Posted: 9/27/2005 10:03 AM
Post subject: Nintendo "Seal of Quality" - what means?
Quote
Bisqwit
Editor, Active player (297)
Joined: 3/8/2004
Posts: 7469
Location: Arzareth
Warp and I were discussing about video game flops of the past [1], and he told me that nowadays there are strict tests and quality conforms a new game has to pass in order to be published for XBox. The official NES game cartridges have(had) a "Seal of Quality" tag in them. Does anyone know what were actually the requirements for a game to get this tag? (Money?) [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_commercial_failures_in_computer_and_video_gaming http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_crash_of_1983
Posted: 9/27/2005 2:20 PM
Quote
Bag_of_Magic_Food
He/Him
Player (206)
Joined: 5/29/2004
Posts: 5712
Oh... I figured all they needed for the seal was to be licensed by Nintendo.
put yourself in my rocketpack if that poochie is one outrageous dude
Posted: 9/27/2005 3:58 PM
Quote
Truncated
Editor, Reviewer, Experienced player (979)
Joined: 4/17/2004
Posts: 3109
Location: Sweden
Arcade TAS of 2023 Sega TASer of 2021 Sega TAS of 2021
The Nintendo seal of quality was originally a way to stop the console from being flooded with low-quality games, which is what had happened to earlier consoles. Actual requirements? Since their console was called Family Computer (Famikon), there was limits to what level of blood and violence could be shown, nudity or sexual depictions, smoking, and religious symbols. Also, there were limits to how many titles a company could release in a year (5), something which was soon circumvented by game makers by creating smaller spin-off companies. Apart from granting seals this was enforced technically by the 10NES lockout chip. A cartridge without this chip would not boot on a standard NES console. This is something they started reevaluating when they lost market shares to Sega due to removing the blood and toning down the fatalities in Mortal Kombat. Today some Nintendo games are rated M. At least that my fairly recent understanding of the situation. I got all my info from here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo_Seal_of_Quality http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo_Entertainment_System http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10NES
Posted: 9/27/2005 8:19 PM
Quote
hopper
Joined: 11/15/2004
Posts: 804
Location: Canada
That may be technically correct, but it doesn't explain the deeper motivation. Nintendo wanted to make sure that they got licensing fees from every game made for the console, so they created the lockout chip. Lots of people made low-quality and, yes, pornographic games for the Atari 2600, but what was worse... they didn't pay a dime in licensing fees! The Seal of Quality tells you that the publisher paid Nintendo for a license. Atari circumvented the lockout chip and produced games that didn't have the Seal of Quality under the Tengen brand, but Nintendo took them to court and forced them to stop. It's probably true that forcing companies to license their games also forced them to produce higher quality games because they had to sell at least enough games to get their licensing fees and other expenses back, and the requirements Nintendo created for the Seal of Quality may have helped, too. But let's be honest. The Seal of Quality is your assurance that Nintendo has made some money off of this game.
TASing or playing back a DOS game? Make sure your files match the archive at RGB Classic Games.
Posted: 9/28/2005 11:14 AM
Quote
Warp
Banned User
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: Finland
Requiring licensing in order to publish a game for a certain console can be seen as controversial. There are positive and negative aspects to it. It is my understanding that Nintendo forcing game companies to get the quality license and limiting the amount of games to 5 per year actually caused many NES games to be of much higher quality than they would have otherwise been. Game companies could not earn profit by flooding the market with dozens and dozens of games each year, getting tiny bits from each one, but instead they had to compete with quality of the few games they were limited to make. In practice they were kind of forced to put time in the developement of their games, by both giving them the time (by limiting the number of games) and by creating healthy competition between game houses. At those times any experienced NES programmer or a small team of them could have made some poor-quality game each two weeks, thus producing over 25 games per year. Instead, now they were actually forced to a longer developement cycle and a tougher competition on quality with other game houses, which resulted in higher-quality games. In this light it was not only Nintendo who got benefits but also the end users. One could, of course, argue that it's unfair to have to pay to Nintendo to just to get the right to publish, IOW Nintendo is getting money even though they are not doing nothing. However, if this forces the game developers to make higher-quality games, is that really a bad thing?
