Nintendo Classic Mini announced

[Atariboy]

I think you'd be the only one to find it enjoyable to have seen that set be left incomplete. I for one am glad to see that Nintendo didn't leave any glaring holes of major significance where their 1st party lineup is concerned. The major pre-NES arcade ports are here, all three primary Super Mario Brothers titles are here, Metroid is here, both Zelda's are here, Kirby's Adventure is here, etc.

 

All that was left behind for domestic NES releases are sports games, a few sequels to less beloved franchises like the StarTropics sequel, Zapper titles that would've resulted in a substantially higher price point, and B tier releases like Mach Rider and Clu Clu Land. Sure beats the NES Remix model where it was obvious they were planning for a sequel from the start.

 

Since this has been bugging me and I realized it too late to edit my earlier post, I of course forgot at least one big exception here with the 1st party release of Tetris.

 

So there is at least one major domestic 1st party NES release that doesn't fall into those categories yet didn't make the cut for the NES Mini, for obvious reasons.

Edited July 25, 2016 by Atariboy

[Flojomojo]

Can't we all just get along?

 

Bill Loguidice is great! We should be nice to him.

 

AtGames wants to be better.

 

The Sega Genesis reproduction toys are cheap and fun as is. Even though they haven't changed in years, even if they sound bad.

 

Competition from Nintendo, assuming they come out with a quality project, should make the 2017 Genesis something better.

 

Please hurry, AtGames. The 30th anniversary for the MegaDrive's Japanese launch will be in October, 2018.

[Atariboy]

AtGames is releasing a 2600 portable, so any past missteps have automatically been forgiven as far as I'm concerned.

[Flojomojo]

Since this has been bugging me and I realized it too late to edit my earlier post, I of course forgot at least one big exception here with the 1st party release of Tetris.

 

So there is at least one major domestic 1st party NES release that doesn't fall into those categories yet didn't make the cut for the NES Mini, for obvious reasons.

 

Dr. Mario is a decent stand-in for Tetris. Personally, I can live without NES Tetris.

If Nintendo ever does a tribute Gameboy machine, I hope they get the rights to Tetris again.

[Andromeda Stardust]

https://www.nintendo.com/nes-classic

 

It says donkey kong jr not math.

Clearly click bait. That's just Atgames peddling their crappy Genesis clones. They've been doing this for years with their shoddy clone chips, bad audio, and incompatibility with game saves.

 

 

Is it true that the AtGames clone doesn't allow carts to save?

Yes.

 

 

 

 

Ouch. Unfortunately for Atgames, this is not a new opinion. Poor Atgames will have to step up its game. They've released the same thing over and over again. This would have been a good year to invest in better quality. This is from a few years ago:

Ass, Ass, Ass! Clearly the NES Mini will Ass-Ass-inate this piece of Ass!!!

[Andromeda Stardust]

 

Since this has been bugging me and I realized it too late to edit my earlier post, I of course forgot at least one big exception here with the 1st party release of Tetris.

 

So there is at least one major domestic 1st party NES release that doesn't fall into those categories yet didn't make the cut for the NES Mini, for obvious reasons.

Tetris is not first party. It was put out by Elorg, which later became the Tetris Company.

 

 

 

Dr. Mario is a decent stand-in for Tetris. Personally, I can live without NES Tetris.

If Nintendo ever does a tribute Gameboy machine, I hope they get the rights to Tetris again.

I prefer the Tengen version myself!

[Bill Loguidice]

AtGames is releasing a 2600 portable, so any past missteps have automatically been forgiven as far as I'm concerned.

 

If all the plans fall in place for the 2600 console for next year, you'll be even happier.

[0078265317]

AtGames is releasing a 2600 portable, so any past missteps have automatically been forgiven as far as I'm concerned.

 

 

No mention of this on google...

[Bill Loguidice]

 

 

No mention of this on google...

 

It's coming. I'll post a link to the official press release when it hits tomorrow.

[NE146]

That ATGames

 

AtGames is releasing a 2600 portable, so any past missteps have automatically been forgiven as far as I'm concerned.

 

Good god.. I bought their Genesis portable with high hopes. I can't believe how much of a disappointment that thing is. Totally off & bonkers sound (e.g. with Sonic 1). Lousy compatibility with the roms I tossed at it (e.g. Contra Hard Corp.). I was like wtf is this shit. That leaves me leery about the chances with the VCS.

