Talk:32X/Archive 1

Archive 1

Untitled

Moving back because "Sega 32X" is the more popular English name:

• "Sega Super 32X" [1] - 22 hits

• 'Sega Super 32X' [2] 79,600 hits

• "Sega 32X" [3] - 77,000 hits

• 'Sega 32X' [4] 91,700 hits

- M123 05:17, 19 Aug 2003 (UTC)

What functionality in the base Genesis system did the 32X actually use? -- NeuronExMachina 22:04, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Cleaned up the specs section. Contrary to popular belief, the 32X has no hardware to do rotation and scaling or any 3D work. It's all done in software.

@NeuronExMachina The Genesis was responsible for bootstrapping the SH2s and collecting input from the controllers. Many games also used it for part of the onscreen graphics. The Genesis hardware also handled the interfacing between the Sega CD and 32X as there is no way to copy data directly between the two units.

- Mask of Destiny 04:50, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

The system had to use the main Genesis processor, as this is what sent out data to be processed by the SH2s. In addition, games used the Genesis video processor and sound capabilities as well, though the PWM channels (there were four) usually were used in place of the DAC channel for some SFX. For example, the AM2-developed 32X games (Virtua Fighter, V. Racing) used the Genesis video processor for the background art, and the FM synth and PSG were utilized in the sound. Knuckles' Chaotix used the Genesis VDP for most of the main level art (now able to use 4 different palettes per level because the character art was done through the SH2), and the sound, except for percussion were again the FM and PSG.

Clean-up

Needs a bit of cleanup, but not enough to warrent a cleanup tag. -- KneeLess 06:06, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

NPOVness

"The 32X however, should have never been released." The second-to-last paragraph, as well as a few of the other parts of the article, seem a bit POV. I'm a bit busy right now to do anything about it, however. I might get around to fixing it up later. -GregoryWeir 01:05, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

I was just going to comment on the same thing. I love my Genesis 32X, even though I know it was not a profitable venture for Sega. Eric 04:47, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

SNL?

"The situation became so bad that the 32X was actually mocked on Saturday Night Live." Does anyone have any more specific information on this? I don't remember it being mentioned on SNL. I tried looking it up on Google and all I could find was that someone from SNL was at E3 in 1998 making fun of the 32X. 12.208.5.169 20:01, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Virtua Racing

I may have missed it, but does the article make any mention to how the Genesis version of Virtua Racing (which had a special chip in the cartridge for the 3D rendering) served as a prototype for the 32X?

You're right, it's missing. The problem is that many people have assumed it used an SH1 or SH2 DSP. In fact the SVP is a Samsung SSP1601. That turnes many "believed" facts wrong or at least they became sidenotes. --32X 19:53, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Article Needs Cleanup

The article is pretty good as a whole, but is sorely lacking citations, and has a fair amount of NPOV commentary.

Unfrotunately I don't care enough to do it; perhaps someone else will? 66.245.37.173 06:18, 18 May 2007 (UTC)kazuo

Sega of America did not know about the Sega Saturn while the 32x was being developed

This is definitely not true. I was working at Sega at the time. I've deleted this portion of the text and replaced it with comments that the 32x was envisioned as extending the life of the 32x while the Saturn's userbase grew. Tm314159 17:47, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

What does it do?

The article assumes that the reader already knows what the 32X does. We all know, but people who never heard of the thing might not have a clue what it's actually for. The introduction simply states that it's an 'add-on', and the article goes on to say that can it can play games and functions as a pass-through for older games. I think the article needs some extra clarification on what, exactly, the device is for. 82.92.64.247 08:04, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Along with the MegaCD it spit roasts the Mega-Drive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.72.54.162 (talk) 12:17, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Pass-through adapter?

