I think there's a pretty clear distinction between the median political stance in gaming side and in etcetera.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Nintendo targets amazing C64 port of Super Mario Bros. after 7 years' development
- Thread starter Deleted member 15428
- Start date
I think there's a pretty clear distinction between the median political stance in gaming side and in etcetera.
Isn't super Mario bros already on switch online? What value does adding a port bring?
Isn't this a scenario where everyone pretty much won?
Guy gets his game out there, it's still out there even if you look for it. He got to see his project completed and his work acknowleded, even more so now with all this attention from the C&D. How many of us we have even known about the awesome thing this guy did without this thread?
Nintendo, who didn't step in until well after the genie would not be able to be out back into the bottle, does what their shareholders expect them to do and protect their IP. Thus get to look tough even though the C&D will ultimately accomplish very little.
I really don't see any losers in this scenario.
Guy gets his game out there, it's still out there even if you look for it. He got to see his project completed and his work acknowleded, even more so now with all this attention from the C&D. How many of us we have even known about the awesome thing this guy did without this thread?
Nintendo, who didn't step in until well after the genie would not be able to be out back into the bottle, does what their shareholders expect them to do and protect their IP. Thus get to look tough even though the C&D will ultimately accomplish very little.
I really don't see any losers in this scenario.
Heck from the guy who made the port, it's pretty good.
He was never going to make money out of it anyway and it's fantastic advertisement of his skills.
The fact that it's not readily available online doesn't mean he can't put that on his resume either so yeah pretty good deal out of it I'd say.
Someone better tell Microsoft that their Halo copyrights are invalid after they chose not to sue Halo 2600 into oblivion. Or ID with all of those millions of Doom fan ports.
No, letting stuff like this pass does not in any way shape or form risk the copyright holders losing their IPs. Yes, they do need to take a proactive stance in protecting the material they copyright, but if you genuinely believe that a multibillion dollar corporation could lose their most valuable IP because some fans ported a 30-year-old game to the Commodore 64 in 20-fucking-19, I don't know what to tell you. No one and nothing is forcing Nintendo's hands here.
When I was younger, circa 1998, I cut my teeth on graphics programming over a summer with a mentor by cloning and reverse engineering the ultima series. Screenshots from our work:
We chose ultima, because we were enormous fans of the series at the time. Flash forward like 10 years later, and I actually had a class taught by Richard Garriot at the University of Texas. I showed him my old work from back in the day, and the dude, beaming with pride, was like "this is freaking awesome!"
That's dope! Were you totally freaking out?
I'm not surprised, but yeah. Sucks.
Just change the graphics to original graphics like Giana Sisters did and it'll be fine I'm sure. Nintendo's just targeting the IP. Make it your own IP.
Look at what happened with Zelda Maker. The creator was smart enough to change the name to Legend Maker and redo the graphics early on and that game has come a long way since.
Just change the graphics to original graphics like Giana Sisters did and it'll be fine I'm sure. Nintendo's just targeting the IP. Make it your own IP.
Look at what happened with Zelda Maker. The creator was smart enough to change the name to Legend Maker and redo the graphics early on and that game has come a long way since.
To be fair, ID made the DOOM engine source open source years ago and you're allowed to port it to anything you want, but the WAD file itself is still copyrighted. You can distribute the engine (Same with Quake) but the game content itself is not free. The person downloading the engine must still own a legit copy of a WAD from any retail version or provide their own completely original WAD (Like FreeDOOM which is a WAD made with all new resources but DOOM-like gameplay and art style for people who don't own any of the originals) in order to actually play it.
He isn't trying to make any money from it, isn't trying to steal credit from the original creator, and doesn't detract from the original work in any way. Morally speaking, what's wrong here?
Nintendo fan: produces an amazing feat of ingenuity by making a game run on hardware it was never supposed to run on
Posters on Era: what an idiot. Why didn't he make his own game. I can't believe someone could do this to Nintendo
Posters on Era: what an idiot. Why didn't he make his own game. I can't believe someone could do this to Nintendo
Yeah they know this was going to happen, the moment you use Nintendo ip's you can count on it to be taken down in a few days.
