Wikipedia

Talk:Dreamcast

(Redirected from Talk:Sega Dreamcast)
Latest comment: 1 month ago by Cogsan in topic "The Dreamcast" listed at Redirects for discussion
Learn more about this page
Good articleDreamcast has been listed as one of the Video games good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Featured topic starDreamcast is part of the Sega video game consoles series, a featured topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 10, 2014Good article nomineeListed
May 15, 2015Featured topic candidatePromoted
September 11, 2022Peer reviewReviewed
Current status: Good article

Sourcing comment

edit
Latest comment: 9 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Just wanted to say that, if anyone ever plans on taking this thing to FAC, there's a big job ahead of them. Back in 2014, I scanned around 200 pages of Dreamcast magazine coverage for Red Phoenix, and it's all still available here. Most of it has not been cited in the article, and I don't think any Dreamcast FA could be considered comprehensive without a careful trawling of this material. Even if most of it is redundant (a distinct possibility), it still has to be double-checked before FAC, in case there are holes in the present article. Plus, I see a lot of weak sources in the article currently (GameSpot and IGN coverage from the 90s, for example) that could be replaced by stronger magazine citations. There's a disproportionate number of online sources in general, given the era in which the Dreamcast was released. All of this is fine for a GA, but, for the future, I wanted to let people know (since Red Phoenix has retired) that this scan cache exists. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 21:11, 5 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

I respectfully disagree about the scope of the undertaking. Dreamcast had a very thorough GA review that lasted a couple of months, during which time it was improved considerably—from looking like this to looking much closer to the current version. In that time, the number of sources in the article more than doubled. Red Phoenix's contributions steadily declined in the middle of the review, leaving Indrian and I to finish up, and before the article was promoted I made a point of checking every single one of your scans. I recall very little that wasn't redundant, although I was quick to add what new material I could, such as this great anecdote from EGM November 1998. It's possible RP and I missed something, but I doubt we missed very much. I am unaware that easily-checked online sources are less reliable than print sources, but I would also point out that I added quite a few Game Informers from the period.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 22:13, 5 September 2015 (UTC)Reply
If the scanned stuff has been explored, then that changes things. (I'm not sure that RP read most of it himself, so you're likely the only one who's gone through it all.) However, no matter how easy they are to check, GameSpot and IGN weren't very strong sources in the 90s. I've seen that fact sink FACs in the past, actually. And an over-reliance on Internet sources for a subject that was largely pre-Internet can be a problem. Something to keep in mind, at the very least. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 23:33, 5 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

Semi-protected edit request on 30 October 2015

edit
Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Total Sales is suspect. All references to 10.6 million sold should be changed to 9.13 million sold

The multiple references to 10.6 million console sales are unsubstantiated and are not sourced from a verifiable resource. Actual verifiable resources from Sega shows that only 9.13 million units were produced and shipped. in their 2001 Anual Report it's stated "for respective totals of 8.20 million units"[1] with the remaining 930,000 units accounted for in their Revision later that year "with domestic sales of 130,000 units and U.S. sales of 530,000 units for the first half.- Consequently, at the end of the half, Dreamcast inventories totaled 40,000 units domestically and 230,000 units for the United States, and we anticipate being able to sell all remaining units by the holiday season as initially planned." [2]Jcgarmatz (talk) 01:52, 30 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

References

  1. ^ "SEGA Corporation Annual Report 2001" (PDF). Sega Corporation. p. 14. Retrieved 30 October 2015.
  2. ^ Sato, Hideki. "Revisions to Annual Results Forecasts" (PDF). SEGA CORPORATION. p. 4. Retrieved 30 October 2015.

