Talk:List of Xbox 360 games

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Famicom style controller This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
Mid This article is on a subject of mid priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.
VG To-do:
WikiProject Xbox This article is within the scope of WikiProject Xbox, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's articles on Xbox related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale.
High This article has been rated as high-importance on the project's importance scale.
Archive
Archives
2007


Contents

[edit] Exclusive?!

This is a list of Xbox 360 games. When you say exclusive, it means exclusive to the 360. If it's scheduled for another system, INCLUDING the PC, it is not exclusive and should not be listed. I took out some ones which were lamely commented with "Yes! It's MS exclusive!" which I know aren't 360 only--Alan Wake, Command and Conquer 3, Bioshock and Oblivion. The PC and the 360 are as different as, say, the PS3 and the PSP as far as this list is concerned--sure they're both influenced by the same company, but that's not what people care about. They care about whether it's out for that system and only that system. I know you guys want to beef up the list of exclusive things, but this "MS exclusive, therefore 360 exclusive" stuff can't be allowed to happen :/ -Twile

This is area of debate, but over at the List of Wii games so far the definition of exclusivity is that the game has not been released on any other home system. PCs, Consoles, and Handhelds are viewed as separate planes. Thus if a game comes out for both the 360 and PC, or Wii and DS, it is still exclusive to that console. PCs, Consoles, and Handheld systems are different enough in terms of features, intended audience, and games to be considered separate entities from each other. Although I do see your point as well as to people wanting it to mean it is on just one system overall. Thing is though, for some games even if they have been released on both PC and the 360, it's still regarded as exclusive to the Xbox or Xbox 360; i.e. Halo, Halo 2, most likely Gears of War, Halo 3 someday. Additionally, when I look at an exclusive column for a console and it says 'No', I assume that it has been ported to the PS3 or the Wii, not that it's available on the PC as well. Again, I do see your point as well, and I agree to it, sort of. Just wanted to bring up some opposing points which I felt were relevant. I feel that additional discussion is needed on this matter, but until then I will (weakly) support your opinion. -Digiwrld1 05:53, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
I think that separating PCs, consoles, and handhelds into their own planes is a very silly idea. Nintendo is promoting the idea of interoperability between the Wii and DS, Sony does it with the PS3 and PSP, Microsoft is doing it with the PC and Xbox 360 to the point where you can play against other people on both platforms. Target audience and such is also a moot point--the PS3 audience is a good bit different from the Wii audience, and I'd wager that the Xbox 360 audience is much closer to the PC audience than the Wii vs PS3 difference. Here's what I think the best test is. Go up to a gamer who knows a good bit about games from the past few years. Ask of Oblivion is an Xbox 360 exclusive. Or ask if Halo is an Xbox exclusive. If you ask any of my friends, they'll say "Ummm, no, those both came out on PC. Though Halo took a while to make it there" or something to that effect. As average people understand it, they are not exclusive to that one platform. --Twile 04:31, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Oh yes, thanks for agreeing with me. Not trying to argue against you, just trying to reinforce the opinions I gave before. --Twile 04:34, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
The article is a list of Xbox 360 games, I do not see the word "exclusive" anywhere in the title. One can weed the lists to make it two sets on the page, one set being "exclusive" the other being multi platform, but for people looking for what all games can be played on Xbox 360- a single article/list compilation should be done. If list of Wii games is faulty it does not mean that we replicate it's faults on Xbox too. Haphar 16:27, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
The point isn't to create a separate list of titles exclusive to the 360 and another for those titles that are multiplatform. The concept is to establish an easy way for users to see whether a game is exclusive to the system or not. Additionally, it helps unify the three seventh generation consoles under a united format, something that hasn't been done before. Although the 360 doesn't use the exact same format as the List of Wii games and the List of Playstation 3 games, sortable tables and and exclusive column are the standard features. Furthermore, do not claim that the List of Wii games is faulty without looking at it. We've worked extremely hard on that article to present users with an organized, informative, and usable list of games. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.181.225.103 (talk) 03:28, 23 March 2007 (UTC).
Errrrr...perhaps you shouldn't comment if you don't know what I'm talking about. I'm not SAYING this is supposed to be a list of EXCLUSIVE titles. I'm saying that it has an exclusive column which indicates whether they're exclusive to the Xbox 360 or not. Why this is important, I don't really know, but it is there and I feel it should be accurate. My issue is that exclusivity in this case seems to mean between consoles, whereas I think many readers would see the list and go "Oh, Alan Wake is only for the Xbox 360? I thought it was coming out for the PC... Bioshock too. Maybe I should get a 360 then." They see exclusive, they assume it means the only place you can get it. --Twile 04:21, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Twile I wasn't arguing against you, I was making the statement against Haphar. I mentioned before that I understand your point, and in fact I went through the list and edited it so that the games that are out for the 360 only are listed under exclusive. Perhaps I may have missed something, and I'd appreciate it if you could amend it. As of right now hitting the sort column I do believe that the games listed as exclusives actually are exclusives, no exceptions. I'm sorry if I caused you some confusion, just wanted to let you know that I wasn't trying to refute your points or anything. Hopefully everything is satisfactory here--perhaps someone with more knowledge of 360 games can find out the exclusivity of those games which are not yet classified? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.181.225.103 (talk) 09:22, 23 March 2007 (UTC).
Um, I'm not disagreeing with you. Look closer. See, we both indented twice. If I were replying to you I'd indent three times as you did when replying to me. I too was making a statement to Haphar. --Twile 13:27, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Surely the nature of the "exclusivity" should be incorporated into the article, no? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 130.209.6.40 (talk • contribs).

