Talk:Fourth generation of video game consoles/Archive 1

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

Old stuff

"Sega took a huge advantage that Sonic was fast and used it to get gamers' attention. After word about Sonic the Hedgehog got out, many people started thinking that Sonic was cooler then Mario due to the speed of the character."

I have a feeling that this was not a reason that people picked Sega over Nintendo, or at least that it was the opinion of very few gamers. Speed of characters seems like such a minor factor that I don't remember it even being mentioned while growing up on these systems. - Bamos 20:54, 16 Apr 2004 (UTC)

As even the opening paragraph admits, the article is currently focused on "North American video game history". Did Sega run the same ads worldwide? Were marketing and release dates the same across the world? Probably not, in most cases. Perhaps we should divide the article into sections on North America, Japan, and Europe. I don't know enough about what gaming was like in Europe or Japan to flesh those sections out by myself, though. ~ FriedMilk 00:38, Sep 28, 2004 (UTC)


The whole thing's a bit of a tit-for-tat mess anyway, it reads like two folk took pot shots at eachother on the Wiki then someone came in and tried to make it worth keeping (like me).

Sockatume 01:07, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I guess the problem is that the fouth generation would apply to the fouth generation of american gaming. Remember that the American market is older than the others. Perhaps start another timeline? --66.102.16.10 16:16, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Right, I made some edits to make this NPOV which were reverted. I challenged the user who made the revert yesterday, but they haven't answered yet, so I'm going to take another attempt at making it NPOV. For completion, I'll state the problems I have with the article here:

"After word about Sonic the Hedgehog got out, many people started thinking that Sonic was cooler than Mario due to the speed of the character. Also, Sega came up with a marketing term called "Blast Processing" -- made-up jargon used to explain the speed in the games (and Genesis superiority).

Nintendo countered with franchise games such as the Mario series, The Legend of Zelda, Star Fox, Super Metroid, Donkey Kong Country, and many others for the Super NES and Game Boy.

Gamers became either a Nintendo fan or a Sega fan, and the two were mutually exclusive. Sega released Sonic the Hedgehog 2 in 1992 and it became more popular than the first game. Less than a year later, Nintendo released enhanced remakes of the original NES Super Mario games on the Super NES titled Super Mario All Stars."

Firstly, I was a gamer but wasn't a Nintendo or Sega "fan" during the time, and I imagine many other people were equally enamoured with each system. Secondly, I thought the info about "sonic 2's day" was interesting and should've been kept. Thirdly, I don't think that the first sentence has any place in an encyclopedia.

Also, I changed the following paragraphs for a reason:

"By 1995, the 16-bit craze started to die down due to Nintendo and Sega both having new consoles in the works. Nintendo went on to have much success with the release of the Nintendo 64 in 1996 and greater success with the Nintendo GameCube in 2001, as well as the Game Boy Color and Game Boy Advance in the Handheld console market. However, Sega was not as successful after the 16-bit era. Their Sega Saturn was released in 1995, but it was a complete failure. Eager to jump-start their skeptical console fanbase in 1999, Sega released the Sega Dreamcast, which saw a bit more success but ultimately not enough to keep Sega in the console hardware business. Sega left the home console market in late 2001.

By the end of the Genesis' run in the U.S., it out-sold the Super NES by roughly a 5% margin. However, total world sales of the Super NES were about twice as much as the Genesis, making Nintendo the world-wide winner of the 16-bit war."

As they're clearly not NPOV.

Sockatume 21:36, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)


"Established Franchises"

I had issues with the following in the "Video game franchises established during the 16-bit era" list:

-Earthbound was a sequel to Mother, a Famicom game -Doom was established on PC, not console -SimCity: See Doom -ActRaiser: Two-game series; nobody played the second one (it was a pretty bad game)

The list is also very SNES-biased, as there are very few Genesis series on the list, and really should be changed. I added Phantasy Star, but please add more.

