Goodbye Nintendo Seal Of Quality...

[Inazuma]

Censorship is a bad thing. I am aware that most people think it's good but in actual reality, it's bad. Ask anyone who is in favor of it why sex is bad and they won't be able to come up with a valid reason. There are many things in this world which most people consider to be bad, merely because someone else told them to think that way. Censorship, sex, cussing, being gay, etc. I stand by what I said earlier. Censorship would be the opposite of quality.

I just checked the link and couldn't find anything about censorship but I did find this:
"With the goal of improving quality, Mario Club will play test and check Nintendo-related titles for bugs." Sounds like "Quality" refers to bug testing and making sure games are playable to me.

*edit* OK, now I found the link you guys were talking about. Yeah, censorship lowered the quality of games like Maniac Mansion. What a shame.

[jfrost]

Yeah, I never understand these laments about the so called Nintendo Seal of Quality. To me all it meant is that the game worked, period. And Nintendo censorship practices are pretty well known.

Now, about the limit of games the companies could put out on the NES, that seems to have more to do with monopoly power than with avoiding shovelware (and remember that the amount of shovelware on the NES is still astonishing).

After all, Nintendo managed to put most publishers on a stranglehold in the 8-bit era. It managed to get its quasi-monopoly after a while, won some legal battles to secure it, and, to prevent the price of games of falling too sharply, they limited the number of titles a publisher could put out. Less to do with quality standards than with market dominance.

Also, remember that a number of companies broke that rule (Konami famously established dummy companies like Ultra Games to publish more titles).

[MrPopo]

Censorship is a bad thing. I am aware that most people think it's good but in actual reality, it's bad. Ask anyone who is in favor of it why sex is bad and they won't be able to come up with a valid reason. There are many things in this world which most people consider to be bad, merely because someone else told them to think that way. Censorship, sex, cussing, being gay, etc. I stand by what I said earlier. Censorship would be the opposite of quality.

Don't forget, back in the day there was no rating system, and the only information you could get about a game was off the box and in magazines like Nintendo Power. Combine that with certain high-profile games made during the Atari era (Custer's Revenge, anyone?) and Nintendo's censorship practices seem to make sense for the time. I'm not saying they were correct, but they were certainly justifiable.

As for the sex thing, aside from the deeply religious most people won't claim that sex is bad. They will claim that sex is bad for a child to be exposed to in an explicit fashion, which seems to be supported by most child psychologists.

[Hobie-wan]

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.

Not all of the old 5 screw games are Famicom carts with adapters. Only first party Nintendo games that they were short of for that first Christmas are that way. Early gold Zelda carts were 5 screw before switching to 3 + tabs and then the later gray cart. There are some transition games too where they were 3 screw cases, but have the dimpled flathead screws as opposed to security ones. Some early third party games were 5 screw as well. Here are some that I have that I know for sure:

Deadly Towers
Gradius
Section Z
Skykid
Sqoon
Stinger
Trojan

But anyway, yeah the original intent was to keep the total garbage off the NES to avoid what happened to Atari and everyone else in the US. They figured if companies could only release 4 games per year, it would help keep shovelware away. Though I guess even that failed, Dragon Spirit is the only Bandai release I've played on NES that wasn't a flaming piece of crap.

[ZeroAX]

They will claim that sex is bad for a child to be exposed to in an explicit fashion, which seems to be supported by most child psychologists.

cause exposing them to violence is better?
for all their crap, the hippies were right about one thing, make love not war.


of course you will counter me with the very important argument "they shouldn't be exposed to violence either".

yeah but they end up exposed, as proved by the amount of voices who haven't reached puberty, you keep hearing in online games. so why people are so angry at a little sex (remember the mass effect fiasco?) but not about their little kids killing the millionth nazi is beyond me.


also I didn't think hot coffee was that shocking. the freaking game already had a 17+ rating in the US (18+ in europe, so it had no problem over here). would that little sex scene (which was basically locked away) really destroy the mind of a 17 year old? I'm sure a 17 year old would have already either had sex or at least watch a porn movie.

also one question. the new rating gta:SA had revieced (AO) is it 18+ or 21+?

[Limewater]

Also, remember that a number of companies broke that rule (Konami famously established dummy companies like Ultra Games to publish more titles).

It is my understanding that the companies that "broke" the rule did so with Nintendo's blessing.

Regarding children's exposure to sex and violence: I think one reason for the concern is because it's a lot easier for kids to mess up regarding sex, with their bodies all running through with hormones, than it is for them to acquire a rocket launcher and shoot nazis. Others may disagree, but I believe that is part of the reason why people are more squeamish with kids regarding sex than violence.

Also, the split seems to be by gender. Mothers seem much more concerned about their kids seeing violence than fathers, but I only say that from personal experience. On a wider scale, that could be highly incorrect.

[Erik_Twice]

^And becuse sex is evil, a sin and something so incredibly bad you are a bad person if you have it while violence is "part of life".

[jfrost]

Also, remember that a number of companies broke that rule (Konami famously established dummy companies like Ultra Games to publish more titles).

It is my understanding that the companies that "broke" the rule did so with Nintendo's blessing.

I can't confirm it, but if so, that's still a bit irrelevant to the point I was making (about shovelware x market power).

[MrPopo]

Also, remember that a number of companies broke that rule (Konami famously established dummy companies like Ultra Games to publish more titles).

It is my understanding that the companies that "broke" the rule did so with Nintendo's blessing.

Regarding children's exposure to sex and violence: I think one reason for the concern is because it's a lot easier for kids to mess up regarding sex, with their bodies all running through with hormones, than it is for them to acquire a rocket launcher and shoot nazis. Others may disagree, but I believe that is part of the reason why people are more squeamish with kids regarding sex than violence.

Also, the split seems to be by gender. Mothers seem much more concerned about their kids seeing violence than fathers, but I only say that from personal experience. On a wider scale, that could be highly incorrect.

There's also cultural differences. If you compare the US with Germany you see a flip-flop on this issue. Germany tends to be very anti-violence but is more permissive of sexual themes.

[Mod_Man_Extreme]

Also, remember that a number of companies broke that rule (Konami famously established dummy companies like Ultra Games to publish more titles).

It is my understanding that the companies that "broke" the rule did so with Nintendo's blessing.

Regarding children's exposure to sex and violence: I think one reason for the concern is because it's a lot easier for kids to mess up regarding sex, with their bodies all running through with hormones, than it is for them to acquire a rocket launcher and shoot nazis. Others may disagree, but I believe that is part of the reason why people are more squeamish with kids regarding sex than violence.

Also, the split seems to be by gender. Mothers seem much more concerned about their kids seeing violence than fathers, but I only say that from personal experience. On a wider scale, that could be highly incorrect.

There's also cultural differences. If you compare the US with Germany you see a flip-flop on this issue. Germany tends to be very anti-violence but is more permissive of sexual themes.

True, they do love to watch Hasselhoff hump a car on stage all night.