  • Shows up a year late*

Does it matter if the games are console exclusive or not? That means we have to change many other lists as well. In all seriousness, who really cares? Rampant fanboyism is almost as bad as vandalism. If something is good, it's good. Denying it's worth because of fanboyism is nonsensical.Sage1989 (talk) 15:34, 14 February 2008 (UTC)Sage1989

The information isn't hurting anyone. Some people do care and would like to see which games are only available on certain consoles. Anyhow the list of PS3 games has a similar column, so for uniformity's sake, either they both stay, or they both go. xenocidic (talk) 15:42, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] "Semi" Exclusive

I see that too many people from both sides are arguing over what games are qualified as "exclusives". To settle the argument, I suggest that we create a new type that is between exclusive and non-exclusive: "Semi-exclusive". Semi-exclusive are titles that are on Xbox 360 and Windows but not PS3 or Wii. (I have already started changing some of the titles up to the end of "B".) In addition, some titles are not yet announced to be on Xbox 360 or on another platform but are listed as "non-exclusive" -- I've changed those to "TBA" under the "Exclus" category. --ktchong 29 October 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.136.156.157 (talk) 08:48, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

There needs to be a changing of this rule. Partial exclusive tells you nothing besides being a marketing ploy for Microsoft. There needs to be a solution to how to designate what other consoles/systems the games appear on. Otherwise, what is the point of labeling it exclusive? --67.208.226.52 (talk) 15:43, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Partial was explained succinctly prior to your edits -> Partial exclusivity means that the Xbox 360 is the only console upon which the game is available. This makes complete sense and is important information for users who are only interested in consoles. xenocidic (talk) 15:49, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
You said it was because of the console war, that doesn't make sense who cares so much about that? If you want it to be correct, why not keep them at no? If it's only purpose is for the fanboys then change all the partial to yes. If you want to make an informative list, why not include the other systems it is on? Anything is better than the partial system.--67.208.226.52 (talk) 16:00, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Console exclusive

As a compromise, I've changed all references of "Partial" exclusive to "Console" exclusive, for clarity. xenocidic (talk) 16:25, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

This is fine, in my opinion. As has been discussed before, the conceptal usage of this term really is "not available on other game systems", but I agree that there seems to be continued confusion here when it comes to the same game being available on the PC. Incidentally, the side claim that "the PS3 can run Linux, Linux can run Windows, and Windows can run these games, meaning the PS3 can play them!" is ridiculous; there's a world of difference between being able to "run Windows" and being able to "run a DirectX Windows game at a playable speed". --Slordak (talk) 17:23, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
I can play, for example Condemned: Criminal Origins at full speed through linux on my PS3 without any hacking. So what to do about those games? --67.208.226.52 (talk) 03:43, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
But to do this you would need to emulate XP code on your PS3 via Linux, which is in affect hacking. I'm sure given time someone could write a PS3 emulator for a highly spec'd PC. Would that mean that PS3 games should then no longer be deemed exclusive? I wouldn't say that Mario 64 is not exclusive to the N64 just because I can run it on my PC. In my opinion, specifying "console" exclusive clarifies any confusion users may have with this article. Unless you feel the need to specify in the intro that- "even though some games were developed with the intention of being exclusive to the PC and Xbox 360, some can infact be emulated on a PS3". I feel that is an unnecessary point to make, and would affect all articles of this nature. It could perhaps be mentioned in a PS3/emulation article of it's own. DemonCleanerUK (talk) 05:43, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
I've added the qualifying term "native mode" and a footnote explaining the bit about PS3 running Windows. xenocidic (talk) 13:56, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
No, you don't have to run XP code on your PS3 to do it. As for Mario 64, well for one thing the List of N64 games doesn't even include an exclusive column. Plus you have the Wii's VC and Super Mario 64 DS to limit the exclusives. The whole runnings games on systems they're not supposed to run one wasn't really a sticking point with me, I just pointed it out. The larger issue at hand is a better way to define exclusive. It's kind of like if you had the release date to have just the Year and the Day. Kind of pointless. It tells you a bit more information than just the year, but not really enough to justify adding the Day with also including the month.--67.208.226.52 (talk) 14:04, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
"No, you don't have to run XP code on your PS3 to do it. " so how is it done? in my opinion the present compromise and qualifying statements resolves this issue. the List of PS3 games article has been modified to match for uniformity. xenocidic (talk) 18:32, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Major overhaul including Japanese and European date columns