Doom was released on the PC in 1993. I believe the game id software game in question is Quake, as it was released in 1996 and really brought deathmatch/multiplayer (through TCP/IP anyways) to the average gamer. The article should reflect this. Reverend Raven 18:32, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Can this section of the article just be removed? It is unsourced and not really accurate. It's someone's OR theory. I wouldn't say Super Metroid started any franchise, as it was intended as the final game in the series. The whole section is a bit silly. ~ JohnnyMrNinja 02:20, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Johnny, the "Established franchise" section has not existed for some time now. This thread is two years old. Are you referring to the "Software" section? If so, then that section was just created a few days ago, so perhaps you should discuss its addition with whoever added it. Gary King (talk) 02:24, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
It was renamed "Rise of the franchise" some time ago, but it was moved to the "software" section earlier today, [1] but it's the same thing. I don't see a point for it. ~ JohnnyMrNinja 03:37, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Remove it, quite a bit of OR. Gary King (talk) 03:45, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
I've cleaned up and de-franchised the list in favor of individual titles. It could use more non-franchise games, maybe?--ZXCVBNM [TALK] 04:49, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Games Computers

Shouldn't 16-bit games computers such as the Amiga and Atari ST be mentioned alongside these consoles, for completeness? Gp100mk 10:16, 24 February 2006 (UTC)]

Omission of ESRB

I think this article should include the fact that the 4th generation was the beginning of video game ratings.

The creation of rating systems and the ratings organizations (like the ESRB) was a key event in the history of video games.

Describing the controversies and controversial games (like Mortal Kombat) that lead to the rating systems would provide a fascinating history lesson for readers.

This would be particularly true for today's kids, since they aren't old enough to remember the time when video games did not have ratings.

07:33, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

The WWII of console wars

Am i right?!

Do we count the Amiga in this era?

Should the the Amiga count in this era? It's an oddball to place because it's as much a personal computer as it was a console, but the Amiga 500, 600 and 1200 were most certainly games machines. The Lemmings, Populous and Worms series all have their origins there, amongst others, and the system had specialist hardware built in for graphics and sound. --Jonathan Drain 19:48, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

No. They were built as multimedia-rich home and small-time-professional computers. The fact that this also makes them pretty good for games goes hand in hand with it, and although part of the design process for the graphics and sound chips was to include some routines that were largely only useful for games, this wasn't their primary focus let alone the sole one. They saw a lot of use in professional digital graphics (TV studios, animation, even photo editing...), CAD/rendering, audio production, artworks, etc. Plus they were no strangers to "real" work, there was a considerable brace of word processing, DTP and other office-work programs, as well as the smaller, more niche applications of that type that home computers attract (record collection catalogues etc...), and even arguably outlasted (if not quite outstripped) their less consoley, more businessy Atari competitors in that field.
And yes, I am doing this with the 500/600/1200 in mind, as they tended to share the AV chipsets - if not always the raw processing power and expandability - of their actual "pro" siblings (1000 thru 4000+)... OCS, ECS and AGA. The 500 will happily display upto 720x560 pixels (or 640x400 if you stick with the NTSC defaults; both interlaced, but scan-doublers for use with VGA monitors were readily available) in upto 32 colours... very useful for serious apps, not so good for games thanks to a slower update (there's only so much a 7.2Mhz CPU/Bus can do per VBlank), flickery appearance on regular monitors, and heavy memory use. The 600 could do similar non-interlaced in 4 colours, or 1440x560 (int/4c), and allegedly 800x600 in mono - gaming modes they are not. The 1200 expanded these modes to be more colourful. And for all of them there were the HAM modes giving a very rich colour display, but one that was practically impossible to even move around, let alone alter on the fly, suitable for only title screens and pro graphics.
Games instead tended to stick with the standard of the time... 320x200 in 16 or 32 colours (occasionally with 64-colour halfbrite shadows...), instead leveraging the chipset's sprite-drawing functions. The most upgrading any of them tended to demand was a paltry 1Mb RAM boost (as the original machines had only 1/2mb), with 2Mb sometimes giving extra features on later ones (this in itself is far, far more RAM than any console could dream of having). Enough serious apps demanded more than this, and the machine had the ability to satisfy them... typically expandable up to 8Mb, with the large upgrades utilising both of the separate memory busses for extra speed, unlike a typical "play 1Mb games" add-on pack.
So no. Even though they were more "PCjr" or "ST" grade rather than full fat IBM PC or Atari TT, they weren't Megadrive either. We'd still have to pull the lower-end Ataris and IBM compatibles into the fold if the home-user focussed Amigas were included. They're computers, not consoles. If nothing else, can we have a devision along the lines of "typically shipped with a keyboard/had one built in", "incorporated some form of normally-accessible mass storage" (in this case, a floppy drive... or a HDD, fer chrissakes, in the A1200 and higher-end A600s), and "able to be connected to a dedicated monitor"? Yer average home computer satisfies all of these, even the Spectrum +2. A console does not - even the PSX doesn't generally qualify, though it arguably has the ability to be upgraded to that level.
Having the same processor as a Genesis and having a good stable of game titles available does not necessarily = it's a games machine, just as having a 300HP engine and only two seats in the cab doesn't make a pickup truck into a sports car.
Also, just look at the prices they originally sold for... they became very cheap near the end of their respective runs, but even the rushed-out and cut-down A1200 was $400, the A500 a little more at launch allowing for interest, the A600 slightly less. All three somewhat pricier than any actually-popular early 90s games console...
Commodore / Amiga corp did make some actual consoles, and one of these has been included on the list (the other is presumably 5th gen?). Is that not enough?

