position or office to which another has succeeded." By the definition, the word is meant to be used in conjuction with a successor, and that is the way it is used in Wikipedia articles. Otherwise, all these articles that show a predecessor would list every "something" that came before it that has any relation to it. The DS is undoubtedly influenced by many different pieces of electronics, from the N64, to handheld systems, to PDA's. That does not mean we should list them. A clamshell design and the ability to play GBA games does not mean that the system spurred from the GBA. Those are simply shared features, and are not what makes the DS a DS. The GBA SP is the predecessor to the DS only in that it is a game system that was made before the DS. If we are going to use such a broad sense of the word, then far too many things need to be listed under predecessor, which renders the section pointless.

It appears that this debate is not going to be solved here. Perhaps it would be best at this point to decide on an alternative solution, be it an added section to the article or something, that we can agree on, and go forward from there. Constantly changing the article back and forth isn't solving anything, and it certainly isn't properly informing readers. Thoughts? 70.126.149.223 05:01, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, my thought is to have a (see below) linking to a section in the article describing the situation. This is what has been done with similar circumstances. There are plenty of sources for both positions, and I think explaining it would be beneficial to readers. I think it'd be nice to know that Nintendo had claimed to still be working on a next generation of Game Boy, and has since reconsidered.[15] One thing, though. The article is nearly twice the recommended size, and I would oppose this for now, until some progress is made in trimming down the article. Dancter 14:33, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Then I guess that should be our first order of business for now, so that this can be cleared up as soon as possible. Actually, Nintendo has not reconsidered making a new Game Boy, as Iwata later clarified what he meant by that quote. [16] Until that happens, would it be best to put something like "debated" under predecessor for now, or at least make a note somewhere? Also, I am many of the IP addresses above, since I work on many computers. Maybe it's time I make an account :). 24.94.113.144 18:59, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Redundant System Info

I removed some redundant info regarding the existance of the touchscreen and virtual surround sound in Firmware. This was already discussed earlier in the article. XXDucky21Xx 01:35, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Internet release dates

Wouldn't the announced European release date contradict with the rumors of Wii being launched October 2nd?

Brazil Launch

The Nintendo DS Lite will be launch officially in Brazil during an event called Arena Gamer Experience in Sao Paulo. just to inform you, if you think that should be add to the article: http://arenagamer.bizsolution.com.br/news_detail.aspx Sorry for my english, I'm a brazilian one :P —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.47.45.27 (talk • contribs) .

article size

This article much too long, and I'm thinking quite a bit of content should be removed or moved to other articles. Any suggestions? "Third party accessories" seems like a good candidate to me. Dancter 16:49, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I can think of a few items. The e3 pre-release DS doesn't belong in the Tech Specs section, for one. The official and third party accessory list should either be pared down or removed altogether and moved into its own article. The marketing and sales section is WAY too long; is it neccesary to list EVERY special and limited edition and have a paragraph about it as well? The Hacking section is WAY too long, especially since it already HAS its own article. The "emulators" section needs to go with the Hacking section or be deleted altogether. The "trivia" section is insanely long. And the links section... there shouldn't even BE a section for "fan" sites, since Wikipedia is NOT a link repository. Ex-Nintendo Employee 03:18, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't know if there shouldn't be any links to "fan" sites, so long as they are relevant to the article itself, but the fact is that there are way to many. I think that it should be trimmed down to no more than three. And only then if they are relevant and informative. As Ex-Nintendo Employee said, Wikipedia isn't a link repository. They can Google it if they want random fan site. WorldsCollide 17:11, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Kudos to whoever changed the Fan and resource links. Good work! WorldsCollide 15:55, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I removed one yesterday for nintendoevolved.com It was posted below everything and the link didn't work anyway. I get almost 200,000 page views and 60,000 unique viewers per month to my Nintendo site and I still don't think that is enough for posting here.The Viper 17:43, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Nintendo DS Pic

I still remember the old pic for the ds on this article.

who changed it?

Someone should change it to something better. Masterhand10 19:06, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Errr... Looks fine to me. Whats the problem with the current pic? WorldsCollide 15:56, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Great now we are back to the one that is missing the logos, what is the deal with that thing anyway? Sonic Hog 22:48, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Community Sites

Please stop deleting touchds.com from the entries, it is a valid community site and ranked one of the top DS fansites. It is completely valid, just stop. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.5.160.207 (talk • contribs) .

Sorry, but first discuss to see if others also think the site should be added to the external links section. There is already too much spam there, and someone must delete quite a lot of links from there. Wikipedia is not a link repository. -- ReyBrujo 06:16, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I am fully aware the wikipedia is not a link depository, but I assumed that no one would have a problem with one of the most visited DS fansites(according to alexa and google) in the link section. I will post it again, and unless people post here with an objection let it stay. Thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.5.160.207 (talk • contribs) .

At Wikipedia, we have something called consensus. Consensus means that, before doing anything, you need to obtain the "editors' blessing". In other words, before adding a link, you need to get the approval of the community around the article. First adding the link and then asking for consensus, what you are doing, is exactly the opposite. Per the third guide, On articles about topics with many fansites, including a link to one major fansite may be appropriate, marking the link as such. Not five, one. We can bend the rules a bit, but not much.

