Talk:Nintendo Classics (marketing label)

Merge to Player's Choice/Move to Nintendo Classics?

From what I can gather, "Classic Serie" is the German name of Nintendo Classics, which, from what I can gather, appears to be the European version of the Player's Choice label in the early 90s.
At the very least, I think this should be moved to Nintendo Classics, since Classic Serie is pretty much the German label for the same series, as can be indicated on boxarts like these two. rend (talk) (edits) 09:26, June 8, 2024 (EDT)

About the names.

So, it was only the Game Boy that actually received the "Nintendo Classics" name. From what I could find, the Classic Serie continued on from the NES to the Game Boy, but other countries got it under the name Nintendo Classics, and then the SNES got them under the Super Classic Serie…so, they all have different names, but since they are all pretty similar, we could group the Classic Serie, Nintendo Classics, and the Super Classic Serie in one page, but call it Nintendo Classics as that is the closest English name? They all pretty much are they same though, they all use the same logo. (which was later used in Super Mario Collection, AKA the Japanese Super Mario All-Stars) and pretty much had the same idea.
— The preceding unsigned comment was added by Starluxe (talk).

The Game Boy was NOT the only console that received the Nintendo Classics label, as can be evidenced by these two boxes, which you have included on this very page. Furthermore, every box I've seen with "Classic Serie" (verbatim) on it, has always been in German, and the only other language I've seen calling it "Classic Series" in its language (aside from America, apparently... might need more research on that), is French with "Série Super Classic". Meanwhile, "Nintendo Classics" is shown on English, Dutch and Italian boxes. rend (talk) (edits) 06:49, June 9, 2024 (EDT)

From what I've gathered is that the original Classic Serie(s) of NES games ran from '92-'93 on both sides of the Atlantic. The purpose of the original Classic Series for the NES was to supply cartridges for new customers who couldn't find Nintendo's old first-party games. When the Player's Choice label began in the US in '96, the European side chose to revive the (Super) Classic Serie label in Germany for Game Boy and SNES rereleases (and Nintendo Classics in other countries). The GB and SNES rereleases are essentially the same as Player's Choice (titles that earned their entry into the label through high volume sales, regardless of whether they were first or third party games). This may warrant a split with the GB/SNES games going to Player's Choice while "Classic Series" should cover only the four European NES games.--Platform (talk) 22:10, June 9, 2024 (EDT)

Moving the page

I’m trying to move the page to Nintendo Classics, but because there was originally a redirect to something WarioWare related, the page already existed. I’m trying to move Classic Series to Nintendo Classics but it won’t let me, could anyone delete the page so I could do so? User:Starluxe (talk) 17:55, June 10, GMT

This absolutely has to move (or merge) now per recent Nintendo news.

If you haven't noticed, Nintendo has officially rebranded classic games offered on Nintendo Switch Online as simply Nintendo Classics which just so happens to match the name of this article. This rebranding can already be seen with Nintendo GameCube - Nintendo Classics and the other applications are likely to have updated names on June 5, 2025. --Bro3256 (talk) 14:35, April 3, 2025 (EDT)

Yeah, maybe we could move this article to Classic Series, stick the Nintendo Switch Online packs at this page name and put a {{distinguish}} template to lessen any potential confusion? Nelsonic (talk) 14:48, April 3, 2025 (EDT)

We don't have a generic article that contains information on all of the applications, so I think it's fine as so. And we are not renaming this to "Classic Series." It is a translation of the German name, and why should we use a non-English name when we have an English name? Kaptain Skurvy 16:43, April 8, 2025 (EDT)

Split the Classic Series version of Mario Bros.

This talk page proposal has already been settled. Please do not edit this section or its subsections. If you wish to discuss the article, please do so in a new section below the proposal.

split 6-0
Per my reasoning for splitting both 25th Anniversary SUPER MARIO BROS. and Donkey Kong Original Edition. The game has a similar amount of changes to Donkey Kong Original Edition, with multiple things from the arcade version being restored, including a level that was removed from the home releases (much like how Original Edition restored 50m).

Proposer: Nelsonic (talk)
Deadline: May 16, 2025, 23:59 GMT

Split (Classic Series)

1. Nelsonic (Classic Series) (talk) Per proposal.
2. Rykitu (Classic Series) (talk) Per proposal.
3. Rering644 (Classic Series) (talk) Per proposal.
4. Camwoodstock (Classic Series) (talk) Per proposal; if we can split the others, there's no reason to split this one, and to be honest, this already kind of feels like a second page starting to grow out of the first one.
5. Kaptain Skurvy (talk) I guess. But I'd prefer to split it as Mario Bros. (Nintendo Classics).
6. SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) Might as well. The article here seems like two articles in one.

