The Official Turbografx 16 Thread!

[roots.genoa]

8 hours ago, jgkspsx said:

The CD version has the whole game and the high resolution mode but I think it has something wrong with it too.

You mean like an intro movie that lasts an hour? 😝

[Bill Loguidice]

Keith Courage looked great for the time, but wasn't a particularly compelling game. It was definitely not the best choice for a pack-in, but then I'm not sure what really would have been considering what was ready at launch. Every other launch title was very genre-specific, i.e., beat em up, racing, shooting, pinball, golf, etc. Some great games for sure, but perhaps too hyper-focused. Keith Courage at least was a bit ambiguous and fairly long-lasting. Of course, when you that versus a game like Legendary Axe, which was superior in just about every way, it's hard to argue that that shouldn't of gotten the nod instead to make a much more dramatic and definitive statement.

 

I also agree that the westernization policy definitely hurt both in what was  brought over and how and what wasn't. Surely in retrospect they would have done things completely differently, but it can't be said that at least initially, the thought process was at least sound (if misguided) for the conditions of the time.

[turboxray]

On 5/20/2023 at 3:46 PM, jgkspsx said:

I agree with you it would not have been a good pack-in, but the US release has the whole entire game - it just drops the high resolution mode that the Japanese half releases had. The CD version has the whole game and the high resolution mode but I think it has something wrong with it too. I think there’s no perfect version of the game (though also no bad version of the game).

 

That said, I don’t know if there’s any Turbografx game I’ve played more.

For one, the US port doesn't "drop" the high resolution mode. It still uses it. It just clips the sides a tiny bit - that's not the same thing as a resolution "drop". It still uses the higher resolution "pixel size". The issue with the US version is the vram speed - they set it to a slower mode and that resulted in more flicker. That Japanese hucards didn't have this slower vram speed and thus have less flicker.

 

 The CD game uses the EXACT same settings of the US hucard - slightly clipped display and slower vram settings/more flicker. They all use high res mode (actually, it's mid-res mode because the PCE has an even higher res pixel mode that is super rarely used).

 

 

 Keith Courage was an adequate pack-in; it was an easy platformer-ish game that tended to appeal to broader audiences. SHMUPS were NOT a general appeal genre. Blazing Lazers or R-Type would not have made a great general purpose pack-in. I got a TG16 in early 1990. I still had an NES, and continued to buy games for it. And Keith Courage graphics blew away anything I saw on my NES at the time. Because how clean the video was, compared to the NES, back then I was convinced that game was running with a higher resolution than any NES game (it's not) - the colors, the detail, etc. I mean, that seems silly now - but back then KC was a huge step up from the gritty, graininess, lower color, low detail, NES graphics. KC game itself was basic, but still looked nice at the time.

 

Things changed by the time the Turbo Duo came out, with Sonic and SMW being top tier titles as pack-ins being the new standard, and Gate of thunder (along with ALL those other games) made it very attractive - pack-in overkill hahah. But judging the original TG16 release with KC as the pack-in choice just seems silly. I know people bring up SMB.. but NO ONE I knew gave two craps about SMB. It was a throw away game. You couldn't give that thing away. Even before SMB 2 had come out, everyone and their mother had SMB.. and it was just to tie you over until you got a real game. That's literally how EVERYONE I knew viewed it. I got sick of that game after about a week of playing it (summer break). With KC, even after playing it and getting bored of it - I'll still boot it up and look at the graphics. The stone-rock cliffs in the town areas looked so realistic. And the ice-cubes in the later town level looked amazing real at the time. I just remember looking at them and thinking how much better the graphics were going to get, and it was an exciting time.

 

 Edit: Knowing the history of the US group that was in charge of the TG16 release (ex-Atari hardware group, who's mentality was companies made money on hardware not software).. Dungeon Explorer probably would have made a great pack-in. Single player, it's pretty fun, general appeal... now you have given a reason for TG16 owner to want (need) to purchase a TAP and extra pads. And it fits with the time line too (in Japan, it came out in 3-4-1989).

Edited May 22, 2023 by turboxray

[+GoldenWheels]

If the US release hadn't been run by Atari guys at all, I imagine they'd have been better off period.  To be fair, this logic goes for a lot of Atari releases too....