From personal experience I must question as to whether or not the 32X really acts as a pass-through adapter for Genesis games. I back up this statement with experience of Genesis games looking better when played through a 32X adapter. Examples being Tengen's Genesis port of Hard Drivin'. The road and explosions in the game are much clearer and appear to utilize a bigger color pallete when played through a 32X. Screen caps will be posted ASAP unless documentation proving true can be obtained. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.88.222.77 (talk • contribs) 23:04, 21 November 2006 (UTC) at the article page

Maybe you've just used better cables for the 32X which give a better video signal? --32X 11:23, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Technically it's a video overlay, but no, the 32x does not enhance the video of non-32x games. I've programmed on it. Tm314159 17:38, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Maybe Tengen's port of the game is built as a hybrid, so it plays better on the 32x. There was some game like that for one of the upgrades to the PC Engine or TurboGrafx-16. 71.220.215.234 (talk) 02:18, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

?

who the hell put all those [citation needed] tags on everything, truth or fiction? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.136.202.49 (talk) 00:57, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

The number of {{unsourced}} tags are... excessive, but I imagine it was someone who was worried about the lack of citation on the site, which stems from comments like this one. --Thaddius (talk) 12:19, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Sega CD 32X

Although its game library is...rather small, to say the least, the Sega CD 32X (Genesis/Mega Drive with both expansions) IS a console, and IS as much deserving of its own article as the Sega CD and Sega 32X on their own are, being the first 32-bit console with a CD drive. 71.220.211.235 (talk) 18:58, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

No, the 3DO, released in 1993, was a 32-bit CD-ROM system before the Genesis 32X was released. Also, while we were getting the Genesis 32X in November of 1994, PlayStation and Saturn were already released in Japan. There's also border-line machines, like Playdia, CD-i, etc. that could or could not have been 32-bit with a CD-ROM. No, the 32X CD wasn't the "first" CD-ROM system using a 32-bit CPU, and it doesn't deserve it's own article, because what purpose would that serve since the Genesis 32X upgrade is still needed to play these games. Coffee4binky (talk) 10:33, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Sales numbers need fixing

Right now, the worldwide sales number says 200,000 But then, if you look in the Launch section of the article, it says 600,000 32X units were shipped to North America for the 1994 Christmas season. Contradicting numbers in the same article...sigh Maybe it only sold 200,000 in Japan, or Europe, both regions the 32X is very rare, and even goes for a lot of money in Europe. Probably over 1 million were made...but 600,000 is the most reliable for sure number I can find, so that's the best we can do for now I suppose.--70.20.246.58 (talk) 01:46, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Update, 600,000 is still the most reliable number I can find. Though, it only covers the US. I read a not trustworthy report that Sega 32X sold 100,000 in Europe. Hopefully someone else can dig up more info. I'm all dug up and out for now.--PimpUigi (talk) 04:13, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Circular logic

On November 26th the user Secret Saturdays made some edits to the page, one in which he added 14 links as sources. All of these links are to articles that use this exact Wikipedia article as a source, clearly colliding with WP:CIRCULAR. As such, I am removing them all. --RoyalFool (talk) 23:04, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Found a very nasty virus in one of the links

I clicked on one of the external links (the32xmemorial.com) and I got a blank page and a pop up from AVG stating that it found a Liberty Exploit Kit type 714. I'm not sure if this is real or if it is a false positive, but I think it would be a very bad idea to just leave it there and risk letting other editors get infected. 96.13.117.10 (talk) 23:24, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

I took it down since wikipedia articles aren't supposed to link to fansites anyways. Sergecross73 msg me 15:19, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

The 32X CD version of Night trap did not display 32,768 colors at once

I'm an engineer familiar with the 32X and the Sega CD. The 32X could display 32,768 colors only with flat, shaded polygons. Its maximum color palette for streaming video was 255. No commercial 32X game displayed 32,768 colors at once. That Night trap displayed that many colors is an often reported myth. The Sega CD has a 1X CD-rom drive, which isn't even fast enough to stream the needed 15 bpp color for a video with 32,768 colors available. I deleted the offending comment, which was as follows: " One of these was a new version of Night Trap, which featured 32,768 on-screen colors instead of the 64 found on the regular Sega CD version." If anyone doubts this, I can go into more technical detail, and even provide screenshots as proof. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.66.212.206 (talk) 20:35, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Seems fair enough to me. Since the sentence you removed had no citation (and in fact had a citation needed tag), anyone is free to remove it per WP:Verifiability, so you don't have to justify yourself. Generally speaking, the burden of proof for a claim is on the claimant, so other than "common knowledge" (e.g. a "claim" such as "the sky is blue" is common knowledge; things like "person X did Y" or "the atmosphere is largely composed of Nitrogen gas" may or may not be, depending on the context), everything needs a citation (within reason). In future, if you find (unsourced) inaccuracies, feel free to remove them without posting on the talk page; just provide a brief explanation in the edit summary (e.g. "removed unsourced assertion" or similar). Bear in mind though that if a claim does have a source (which in this case it didn't have, but could have had as it's "an often reported myth") then you must provide some kind of proof, and screenshots would not be sufficient; you either need to provide a conflicting source of equal or greater validity (e.g. in this case, a quote from a Sega software engineer or an article in a technology journal (like a tech equivalent of "new scientist" or similar, if one exists; I don't know)), or provide irrefutable proof (which doesn't apply in many cases - in this case you could prove through maths that the system is incapable of this, but in many other circumstances this would not apply). Hope this helps and you stick around to help us out. Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.θɒn/ ^(talk) 23:51, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Sega 32X/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Numbermaniac (talk · contribs) 09:13, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

