Goodbye Nintendo Seal Of Quality...

[lost_within]

Does this mean they will stop pumping out 300 new games a month on the wii to only have ONE out of all of them that I MIGHT be willing to play? Oh please god say yes, there is literally more wii CRAP on the walls at most gamestores than there is ANYTHING else. Period.

[Mod_Man_Extreme]

They are not all the same. You must not have many EA games there close but if you have to, use a ruler you'll see the case size difference. Some are taller some skinnier, and of course the inside is different because of the game size difference. I do like hard cases better then cardboard of course, but i also like things uniform. Granted there is a difference in SNES games from '91 and then after. I can upload a picture if you would like.

Go right ahead, I'm actually quite curious, as I know they changed the design of the cartridge lock slot on the front of the carts themselves but I didn't know they had changed anything else.

EDIT: Fixed quotes.

[pepharytheworm]

I was refering to the Genesis cases I figured you Knew about the SNES changes. But the NES had a slight change too. the top doesnt have tabs and there are 5 screws instead of 3 and they are flat head screws. Of course those are alot easier to open.

[Mod_Man_Extreme]

Actually those five screw games are actually Japanese Famicom PCB's placed into an official Famicom to NES adapter which Nintendo used to keep up supply when the NES first launched in the US.

[Hatta]

The Nintendo Seal of Quality was responsible for this travesty, so good riddance. I'd rather wade through shovelware than have great games ruined that way.

[Inazuma]

All the Seal of Quality ever really meant was that the company paid Nintendo to make the game for their system, and they didn't include anything that Nintendo found objectionable (though even that was circumvented a couple times). It didn't really have anything to do with the quality of the game at all.

Partially correct. The Quality in the Seal of Quality never referred to how fun the game was. It was about compatibility and being bug free. Basically you could expect the game to run on your machine, not freeze up on you and at least be playable. There was no guarantee the game wouldn't suck ass. Censoring the games would be the opposite of quality.

[Limewater]

It's also worth noting that Nintendo (at least initially) capped the number of titles a company could put out in a given year. I think the original limit was five or something. I think this did somewhat help inhibit shovelware. I think that practice was only indirectly linked to the seal of quality, though, since it was all part of the same agreement when companies agreed to "go steady" with Nintendo.

[Funk, E]

All the Seal of Quality ever really meant was that the company paid Nintendo to make the game for their system, and they didn't include anything that Nintendo found objectionable (though even that was circumvented a couple times). It didn't really have anything to do with the quality of the game at all.

Partially correct. The Quality in the Seal of Quality never referred to how fun the game was. It was about compatibility and being bug free. Basically you could expect the game to run on your machine, not freeze up on you and at least be playable. There was no guarantee the game wouldn't suck ass. Censoring the games would be the opposite of quality.

Not sure where your support on that comes from, seeing as there's an article just posted above you that contradicts what you've said here.

[Inazuma]

All the Seal of Quality ever really meant was that the company paid Nintendo to make the game for their system, and they didn't include anything that Nintendo found objectionable (though even that was circumvented a couple times). It didn't really have anything to do with the quality of the game at all.

Partially correct. The Quality in the Seal of Quality never referred to how fun the game was. It was about compatibility and being bug free. Basically you could expect the game to run on your machine, not freeze up on you and at least be playable. There was no guarantee the game wouldn't suck ass. Censoring the games would be the opposite of quality.

Not sure where your support on that comes from, seeing as there's an article just posted above you that contradicts what you've said here.

So every game that had the Nintendo Seal of Quality was a fun game? They refused to allow crappy games on Nintendo consoles? Actions speak louder than words.

[the King]

quote]
Partially correct. The Quality in the Seal of Quality never referred to how fun the game was. It was about compatibility and being bug free. Basically you could expect the game to run on your machine, not freeze up on you and at least be playable. There was no guarantee the game wouldn't suck ass. Censoring the games would be the opposite of quality.

Not sure where your support on that comes from, seeing as there's an article just posted above you that contradicts what you've said here.

So every game that had the Nintendo Seal of Quality was a fun game? They refused to allow crappy games on Nintendo consoles? Actions speak louder than words.

I think he was talking about the censoring part. check out the link.