193.63.174.211 (talk) 09:31, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Rise of Franchises?

Most of the franchises listed started in the third-generation. Is it reeally appropriate to discuss them here? Also, should Sonic be listed? It is discussed in detail farther up. Ace of Sevens 10:50, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Handheld Atari?

Is there a reason for the total omission of the Atari Lynx in the 16-bit handheld block? I bought both a Gameboy and Lynx the same summer (1990), and the Lynx is still around although sadly lacking in new content or decent battery life.  :-) AndySocial 20:06, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Mortal Kombat

If I'm not mistaken, both the Genesis and the SNES version of Mortal Kombat were censored, they both contained (this is the fact I can't check) the "blood code", and both releases (I know this for sure) of MKII were left uncensored. WhateverTS 06:05, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

The SNES didn't contain the "blood code". Gore could only be unlocked on the Mega Drive (and other Sega systems) version. Mr Wesker 16:02, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Virtual Boy

The Virtual Boy is listed in with the handhelds on the page. This is inaccurate as you don't hold it in your hand to use it, hence "handheld". I would consider it portable though. It could use AA batteries.Peter Tangney 02:48, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

i noticed that same thing. in addition to it not being held in your hands it had a separate controller. plus Nintendo didn't market it as a handheld, it far more similar to a console than a handheld, but really should be listed as an other. i'll fix that.J.L.Main 03:08, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

TurboExpress

Isn't the TurboExpress 4th gen? Why isn't it in the handhelds section?

Neo Geo Pocket Color

shouldn't the Neo Geo Pocket & Neo Geo Pocket Color be included in the handhelds section? Suddhadeep (talk) 04:53, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

No, those are from a later generation. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 07:37, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

C64GS 8 bit

The C64 game system is basically an Commodore 64 ( 8-bit Personal Computer) without a keyboard, it should not be here, can I delete it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Charliechuck (talk • contribs) 13:58, 14 December 2006 (UTC).


Milestones

Most other articles of the history of video games series include a section called "Milestone Titles". I think one could easily add it to this article, as it covers the most influential era of videogaming ever. --80.136.48.194 00:18, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

'Fourth generation'

Come on, this name is silly and overly America biased.
No one used the name 'fourth generation', it was the 16-bit era.
In most of the world it wasn't even the 'fourth generation', here in Britain it was just the second. In Japan....The 3rd?...Maybe the second too as before then consoles were just released every so often, no co-ordinated battles for market share.
For the later generations of consoles for which there are no defined names (PS2 et al onwards) then yes, use this sort of name but for the generations with well publicised names it just doesn't make sense.--Josquius 22:02, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree, it was known as the '16-bit era', or just the 'new era' as at the time it was considered the second era. Another problem we have here is the Gameboy & Gamegear handhelds that came out at this time were 8-bit machines. This could get very confusing.Charliechuck 10:03, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