Comments (Classic Series)

I feel like this is a slippery slope to splitting all ports of Donkey Kong, Donkey Kong Jr., and Mario Bros.. All those ports by Atari, Coleco, Ocean, etc. on a multitude of platforms have much bigger differences than this one to their arcade originals. The 1993 NES version is closer to the original arcade version than the 1983 Famicom port, so shouldn't that one be split too?--Platform (talk) 11:53, May 3, 2025 (EDT)

There's a difference between a port and an enhanced port, and it's not just about the overall quality of the port. Bringing back things that were initially removed in a port is "enhanced", being the port that had to remove things in the first place isn't--you're just a port that had to cull things. ~Camwoodstock ( talk ☯ contribs ) 12:08, May 3, 2025 (EDT)

That does not explain why an enhanced port deserves a split but a non-enhanced port does not (the distinction can be questionable). There's no strict criteria I could find in MarioWiki:New articles. Ultimately, I think we'll eventually go the route of Wario's Woods and Mario is Missing! and split up Donkey Kong into Donkey Kong (arcade), Donkey Kong (Family Computer port), etc.--Platform (talk) 12:40, May 3, 2025 (EDT)

We're gonna be honest here; the various versions of Missing probably should have been split awhile ago, as they're a weird edge case where literally zero "port" plays exactly the same. This would be in contrast to something like, say, the various versions of Super Mario Bros. Special or Donkey Kong 3: Dai Gyakushū, which are only "different" in the audiovisual department, and what few gameplay differences exist are due to hardware differences. There's no shot those are getting split anytime soon, and not just because of the obscure source material; there's just not a lot worth splitting in the first place; and by that token, nobody's going to suggest splitting the many, many ports of Donkey Kong (game), as there is nothing "enhanced" about them. In contrast, the fact that Nintendo felt it important to re-implement Icicles to the Classics version of NES Mario Bros., or 50m to the Original Edition of NES Donkey Kong, is a proper enhancement compared to a standard re-release of that specific version of the game.
We will say: the Reissue page is definitely in dire need of reworking. It's... Not clear at all what exactly a "reissue" is, and we've definitely noticed a lot of the policy ages are in varying degrees of out-of-date, thanks to many, many individual proposals, kinda like this one. But we earnestly can't see a world in which allowing for Mario Bros. (Nintendo Classics) would beget a Donkey Kong (Amstrad CPC), unless the proposal in question was "split literally every port, ever, regardless of if it's enhanced or not". ~Camwoodstock ( talk ☯ contribs ) 16:28, May 3, 2025 (EDT)

Except most of the Donkey Kong ports listed in the article are NOT listed in the "Ports" section of the Reissue page. And what do we call ports that are neither enhanced ports nor plain ports? "Dehanced" ports (and yes, dehance is a word)? And since when do we NOT split versions of games with major differences, whether they're removals or additions? SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 10:00, May 5, 2025 (EDT)

The Reissue page is already marked "under construction", so we can excuse the various DK ports being absent at the moment, though y'know... Someone should definitely add those.
What do we call "dehanced" ports? ...Just ports? The NES DK port is, by definition, dehanced, since it's missing 50m and various animations, and it remaining merged with the original Arcade DK is extremely non-contentious. There's a reason the call for a split was directed at the enhanced Original Edition, rather than the dehanced base version. There's really no reason to acknowledge a port being dehanced when, for the longest time, that was the norm. A port nowadays being dehanced would be worth noting, sure, since that's incredibly rare to see nowadays. But back in the day where hardware capabilities could range from the bespoke, unique hardware of an Arcade cabinet tailor-made for the game itself, to "whatever potato could run MS-DOS", the latter losing out on stuff compared to the former just isn't remarkable. That's just how it was back then.
When do we not split versions of games with major differences? "Dehanced" ports, direct emulated re-releases with occasional anti-epilepsy patches (hi Wii U virtual console specifically), ports that aren't actually dehanced but are actually just lateral changes thanks to slightly different hardware (hi again DK3DG), and we're probably missing other examples, but that's just what we can remember off the top of our head.
Again, a large portion of the problem is that the Reissue page itself is simultaneously unclear, but evidently, incomplete in the first place if it can't muster mentions of the DK ports. ~Camwoodstock ( talk ☯ contribs ) 13:02, May 5, 2025 (EDT)

Ok, yeah, true about it being worth noting TODAY. But anti-epilepsy patches aren't really MAJOR. A level removal is, as the opposite of it, a level addition, also is. We can't just assume that a level removal is NOT major if a level addition IS. And whether it's "remarkable" doesn't correlate with whether it's "major". SONIC123CDMANIA+&K(B&ATSA) (talk) 15:27, May 5, 2025 (EDT)

Again, the removal of something being deemed "not major" in contrast to addition being considered "major" is because that's how ports were back in the day, just, in general. It was extremely rare for a port to come out without at least something being lost in the transition from bespoke Arcade hardware to a console or home computer that couldn't compete with literally being tailor-made for the game in question; that older ports are missing elements from their source material is quite literally, the norm, not the exception. It's about as much a given as different graphics or different sound is. ~Camwoodstock ( talk ☯ contribs ) 15:50, May 5, 2025 (EDT)