I have decided to take up the task of reviewing this article for GA status. -- ^(T) Numbermaniac _(C) 09:14, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

Fantastic. I look forward to hearing the results. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 00:45, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

Decent article overall.

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

   A lot of information presented here, but not too much.

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

   As negative as this console seemed to be, both sides have been presented fairly in my opinion.

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   This is a very good article overall.

Thanks. Yeah, the console was pretty poorly perceived and still is. Getting a neutral point was pretty tough because there's very few who see this console add-on in a positive light. I tend to think it's what really killed Sega as a console maker, even though they made the Saturn and Dreamcast later on. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 00:24, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

This interview offers a tiny bit of positive, perhaps. I'm not sure if it's just trivial information or not.--SexyKick 04:25, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Even with all the negative attention, you've done brilliantly.

 pass! Sorry, I would have done this last night (about 14 hours ago), but the Internet cut out randomly. Well done! -- ^(T) Numbermaniac _(C) 01:55, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

One thing that I think this article is missing...

Reviews from the time. Even if they made no sense, EGM gave 32X games really high review scores in 1994. GameInformer gave Doom an 8/10. Things like this should probably have a place in the article so it is more understood what people felt in 1994, and early 1995.--SexyKick 04:43, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

I wouldn't object to that if we have the sources, but bear in mind those may be more appropriate for the game articles themselves. When we're looking at the game library in itself, some highlights can be mentioned, but the focus should really be on the strength of the library as a whole. I'd love some reliable time-appropriate console reviews, though. Something that will help here is I've finally turned up a Retro Gamer article on the 32X, which I think will be a great resource that could help push this article to at least A-class status. FA might be a little bit of a distant reach just because there's not a ton of coverage out there due to the 32X's failures, but it's certainly not completely impossible. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 05:13, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

That's a very good point.--SexyKick 15:38, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

EGM console "review", Virtua Racing Deluxe review scores, and some classic game magazine reviews for Star Wars Arcade. That covers the console, and the three launch games.--SexyKick 16:45, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

That's pretty brilliant, SexyKick. I'll have to make sure to make use of the EGM reviews, for sure. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 14:14, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

What's really surprising though, is GamePro giving perfect 100's to Doom and Virtua Racing Deluxe. On paper, you'd think it was one of the greatest console launches of all time.--SexyKick 14:49, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Amazing how letting the console run its course changes everything, isn't it? Okami was a very highly reviewed game with lots of 9s and 10s, and it was a commercial failure. Some things just don't catch on in the long run, and the 32X is the perfect example of that. I'd say on its own merits it was a nifty idea, but over time it wasn't ever fleshed out well and the upcoming Sega Saturn meant that it never would be. On the side of article writing, I'd like to start today with some more fleshing out; I could have this ready for an FAC pretty soon with some significant expansion. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 15:13, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

In hindsight, it's a real let down that the Saturn had to come out at all, much less six months early. There was a cool X-men game coming out, and Virtua Hamster...the 32X is a quirky little thing, but Sega could have went through to Dreamcast by positioning themselves as the purposefully "budget 32-bit entry", and all their systems would have benefited from the lack of Sega Saturn.--SexyKick 15:26, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Article Needs Neutrality

This article is very biased against 32X, and entirely ignores its early success and most of the favorable media coverage from the time. The opening statement of referencing the console as a "poor man's" console is defamatory. It would be more accurate to state that the console was intended as a stop gap between Genesis and Saturn, so that Sega fans could play arcade games like Virtua Fighter and Star Wars arcade for realitively cheaply. Considering the $99 price tag of Genesis games with SVP chips, the $159 price of a 32X was much more reasonable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.164.193.253 (talk) 00:47, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