The first sentence is laughable at best. "In the history of computer and video games, the fourth generation (more commonly referred to as the 16 bit era) began on October 30, 1987 with the Japanese release of Nippon Electric Company's (NEC) PC Engine" It says the 16 bit era, then mentions the 8 bit PC Engine lol... No matter how much you try argue the PC Engine is not an 8 bit console with 16 bit gfx chips, it *IS* an 8 bit console!.

I find claims that the PC Engine is 8-bit highly dubious, especially since no one ever cites any reason behind such claims.--Martin IIIa (talk) 23:33, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Its use of an 8-bit CPU and bus doesn't count, then? I'm not even certain it has a 16-bit graphics chip. I think it was actually an advanced 8-bit one and they took the idea of 2x8-bit processors to make it a "16 bit" machine. By which measure the Genesis and Neo-Geo are actually "24 bit", and a Genesis with a 32X installed is 56... 193.63.174.211 (talk) 09:43, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
Nope, my bad... it has "dual 16-bit graphics processors" (so, 40-bit?), though one of them is really nothing more than a renamed shift-register affair that deals with the palettes etc, and the arcade versions of the PCE/TG boards did away with it altogether (having enough space to just make their own out custom versions out of discrete logic). Even so, if we're going to start categorising consoles by their graphics subsystem bitwidths, we're in for a whole additional world of hurt. 193.63.174.211 (talk) 15:17, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Favors Nintendo

From reading several sections of this article it's obvious the author was extremely biased towards Nintendo. Note the second paragraph under "The second Sega vs. Nintendo console war"; statements like "And then there was the control pad" seem amateurish and biased. Somebody fix this, the best video game generation deserves a better article. -Grim (neuropod@gmail.com)

I'm detecting a bit of a bias as well, but it didn't really hit me until the handhelds section. The game gear was "sidelined"... really? I think they had a bit of a pitched battle going on for a while, until Sega decided to move on to stuff like the Nomad (not so much deciding that colour backlit handhelds weren't going to work in a satisfactory manner at this technology level, more that they may as well pack more processing power in and even up the balance between screen and circuit board).
Granted, the game boy did "win" the handheld race, but being #2, particularly a #2 with its own differing USP, good sales, and a fairly loyal fanbase doesn't equal "sidelined". The game gear sold almost eleven million units, which is enough to compete in the TV-connected console list. It's more than - according to Nintendo's figures from the same document listing the GB/GBC sales - either the GBA or DS managed to sell, including their sub-versions. Shouldn't we say that the Game Gear sidelined the Gameboy Advance, in terms of colour games systems with (very roughly) similar prowess?
Also, despite the GB selling 110 million units, that includes not only things like the GB Pocket and GB Light (and maybe even the Micro?), which some people may have bought to replace their older, perfectly good, but "too large" / "too battery hungry" / "can't play in the dark" / etc originals, but also the Gameboy Colour... a significant upgrade to the console's hardware and all-round capabilities that completely displaced the original in the market (Nintendo are not coy about completely nuking a previous product line once its successor becomes reasonably established). It's about as different from the monochrome GB as the Wii is from the Gamecube. A lot of people will have bought those even if they originally had a B/W gameboy, or even a Pocket or Light. It's not even 100% backwards compatible, so they may have held onto their old ones for particularly fussy games instead of passing them down to a younger sibling, who then has to have a GB/GBC of their own bought if they want to play. Approximately a full one-half of those 110-million lifetime sales are in 1999 and later, following the launch of the GBC in 1998 (when 98 is included, it's about 65m out of 110m... we can maybe presume that, after an autumn launch, it sold like hotcakes in the run up to christmas, and GB sales YTD before then would have been down whilst people anticipated the launch of the new model and hence a price drop for the old?)
It's bizarre that their sales would be listed together, I can only assume it's a (successful, in this case?) ploy by Nintendo marketeers to artificially overinflate the figures, and so definitively grab the all-time "best selling handheld" title, as if it was even in any doubt anyway.
Really if the GBC is allowed here, shouldn't the Neo Geo Pocket Colour and the Bandai Wonderswan Colour - which I remember as it's actual main rivals at the time, and arguably even the machines it was developed/released to compete against - be included as well? They're of quite similar display quality and power level after all. And really DID get sidelined by the Nintendo ("kerb stomped" may be a more accurate assessment...).
After all, there was only one model of Game Gear. How many people would have gone out and bought a second one when their existing one was perfectly fine? I've only bought (in the last 10 years, so very definitely second hand) a replacement for my original GG because the (incandescent filament!!) backlight finally burnt out after more than a decade of abuse, and it was much cheaper and easier to pick up a whole new unit off eBay (just like a typical Gameboy, the rest of it still works 100%, just there's no backlight...). Until that point, there was just the one of them, shared between me and my brother. That was possible thanks to some games offering 2-players-on-one-console modes (one player takes the Dpad, the other takes the A/B/Start buttons), which would have been difficult at best on the smaller and overall portrait-format GB...
(Plus, they were built to last, which you can't really say for - especially - the GB Pocket and GB Advance, both of which tend to look pretty tired by now and have bits falling off...)
I do feel like going and adding some kind of unfair bias tag to, at least, that section, once I figure out which one to use... 193.63.174.211 (talk) 15:00, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