Jcgarmatz (talk) 01:52, 30 October 2015 (UTC)   Not done Many reliable sources verify the 10.6 figure. Sergecross73 msg me 02:25, 30 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Semi-protected edit request on 30 October 2015

edit
Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

58.70.199.213 (talk) 09:59, 30 October 2015 (UTC) Japanese wikipedia has accurate source that only 9.13 million Dreamcasts were ever produced. This makes the English sites 10.6million totally inaccurate.Reply

The current source, http://web.archive.org/web/20080905175406/http://www.gamepro.com/article/features/111822/the-10-worst-selling-consoles-of-all-time/ - is considered a reliable source per WP:VG/S, and is widely correlated by other sources. Sergecross73 msg me 11:08, 30 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

I know this is not a forum

edit
Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

However, if the editors are refusing to check actual facts what is the point of Wikipedia? How isa blog an accurate source over the manufacturer as a source? Seems both childish and pathetic. Add to the fact we have it clearly stated on the Japanese Wiki the Japanese company made 9.13 million units this whole 10.6 million figure is now nothing more that a bad joke.

The editors are abusing power here instead of looking at facts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.70.199.213 (talk) 11:55, 30 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

As I noted in your second section below, none of the edit warring IPs were changing the article to 9.13 million or quoting a source. The reverts were for disruptive edits changing to an unsourced 6.4 million, many of the edits resulting in citation/template errors. -- ferret (talk) 14:17, 30 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Shenmue release date?

edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hi guys. Sorry to post here, as it's a little off-topic, but no one has responded to my post on the Shenmue talk page. I've been doing a lot of work on the various Shenmue articles, but try as I might I can't find a reliable source anywhere stating the Japanese and European release dates for Shenmue 1. Does anyone know where I could find these? Popcornduff (talk) 04:48, 27 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

According to Sega Financial reports, Dreamcast sold 8.20 Million, not 10.6 or 9.13.

edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

https://www.segasammy.co.jp/japanese/ir/library/pdf/printing_archive/2001/sega/sega_annual_tuuki_2001.pdf Here is the link to the official sales report form SEGA 2001, can someone correct the sales in the article?.

It's been discussed extensively above, you may want to read through that first... Sergecross73 msg me 19:04, 1 January 2016 (UTC)Reply
TL;DR? 9.13 million is Sega's official number. 8.2 million is from an earlier financial report covering the time period through March 31, 2001. Sega still had a fairly significant (relative to the total number of units manufactured) amount of unsold Dreamcast inventory that was subsequently cleared out at heavily discounted prices (although, apparently not as much unsold inventory as was widely believed by journalists at the time).TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 19:08, 1 January 2016 (UTC)Reply
edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 29 external links on Dreamcast. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:35, 30 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dreamcast. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:00, 4 July 2016 (UTC)Reply

Homebrewing community for the Dreamcast (KallistiOS)

edit
Latest comment: 4 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

There are active homebrew communities even today, and they are continuing to write software for the console. Some people feel as though the console never died. Would it be appropriate to add this to the article? Ryanalexmartin (talk) 00:41, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

Not without coverage in reliable sources. -- ferret (talk) 01:41, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

Reliable sources such as the actual game studio called Josh Prod? They buy old IPs and mostly release them on the Dreamcast and is a registrered Developer. PettrK (talk) 07:58, 1 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Dreamcast. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 21:35, 16 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Logo variations

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago6 comments3 people in discussion

Why is there no mention of the 3 different colours used for the logo on different regions machines?Aluminium Colours (talk) 23:09, 21 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

I'm not necessarily against it, but it is rather unimportant. It's the same exact logo with a few color variations. Sergecross73 msg me 23:47, 21 July 2017 (UTC)Reply
Maybe not important. But the fact that it has 3 different colours and the article doesn't even mention it. Someone curious would probably come to this article to find out why, only to find nothing.Aluminium Colours (talk) 10:18, 23 July 2017 (UTC)Reply
I think people generally go to Google for minor trivial whims like that, not sift through massive encyclopedia articles for a sentence or two on it. Sergecross73 msg me 19:49, 23 July 2017 (UTC)Reply
I think mentioning that Sega changed the logo color from orange to blue for marketing reasons in the west is probably notable, though? Popcornduff (talk) 09:56, 24 July 2017 (UTC)Reply
If you want to add a sentence on it, sure. It doesn't strike me as that important, but it's not wrong. So as long as we're not proposing a "Marketing controversy" subsection with a whole paragraph about it, I'm fine with it. (I'm not suggesting you'd do that...but I've seen others do it. Sergecross73 msg me 12:48, 24 July 2017 (UTC))Reply

