Talk:List of Virtual Console games for Wii (North America)/Archives/2011/June

3DS Virtual Console

Resolved

 – The new article has been started. --McDoobAU93 15:48, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

I think the information regarding 3DS Virtual Console games should be moved to a page of its own as it's an entirely different entity. Having them in the same place here is almost the same as having a page with Virtual Console and XBLA games. Briggity Brak (talk) 06:37, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Maybe at some point, but not right now. There's still very little information on 3DS Virtual Console, and certainly not enough to support its own article at this time. --McDoobAU93 16:32, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

For right now, I've separated out the planned 3DS Virtual Console games into their own table with their own subhead. I've also added a new field, one that can be carried over eventually to the separate article, to indicate if the game will have 3D upgrades. --McDoobAU93 03:47, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

There is NO confirmation or proof that any Virtual Console games will be in 3D. As far as I know they will be just as they were on their original consoles, i.e. 2D. It appears that multiple sources got the wrong message, and that what Nintendo meant was that the eShop would contain a Virtual Console AND 3D Classics ("classic games in 3D"), but people misinterpreted that as meaning that there'd be 3D Game Boy Games. Another question regarding this. In the name of all insanity, how the heck can a 2D flat non-parallactic games have any autostereoscopy? I mean what is there to have depth? For starters the background would have to scroll at a slower speed, to show it's farther away than the foreground--The Ultimate Koopa (talk) 17:01, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Also Nintendo stated that "As with the Virtual Console service on Wii, all Virtual Console games for Nintendo 3DS will be in their original 2D format."--The Ultimate Koopa (talk) 17:05, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Not necessarily disagreeing with you, but if you could please provide a link to this interview of which you speak instead of simply saying it is, it might solve all this. The cited sources for the two potentially-3D releases say they will be converted and then can be restored to the original 2D version with the 3DS' depth slider. About the only thing that will trump a published source is a more recent published source, not "as far as I know" or "what Nintendo meant" without anything to back it up. --McDoobAU93 00:46, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, here's a source. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uuxox2MuDu4#t=2m --The Ultimate Koopa (talk) 01:25, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Actually, from additional reading from Nintendo, it looks like we're both right, in a way. While the actual Virtual Console games won't be upgraded to 3D, certain games will have upgraded versions that are sold separately, so that merits inclusion. --McDoobAU93 02:11, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

So, should we have a seperate table for the so-called "3D Classics"?

To answer the response from an unknown poster, the answer is yes, we should. These are modified games and not the original software, and are being marketed under a separate name, and thus should be considered separately. --McDoobAU93 14:35, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Virtual Console Not a Network

Resolved

 – The new article has been started. --McDoobAU93 02:29, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

As Virtual Console is not a subscription network like XBox Live or PSN and is system specific (seperate for Wii & DS), I feel the two sections should be seperated on this site. Deusamator (talk) 00:21, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

I guess I'm kinda confused as to your suggestion, but I think it has to do with the fact that we are currently listing the 3DS Virtual Console here, instead of its own article. As there is not enough information to merit a separate 3DS list article (yet), this would seem like the most logical place to discuss it. Some day (quite likely before the end of the 3rd quarter of this year), there will be enough to separate it. However, maybe the information here could be included in the appropriate section of the main 3DS article, instead. --McDoobAU93 00:59, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

I think that the article should remain as is until more games are released, or at least until the service launches. For now, I think it's good. 65.31.176.72 (talk) 06:26, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

I agree mostly with commenter #2 (McDoobAU93). But maybe since people will be looking in both the main 3DS article, as well as the List of Virtual Console games (North America) for that information, wherever we decide to locate the primary info, we should be sure to have a Wikilink to it in the place that doesn't get chosen. My 2 cents. 67.182.237.57 (talk) 00:03, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

ERSB 2

This is more of an note of commentary of the article's sources; We have Final fantasy III listed as a future release. While i full heartedly agree it will eventually be released in North America- and many websites speculate this, the reference used; [1] is basing its immenant release on the fact that ERSB has rated the game. I know in the past we have brought up the issue of ERSB not being an indicator for inclusion in the list of up coming games, but we are using sources that use ERSB as an indication for release without apparent objection. Would not that make ERSB reliable in that context if we use sources that use ERSB? Personally I am under the opinion that unless Nintendo or the publisher itself sets a date for the game we shouldnt be listing them in upcoming releases unless we want to accept ERSB as a source. Just a thought Ottawa4ever (talk) 19:56, 8 June 2011 (UTC)