[+jgkspsx]

Dungeon crawlers on consoles back then were pretty weird and didn’t sell great. I think as a pack in it would have been a poor fit except for selling to adults. Which might have been a better play… 

[Zoyous]

Didn't the PC Engine already have a pretty massive library of games by the time of the TG16 launch? I wonder if there were any Japanese releases that didn't get localized at the time of the Western launch, that maybe should have been - and maybe there would have been a better pack-in candidate among those. I had a friend back in the day who used to occasionally get an imported copy of Famitsu, and we would look in amazement at the PC Engine coverage and try to translate bits of the text. I remember obsessing over one platformer in particular that I'm not sure ever made it to the West. But we were hyped. We always wanted that arcade-quality experience in a home console and this console definitely looked like it delivered.

 

But from a marketing perspective, it seems to me that NEC sort of worked from the design blueprint established by the Sega Master System. They did use much better box art, but they also imposed a design style using a single font for every game (even if the game was an arcade title with an already-recognizable logo) and every piece of hardware. As a designer, I do find that kind of uniformity appealing. In fact, I think the SMS design style is really nice as well. But it is quite heavy-handed to discard the original artwork and impose the use of one single font across every release for the system. And it's not really age-appropriate for an audience of kids and teens who want excitement and intensity, not refinement and subtlety. On the other hand, Sega of America seemed to learn from the results of the previous generation to not impose that kind of design restriction for the Genesis/MD launch and so you had a much more understated grid background that carried over but now there were full color graphic logos for games and much larger, more beautiful and elaborate paintings for the box art.

 

20 hours ago, turboxray said:

I know people bring up SMB.. but NO ONE I knew gave two craps about SMB. It was a throw away game. You couldn't give that thing away. Even before SMB 2 had come out, everyone and their mother had SMB.. and it was just to tie you over until you got a real game. That's literally how EVERYONE I knew viewed it.

That's a good example of what people call being "in a bubble" or "an echo chamber." So you knew a handful of people who didn't like Super Mario Bros. and didn't think it was anything special? I'm no Nintendo fan, but I think it's a fairly objective statement to say that SMB had a massive cultural impact among gamers as well as being very influential in game design.

[+jgkspsx]

44 minutes ago, Zoyous said:

That's a good example of what people call being "in a bubble" or "an echo chamber." So you knew a handful of people who didn't like Super Mario Bros. and didn't think it was anything special? I'm no Nintendo fan, but I think it's a fairly objective statement to say that SMB had a massive cultural impact among gamers as well as being very influential in game design.

I literally never owned another game for the NES during its lifetime. My parents wouldn’t buy us anything else. It was all SMB/Duck Hunt all the time.

[Lost Monkey]

I kinda get what turboxray is saying about SMB - it was like the Combat of the NES.  Such is the life of a pack-in. 

[Bill Loguidice]

3 minutes ago, Lost Monkey said:

I kinda get what turboxray is saying about SMB - it was like the Combat of the NES.  Such is the life of a pack-in. 

Having one of the greatest games of all-time and a game that was quite unlike anything else out there at the time as a pack-in was among the primary drivers for the NES's massive success relative to its era, so we really shouldn't underestimate the value of a good pack-in, particularly since we can point to consoles with poor pack-ins and how they ultimately fared. Again, Keith Courage did the TG-16 no favors, but of course there were other issues at play for the platform in the US. 

[+GoldLeader]

22 hours ago, turboxray said:

 

 Keith Courage was an adequate pack-in; it was an easy platformer-ish game that tended to appeal to broader audiences. SHMUPS were NOT a general appeal genre. Blazing Lazers or R-Type would not have made a great general purpose pack-in. I got a TG16 in early 1990. I still had an NES, and continued to buy games for it. And Keith Courage graphics blew away anything I saw on my NES at the time. Because how clean the video was, compared to the NES, back then I was convinced that game was running with a higher resolution than any NES game (it's not) - the colors, the detail, etc. I mean, that seems silly now - but back then KC was a huge step up from the gritty, graininess, lower color, low detail, NES graphics. KC game itself was basic, but still looked nice at the time.