Helping

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Sega worked with Microsoft (Xbox) to create the Dreamcast. - TB57

I'm pretty sure the degree to which that is true, is already mentioned in the article. Sergecross73 msg me 00:27, 10 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

Sega Modem

edit
Latest comment: 6 years ago21 comments5 people in discussion

Theres seems to be some issue at saying Sega had a built-in modem at the launch of its console. Considering most of the references on the page says this I don't understand the rsistance here. CD-i had models with built in modems so that two word addition to that paragraph, two words I stress, shouldn't be an issue. Especially since "at release" or "launched with" is used in many references in the Dreamcast article itself. At launch is to specify, and remove minor confusion. Spike Danton (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:00, 31 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

Wait, which CD-i models actually had built in modems instead of using the added modem and CD-Online disc, and where is that established? --tronvillain (talk) 16:28, 31 August 2018 (UTC)Reply
This is other editors concern, as well. Sergecross73 msg me 16:29, 31 August 2018 (UTC)Reply
Okay... and where is that established, exactly? --tronvillain (talk) 16:35, 31 August 2018 (UTC)Reply
Check the page history. (I’m talking about the other editors who also opposed Spike’s edit.) Sergecross73 msg me 16:54, 31 August 2018 (UTC)Reply
605, It has a browser in the launch menu when you turn on the system as well. For the separate modem, the models compatible with t need a disc to add a browser to them. I also would like to stress again, that a whole ton of references in the this article, also mention Modem "at release" or "at launch" the fact there's discussion on a two word specification is very odd. Also this is just about the CD-I the CDTV had models with built in modems to. I mean it's really not that big of a deal overall but there seems to be a notable resistance to a two word simple edit. Spike Danton (talk)
So, where is a reliable source for that? Nothing I can find seems to establish the existence of an integrated model of CD-I. That doesn't mean it didn't exist of course, but we need sources. --tronvillain (talk) 16:52, 31 August 2018 (UTC)Reply
Source? Sergecross73 msg me 16:54, 31 August 2018 (UTC)Reply
I provided a archive link to an old site on the CD-I page through the wayback machine. Also, I'd thrown in the VIS/CDTV as well, but I guess that would depend if wikipedia thinks of this as "actual game consoles" relative to the Dreamcast or just computers in console shells. Spike Danton (talk)
Please provide it here for review. Sergecross73 msg me 17:05, 31 August 2018 (UTC)Reply
This? A self-published source from 2005. If it were a reliable source it might establish the use of the Web-i name (though that could just be the name of the browser), but it doesn't even cover it being integrated. In fact, the page specifically talks about using an external modem.--tronvillain (talk) 17:15, 31 August 2018 (UTC): edited 17:18, 31 August 2018 (UTC)Reply
You seem not able to keep track of multiple things going on at once. That edit was to revert your citation on the web-i name. None of my edits relating to that involved the word "modem" and if you could tell time you would see this is not the source I was referring to. I was referring to the earlier one. Not the latest one which was made AFTER the fact. I also don't understand why you would ask "this one?" then proceed to assume that's the source I'm talking about when it doesn't even align with the rest of the edits. Spike Danton (talk)
Likewise, I don't understand why you don't just share the link and save everyone time, including yourself. -- ferret (talk) 17:34, 31 August 2018 (UTC)Reply
Serge reverted the link and then pretended he didn't know what link I'm talking about, something he's done multiple times he has no interest in any article hes reverting, and Tron decided to quickly grab a link and say that's the one i was referring to when it wasn't. Both of these happened right next to each other and both were when i was about to post the source myself. It's clear you guys are spending more time trying to prove me wrong then spending less than 20 seconds looking at one link that was made a few edits ago the CD-i page. Over two words, "At launch" which is also in a good number of references across the whole the whole damn Dreamcast article, so the fact you guys are freaking out over a TWO WORD edit doesn't make anysense. Everyone also omitted my CDTV (and VIS) mentions as well, so are you guys even really interested in the source or are you guys busy selectively reading so you can continue this circle? Because I'd be interested in an actual discussion on this but it doesn't seem like none of you are, especially since the responses so far only focus on a few things and not my whole posts. Spike Danton (talk)