[Atariboy]

Tetris is not first party. It was put out by Elorg, which later became the Tetris Company.

 

It most certainly was a Nintendo release.

 

I assume you're nitpicking and this was your way of telling me that the programming wasn't done in-house, but it's still irrelevant. The version that I was referencing to on the NES (i.e., not the Tengen release) was Nintendo published and that makes it a 1st party release since Nintendo can hardly be a 3rd party publisher for their own platform.

 

No mention of this on google...

 

Check out the AtariAge search engine for 'Atari portable'. The top hit is the one that you'll want to read.

Edited July 25, 2016 by Atariboy

[SoulBlazer]

 

It most certainly was a Nintendo release.

 

I assume you're nitpicking and this was your way of telling me that the programming wasn't done in-house, but it's still irrelevant. The version that I was referencing to on the NES (i.e., not the Tengen release) was Nintendo published and that makes it a 1st party release since Nintendo can hardly be a 3rd party publisher for their own platform.

 

I think what he was trying to say is that while Nintendo had the rights to the console version of Tetris back THEN, when the game came out in the late 80's (in fact the major lawsuit between Nintendo and Tengen was over the game, which they both thought they had the rights to and released their own version off), NOW the rights totally belong to the creator and his company. Hence if Nintendo wants to re-release their NES version of Tetris in any format they have to licence it from them and they decided for one reason or another not to do that. It was easier and cheaper to them, I suspect, to put Dr. Mario on there as the 'puzzle game' and call it a day as they have full rights to that.

[wolfy62]

The Intellivision Flashback is awesome as it brought me great controllers for my Intellivision 2!

 

Worth more to me by far then I actually paid for it.

[Flojomojo]

I prefer the Tengen version myself!

I prefer the Mac version to any console version! But the game boy one is iconic.

[Andromeda Stardust]

 

It most certainly was a Nintendo release.

 

I assume you're nitpicking and this was your way of telling me that the programming wasn't done in-house, but it's still irrelevant. The version that I was referencing to on the NES (i.e., not the Tengen release) was Nintendo published and that makes it a 1st party release since Nintendo can hardly be a 3rd party publisher for their own platform.

 

 

 

I think what he was trying to say is that while Nintendo had the rights to the console version of Tetris back THEN, when the game came out in the late 80's (in fact the major lawsuit between Nintendo and Tengen was over the game, which they both thought they had the rights to and released their own version off), NOW the rights totally belong to the creator and his company. Hence if Nintendo wants to re-release their NES version of Tetris in any format they have to licence it from them and they decided for one reason or another not to do that. It was easier and cheaper to them, I suspect, to put Dr. Mario on there as the 'puzzle game' and call it a day as they have full rights to that.

Okay maybe it was the Game Boy version that had ELORG on the title screen. But you and I both know that Nintendo did not retain the rights to distribute Tetris on Virtual Console or otherwise. In fact the Game Boy game was removed from 3DS VC. Lucky for me I downloaded it while it was available!

[Andromeda Stardust]

As long as Nintendo isn't stupid and puts 50hz versions on there. Still happens from time to time on the Wii U's Virtual Console.

I wouldn't put it past them to do this. I made a mini write-up of this on the NintendoAge thread that bears repeating, on why I think there's a possibility Nintendo may choose to use the 50Hz versions:

 

 

Problem with the European release Classic NES Mini is we do not know if Ninja Gaiden and Super C are censored or not. The scene should not matter much today but if they use the PAL ROMs they would also need to do 50Hz or the timing and pitch would be off. Nintendo used the "gamers get the same experience as bitd" approach with the Wii Virtual Console using the PAL ROMs, a decision which was heavily criticized such that they started using NTSC ROMs with Wii-U and 3DS service. But you never know with Nintendo...

HDMI certainly opens the possibility for 60Hz playback, but until we know more details, I would consider it a gamble to preorder the Euro versions.

[Atariboy]

 

But you and I both know that Nintendo did not retain the rights to distribute Tetris on Virtual Console or otherwise.

 

That's why I said that it "didn't make the cut for the NES Mini, for obvious reasons".