 

Things changed by the time the Turbo Duo came out, with Sonic and SMW being top tier titles as pack-ins being the new standard, and Gate of thunder (along with ALL those other games) made it very attractive - pack-in overkill hahah. But judging the original TG16 release with KC as the pack-in choice just seems silly. I know people bring up SMB.. but NO ONE I knew gave two craps about SMB. It was a throw away game. You couldn't give that thing away. Even before SMB 2 had come out, everyone and their mother had SMB.. and it was just to tie you over until you got a real game. That's literally how EVERYONE I knew viewed it. I got sick of that game after about a week of playing it (summer break). With KC, even after playing it and getting bored of it - I'll still boot it up and look at the graphics. The stone-rock cliffs in the town areas looked so realistic. And the ice-cubes in the later town level looked amazing real at the time. I just remember looking at them and thinking how much better the graphics were going to get, and it was an exciting time.

 

 Edit: Knowing the history of the US group that was in charge of the TG16 release (ex-Atari hardware group, who's mentality was companies made money on hardware not software).. Dungeon Explorer probably would have made a great pack-in. Single player, it's pretty fun, general appeal... now you have given a reason for TG16 owner to want (need) to purchase a TAP and extra pads. And it fits with the time line too (in Japan, it came out in 3-4-1989).

 

My take is somewhat in the middle of all of this.  When the NES came out,  my friend said he got one and I had to check it out.  He was right and it blew me away and video games were back!  I couldn't wait to play Super Mario Bros., but also instantly bought "real" games too.  Probably part of why I Love the oft-Hated Deadly Towers so much;  It was one of my first purchases along with Arkanoid and Contra.

 

Now,  advancing the timeline a little bit, the same friend who turned me onto the NES,  said he just got a Turbografx 16.  I went over and he showed me Kieth Courage and it blew me away!  I knew I wanted a Turbografx right then,  but I didn't know when I'd get one (2006 or 2007 as it turns out,  LOL)...I had another group of friends who we'd hang out with and drink beer etc. and they had a TG16 too so someone was always playing Blazing Lazers in the background at parties over there.  Our guitarist in the band I was in at the time used to say "I F-ing Hate that game!".  This was when we all realized that it is No Fun to watch someone else play a game.

 

Then,  shortly after,  as if to complete the Trilogy...My friend says I have to come over.  He just got a Sega Genesis!

[Razzie.P]

Turbo Everdrive Pro is back in stock over at Krikzz.com, if anyone here is interested. 

 

I missed a recent chance to get one and doing a search to see if I could find it in stock anywhere, I saw a LOT of gripes n' grumbles (probably reddit) about how quickly they went out of stock, so nice to see them back.  

[SlidellMan]

As far as TG-16 shmups are concerned, I like Paranoia/Psychosis.

[turboxray]

4 hours ago, Zoyous said:

That's a good example of what people call being "in a bubble" or "an echo chamber." So you knew a handful of people who didn't like Super Mario Bros. and didn't think it was anything special? I'm no Nintendo fan, but I think it's a fairly objective statement to say that SMB had a massive cultural impact among gamers as well as being very influential in game design.

 30 to 40+ people is HARDLY a handful of people. That's statistically enough to say it's simply not just anecdotal. I didn't say people DIDN'T like SMB. Stop trying to read into things. I said people didn't think it was anything special - after a while. No one talked about it. No one asked to borrow it (we would trade-lend games to each other). Obviously, that wasn't DAY 1 of the game being released; I'm not saying SMB didn't have an impact when it first came out. The bundle literally made it a house-hold name. I'm saying it didn't take long for that SMB1 hype to wear off - better, more complex and interesting games were coming out. I mean, right on the heels of SMB1. Why the heck would you want to play SMB when you had games like Contra, Zelda, Megaman, Castlevania, Kid Icarus, Metroid, Rygar, etc. Even when you beat those games 10x over, you still went back and played them over replaying SMB1. SMB1 didn't hold up. It was quickly pushed aside in the crazy pace of competing titles that offered more. SMB2 and SMB3 did NOT suffer the same fate.