Again, reminding you of WP:BURDEN, if you want to make changes, it’s up to you to prove your point and convince people. It’s on you here. Feel free to not provide it here. But then you will have no WP:CONSENSUS to make your change, and it won’t be implemented, simple as that. Prove your point or drop it. Sergecross73 msg me 18:01, 31 August 2018 (UTC)Reply
And stop accusing me of knowingly excluding correct changes. I’ve checked every source you’ve provided and have not seen anything that actually verified your claim. Sergecross73 msg me 18:02, 31 August 2018 (UTC)Reply
Edit: If people want to have a discussion on this topic please respond to my whole posts and not sections of it indicating you have no interest in discussion. Because I'd be interested in an actual discussion on this but it doesn't seem like none of you are, especially since the responses so far only focus on a few things and not my whole posts. So anyone that is actually interested in having a discussion on this topic, and not a person reverting edits in 2 seconds claiming they saw them, let me know. Because I'd almost say the two word edit should be applied just based on the gaming journalists references that already use the same wording I do "at launch" but of course i think it's also important to mention systems that are niche for historical accuracy. Spike Danton (talk) 18:19, 31 August 2018 (UTC)Reply
So where's the source? What's difficult in stopping your tirade against other editors and just posting the source, so there's no confusion at all about which source you meant, and the discussion can continue. Please read WP:V, WP:BURDEN and WP:Verifiability, not truth. Frankly we don't care what you know to be true. Wikipedia is built on sources, and without them this goes nowhere. -- ferret (talk) 18:21, 31 August 2018 (UTC)Reply
I already mentioned where the source is, and the rest of your post does nothing but keep the circle going because you are basically ignoring everything I'm writing and only to respond to what you want to. Maybe if you read you'd see where I mentioned where the source was in that same post you responded to. Hmmm. Spike Danton (talk) 18:25, 31 August 2018 (UTC)Reply
I'm not going to go comb back over the last dozen revisions to these two pages looking for it, it's not my problem. You can post it here in this talk section and we discuss, or you can drop the stick and move on. Your call. -- ferret (talk) 18:30, 31 August 2018 (UTC)Reply
Again showing you still haven't read my above responses. If you have no interest on this issue say so don't pretend you care about the source when i already told you what article the edit is in and it's within the last 10 revisions on the article, which will show up on your screen immediately when you click on "View history" so saying you have to comb through things to find the source only tells me you haven't read a single thing here and you have no interest in this topic. Away with ye, I'll wait for another person to come by who isn't lazy. Spike Danton (talk) 18:44, 31 August 2018 (UTC)Reply
As I said, I literally cannot find source you’ve given that verifies your claim. And you’re in no position to demand others dig through your edits to prove a point that you yourself are trying to make. Sergecross73 msg me 18:31, 31 August 2018 (UTC)Reply
Earlier source? The screenshot on Imgur? That is absolutely not a reliable source - it's not even vaguely close to being a reliable source. --tronvillain (talk) 18:58, 31 August 2018 (UTC)Reply
I don't know why you're here serge leave. Go revert more edits you never read. You pretending to care about this conversation helps nothing.
As for tron, it's amazing how you took the latest edit, than took it out of context, now you come back with the oldest edit, skipping over the one I said you can see as soon as you click on "view sources" not a coincidence. I said it was a wayback article why would it be that one? this is the second time now.
And finally once again not one person responds to the other things I mentioned, including the CDTv/VIS, and the multiple sources already in the article from gaming journalists and other wise also using "at launch" for the same reason I used it. Because they know saying ohther wise eould not be accurate. I mean if you guys really want to cause all this over a two word edit go ahead. I'm sure some reasonable guy will come or it'll likely be implemented later regardless of this page anyway. I'll let you continue the circular discussion on your own. Spike Danton (talk)
Keep it civil, please, and assume good faith. As has been politely pointed out multiple times by other editors (who I have no doubt are just as "reasonable" as your hypothetical future editor), the burden of proof is on you; it is not appropriate to ask other editors to do your legwork for you. If you have proof to back up your edit, link it directly. --McDoobAU93 19:12, 31 August 2018 (UTC)Reply
Okay, I have no idea what you're talking about. Would it be so hard to provide the source here where the actual discussion is happening? Unless it's supposed to be this archive link, which appears to be a Philips professional technical support page index which says nothing about integrated modems. --tronvillain (talk) 19:25, 31 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