Posted: 9/28/2005 11:39 AM
Quote
feitclub
Former player
Joined: 3/13/2004
Posts: 1118
Location: Kansai, JAPAN
While I agree that it seems greedy to charge a fee just to be allowed to program for a system, I think this is a case where the ends justified the means. A winner was everybody: Nintendo got loads of cash and the consumers got a higher standard of game. I remember the Tengen games, they were not well made to begin with. Just look at the Rolling Thunder translation and you'll see what I mean.
Do Not Talk About Feitclub http://www.feitclub.com
Posted: 9/28/2005 3:24 PM
Quote
nitsuja
Emulator Coder, Skilled player (1310)
Joined: 12/21/2004
Posts: 2687
Computer TASer of 2011 TAS of 2011 First edition TAS of 2011 Computer TAS of 2011 Sega TAS of 2010 Sega TAS of 2008 Sega TAS of 2007 Glitchy TAS of 2007
I know nowadays games are put through some pretty rigorous tests (including / especially games for Nintendo consoles). But for the NES, did anyone from Nintendo even play the games and decide that some of them sucked too much to approve? It seems like that wouldn't be that much harder if they were already going to the trouble of somehow determining that there was no graphic violence / nudity / etc. anywhere in the game. Obviously it hurts everyone if they're too picky, but I've seen some NES games that played poorly and looked terrible and sounded awful even in comparison with other NES games released near the same time.
Posted: 9/28/2005 3:28 PM
Quote
Bag_of_Magic_Food
He/Him
Player (206)
Joined: 5/29/2004
Posts: 5712
Well wasn't the Tengen Tetris programmed better?
put yourself in my rocketpack if that poochie is one outrageous dude
Posted: 9/28/2005 3:37 PM
Quote
nitsuja
Emulator Coder, Skilled player (1310)
Joined: 12/21/2004
Posts: 2687
Computer TASer of 2011 TAS of 2011 First edition TAS of 2011 Computer TAS of 2011 Sega TAS of 2010 Sega TAS of 2008 Sega TAS of 2007 Glitchy TAS of 2007
Bag of Magic Food wrote:
Well wasn't the Tengen Tetris programmed better?
I remember playing that for a while somewhere, then later I rented the other Tetris thinking it would be the same thing, and was confused that it was less fun to play and had fewer features.
Posted: 9/28/2005 3:50 PM
Quote
Phil
Active player (411)
Joined: 3/16/2004
Posts: 2623
Location: America, Québec
I agree with nitsuja. At least half the games released were insults to everyone's intelligence.
Posted: 9/28/2005 4:40 PM
Quote
Kapow
Joined: 9/17/2005
Posts: 47
unlicensed: klax, impossible mission 2, spiritual warfare licensed: ikari warriors, deadly towers, home alone
Posted: 9/28/2005 4:47 PM
Quote
Bag_of_Magic_Food
He/Him
Player (206)
Joined: 5/29/2004
Posts: 5712
Heh heh, we need a Spiritual Warfare movie.
put yourself in my rocketpack if that poochie is one outrageous dude
Posted: 9/30/2005 6:06 AM
Quote
todd
Joined: 4/4/2004
Posts: 66
Another problem with the Seal of Quality was that the 5 game limitation was easily circumvented. I once read that Konami created the "Ultra" brand in order to be able to publish more than 5 games per year.
Posted: 9/30/2005 8:03 AM
Quote
Josh_the_FunkDOC
Former player
Joined: 3/13/2004
Posts: 706
Location: Elyria/Oberlin, OH
Yep, todd is right. I think Acklame also did this with the LJN label, but there aren't any other cases I'm aware of. And I second the demand for a Spiritual Warfare TAS! =P -Josh
but then you take my 75 perchance chance of winning, if we was to go one-on-one, and then add 66 and two-thirds ch...percents...i got a 141 and two-thirds chance of winning at sacrifice
Posted: 10/1/2005 8:40 PM
Quote
krieg747
Former player
Joined: 6/28/2004
Posts: 219
Location: Raccoon City
it meant you didnt need to blow in them alot to get the to work
Posted: 4/14/2010 12:13 AM
Quote
MarbleousDave
He/Him
Player (13)
Joined: 9/12/2009
Posts: 1559
LJN was founded in 1970. LJN was acquired by MCA in 1985, then was acquired by Acclaim in 1990. LJN worked independently from Acclaim.