 

 Look, I'm not debating the popularity of Mario or the importance of SMB1.. I'm simply stating that SMB got boring fairly quickly. And everyone had it. It held no perceived value. 2nd hand shops in my city would give you less than a $1 for it (in 1987) - they had too much stock on hand. The cultural impact of SMB1.. is that everyone had it. It really does say something that Nintendo of America didn't bring over the Japanese sequel. Look, we were just kids. We didn't understand the importance of gameplay mechanics that SMB1 brought and the influence it had on game design. And why would we? That is an academic look at games in general. So I'm not even speaking to that. The fact that you conflate the two, means you're missing the point entirely.

 

 tldr; it didn't take long for the appeal of SMB1 to wane, simply because it was on the cusp of old game design and new game design, and newer games coming out right after SMB1 - proved to be much more complex, engaging, etc. They leapfrogged SMB1. SMB1 as a pack-in very early on, was a huge success for Nintendo. SMB1 as a pack-in, when other more complex games quickly left it in the dust by comparison, relegated it to just a simple (albeit famous) little "bonus" game. Now put that into context; 1989 when the TG16 and Genesis came out in the US.. what was the competition doing for a pack-in? SMB1. In that respect, KC and AB were the equivalent (I'd say better) at the time. The perception at that time was that you got a fun little "bonus" pack-in game. Because that was the perceived narrative of game system sales. 

 

[Bill Loguidice]

2 minutes ago, turboxray said:

 30 to 40+ people is HARDLY a handful of people. That's statistically enough to say it's simply not just anecdotal. I didn't say people DIDN'T like SMB. Stop trying to read into things. I said people didn't think it was anything special - after a while. No one talked about it. No one asked to borrow it (we would trade-lend games to each other). Obviously, that wasn't DAY 1 of the game being released; I'm not saying SMB didn't have an impact when it first came out. The bundle literally made it a house-hold name. I'm saying it didn't take long for that SMB1 hype to wear off - better, more complex and interesting games were coming out. I mean, right on the heels of SMB1. Why the heck would you want to play SMB when you had games like Contra, Zelda, Megaman, Castlevania, Kid Icarus, Metroid, Rygar, etc. Even when you beat those games 10x over, you still went back and played them over replaying SMB1. SMB1 didn't hold up. It was quickly pushed aside in the crazy pace of competing titles that offered more. SMB2 and SMB3 did NOT suffer the same fate.

 

 Look, I'm not debating the popularity of Mario or the importance of SMB1.. I'm simply stating that SMB got boring fairly quickly. And everyone had it. It held no perceived value. 2nd hand shops in my city would give you less than a $1 for it (in 1987) - they had too much stock on hand. The cultural impact of SMB1.. is that everyone had it. It really does say something that Nintendo of America didn't bring over the Japanese sequel. Look, we were just kids. We didn't understand the importance of gameplay mechanics that SMB1 brought and the influence it had on game design. And why would we? That is an academic look at games in general. So I'm not even speaking to that. The fact that you conflate the two, means you're missing the point entirely.

 

 tldr; it didn't take long for the appeal of SMB1 to wane, simply because it was on the cusp of old game design and new game design, and newer games coming out right after SMB1 - proved to be much more complex, engaging, etc. They leapfrogged SMB1. SMB1 as a pack-in very early on, was a huge success for Nintendo. SMB1 as a pack-in, when other more complex games quickly left it in the dust by comparison, relegated it to just a simple (albeit famous) little "bonus" game. Now put that into context; 1989 when the TG16 and Genesis came out in the US.. what was the competition doing for a pack-in? SMB1. In that respect, KC and AB were the equivalent (I'd say better) at the time. The perception at that time was that you got a fun little "bonus" pack-in game. Because that was the perceived narrative of game system sales. 

 

I think your premise is pretty weak. No one was borrowing or trading for Super Mario Bros. because everyone already had it, and with 40+ million copies in existence by the end, why would there be any market value? And all it says about Nintendo not bringing over the little-changed Japanese Super Mario Bros. 2 (until the SNES days) is that they thought it was too hard for American tastes, which really was a thing then. Isn't it also telling that the Western Super Mario Bros. 2 is the best-selling non-pack-in game on the NES? The first game must have REALLY made a lasting impact, no? 

Again, Keith Courage looked and sounded pretty decent, but it had arguably weak gameplay. Nothing about it was memorable. The same can't be said of Super Mario Bros. 