Source

edit
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The below little article in Next Generation seems to only have info that's already well-sourced in the WP article, but I'm not well-versed in Dreamcast history, so I'm a bit worried I may have overlooked something. If anyone wants to give it a look...--Martin IIIa (talk) 02:11, 24 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Sergecross73

edit
Latest comment: 6 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

@Sergecross73

ok, but the legacy of Dreamcast is special, communities mention is relevant.

and what you mean with "Major regions only"? Australia is not a "major region", Russian Federation is much bigger and has one of the biggest video gaming markets in the world which is fast growing. sometimes it seems like Wikipedia is stucked in the past. but ok your choice. i believe this choice is not right --85.212.86.28 (talk) 03:57, 1 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

When it comes to "major regions", what Sergecross73 is referring to is what has been covered in rigor in reliable sources. Reliable sources usually don't cover Russia as a region. They do usually talk about Japan, North America, and either Europe or the entirety of PAL territories. Australia is more relatively frequent as well. This has to do with making sure we give due weight and not just list a bunch of statistics; that's not what Wikipedia is. Usually numbers for other regions are only mentioned when that region has a special reason to be and is covered with rigor in reliable sources, such as how Brazil is covered in Master System because the console has survived so long there and has significant coverage. Hope that helps! Red Phoenix talk 11:31, 1 November 2018 (UTC)Reply
Yes, this is correct. The guidelines say to generally just use a few major regions in release. It’s a matter of bloat too - without any limit, every passerby adds another country on and before you know it, there’s a laundry list of 30 countries on there, all documenting the trivial variants of coming out on a different day of the week or whatever. And unless major third party websites (Gamespot, IGN, Eurogamer, etc) write about these fansites/fanbases/communities/etc, they fall outside the scope of what Wikipedia covers. Sergecross73 msg me 15:05, 1 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

Recent edits

edit
Latest comment: 4 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

I appreciate the edits made by PettrK, but I'm afraid I have to revert such edits in good faith. Reasons are as follows:

If you feel that the information should be included in the article, please feel free to discuss. Thanks! – Hounder4 10:41, 1 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your reply Hounder4! I agree with you, however, I have lots of info to add, but I was on my cellphone and was actually fixing alot of this stuff, before I got a low battery warning, then 10seconds, (like wth, 10 seconds warning??) it just died. All gone. Anyway, one thing that annoys me about one particular Sega product on Wikipedia is the Sega Mega Drive, or, Genesis if you live in __ONE__ region where that name is correct. How come the rest of the world is ignored just because the site is in English? People in India has English as their language (although 2nd language) as well, yet I do believe they did not get the Genesis name on their consoles.