I'm looking at a complete reworking of this list to bring a level of consistency with the wii and ps3 lists. Below I have what would be the start of the list (based on the List of PlayStation 3 games). This will include links to official game website (or IGN if not available) as well as links to the corresponding international Xbox game page for each date. I feel that IGN can be pretty unreliable when it comes to game dates. However I did notice that the date for 2006 Fifa World Cup was wrong on the US Xbox website, so I linked to IGN instead. Hopefully this is just the odd error on Microsoft's part, but it may be best to check with the corresponding wikipedia articles to make sure it is the only exception.

Title Developer Publisher Exclus. Flag of Japan Japan Flag of Europe Europe Flag of the United StatesFlag of Canada North America
100 Bullets → TBA D3 Publisher TBA TBA TBA TBA
1XR → Infinite Games TBA Yes TBA TBA TBA
2006 FIFA World Cup → EA Canada EA Sports No 02006-04-2727 April 2006 [1] 02006-04-2828 April 2006 [2] 02006-04-2424 April 2006 [3]
2 Days to Vegas → Steel Monkeys TBA No TBA 02008-12December 2008 [4] 02008-12December 2008 [5]
A-Train HX → Artdink Artdink Yes 02006-12-2121 December 2006 [6] Unreleased Unreleased
Absolute: Blazing Infinity → Idea Factory Idea Factory Yes 02007-03-2929 March 2007 [7] Unreleased Unreleased
Ace Combat 6: Fires of Liberation → Namco Bandai Games Namco Bandai Games Yes 02007-11-011 November 2007 [8] 02007-11-2323 November 2007 [9] 02007-10-2323 October 2007 [10]
Age of Conan: Hyborian Adventures Funcom Eidos Interactive Partial 2008
Age of Pirates: Captain Blood Akella Playlogic Partial 2008
Alan Wake Remedy Entertainment Microsoft Game Studios Partial 2008
Alliance: The Silent War Windward Mark Interactive TBA TBA 2008
Aliens FPS (working title) → Gearbox Software Sega No 2009
Alien RPG (working title) → Obsidian Entertainment Sega TBA TBA
Alive Ubisoft Ubisoft No 2008
All-Pro Football 2K8 Visual Concepts 2K Sports No 02007-07-1616 July 2007
Alone in the Dark 5 Eden Studios Atari No 2008
America's Army: True Soldiers Red Storm Entertainment Ubisoft Yes 02007-11-1515 November 2007
Amped 3 2k Sports 2k Sports Yes 02005-11-1515 November 2005

If there are no objections, I will move all the dates already present to the "North America" column in preparation of the game being updated, so as to not completely destroy the list while this process is undertaken (as shown from "Age Of Pirates" onwards). Some games will need to be removed from the list if they are no longer in development, but these should probably be discussed in a new forum before deletion (ie. 2 Days to Vegas seems to be PC only according to the official website). I considered a genre column, but thought it was unnecessary.