And I also don't agree with the idea that you got a little "bonus" pack-in game. Pack-ins were important. As just one example, the ColecoVision wouldn't have made the impact it did without Donkey Kong. Just look at the thud the Atari 5200 landed with comparatively for packing in Breakout. It's the same reason why pack-in games kept evolving over time, like Sega packing in Sonic. You go with what moves consoles. Even today, where there are typically no pack-in games, bundles with pack-ins still appear over time. In short, it was important and can still be important. So no, Keith Courage did the TG-16 no favors, much like Cybermorph on Atari Jaguar (to use just one example). Neither game was bad, but neither game generated much enthusiasm.

[turboxray]

1 minute ago, Bill Loguidice said:

I think your premise is pretty weak.

That's okay. I think your critical thinking skills are weak.

 

Quote

No one was borrowing or trading for Super Mario Bros. because everyone already had it, and with 40+ million copies in existence by the end, why would there be any market value? And all it says about Nintendo not bringing over the little-changed Japanese Super Mario Bros. 2 (until the SNES days) is that they thought it was too hard for American tastes, which really was a thing then.

 Obviously you don't understand how perceived value plays back into the pack-in - if the public perception (gamers) is that it's not valued as much, then it doesn't add much value as a pack-in. Its status DID get downgraded and relegated to that of a "simple little game". Do I really need to spell all the details out to you? You honestly think difficulty was the reason why SMB2J was not released in the US? Did you EVEN play NES games during that era? hahah, what. And for the sake of this unrealistic/ridiculous argument, if that were true.. a simple level editor to make it easier would have been CAKE walk to do. Howard could have asked the original devs to make it easier. I mean, that actually happened to some NES games.

 

Quote

Isn't it also telling that the Western Super Mario Bros. 2 is the best-selling non-pack-in game on the NES? The first game must have REALLY made a lasting impact, no? 

Do you make that same qualification for ALL other nes games too? Try gain.
 

Quote

Again, Keith Courage looked and sounded pretty decent, but it had arguably weak gameplay. Nothing about it was memorable. The same can't be said of Super Mario Bros. 

Yes.. in highsight. In today's world, where none of the context and expectations of being right smack in the middle of that era, have any influences anymore - we re-discover things about games and their designs, controls, etc. Sure. Because we can evaluate games completely outside all those expectations and such, and we find that some games don't age well and others age better. Context is key here. But that doesn't mean you get to re-imagine history just because we hold different attitudes and perspectives nowadays compared to then.

 

Quote

And I also don't agree with the idea that you got a little "bonus" pack-in game. Pack-ins were important. As just one example, the ColecoVision wouldn't have made the impact it did without Donkey Kong. Just look at the thud the Atari 5200 landed with comparatively for packing in Breakout. It's the same reason why pack-in games kept evolving over time, like Sega packing in Sonic. You go with what moves consoles. Even today, where there are typically no pack-in games, bundles with pack-ins still appear over time. In short, it was important and can still be important. So no, Keith Courage did the TG-16 no favors, much like Cybermorph on Atari Jaguar (to use just one example). Neither game was bad, but neither game generated much enthusiasm.

 Pack-ins became important when Nintendo decided to bundle their flag-ship game with the SNES on release. And when Sega bundled their amazing flag-ship game Sonic with the Genesis. If you actually followed along with that I was saying, is that perception and modelling of systems changed; from "simple little bonus games" to full-fledged system seller pack-ins. That is LITERALLY my whole point. In the context of the TG16 being release, that was not the retail sales mentality of game companies. So in that context, KC at release was the norm for pack-ins. Trying to find some grand fault in that decision is incorrect and ignores all context of the time/era/whatever. It has nothing to do with "doing favors". It simply delivered expectations of the gaming market at the time. The release of the Jag and the release of the TG16, are not comparable. 

[+jgkspsx]

Super Mario Brothers sold more copies on the 3DS eShop alone than any Turbografx game has ever sold on any platform ever. Possibly all platforms combined. So there’s that.

[Bill Loguidice]

50 minutes ago, turboxray said:

That's okay. I think your critical thinking skills are weak.