Best regards PettrK (talk) 11:52, 1 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

Agree with Hounders removal. Wikipedia needs to be written by what reliable sources say, and these additions were either unsourced or were added using unreliable sources. And you’re straight up not going to find the sourcing to call the Mega Drive Mini Segas “return to the console market”. That’s simply not how the industry has described it. Anyways, until you understand how to identify usable sources, I recommend seeing WP:VG/S for lists of sources generally deemed usable. Sergecross73 msg me 13:47, 1 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

PettrK (talk) 07:38, 2 March 2020 (GMT+2) At E3, Sega themselves made this statement that since the Dreamcast, this is their first home consumer console and hardware production available at retailers. As in, this is the first time Sega has produced 1st party peripherals and console hardware since the Dreamcast. The console includes two games, which does not see an official release back in the day of Genesis and Mega Drive, and thus, this *IS* a console with it's own games. However, I agree somewhat in that it's based on a previous console, but that being said, thats like saying the manufacturers of, say, Google Stadia or Nvidia (Shield), is not in the hardware gaming business, something that is simply not true. Sega has undoubtedly re-entered the console manufacturing business for home consumers with this Mini console because it has games never been released at a "16"-bit console before, Darius and Tetris. How is this false? Before the release of the Mini, Sega's COO said the following, which is reported by Polygon: Just last week, Sega’s COO said the company was interested in getting back into the hardware business, following the explosive success of Nintendo’s classic reissues. "[...]Sega famously exited the hardware business after the failure of the Sega Dreamcast in 2001." and "Sega's COO says they're looking at getting back into the hardware game with a proper reissue of the Genesis/Mega Drive, no doubt inspired by Nintendo's wild success with the NES and SNES classic."

If this is not a reliable source, Polygon, then the guidelines for what is needs to be updated. This is a direct reference to the COO of Sega, about making a return to the hardware business - which did happen, in form of the Mini, as a first party console never before produced, and the first one since Sega. I highly disagree with you on this exact statement. However a next-generation console is never mentioned, but was never written anyway. [1] PettrK (talk) 06:48, 2 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

References

  1. ^ https://www.polygon.com/2018/4/13/17237000/sega-mega-drive-mini-classic-edition/

PSO

edit
Latest comment: 4 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion

@TheTimesAreAChanging: Regarding this edit, and this summary: "deletion of sourced, notable context due to the mistaken belief that influential games cannot have antecedents"

To clarify, that is not my belief, and I didn't say it was. My point is that it is odd to describe a game as influential, then, instead of explaining why or how it is influential, which would be interesting and relevant, explain only that it was inspired by another game. It's a non-sequitur.

The sources I supplied were (if I'm not mistaken) sources that credited PSO as a landmark game for being the first online console RPG. They were taken from the Phantasy Star Online article. Are we sure that the sources we now have back up the claim that it "is considered a landmark game for refining and simplifing Diablo's style of gameplay to appeal to console audiences"? Two of them 404/redirect for me and the other is a book I don't have access to. I am not sure that the fact that PSO was inspired by Diablo is what makes it important. Popcornfud (talk) 16:03, 22 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

It's hard to find a source on Phantasy Star Online that fails to mention its obvious connection to Diablo. If we are following the sources, that inspiration provides important context that should not be obscured in the interest of shortening the article as an end in itself. The article does not state "that PSO was inspired by Diablo is what makes it important"; however, the current text (trimmed per your request) is fully supported by the cited sources. For example, 1UP.com's "The Decade That Was: Essential Newcomers" (which is still accessible on archive.is) states:

While [PSO's] design wasn't particularly massive, it was multiplayer and online, and it paved the way for larger-scale efforts such as Final Fantasy XI. More significantly, it established a template that would be copied and perfected by Capcom's Monster Hunter series. ... PSO's design wasn't entirely original. Its loot-driven cooperative action owed a tremendous debt to Blizzard's Diablo series. What Sega's Sonic Team accomplished with PSO, though, was a reinvention of an established PC adventure concept into something perfectly suited for the tastes and demands of console gamers. More importantly, it made both online gaming and the concept of fee-based services a reality for consoles.