Posted: 4/14/2010 8:58 AM
Quote
arflech
He/Him
Joined: 5/3/2008
Posts: 1120
Interestingly, even though Tengen was taken to court for 10NES circumvention, Wisdom Tree (developer of such wholesome games as Bible Buffet and Super 3D Noah's Ark) got away with it, probably because Nintendo didn't want to sully its family-friendly image by suing a Christian video-game company. then less than a decade later the big N allowed Conker's Bad Fur Day on the N64
i imgur com/QiCaaH8 png
Posted: 4/14/2010 1:20 PM
Quote
Limne
Any
Joined: 2/24/2010
Posts: 153
If I remember correctly, Nintendo did mandate certain tests in order to get the seal; namely, the game was not supposed to randomly crash all the time as happened on, say, the Action 52 games. I have no idea how that compares to the Atari days. Nintendo's content guidelines were only enforced in the American and European markets (I remember hearing that to this day neither Nintendo, nor Sony, nor Microsoft allow A0/18+ games (porn) on their consoles. But then, Something Awful has made me aware of the Japanese "visual novels" so I'm not sure how true that might be. Also, if memory serves me right, Nintendo sold their systems at a loss in every case but the Wii; licensing fees weren't their way of "being greedy," (Although I remember hearing that they become exorbitant up until the N64) it was their way of making any money at all.
Posted: 4/14/2010 3:24 PM
Quote
Derakon
Joined: 7/2/2007
Posts: 3960
Limne wrote:
Also, if memory serves me right, Nintendo sold their systems at a loss in every case but the Wii; licensing fees weren't their way of "being greedy," (Although I remember hearing that they become exorbitant up until the N64) it was their way of making any money at all.
That's funny, because the way I remember it, Nintendo is the only company to consistently sell their consoles at a profit. It's Sony and Microsoft that are trying to go with the razor model of profitability (sell the razors cheap, make your money on selling replacement blades). I'm unable to find a source for this, mind you -- but you didn't list a source for your statement either.
Pyrel - an open-source rewrite of the Angband roguelike game in Python.
Posted: 4/14/2010 9:05 PM
Quote
Limne
Any
Joined: 2/24/2010
Posts: 153
My source was "If I remember correctly." It's a legitimate epistemic modality... Maybe your memory is better than mine.
Posted: 4/14/2010 9:26 PM
Quote
Derakon
Joined: 7/2/2007
Posts: 3960
Oh, I'm not saying you have any less of a leg to stand on than I do. I'm just wishing we could find a reliable source to resolve this ambiguity. :)
Pyrel - an open-source rewrite of the Angband roguelike game in Python.
Posted: 4/15/2010 12:36 AM
Quote
Kuwaga
Joined: 10/20/2006
Posts: 1248
Afaik Derakon is right on this. No source, but I'm quite sure it's been like this in the more recent console wars at least.
Posted: 4/15/2010 12:48 AM
Quote
DarkKobold
Skilled player (1652)
Joined: 11/15/2004
Posts: 2202
Location: Killjoy
Arcade TASer of 2010 PCE TASer of 2010 Arcade TAS of 2010 Lucky TAS of 2009 Lucky TAS of 2007
Questions answered. Wii is not a loss leader http://tinyurl.com/y5fdfff The original NES was. http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/video-game2.htm
Sage advice from a friend of Jim: So put your tinfoil hat back in the closet, open your eyes to the truth, and realize that the government is in fact causing austismal cancer with it's 9/11 fluoride vaccinations of your water supply.
Posted: 4/15/2010 1:12 AM
Quote
nesrocks
He/Him
Player (246)
Joined: 5/1/2004
Posts: 4096
Location: Rio, Brazil
Interesting. Hardware was REALLY expensive back then, because, IIRC, all nintendo consoles were priced 200,00 USD at launch (except for the wii). If you make monetization corrections you'll see that the NES was more expensive than a PS3 by today's standards. And now I've learned that it was also sold at a loss.
aka Nesrocks http://www.youtube.com/user/UoBtExFODA https://nesrocks.com https://twitter.com/bitinkstudios
Posted: 4/15/2010 6:36 PM
Quote
Limne
Any
Joined: 2/24/2010
Posts: 153
Oh, I'm not saying you have any less of a leg to stand on than I do. I'm just wishing we could find a reliable source to resolve this ambiguity. :)
I know, I just like not having to do any research while being snarky about it :D
Questions answered. Wii is not a loss leader http://tinyurl.com/y5fdfff The original NES was. http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/video-game2.htm
Yay! Go team Limne's memory!