I somewhat agree with your post, but Sega themselves called it the "poor man's entry" in 1994, themselves. So that is certainly in no way defamatory, and is very accurate.--SexyKick 03:46, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

What we're really looking at here is media hype. I found some more from GamePro and some from Joe Miller that I'll be throwing in on the positive side, but let's face facts here: the 32X is what it is, and overall both past and present it's been very negatively received. That makes it a difficult topic to promote neutrality; it has to have more negativity because of the amount of content that speaks of it negatively versus the amount of positive feedback, which makes it seem negative, but promote too much of the positivity and the bias is that much more evident. The sentence provided by the IP actually seems to add a positive bias to me; there's nothing in the sourcing that says they made it to play arcade games relatively cheaply. Sources actually indicate it was a response to the Atari Jaguar amidst concerns that the Sega Saturn would not make it to market soon enough to compete. Their poor support and lack of quality game development are what really killed the add-on, not to mention the poor timing. Also, how can you say its early success is ignored when the amount of orders (over 1 million) is mentioned plain as day? Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 19:29, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

I agree Red. That's why I only somewhat agreed with the first poster. I like the additions you made, I think it's worth adding what EGM wrote about the 32X launch, and that all three of the launch titles received high praise from reviewers upon release. But, actually, I'm kinda confused about what was actually available at launch. I guess Kent's book says Cosmic Carnage was a launch title, but I don't recall that at the time. And I haven't seen anything else that says that. Doom, Star Wars, and Virtua Racing were the launch titles I'm aware of.--SexyKick 22:41, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Kent's book mentions six launch titles. Cosmic Carnage was kind of a poor quality title, and if you saw Doom, Star Wars Arcade, and Virtua Racing, would you necessarily pay attention to Cosmic Carnage? Probably not. The GamePro source even mentions that Sega planned to have 12 available, and that didn't happen. Anyway, I just finished my reworking; this is probably on par with an FA candidacy now that will hopefully go better than the Sega CD one did a couple of weeks ago. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}_{remember the past...} 22:58, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

I think I could give my support instantly based on the fact you've addressed everything minor I found issue with already, yes. I think listing all six launch titles from Kent's book would be good for completeness.--SexyKick 23:24, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Kent's book doesn't list the six. It just lists the three I already put in. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...}_{check out the Sega task force} 23:31, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Based on List of Sega 32X games, only 7 games were released in 1994: Corpse Killer, Cosmic Carnage, Night Trap, Star Wars Arcade, Space Harrier, Virtua Racing Deluxe, and Doom. Do the math, and that's your launch lineup except for one. That agrees with what Kent has, and since the system launched in November it's completely feasible that one of those releases was between the launch and January of 1995. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...}_{check out the Sega task force} 23:34, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm willing to bet Space Harrier was the odd one out.--SexyKick 02:55, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

@Red Phoenix:Here and maybe this too are a couple good sources. The first has the launch title information.--SexyKick 21:28, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

A shame that this probably isn't a reliable source, as it's really what I remember from the time and how I think of the 32X.--SexyKick 06:37, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, that one's not; it's more or less a blog entry. I worry that that one has some bias, too. I mean, video game media always will be tinged one way or another (hop over to Sega CD and compare IGN's bashing with 1UP.com's immense praise), but the presence of editing staffs is supposed to keep that balanced - Retro Gamer's "retroinspection" article actually bashed the 32X hard for "killing Sega", but I pulled out pieces of praise to try and balance it out with all of the negative feedback already provided, and explicitly stated when an idea came from Scot Bayless, a former Sega producer. For myself, it's always been about the opportunities presented, and sometimes wasted. Saturn, for instance, represented a bold move to try and fix the issues in Japan, where Sega actually lost to both the Famicom and PC Engine, and was really successful there, but nowhere close around the rest of the world. I'd like to redo the Saturn article at some point, but that will take a lot of time to do and I'm still trying to get this and the Sega CD article through FACs. Red Phoenix ^{let's talk...}_{check out the Sega task force} 13:43, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Redundancy