Hopefully that resolves your concerns.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 16:50, 22 September 2020 (UTC)Reply
For the sake of comparison, the entry in Mott 2013 by David McCarthy states: "When Phantasy Star Online was released in 2000, it wasn't the first online console game. ... But Phantasy Star Online was the first that felt like it really worked—and the first online game to adopt a console design sensibility, transforming it through the prism of online connectivity to create something truly original, something that probably couldn't have existed on a PC alone. Taking inspiration from massively multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPGs) that were in abundance on PCs at the time, Phantasy Star Online took the connectivity and community of the genre but brought a more tightly contained, console-style adventuring."TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 17:35, 22 September 2020 (UTC)Reply
TheTimesAreAChanging, sorry, I completely forgot to reply to this.
Thanks for digging up those source quotes. I didn’t see that the archived links were in the refs. However... I don't think the article's current text, considered a landmark game for refining and simplifying Diablo's style of gameplay to appeal to console audiences, quite reflects the sources we're citing.
Right now the article implies that what made PSO important was that it adapted Diablo gameplay. The 1Up source does say that, but it then immediately says More importantly, it made both online gaming and the concept of fee-based services a reality for consoles. In other words, it is literally saying that the Diablo thing is not the most important thing about the game. Specifically, we are missing what seems to be the obviously important thing, which is that it was the first online console RPG.
Certainly many sources mention Diablo as an influence, but I don’t think they say PSO was important because of the Diablo influence alone. Would you object to this wording instead? Sonic Team's Phantasy Star Online, influenced by the PC game Diablo, was the first online console RPG. Popcornfud (talk) 14:43, 4 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
I don't have any particular strong objection to that wording, but I also don't consider it to be a clear improvement over the current version or the previous long-standing version, not least of all because it omits the fact that Phantasy Star Online is considered a landmark game by many sources.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 03:56, 5 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

For that little bronze star...

edit
Latest comment: 4 years ago5 comments4 people in discussion

@TheTimesAreAChanging and Indrian: I wanted to get your attention because of my past history with this article - reviews for it and Sega Saturn were not my finest hours as an editor, but I digress. I've been thinking long and hard about this, and with as well-written and well-referenced as this article is, plus six years of new sources that are bound to have been written (we just passed 20 years since the launch in 2019), I'd love to try and take this up to FA status. If it weren't for the fact that I'm really getting to this too late, I'd say March 2021 would have been a good time to get it on the main page for 20 years since its cancellation and the death of Sega as a hardware maker. But, I don't know even if I had all the time in the world that I could get it through FAC by then. Regardless, at least with an FA star, at the right time it could be the featured article of the day when it's appropriate.

The reason I'm pinging both of you is this: as much as I did do a lot to this article, I know most of the prose and referencing now is not my work; it's yours. WP:OWN aside, I don't want to step on anyone's toes if I start messing with things or decide to work on this further without consulting with those really behind this article first. It's also an FAC requirement, though I don't want to send it to FAC as-is. I guess I'd like to know two things:

1. Is everyone okay if I start working on this again and take it to FAC when it's ready? It may be a few months; I'm starting a new job this week.

2. Does anyone want to collaborate? I'm all for it, but I will understand if I'm going it alone.

You guys did a really great job with this article, much better than I was capable of in 2014. I'd love to see it stand among Wikipedia's best. Red Phoenix talk 21:29, 2 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

As usual, I'd be happy to do copyediting sweeps if others do the research. I'm too lazy for the research. Popcornfud (talk) 21:36, 2 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
I'm always happy to answer any questions about text that I contributed, but beyond that I have nothing particularly new to say about this topic. I wish you (and the article) the best.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 00:56, 3 October 2020 (UTC)Reply
Thanks, guys, I appreciate the encouragement to proceed. Right now I'm still forming a plan on where it needs work, and it may take a while before I have it ready for a FAC. Hopefully this'll add well to the Sega console FA's when all is said and done. Red Phoenix talk 01:47, 4 October 2020 (UTC)Reply

Nvidia involvement?

edit
Latest comment: 1 year ago1 comment1 person in discussion

According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NV1 and other sources around the web nvidia also worked with sega on providing the gpu for the dreamcast. maybe this should be incorporated into this article?