Any other feedback is welcome before I make the initial change. DemonCleanerUK (talk) 23:55, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I can see the uses of such an update. One thing that I don't think is necessary though is the extra links which I believe are useless unless the respective game page does not exist. Having a link for each game is completely unnecessary and they can easy be found or added in on the respective game pages. Also while it isn't really that big of a deal I believe with the columns the North American one should probably be first as I believe more games have been released in North America then the other regions and the system was released in North America first but like I said it doesn't really make that much of a difference. Silver Sonic Shadow (talk) 02:45, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
I arranged the list in the same order as the PS3 list, which orders the regions alphabetically. I feel this is the fairest solution and keeps some consistency between the articles. Just to clarify - I should remove the additional links from "games title" column AND from the "date" columns? Should the links to the date be placed in the corresponding game article (if present) instead then? I'm just a little confused on what needs to be referenced in an article like this. DemonCleanerUK (talk) 14:32, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Yeah I noticed that your doing it in the same order as the PS3 list which I don't mind but if the regions are ordered alphabetically as you say then Europe should be before Japan. I was just saying that as I figured the Japan list being first is going to look a little weird as a good portion of the games released for the 360 seem to have not been released in Japan. For the links, like Slordak just said too, they are unnecessary unless Wikipedia doesn't have an article on that game. The only time it will need to have a reference is when Wikipedia doesn't have an article on it. If you notice however that the necessary info or link is not in the main game article feel free to edit it in there instead. Silver Sonic Shadow (talk) 05:36, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
My bad, must have made that assumption about it being alphabetical without actually looking. I will put the North American column first, followed by the European, and lastly the Japanese. DemonCleanerUK (talk) 07:46, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Yes, please only include external links when the Wikipedia page does not exist. Otherwise, including this redundant information tends to really bloat up the size of the list and increases the time to load the page. --Slordak (talk) 20:16, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Picture format

Added a "Picture format" column. This should help users to gain a quick overview of game's maximum picture resolution (e.g. 720p, 1080i, 1080p). This is helpful when considering a purchase of a new TV set.--Kozuch (talk) 11:55, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

How does this help to decide what TV to buy? The vast majority of games are 720p/1080i maximum anyway. There are only two games (that I know of) that have been confirmed to support 1080p natively; Street Home Court and Virtua Tennis 3. The 30 odd games that state 1080p on their box are actually just upscaling the resolution to 1080p - think Halo 3 [11]. All the games you can play on your 360 (inluding old xbox ones) can be scaled to 1080p via the xbox hardware, so I'm struggling to find the need for something like this. Besides, the table is bloated enough already. DemonCleanerUK (talk) 16:06, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Unlike the Playstation 3, the Xbox 360 doesn't have any quirks with native game resolutions and television types. Every game will be scaled correctly for the selected output resolution. As DemonCleanerUK notes, the table is already quite bloated and does not need another column of dubious value. I've gone ahead and reverted this change. --Slordak (talk) 16:09, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Okay, did not know that. Added the information to Xbox_360#Output_resolution_scaling.--Kozuch (talk) 11:55, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Seventh generation exclusivity

I'm uncomfortable with this article defining exclusivity to what is available on seventh generation consoles. With this definition, titles like Burnout Revenge, Gun, King Kong, Hitman: Blood Money, and most games released before November 2006, should be changed to exclusive (or partial exclusive) even though they are available on the PS2 and/or Gamecube. I feel that someone glancing at this list would assume that exclusivity refers to all consoles. I realise that this may again bring up the debate as to whether partial exclusivity should even be included in the first place. But I think the term "console exclusivity" can and should be used as companies like Microsoft use it from time to time in their press releases. Also, the introduction should define whether handhelds are included in this exclusivity definition. DemonCleanerUK (talk) 23:01, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

I think you're probably right; games like Burnout Revenge probably shouldn't be considered exclusive, even if the Xbox 360 version is significantly enhanced as compared to the versions for the previous console generation. I haven't seen anyone make the claim that, say, Guitar Hero II is exclusive. So yes, I really think a game should only be "Console Exclusive" if it really is a console exclusive. These games would all get a "No". --Slordak (talk) 18:35, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
I will remove this term then. And to those who are unconvinced with the validity of the term "console exclusive", here are some links to the press releases from xbox.com [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] and playstation.com [17] [18] DemonCleanerUK (talk) 20:59, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Date format

Some of the dates are in the wrong format and don't allow for sorting... e.g. Battlefield Bad Company ShadowFusion (talk) 15:06, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I fixed BF:BC, feel free to fix others yourself if you feel comfortable doing so. xenocidic ( talk ¿ review ) 15:31, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Split

Should we split the this page into two different ones for example one page should be # - N the 2nd should be O - Z .--Lbrun12415 04:19, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

A nice idea in theory, but in doing so would effect the usability of the sortable date columns. DemonCleanerUK (talk) 02:21, 3 June 2008 (UTC)