In this sentence, "the product was originally conceived as an entirely new console", is "originally" necessary? I had deleted it, but User:SexyKick added it back in with the comment, "the word helps the reader understand more".

merriam-webster.com defines "conceive" to mean (in part):

b : to cause to begin : originate <a project conceived by the company's founder>

If readers don't understand that "conceive" refers to the origin of something, then we should change that word instead of adding in a redundant "originally". I think we can trust readers to understand what "conceive" means or to look it up for themselves. Comments? Ground Zero | t 16:49, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Okay, how about "first conceived" ? Because then it was conceived as something else afterwards.--SexyKick 05:57, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Or how about "conceived" as in "cause to begin" or "originate"? This is something that only happens once. Adding a modifer seems to be a way of hinting at something else, which we really shouldn't do. We should tell the reader explicitly what is happening, rather than hinting at it. Fortunately, the very next sentence tells us that it was converted into something else, so the reader knowns right away what is happening. The modifer in the first sentence is completely unnecessary -- the issue is dealt with right away so there is no room for ambiguity, and no need to suggest that the product was originated twice or begun twice, which doesn't make sense. Ground Zero | t 13:18, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Collected Works interviews

The Collected Works book has an interview with Shinobu Toyoda of Sega of America and Sega of Japan, Hayao Nakayama, the former says 800,000 units of the 32X were sold (specifically in the US), and the latter says 5 million units of the Mega-CD were sold worldwide.--SexyKick 15:45, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Actually, the five million figure does not come from an interview, it is merely claimed by the author of the text, Keith Stuart. That number continues not to be credible based on sales figures announced in that time period. Indrian (talk) 17:21, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

If you have the book, can you add the citation for the 32X stuff?--SexyKick 04:38, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Sure, I will try to do so tomorrow. Indrian (talk) 08:08, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Japanese name

Is there any evidence that the 32X was distributed in Japan as Sūpā Sātī Tsu Ekkusu? This video is a Japanese promo of the 32X and repeatedly calls it Sūpā San-jū-ni Ekkusu. For now, I'm going to add a citation needed tag to that part. If none comes up, I'll replace the claimed name with the name that is actually heard in that video. Devil Master (talk) 21:25, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Sega Neptune

I wonder if the info about the Sega Neptune is worth inclusion? Yes, it was probably constructed and planned for release. But because that stuff never made the market, it's like everything about that device never happened. The device also did not affect the 32x in any way. 172.56.16.239 (talk) 19:58, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

I've reverted for discussion and until you have consensus. Apologize for edit summary. I didn't realize you had already brought the edit to discussion.(Littleolive oil (talk) 17:02, 1 July 2015 (UTC))

Actually, Sega's proclivity for announcing things that never came to fruition damaged their reputation with retailers. It's not that easy to sweep history under the rug.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 18:54, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Final release

I've removed the following phrase: "with the add-on's final release being Darxide in PAL territories." I'm not completely sure whether this is meant to essentially say

a) "In PAL territories, the 32X's final release was Darxide, though it was not the final release globally."

or

b) "The 32X's final release was Darxide. It was released only in PAL territories."

but either one has problems. (a) places a peculiar focus on the PAL realm, since the article makes no mention of what the final 32X release was in North America or Japan. (b) is, as far as I can tell, flat-out incorrect. All the sources I've seen indicate that Darxide was released in 1995, while the North America-only Spider-Man: Web of Fire was released in 1996. Those are the dates they were copyrighted, and a review in GamePro confirms Web of Fire didn't come out until 1996. The cited source does indeed say Darxide was "the last 32X title released worldwide", but I find the source's reliability concerning release dates highly questionable given that it says Darxide was released in 1995 at the top and 1996 in the body of the article.--Martin IIIa (talk) 19:11, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

GameFan award

In regards to this statement: 'The add-on won GameFan's "Best New System" award for 1994.' Please correct me if I'm overlooking something, but wasn't the 32X the only new system in 1994? A non-contested award doesn't seem notable.--Martin IIIa (talk) 01:58, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

@Martin IIIa: Technically PC-FX, Sega Saturn and PlayStation were all released in Japan very late 1994. (Of course PS1 and Saturn didn't hit NA till 1995). Amiga CD32 also saw its NA release in 1994 (But was in EU in 1993). GameFan gave overall best system to 3DO, which while released late 1993 in NA, was released 1994 for JP and EU. The only truly fresh 1994 release in North America does appear to be 32X though. -- ferret (talk) 02:07, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