Here's an archived article on the NV2 and Sega involvement. https://web.archive.org/web/20060919170554/https://firingsquad.com/features/nv2/default.asp 

 Djmips (talk) 20:46, 6 March 2023 (UTC)Reply

Sega claims the Dreamcast launched in Japan November 11, 1998 instead of November 27.

edit
Latest comment: 1 year ago5 comments2 people in discussion

Acorrding to there official website Sega claims that it launched November 11, 1998 instraf of November 27.

Press the link below.

So should we change Japan's release date?

Dreamcast | SEGA NakhlaMan (talk) 13:02, 15 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

It says November 27. I think you're misreading it. oknazevad (talk) 17:45, 15 May 2023 (UTC)Reply
Very odd when I was accesing the website on my phone using the Chrome app it says Novemeber 27 but on the browser it I am using Edge and when it translates it says
Release Date:
Nov 1998, 11
Could it be a problem with translator on the browser? Maybe I should stop using Microsoft Translator and download a better extension for translating.
NakhlaMan (talk) 00:49, 16 May 2023 (UTC)Reply
Yes, it's a browser translator issue. It's misinterpreting the 11 for November as the day, instead of the 27. oknazevad (talk) 00:56, 16 May 2023 (UTC)Reply
Alright then from now I will be using the Google Translate extension then. Damn Microsoft fix ur translator. NakhlaMan (talk) 00:59, 16 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

Accuracy of Dreamcast Logo?

edit
Latest comment: 4 months ago4 comments4 people in discussion

The article uses a logo sourced from a dead link to a Fandom logo wiki. The color also differs distinctly from the one on the Sega website. First and foremost, the current logo should have a better source to prevent citogenesis.

In fact, Wikipedia has three versions of the SEGA logo uploaded: a red one labeled NTSC-U, a light orange one labeled NTSC-J, and a blue one labeled PAL. These all appear to be reproductions of the logo from the Dreamcast boot screen, and while there is evidence for the PAL blue logo, neither the red or light orange seem to be accurate. It looks like the logo should be a reddish orange color, as appears on the Sega website linked above and the boot screen of the console. Unless a primary source for these red and light orange logos can be found, I am concerned that citogenesis has already taken place as these seem to be the commonly used Dreamcast logos online. DMonitor (talk) 06:11, 6 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Agreed that a better source for the image should be used, at the very minimum. On the color differences, perhaps images in old gaming magazines can help us out here? Red Phoenix talk 13:58, 6 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
This is probably worth pinging @Evan-Amos about, as I know he's said that capturing some colors on consoles has been difficult at times. He's photographed this stuff, so while that may not work for us sourcing wise, can perhaps give us a first hand opinion on what we should be looking for. -- ferret (talk) 14:13, 6 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
From what I've seen (and I own Dreamcast) there is no difference between the shade of red-orange used for the logo in Japan and North America, while the European logo was blue because of a trademark conflict (a German company already had a similar looking trademark with an orange swirl). As for that red-orange, neither the supposed North American or the Japanese logos on commons are 100% accurate to the shade. The supposed darker shade of the North American version appears to be just misinterpreting the difference between different monitors (as someone already noted on the file's talk page). The logo on the unit itself and packaging is notably lighter and more orangish. Meanwhile the supposed Japanese logo is clearly too pale. The fact that both files are sourced to the Logopedia Fandom site (not a reliable source as user-generated) means the citogenesis issue is a concern. oknazevad (talk) 22:22, 19 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

"DcVD" listed at Redirects for discussion

edit
Latest comment: 2 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

  The redirect DcVD has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 September 12 § DcVD until a consensus is reached. Mika1h (talk) 08:44, 12 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

"The Dreamcast" listed at Redirects for discussion

edit
Latest comment: 1 month ago1 comment1 person in discussion

  The redirect The Dreamcast has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 11 § The Dreamcast until a consensus is reached. cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:03, 11 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Dreamcast&oldid=1259160993"