'SNES is better' not NPOV

"It should be noted that despite Sega's aggressive and sometimes misleading marketing tactics during this era, Nintendo's platform was technically superior to Sega's platform in several key areas. In terms of graphics, far more colors were available on the 'Super, and far more colors could be used on screen at the same time. In terms of sound, the capabilities between the two systems was night and day, with the 'Super sounding much more like a true 16-bit experience (compare if to an early Sound Blaster card for a PC) while Genesis sounded similar if not identical to a PC "Ad-lib Sound" card, which in PC terms was the technology existing prior to "Sound Blaster". The control pad featured far more buttons, with an arguably more friendly layout. Also, the 'Super was first to introduce the "L and R" buttons on a console controller, this allowed greater options for controlling a game than was possible (or practical) previously." This does not seem very NPOV to me... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by VDZ (talk • contribs) 19:50, 16 January 2007 (UTC).

I've just removed all this stuff as part of my last edit, as I also found it highly non-NPOV. For the record, the SNES has a superior colour depth but the Mega Drive has a superior pixel resolution. The SNES has more capable sound hardware but the Mega Drive has a much more capable CPU and a dedicated sound CPU that can do much more than a PC "Ad-lib Sound" card. I don't consider either platform to be objectively technologically superior to the other, it'll always be a personal POV decision and therefore not encyclopaedic — ThomasHarte 19:32, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
It seems as though there has been quite a bit of weasel wording in the article both ways. I've done some work to correct it in the past, hopefully we can work out the rest of it soon. DestradoZero 19:21, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Two handheld lists

Is there a reason that there are two sections listing the handheld systems from this era? CB Droege 15:09, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

It's somewhat vague anyway as the handheld years overlap the main system releases. I agree though they should be in one place or the other, or perhaps just linked to a history of handheld games and consoles. As the "first generation" of home console history includes dedicated devices, so could the handheld history. 72.15.95.101 18:54, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Bonk's Adventure PCE.png

The image Image:Bonk's Adventure PCE.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --21:36, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Most popular games?

I'd be very interested in knowing that, top 100 would be great, it's available on Golden_Age_of_Video_Arcade_Games (I'm conducting a sort of history in gaming with music from the games.) I don't see the top games being the same as the franchise games? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Phoenixdolphin (talk • contribs) 16:23, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Fourth Generation?