I also don't understand why people keep blaming Nintendo for this, sure it's dissapointing that they don't allow it but they have to to protect their ip's and the people know this before they start their projects.
I also don't understand why people keep blaming Nintendo for this, sure it's dissapointing that they don't allow it but they have to to protect their ip's and the people know this before they start their projects.
I see so many people with Nintendo avatars on Era spouting utter shite, associating themselves with Nintendo by using Nintendo IP and characters as their avatar, and yet Nintendo doesn't come for them, and Nintendo don't lose any money because of it
If anything, this guy is putting Nintendo in the news for a positive reason (technical programming wizardly) and isn't causing Nintendo to suffer any lost revenue at all
Nintendo would be better off coming for the shitposters
My thoughts exactly. I really don't understand why people continue to do this when they KNOW Nintendo will be dropping the hammer.
I'm thinking maybe, maybe the distinction here is that the fan remade the original game as opposed to making a different / new fan game. Other gaming companies seem to go after things like that (see the Streets of Rage remake that took 8 years to make that SEGA shut down), but usually let other fan games live (e.g. Super Mario War and all the fanmade Sonic games).
It's still unfortunate that the work was targeted, but at least the developer was able to release it and get the fame and recognition.
It's still unfortunate that the work was targeted, but at least the developer was able to release it and get the fame and recognition.
I get your point, but Halo 2600 was programmed by Ed Fries, the former head of Microsoft Game Studios and the guy who oversaw the Bungie acquisition. I'm pretty sure he got the ok before developing the game.
Change the sprites and name. Zelda Maker changed the name to Legend Maker and replaced the sprites.
The idea/myth that they have to defend their copyright/trademark because blah blah blah is an interesting one, because how does one prove that (for example) Nintendo knew about project A but did nothing about it?
So I suppose what I'm really saying is, no, they don't have to do this, because if pressed by the copyright/trademark office (if, like I said, the myth is true), they could easily say "we didn't know about it". Even if they did know about it, and just wanted to allow a fan project to continue.
Like, for instance, do you think Nintendo doesn't know about all the ROM hacks Pokemon YouTubers play? Of course they do.
So I suppose what I'm really saying is, no, they don't have to do this, because if pressed by the copyright/trademark office (if, like I said, the myth is true), they could easily say "we didn't know about it". Even if they did know about it, and just wanted to allow a fan project to continue.
Like, for instance, do you think Nintendo doesn't know about all the ROM hacks Pokemon YouTubers play? Of course they do.
Can't believe some of the replies in here lol
It's just a really cool piece of programming that was essentially harmless to the source material. Anyone who is a C64 enthusiast wanting to play this on real hardware has no doubt played and purchased Super Mario Bros. legally at some point prior to downloading.
Sure it's within Nintendo's rights to request a takedown, but in a niche case like this, it comes across as an incredible overreaction and honestly kind of petty. As others have said, it's a far cry from stuff like Sega's embrace of hacks for their most popular Genesis titles through Steam Workshop, or hiring some of the most noteworthy fangame creators to make stuff like Mania.
It's just a really cool piece of programming that was essentially harmless to the source material. Anyone who is a C64 enthusiast wanting to play this on real hardware has no doubt played and purchased Super Mario Bros. legally at some point prior to downloading.
Sure it's within Nintendo's rights to request a takedown, but in a niche case like this, it comes across as an incredible overreaction and honestly kind of petty. As others have said, it's a far cry from stuff like Sega's embrace of hacks for their most popular Genesis titles through Steam Workshop, or hiring some of the most noteworthy fangame creators to make stuff like Mania.
Yup. An insane amount of corporate ball-washing goes on every time Nintendo issues a C and D despite evidence in the industry (Sega, Bethesda and Doom, etc.) that they don't HAVE to do this.