 

 Obviously you don't understand how perceived value plays back into the pack-in - if the public perception (gamers) is that it's not valued as much, then it doesn't add much value as a pack-in. Its status DID get downgraded and relegated to that of a "simple little game". Do I really need to spell all the details out to you? You honestly think difficulty was the reason why SMB2J was not released in the US? Did you EVEN play NES games during that era? hahah, what. And for the sake of this unrealistic/ridiculous argument, if that were true.. a simple level editor to make it easier would have been CAKE walk to do. Howard could have asked the original devs to make it easier. I mean, that actually happened to some NES games.

 

Do you make that same qualification for ALL other nes games too? Try gain.
 

Yes.. in highsight. In today's world, where none of the context and expectations of being right smack in the middle of that era, have any influences anymore - we re-discover things about games and their designs, controls, etc. Sure. Because we can evaluate games completely outside all those expectations and such, and we find that some games don't age well and others age better. Context is key here. But that doesn't mean you get to re-imagine history just because we hold different attitudes and perspectives nowadays compared to then.

 

 Pack-ins became important when Nintendo decided to bundle their flag-ship game with the SNES on release. And when Sega bundled their amazing flag-ship game Sonic with the Genesis. If you actually followed along with that I was saying, is that perception and modelling of systems changed; from "simple little bonus games" to full-fledged system seller pack-ins. That is LITERALLY my whole point. In the context of the TG16 being release, that was not the retail sales mentality of game companies. So in that context, KC at release was the norm for pack-ins. Trying to find some grand fault in that decision is incorrect and ignores all context of the time/era/whatever. It has nothing to do with "doing favors". It simply delivered expectations of the gaming market at the time. The release of the Jag and the release of the TG16, are not comparable. 

This is a waste of time with you, but here goes anyway. Super Mario Bros. was a reason to get a NES for as long as it was a pack-in. It made the system an attractive purchase. Keith Courage was never that game. So yes, it was "wasted" in the sense that very few people wanted a TG-16 for Keith Courage. It was there. It existed. You got it "free." Super Mario Bros., as among the greatest pack-in games of all-time, was a value-add, not something to merely take up space or check off the box of "has a game included." 

And the examples that I gave were quite valid. Donkey Kong as a pack-in made the ColecoVision a significantly more attractive get. Super Breakout for the Atari 5200 didn't. Cybermorph for the Jaguar really didn't. Keith Courage for the TG-16 really didn't. Sega pivoted to including Sonic as a pack-in for a reason. Nintendo included Super Mario World as a pack-in for the SNES for a reason. Same thing with Super Mario 64 and the Nintendo 64. Not only were these technical showcases for their respective platform's technical features, but also an important showcase for how to use the controllers in many cases (much like the Atari VCS's Combat or the games with the Fairchild Channel F and Bally Astrocade - all important showcases for how to use the controls). Keith Courage was not a comparable choice versus the best pack-in games. Period. Until pack-in games were no longer a thing, they tended to be quite important (contrary to your clearly wrong statement above), and could certainly negatively impact a console's perception going forward. Just take a look at the Sega Saturn's launch here in the US. First impressions mean something. Keith Courage's first impression was "meh." It certainly didn't break the console, but it certainly didn't make a stellar first impression.

[MrTrust]

1 hour ago, turboxray said:

Yes.. in highsight. In today's world, where none of the context and expectations of being right smack in the middle of that era, have any influences anymore - we re-discover things about games and their designs, controls, etc. Sure. Because we can evaluate games completely outside all those expectations and such, and we find that some games don't age well and others age better. Context is key here. But that doesn't mean you get to re-imagine history just because we hold different attitudes and perspectives nowadays compared to then.

 

The original Super Mario Bros. was a revelation in '86 when most of us were coming off of playing Colecovision and 5200 if we were lucky.  Most people's gaming experience was still 2600 if anything.  "Simple little game" my ass.  Multiple paths, warps, secrets, 32 distinct levels... This was a paradigm-shifting game and everybody who wasn't you and your friends acknowledged it.