Am I not right in saying the 32x should not be here, and should be in the Fifth Generation, as it is 32 bit processing, and that the Neo Geo CD which as 16 bit proccesing should be on this article, also the NEC TurboGrafx CD does not appear on the Article at all, dispite being an offial 16 bit (cd based) add on. I am doing work on editing both forth and fifth generation articles. Thanks mcjakeqcool Mcjakeqcool (talk) 13:10, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

No, generations are not decided by bit processing. The Intellivision for instance, has a 16-bit cpu, but does not belong with the Genesis, SNES, etc. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 13:40, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
It's kind of... 4th and a half generation? It's more advanced than, and something of a successor to the Genesis in which it sits, but it's not up to Saturn standards either. Though it is really a sort of booster add-on, like adding an FPU coprocessor and new graphics card to an old PC (or, externalising the SNES's SFX chips).
BTW, which generation should we consider the Atari Jaguar in, then, as it somewhat predated the more easily recognised Sony, Sega and Nintendo "5th" gen, but came a bit after the SNES/Genesis et al? (It was roughly 32X era ... a version of Virtua Racer was made for it!) 193.63.174.211 (talk) 15:10, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

$109 price tag

If I am not wrong in saying this, the GameBoy's $109 price tag in quite expensive considering it is the most inferior handheld of this era, by the way, I always thought the GameBoy sold for $99. mcjakeqcool Mcjakeqcool (talk) 11:41, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

The $110 price tag was for the 1989 US Game Boy, it may have been reduced to $99 later.--Anss123 (talk) 13:03, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
That information has been corrected. The article now has a reference towards it selling at launch for US$89.95. Dream Focus 08:26, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Intro sentence misleading

The article starts with 'history of computer and video games,' and yet only covers consoles, thus missing the Atari ST and Commodore Amiga. As the article does not cover computer games, I find this line misleading. Also, computers were used as consoles in Europe up until the snes and megadrive began to take dominance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.199.115.246 (talk) 22:35, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Look more closely; presuming it's not been massively changed since you said that, the title is "video games consoles", and the intro sentence is providing a link to the full history. The lede could probably do with better clarification that it's dealing with consoles per se (I might go drop that in right now in fact), but it's otherwise not too bad. Regardless of what use you put them to, consoles are distinct from home computers such as the ST, Amiga, etc - much simpler input methods, often a lack of built in (or any) operating system, limited memory (only enough to satisfy retrieving and holding the currently relevant graphics data, along with a bare few variables), limited or no user data storage and communication ability, little expandability, reliance on connection to a TV rather than a monitor, lack of true hi-rez modes (or at least, hardly ever using them; the PC Engine, SNES and PSX can all do some kind of 80-column and/or interlaced output, but games that use resolutions exceed VGA "ModeX" levels are exceptionally rare), etc. A computer of the time has a built in keyboard and often a mouse, vs a joypad; some kind of at least basic OS in ROM (or even a full windowing system) plus a more fully featured one on a supplied floppy, capable of if not indeed defaulting to some kind of 80-column productivity screen mode (sometimes with high vertical resolution too), a good amount of working RAM (at least 256k, often 1mb), a floppy disk or even hard disk for storage, monitor connection, reasonable expandability, ports for modems... printers... external drives, etc. Their CPU speeds tend to be slightly (though not always massively) higher as well. The consoles, however, tend to have at least a slight upper hand in graphics and sound capability, being custom designed to give the best possible performance in that regard (sophisticated sprite and playfield handling, multiple voices, FM synthesis etc). There's a reasonably good dividing line, and when people try to straddle it (EG with the CDTV, or most attempts to add actual home-computer capability to a console), that's when things start to go wrong. 193.63.174.211 (talk) 15:31, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Game sales listed strangely.