And yet, somehow, SEGA hasn't magically lost ownership of the Sonic IP despite the breadth of fangames being posted online over the past two decades.
Given the limitations of the C64 that you have to contend with kudos to the creators . Must have been one hell of a series of problems to fix to get it right and working .
Nintendo sending out a C&D is a shame but that's them flexing to be in the clear in case of a bigger infringement by an actually threatening competitor so that they don't argue in court "But Nintendo was aware of this other copyright infringing game using their IP and they let them roam Scott free , why is it okay for me and not for them , here have a proof this other game doesn't have official license that Nintendo knew about the game and did nothing"
It's in that sense that they have to defend their copyright always all the time so that bigger offenders can't go "the others did it and got away with it why not me ?"
Besides look at the bright side projects like Cadence of Hyrule are happening , it's not like they are opposed to see other studios using their IP , just you need to have licence to do so .
Nintendo sending out a C&D is a shame but that's them flexing to be in the clear in case of a bigger infringement by an actually threatening competitor so that they don't argue in court "But Nintendo was aware of this other copyright infringing game using their IP and they let them roam Scott free , why is it okay for me and not for them , here have a proof this other game doesn't have official license that Nintendo knew about the game and did nothing"
It's in that sense that they have to defend their copyright always all the time so that bigger offenders can't go "the others did it and got away with it why not me ?"
Besides look at the bright side projects like Cadence of Hyrule are happening , it's not like they are opposed to see other studios using their IP , just you need to have licence to do so .
This is where I'm at tbh. Anyone that wants to play it will be able to regardless. This would be a different story if the project was nuked during development.
Some IP owners are stricter on this, but it doesn't always have to be about the direct sales the fan made project may receive but more about any potential damage that could be done if the IP is not represented up to the IP owner's standards, which could tarnish the brand and cause potential monetary damages to the company. Most likely in the eyes of Nintendo, it is easier to send a cease and desist letter than review fan projects and the like. They are a company that wants direct control of their IP's.
His work isn't destroyed. It's out there and won't ever not be.
Factually untrue.
Nintendo pursues ROMs, not fan games. When AM2R got hit that was actually surprising at the time (and turned out it was because they were making their own Metroid 2 Remake). There are dozens of Pokemon fan games out there, including a game that's just online battling that's been maintained for over a decade now, and literally thousands of Super Mario World Kaizo mods. (And before you point out Pokemon Uranium, the Uranium guy himself said they never got C&D'd by Nintendo)
This is, as far as I can tell, just Super Mario Bros, but ported to a system it was never ported to. That's the kind of thing they do go after.
I wasn't asking about a generic hypothetical, and not about IP law. I was asking what's morally wrong in this case.
Speaking as an artist, taking someone's work and putting out isn't something you do without permission from the original IP holder. Like if I made a piece of an art that I sold for money, I wouldn't be flattered if someone took it and plastered on the internet without my permission even if they made no profit from it.
Even without copyright laws, it's bad form. If you're using it for learning, that's fine. But the moment give the public access to it, that's when you run into trouble.
Last edited:
Given where Sega's IP are at in terms of profit, not sure using Sega as something to strive for is the best argument. I mean, you would have better argument like Blizzard supporting PC mobs.
No, they don't have to. But they can because unlike the above, they don't like people using their work and it's their right. I would have this stance for starving artist on the corner. It's their work, they put the time to make it, they can do whatever they want with it. If you don't like it, don't support the company. It's as simple as that.
This is the equivalent of someone making an impressive version of a famous piece of art with crayons or an etch-a-sketch to show off your technical prowess using a less advanced tool or medium. That is hardly unheard of, and it's hard to see it as anything but a tribute to the original. It's hardly a rip off or a case of plagiarism.
Leaving the law aside for a moment, nothing here hurts Nintendo. It's their right to take this stance. It's also the right of everyone else to judge them for it.