Keith Courage was a middling, clunky ass game even by the standards of its day.  This is just a selection of action/adventure games from that same year on other platforms

Ninja Gaiden

Mega Man 2

Faxanadu

The Battle of Olympus
Wonder Boy III: The Dragon's Trap

 

Many critically-acclaimed classics, some of which can still sell to this day and all of which would blow KC's doors in any day of the week and twice on Sunday.  Plus, the NES still had a lot left in the tank after that.  Compared to any of those, KC is sluggish, simplistic, and boring.  I remember my dad getting the TG-16 back when.  We already had Genesis, so there was nothing impressive about it, technically.  Most of the games felt last-gen compared to what Sega had, and not even particularly good last-gen compared to the better games that were coming out on NES.  Bonk's Adventure and Legendary Axe, that's all I remember anyone caring about back then.

 

1 hour ago, turboxray said:

Pack-ins became important when Nintendo decided to bundle their flag-ship game with the SNES on release. And when Sega bundled their amazing flag-ship game Sonic with the Genesis.

 

Atari packaged Pac-Man with the 2600 in '83; flagship title.  Coleco packaged Donkey Kong with the CV in '82; flagship title.  Nintendo packaged SMB3 with the NES in '92; flagship title.  Game Boy came with Tetris in '89; flagship title.  Genesis came with Altered Beast; flagship title.  After the period you referenced, launch pack-in games were largely phased out in favor or retailer bundles.  My first Playstation didn't come with a pack-in.  N64 didn't.  Dreamcast, XBox, Gamecube, PS3, 360, Switch... no pack-ins.  Nothing you're saying here makes any sense.

 

So, no, your rant here is just not the case, and it is not the case that people expected some boring ass, throwaway piece of shit to be packaged with their console up until the SNES and Sonic.  If you and your friends were really more impressed by trash like KC than with a perennial classic like SMB, there's no helping you.  You could at least spare everyone the ridiculous attitude.

 

1 hour ago, turboxray said:

That's okay. I think your critical thinking skills are weak.

 

LOL.  LMAO, even.   

 

[Zoyous]

2 hours ago, turboxray said:

 30 to 40+ people is HARDLY a handful of people. That's statistically enough to say it's simply not just anecdotal. I didn't say people DIDN'T like SMB. Stop trying to read into things. I said people didn't think it was anything special - after a while.

That's actually a great example of statistically insignificant in light of 40 million+ units sold. You'd have to increase that number by four orders of magnitude to even get to 1% of the total userbase... which still isn't stat sig. Anyway, don't get snippy with us. You should conduct yourself in this forum like we're sitting in person, enjoying a few drinks and talking about games. Sometimes we agree and sometimes we disagree, but we keep up a better atmosphere here than other parts of the internet.

 

To me the more eye-opening aspect of this discussion is just how great a pack-in game SMB really was. Like I said, I don't like Nintendo. This is coming from a Sega kid: Has there ever been a better pack-in game? Not only did it hit at precisely the right time to usher in an era when platformers ruled for several years, it opened up the eyes of everyone who played it to new aspects of game design - "secrets" and seemingly game-breaking tricks that we soon realized were actually part of the intentional design of the game. You mention several other games that surpass SMB - at least in terms of graphics, in some cases in terms of depth/ambition of design. But SMB essentially taught players a lot of the unspoken language of game design that enabled players to understand the depth of those games that followed. And some of those titles you mention don't really have the same degree of active playerbase today. You really think Rygar and Kid Icarus hold up better?

 

As for why Nintendo didn't bring over their own Super Mario Bros. 2, I've only read about it but my understanding of it is that it's visually almost identical but its difficulty has been increased to a diabolical degree that NOA figured, probably correctly, would not have been well-received in the US at that time.

[Tanooki]

Wow there is no arguing with turbo when he goes turbo off the rails into some delusional angry rants of that magnitude.  That whole series of irrational posts about SMB goes into into the more modern spectrum of the internet reviewer website edge lord that will throw a 5 at a game because everyone is wrong for kissing its ass and giving it a 9 or a 10.   Good job being edgy, problem is most that commentary is angry, ham fisted, and bucking history to the level of watch a slow burn into delusion.