History_of_video_game_consoles_(fourth_generation)#Worldwide_sales_standings Instead of listing the sales for one system, where the rest of the game consoles list their sales, instead it gives a link to the notes section which says "United States: 20 million,[28] Rest of the world: 15 million,[29] Tec Toy: 2 million,[30] Majesco: 2 million,[30] Sega Nomad: 1 million[31]"

If the information is acceptable in the notes section, why not in the section where it should be? It isn't original research to say 20+15+2+2+1 = 40. Dream Focus 01:40, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

I agree, and according to WP:Original Research, simple arithmetic is allowed, and not considered original research.--SexyKick 02:01, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
The problem is that, despite every reliable source found giving numbers between 29 and 30.75 million, a small but vocal group of editors feel that they should be allowed to ignore the reliable sources and add up numbers for individual regions from unrelated sources instead. The current situation is unsatisfactory, but for the moment it is preventing edit wars over the issue. Anomie⚔ 02:42, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
I think the problem is that all reliable sources for regional numbers outnumber 29 million by a great amount, and that the original source for 29 million coming from a magazine in 1995 clears up the timing for the low number of 29 million. Avoiding an edit war is preferable. The rule on simple arithmetic doesn't state the numbers have to come from the same source, but it does state editors need to agree on the arithmetic used.--SexyKick 04:38, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
You are against adding up numbers from different regions from reliable sources? How else can you get an updated worldwide view? And I believe most people will support this, since its common sense, not original research. We'll see what consensus as, as more people come and express their opinion. And not every reliable source found uses those numbers. That number seems to all come from the same place, a study published by someone in 1995, which so far no one has been able to find. It'd be useful to see exactly what it was, what versions of the system were included in it, and where the information was gathered from. Dream Focus 08:15, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
I'm all for adding them up to get 40 million. If you read through that archive you posted the link to, I'm the one who brought up the fact that it's not original research to add the numbers...we could even do it fairly with a 40 million[cn] where the content note specifies 35 million first party, 4 million 3rd party (or specify,) and 1 million Nomad. One person fought me, and no one else jumped on the discussion so 1 to 1 it stayed.--SexyKick 09:03, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
  • I found a discussion about this online [2] it having posters encouraging people to go to the Wikipedia talk page for Mega Drive and argue various points. Notice it links to many reliable sources for the numbers, including the New York Times. Then you have a discussion about this Talk:Mega_Drive/Archive_12 where apparently all other sources are ignored, because of an old article in a single foreign magazine, which came out years before the other sources that have bigger numbers(more updated information). This magazine mentions it compiles sources from five different places, but doesn't list what years the information it compiled comes from. So you can't really consider Man!ac to be a reliable source, and use that one place alone to ignore all other sources that contradict it. Dream Focus 06:55, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
It's been confirmed by other users to be the May 1995 issue, it's certainly reliable. How do any sources contradict it again??--SexyKick 07:35, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Excuse me. I misread something. Dream Focus 08:01, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Only one person against it, and two for it, so consensus is for the change. I'm changing it now. Dream Focus 08:08, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
For clarity, please read the policy. WP:CALC Adding numbers together, does not count as original research. So unless someone doubts the reliability of the more recent sources, with the most recent sales figures, then you have no reason to oppose this. Dream Focus 08:23, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Let's ask elsewhere for more input. I've posted at WP:ORN#Mega Drive/Genesis sales and WT:VG/RS#Brazilian fan/blogsite? Anomie⚔ 16:56, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Google translation of http://www.team-aaa.com/news-15016-0-1-flashback_la_megadrive.html shows another source for Majesco sales, places it at 2.5 million units. The source for 2 million was published before then, and perhaps not as up to date. A Google news archive search for "Majesco" "Sega" and "Genesis" shows results [3]. I ran some through Google translator to find the one above, which seems credible. Anyone have any other sources for information about the sales of this? Dream Focus 17:30, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

About Importing Games

Guys, first of all about that mini map with different tv formats in the world (pal, ntsc, secam). I live in Russia all my 25 years and believe me it's been 20 years (since the fall of USSR in 1991) that we have PAL not SECAM. Secam is a very old format and its ridiculous that a lot of people think that it still exists. Plese change the colors on that map, I dont know how to do it myself.