The site's Alexa rank is 3,756,130. In other words, it is not really a notable site according to Alexa. DS Play has an Alexa rank of 447,792, DS Community and Game Inspire are non notable (removed them), and Friend Codes, 771,918. -- ReyBrujo 05:29, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

That's way too low of an Alexa rank. My site has a rank of under 10k (granted it's not DS specific either) and I don't post it here. Unless it's widely recognized and/or gains it's news directly from the source and not by copying what IGn/Gamespot post, it's redundant.--The Viper 07:52, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Its a COMMUNITY site, not a news site. Getting news not straight from the source is completely passable, since that isn't really its main purpose anyway. And according to Alexa it is the 8th most popular DS site right now, with giants like IGN DS and Gamespot DS taking up the top spots. I fail to understand why you people are nazis about this, if you're going to list Community DS Sites you should really have much more than two. Believe it or not touchds.com IS a community DS site and i don't recall a site ranking requirement to become one. It is one of the more popular ones so why not let it be listed? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.5.160.207 (talk • contribs) .

If we begin allowing 3 "community", 3 "news", 3 "markets", 3 "reviews", etc, the article would become a link farm. Please review the guidelines, what should and shouldn't be linked. -- ReyBrujo 22:01, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I honestly do not see anything that is against putting touchds.com on there. The DS community link section completely fails in what it is supposed to do. 2 Sites? It is a total joke. Either remove it or link to to the google directory for DS(http://directory.google.com/Top/Games/Video_Games/Console_Platforms/Nintendo/Nintendo_DS/).

If it is the 8th rank DS community on Alexa, don't you think the other 7 should be on their first? Besides, a rank of 3.7 million is really low. I run 3 communities all under 100k with my biggest at 7k. Worse still, according to Alexa, the site is slowing down. It's rank has fallen harshly the past 3 months. No, Alexa is not a determining factor for inclusion but it's a place to start and get an idea. No hate, just being honest.--The Viper 05:16, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Its not the 8th ranked community DS site, its the 8th ranked DS site(NOT community, its under EVERYTHING). Geez, read before you speak. Its number 2 on there in terms of actual community DS sites.

One person above just said it was a community, not a news site, now you say the opposite and 8th ranked or not, 3.7 million on Alexa is NOT good enough. 5 news articles since June 4th? It looks to make maybe 100 posts per day, 1 new user per day. Sorry, but no.--The Viper 01:28, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

• sighs* you really need to work on your reading comprehension. TouchDS is a community site but under the alexa category its just under DS since there is no "community" caetgory. And can you point out where wikipedia has the minimum amount of site hits regulation? I must've missed it. and lmao where did you get this 5 news articles since june 4th? that last one is the NSMB review, not a freaking news article. The last 4 news articles are displayed, and then the 5th is the last major game reviewed. --70.237.109.53 02:08, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

The context of Alexa's ranking being either community or not is irrelevant. The fact of the matter is that there are far better sources for both news and community and TouchDS has only submitted 5 articles (news, reviews, editorials, doesn't matter) since June 4th. That's hardly considered reliable in any fashion and would be a disservice to Wiki readers to suggest to them a site with lacking content.--The Viper 03:17, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Holy shiz dude you are an idiot 0.o Touchds has submitted OVER 20 ARTICLES since june 4th(i haven't counted exactly, its probably over 30). I agree the alexa is irrelevant but i was trying to clear it up for you. Do the wiki readers a favor and get off this site, seriously. I don't understand how you can possibly be so stupid. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.237.109.53 (talk • contribs) .

No personal attacks, please. -- ReyBrujo 19:42, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi, 70.237.109.53. I'm sorry if I've done something to frustrate to the point of insults but facts remain facts. Even 30 articles since June 4th is really light, however, the main page of www.touchds.com shows only 5 articles and clicking the News and Game Reviews buttons takes you to the forums so even the missing 25 articles are not viewable by readers. Any special editorials, interviews, features that other sites do not do? Anything to set it apart from higher quality sites? If not, the only one benefitting by its inclusion would be the webmaster of the TouchDS site by having it backlinked from a PR6 site, the DS wiki page. I have presented many valid reasons why it should not be included. Can you provide a valid reason why it should?--The Viper 00:03, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Since there is no section for community DS sites anymore, it doesn't even really matter now. The forums are where the articles/news are registered and put on the homepage, so when you click on news it takes you to the news forum, which is the news archive. And considering it is a community site, its about the community and not special interviews, features and whatever else. I fail to see how it would hurt wiki to add the site to the now nonexistant ds community external links section. It is a fairly large DS community(compared to most other DS community sites) so i really don't understand why it should not be put on there(with the other large DS community sites).

And thirty news articles is light? DS news has not been so hot recently, and they're not like gamespot and make news articles saying "Spongebob DS ships" and other uninteresting new snippets.

Adults Only

Can the line about how many AO games there are be removed? That will be always be 0 because Nintendo doesn't allow AO rated games on their systems, Sony and Microsoft have the same policy in that they won't allow AO rated games. TJ Spyke 04:33, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

does this statement need a source?

"Nintendo has emphasized that its main intention for its inclusion was to allow a wide variety of accessories to be released for the system" RN 04:01, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Calibration

I have a DS but I don't know what happens once you've started it up, because it's so long ago I forgot. Is the touch screen pre-calibrated, or does it make you do it yourself? If it is pre-calibrated, if you do calibration on the Options but mess up, is there a way to restore it to manufacturer's setting? *red-faced* Vitriol 18:17, 31 August 2006 (UTC)