 

Funny giving Bill there the dressing down on perceived value, customer interaction and reaction and what not...given his position with atgames among others.  Maybe, just maybe someone who deals with the gaming medium as a job and moving such related product in a way to be enticing to others to buy it may have a clue more than your rants.  If anything Super Mario Bros for years of the NES was the epitome of perceived value, and not a value of next to zero as a throw away.  The game booted Gyromite and Duck Hunt in the deluxe version into the sunset and took ones place, teamed with the other, to make the biggest value added statement of the generation and largely ones after as a pack-in.  They may look and seem basic, but that style of basic was appealing to millions, tens of millions, moving so many into those hands.  Specialty packs against(sports, etc) it took the 3rd Mario to pitch it to the curb as the key pack-in with the challenge set.  The true perceived value of SMB(and DH) is very plain and obvious.  You had to move a system, sure at a time they did sell it even less on its own with NOTHING, but that didn't last.  Why?  SMB+DH.  That one game both added immense reason to buy a NES and be happy with it for quite awhile(like Wii Sports did decades later) but also gave many pause enough to not buy the shitty game-less cheap box and pony up for the Action Set to get that two pack gem.

 

Super Mario World was not the first and didn't move the needle anymore than packing in Super Mario Bros/Duck Hunt or potentially even really SMB3 did either though given the time that dropped (post genesis) that would be debatable.  Super Mario World helped move millions of SNES systems as a freebie of sorts in the box, but SMB+DH did it much longer, to millions more consumers, and sustained its usability far longer too than Mario World did.  Nintendo quickly went on from SMW seeing it wasn't enough to then giving in box (or mail away) ironically Super Mario All-Stars, and later making the SMAS+SMW pack-in only cart which hah...has Super Mario Bros on it and it drove people nuts getting that yet again in 16bit style.

[NE146]

I mean you have to look at its time. It was actually 1985 and Joust/Robotron were my favorite games when my brother went with a group to Japan, and stayed with a host family. When he came back he told me about a home video game system (and game) they had that was so amazing, he actually had a hard time describing it. He was talking about going to different worlds, going underground, visiting castles, finding things that change you and give you powers, and finding tunnels and secrets.... to the point I remember thinking it sounded more like a movie or show, vs any type of video game. Of course it was SMB. And later on in life when we finally did play it, it was totally and fully groundbreaking vs. anything we had ever played before.. and yes it was fun, and stayed fun for a LONG TIME. There is zero friggin doubt about that. To try and downplay the game itself, and its impact is pointless. It was like the big bang of Eddie Van Halen/Jimi Hendrix in the rock guitar world, where perceptions and expectations were just changed forever. 

 

THAT SAID, I will fully 100% admit that eventually I did find SMB boring (I don't even like the current batches of Mario platform games), but by then years had passed and all the newer video games had already taken their cues from it.

Edited May 24, 2023 by NE146

[roots.genoa]

What's surprising? Most Atari, SEGA, Sony, and NEC fans are Nintendo haters; I see examples here every day.

Being myself a former SEGA fan, I didn't enjoy the SMB formula until the NSMB series, but I tend to be open minded and respect opinions, unless they're blatantly bad faith.

[DragonGrafx-16]

5 minutes ago, roots.genoa said:

What's surprising? Most Atari, SEGA, Sony, and NEC fans are Nintendo haters; I see examples here every day.

Being myself a former SEGA fan, I didn't enjoy the SMB formula until the NSMB series, but I tend to be open minded and respect opinions, unless they're blatantly bad faith.

And I don't get the Nintendo haters either. The PC Engine/TG-16 is my favorite platform... but guess what... the NES is my second favorite!

[roots.genoa]

In France it's mostly Amiga fans that are Nintendo haters, and they particularly hate Mario. The hilarious thing is they always get overexcited when a SMB game gets ported to Amiga (or any other micro computer actually) - take that, Nintendo! - they bitch about it when Nintendo has the game removed - f*** you Nintendo! - then celebrate again when the game is obviously still available on the web - take that Nintendo! They really sound like small children to me. 🤦‍♂️

[akator]

25 minutes ago, roots.genoa said:

What's surprising? Most Atari, SEGA, Sony, and NEC fans are Nintendo haters; I see examples here every day.

I disagree that most Atari, Sega, Sony, and NEC fans are Nintendo haters.  I'm not sure how you reached this conclusion, as I have found that not to be the case at all.  The majority of classic gamers I know enjoy many systems from many companies and publishers and very few of those people hate anything broadly — they may hate select games, but rarely an entire system.