And speaking about formats and importing - not sega neither nintendo were officially present in Russia in 90-s but the stores were full of their Asian imports (because Asia also has Pal and sometimes has English in manuals and games). But Sega was much more popular in Russia because of the pirates - it was much easier to make sega cart then snes. Therefore there were much more pirated sega carts in stores and they were significantly cheaper than snes ones. I think it was not only in Russia but in most Asian countries and Brasil - it really made Sega more popular in that regions. I think that pirating played a huge role in the fourth generation and should be mentioned here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.118.81.48 (talk) 08:33, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

I must say I'm a bit confused about the "NTSC, converting to PAL" bit - I can't even see that colour on the map, and don't know of anywhere that's doing this (not even sure anywhere has DONE it). In this day and age it'd be a bit pointless with the onrush of DVB and hi-def, wouldn't it? 193.63.174.211 (talk) 12:05, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Import confusion, pt2

I have to wonder ... what has the description of PAL vs NTSC, and the way the games will then play on different machines, got to do with the price of chips? If you import an American game and plug it into a European console, then - assuming you successfully bypass any regional lockout - won't it play exactly the same as a poorly converted (or not converted at all) local release? Unless you have an NTSC console and a compatible TV to play it on, of course. Would it not have been the case that european TVs were starting to become more compatible with NTSC signals and scan rates, so it would be a lot easier to import just a US (or Japan) spec console along with a few games (and a voltage converter) and hook it right up, instead of needing to also import a TV or have one modified just to play that console?

Unless of course putting a US/Jap cartridge into your console also switched it into NTSC mode?

(I wonder even if a lot of them had the -ability- to do a full-screen scan in PAL mode; given that a lot of them have either a single resolution, or a small range of them that are somewhat limited definition, particularly in the vertical dimension (240 being a common maximum; 224, 200 and 192 also appearing - similar to an Atari ST or Sinclair Spectrum - or an Amiga playing one of the myriad poorly converted games, all of which had stonking great borders at all times on PAL equipment, unless you used an RGB monitor and tweaked the vertical size to maximum...), wouldn't it be more likely that it was the HARDWARE that was poorly adapted for PAL, and EVERYTHING was a bit vertically compressed, with just a load of extra blanking (or border-colour) lines shoved in above and below (...or in the case of the comparitive Amiga, only below!) the playfield? All that would be necessary would be to adjust the time constants for music and moving objects so they moved further for each VBlank (or HBlank for music), no need or indeed ability to vastly reprogram the game to use, say, a 240~256~288 high display with an expanded background, control panel, or just a decorative border... Not the hugest of programming tasks, unless of course you only want to make one type of cartridge and set the region by bridging one or other set of contacts just before the outer case is screwed shut, or you've already had the ROMs produced before someone points out the problem... Though, if you're already converting the game for other platforms, some of which will likely have different resolutions in all directions, it can't be much harder to make two for different regions of the same console... I presume this mainly only applied to platform-exclusive games?)

There's a lot in the article text that's either unsaid, or doesn't make sense, or is plain unneccessary. I was never an importer but I know a little about the standards, and the hardware capabilities (screen modes, lockouts), etc, and it just doesn't make sense. Never mind the importing of games which actually HAD PAL versions made; unless it activated some special magic, wouldn't you be paying through the nose for something that could be had cheaper locally?

Anyone who actually knows this stuff from being on the scene care to fill me in? As right now I've half a mind to just delete the complicated description of PAL/NTSC differences outright and put some simpler thing about "differences in screen mode in PAL and NTSC regions meant that games originating in NTSC regions (Japan, USA) would often play more slowly and with large "letterbox" borders on PAL equipment (Europe, Oceania, etc); some developers, especially smaller ones or those of niche/local-only interest had difficulty making satisfactory or cost effective PAL conversions of their games, and so didn't bother making an official non-NTSC version"... ??193.63.174.211 (talk) 16:51, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

CD-I sales

I think since there are two newspaper sources for one million sold, that this is the more verifiable / reliable number.--SexyKick 01:20, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

No consensus for title change.

I don't agree with this title change, and there was no discussion about it. It should be undone.--SexyKick 14:41, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Fourth_generation_of_video_game_consoles/Archive_1&oldid=1136352159"