 

And looking at my copy, I didn't see that company name at all on my box or the title screen (Which incidentally clearly shows that Nintendo owns that version of Tetris; They obviously don't own the Tetris brand or game concept, but the code for their NES release clearly is Nintendo owned).

[Great Hierophant]

I think Nintendo would want to keep things as cheaply as possible and release one system for the world. Given that the NES was never a huge success in PAL regions, there may not be sufficient numbers of true bitd-PAL fans that would care that "their" version was not included to make a huge dent in the sales. Many NES fans in PAL territories came to appreciate its virtues rather later in life. Every HDTV sold in PAL countries with an HDMI connection can display 60Hz.

 

I can't wait for someone to complain the emulation is off because the screen does not flash on Zelda 2 when you lose your last life or the screen stays orange rather than flashes when you obtain a Koopa kid's scepter in SMB3. It isn't off, Nintendo altered the ROMs to reduce or eliminate rapid color changing effects to reduce the likelihood of these games causing epileptic incidents.

[+Random Terrain]

It isn't off, Nintendo altered the ROMs to reduce or eliminate rapid color changing effects to reduce the likelihood of these games causing epileptic incidents.

Nice to know that Nintendo finally agrees with me.

[CatPix]

 

That's why I said that it "didn't make the cut for the NES Mini, for obvious reasons".

 

And looking at my copy, I didn't see that company name at all on my box or the title screen (Which incidentally clearly shows that Nintendo owns that version of Tetris; They obviously don't own the Tetris brand or game concept, but the code for their NES release clearly is Nintendo owned).

Elorg never touched any code/programming for any console.

Elektronorgtechnica was just the Soviet-made body in charge of handling the rights to the Tetris concept outside of the Comecon, when it became clear that it was goign to be a big thing.

Previously, the game was just distribued freely all across the Soviet Union and the Comecon, and the first Western publisher was the English Andromeda, licencing from an Hungarian programmer that had programmed a ZX Spectrum version of Tetris. And this is the start of much confusion about the rights for the game, as other companies approached Andromeda to obtain the licence, or the Hungarian publisher.

But as far as we're concerned, Elorg never programmed anything, they just sold the rights to anyone wanting them. The only game that came with only Pajinov's name and Elorg name was the PC release (I do'nt think Pajinov's original Elektronika-60 version was sold internationally).

 

http://vadim.oversigma.com/Tetris.htm

 

So, yes, while Nintendo had to program the NES and GB versions themselves, it doesn't make them the Tetris licence owners, and certainly not a first-party title. Maybe a 2nd party title? (what is a 2nd party title? )

[godslabrat]

Strictly speaking, the "second party" in the sale of a video game is the consumer. Until the advent of small devs and homebrewers, a "second party game" would be meaningless. The term eventually came to be used for third party developers who had a special partnership or shepherding by the primary developer. For example, Rare developing the DKC series, or Capcom developing the Oracle games.

[Schizophretard]

These details confuse me. I just think of first party and third party titles in the context they were originally used like the games Atari published to the 2600 were first party("official") and everyone else that started publishing games for it were third party("unofficial"). I think in those terms with other consoles. Then I view all the licensing, who holds what copyrights, etc. as just other details on top of that but doesn't change rather a game is first or third party. In other words, I would consider all NES games that are made in Nintendo's own cartridge shells with their seal of quality on them as first party games.

[Gentlegamer]

These details confuse me. I just think of first party and third party titles in the context they were originally used like the games Atari published to the 2600 were first party("official") and everyone else that started publishing games for it were third party("unofficial"). I think in those terms with other consoles. Then I view all the licensing, who holds what copyrights, etc. as just other details on top of that but doesn't change rather a game is first or third party. In other words, I would consider all NES games that are made in Nintendo's own cartridge shells with their seal of quality on them as first party games.

 

The industry business model changed (Nintendo changed it), it's way past time for you to update your terminology.

 

Licensed games, regardless of manufacturing details, are third-party. What in pre-crash days was called third-party is now unlicensed.

[high voltage]

All PC games are unlicensed?

[Gentlegamer]

All PC games are unlicensed?

 

We're talking about console, closed platform, games.

 

But yes, PC games are "unlicensed" in that they don't need permission from either the hardware manufacturers or the OS publisher.

 

Hence the legitimate concern about Microsoft trying to create a closed platform like Apple with "apps" for Windows.