I don't think the word "non-contested" applies, considering that award was contested in other years. Firstly, as with all awards created by gaming magazines, the awards from GameFan were held at a certain time annually. Because of that, any new system released prior the awards will have great chance of winning. Anyway, it's not that GameFan was trying to deny other systems their awards. 2605:E000:2E54:800:3041:92C6:5FCF:5A52 (talk) 03:34, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, I should have clarified. I know there were consoles which debuted in 1994 in Japan (and in the case of the Amiga CD32, in Canada), but while it of course doesn't say so, I would assume that the award was for new system(s) in the U.S. Looking over the other categories, all of the awards, and even all the nominations, seem to have gone to U.S. releases, as one would expect given that GameFan was a U.S. publication.--Martin IIIa (talk) 15:57, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

I don't think it matters wether a system is released in the U.S. or another country. The thing is the system has to be tested in the country of which magazine's reviewers are based in for a chance of the award. Therefore it's not like there's any bias from the magazine. With that said, I think the award is worth adding in the page. Mentioning an award from a media is no different from mentioning a review from a media. 2605:E000:2E54:8F0:F1FC:30DB:83DE:BF3 (talk) 23:59, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

I didn't say anything about bias. I'm saying I don't think they were including systems not released in the U.S. in the awards. I didn't say we shouldn't mention awards either. However, we do have to differentiate between notable awards and awards like Best Hummingbird-Based Shooter for the 32X. While the name "Best New System of 1994" may not immediately sound funny, once you take into account that there is only one system in the running for that title it is just as humorously meaningless an award.--Martin IIIa (talk) 04:40, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

There's probably nothing wrong with an award involving only one candidate, especially there's nothing else available to be a candidate. As to why systems not released in the U.S. aren't in the awards, perhaps it's like this. If a system does not get released in the U.S., the U.S. reviewers can't test it for review. If you're going to review something, you don't read or listen to someone else's review, you need to actually test it. 2605:E000:2E54:8F0:F043:1166:E4CE:6546 (talk) 04:40, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Wrong, no. But not notable either. As to the non-U.S. systems, as exemplified by the GamePro review in this very article, U.S. reviewers not only got to test systems before they were released in the U.S., but before they were even finished. But I don't think they'd expect most readers to be happy with an award going to a system that they can't buy yet.--Martin IIIa (talk) 18:14, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

"Kalinske has stated that Sega of America did not receive enough support from Japan in game development"

That's a gross twisting of his words. Let's say I'm in charge on a project, and I can't do it on my own so I ask you to do XYZ. You don't want to do XYZ, but you do it anyway. I then tell people you didn't support me enough. You'd be rightly annoyed at how I've distorted your contribution.

Kalinske stated he thought the Japanese team were reluctant to do what the American team wanted. He's never said they should have done more, or that they didn't do what was asked, or that they didn't do enough. I don't understand how paraphrasing reluctance into lack of compliance helps this article. 86.164.19.237 (talk) 19:39, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

It's clear that Sega of Japan's support for the 32X, particularly with regard to software development, was lackluster at best. Any suggestion to the contrary would constitute an extremely marginal, WP:FRINGE viewpoint, totally at odds with virtually all RS. You are correct to note that "being reluctant to do something but still doing what's asked is not the same as 'not doing enough'," but such an interpretation is inconsistent with the context provided by the source for the Kalinske quote, which also confirms that "Development kits came out very late, leaving little time for game development before the 32X release."TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 04:49, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Game Cartridge Image?

So, the article states that the 32X plays different ROM cartridge from then Console it plugs into.

Shouldn't an image of the Cartridge be added to the article?

especially a side-by-side of the 32X and a Genesis cartridge, showing that it's not compatible.

and/or a side-by-side of a 32x cartridge from Japan Region vs one from the North America Region (i do not know if this system had design change for cartridges based on Region)2603:7080:CB3F:5032:89E4:4993:A239:5457 (talk) 18:56, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Problem there is going to be you’ll need shots of cartridges without the game art stickers to avoid any copyright issues. Otherwise not a bad idea. Red Phoenix ^talk 00:15, 17 September 2022 (UTC)