racketboy.com

racketboy wrote:Yeah that would be my line of thinking as well. If Nintendo owns all the graphical likenesses, reverse engineering should take care of the rest. And Miyamoto did the level designs, correct?

I believe so.

In regards to the legal issues, I did a little digging and came up with this from Wikipedia. I think this is why there is so much speculation about the legality of duplicating Donkey Kong's arcade code.

According to some sources [2][3][4][5] in the early 80s, Ikegami developed a number of arcade games as a subcontractor to Japanese video game companies. Among the games they may have developed are Computer Othello, Block Fever, Monkey Magic, Congo Bongo, Popeye, Donkey Kong, Radar Scope, Sheriff, Space Fever, Space Firebird, Space Demon, Heli Fire, Sky Skipper, Space Launcher and Zaxxon.[2] At that time, computer programs were not recognized as copyrightable material. According to these sources, Ikegami proceeded to sue Nintendo for unauthorized duplication of the Donkey Kong program code for the latter's creation of Donkey Kong Junior (1983, Tokyo District Court), but it was not until 1989 that the Tokyo High Court gave a verdict that acknowledged the originality of program code. In 1990, Ikegami and Nintendo reached a settlement, terms of which were never disclosed.[6]

OK nice find. Seems like if they settled, it should be good now -- and since then we've have the Gameboy port, the inclusion in DK64, and the NES Classics version on GBA

I think that is the confusion. It may very well lie just in Nintendo being lazy or stubborn about it. Even if the original code isn't entirely there's they can still distribute the original DK NES version which is why you have that GBA NES emulator they sold. DK64 would likely have been as I think I read RARE coded their own language and used the Nintendo made assets as Nintendo designed the layouts, visuals, characters, and the franchised out bit was the program code. One could just reverse engineer it and make their own and then just re-use assets but it just hasn't been done by Nintendo.

It could cause a hang up maybe in the ACA stuff unless the undisclosed agreement makes it ok or they make a later one to share some $ on it. It wasn't even DK that got sued over but DK Jr as it is, so both could be held hostage depending on what we don't know if there is an issue there at all.

The Gameboy one was a good version as it seemed more of the same and then surprised me with newer levels ,well pleased. Apart from that of course it is the usual Nes Donkey Kong classics and Colecovision.

I've read a lot about the Ikagami / Nintendo illegal issues and as far as I can tell, Ikagami owns the arcade code behind the original DK and DK Junior (which was Nintendo's first in-house developed game, but based on the DK code written by Ikagami, which apparently started all the legal trouble). So while Miyamoto designed everything from characters, scenarios, level layout on paper, it was Ikagami who turned these ideas (originally based on Popeye comics) into playable video game code. If you'll notice, none of the ports or home versions Nintendo has released since have been the actual arcade roms. As close as the Coleco, NES, GameBoy, etc. versions may be, they are all distinctly different in comparison to the arcade original.

The rom inside DK64 I have long suspected is just a case of 'flying under the radar' as it was Rare developing, and not directly Nintendo's doing.

Even Hampster, who is currently releasing Nintendo's old arcade titles for download (something Nintendo has never done before) on Switch, have announced pretty much everything from Mario Bros. to Punch-Out!! with the original DK games nowhere in sight. Sad situation if it's true!!

It's sad from a preservationist point of view, but you know what? It's not a huge loss from a gameplay standpoint. The NES version and the Game Boy version are more playable.

samsonlonghair wrote:It's sad from a preservationist point of view, but you know what? It's not a huge loss from a gameplay standpoint. The NES version and the Game Boy version are more playable.

You think so? I guess I haven't spent much time with the ports. What do you think is improved?

racketboy wrote:

samsonlonghair wrote:It's sad from a preservationist point of view, but you know what? It's not a huge loss from a gameplay standpoint. The NES version and the Game Boy version are more playable.

You think so? I guess I haven't spent much time with the ports. What do you think is improved?

The controls, most definitely! While Donkey Kong is a classic arcade game, it doesn't control as well as later platformers. Nintendo really stepped their game up when they made the Game Boy remake Donkey Kong 94.

I'm pretty confident that the new Switch port is the best one now. It has three different versions of the arcade game: original, "later", and international. Original is the original Japanese release that apparently has some bugs. The "later" version is the bug fixed Japanese version. International is what we got in the states. However, the real winning feature is the ability to play it in TATE mode.

bmoc wrote:I'm pretty confident that the new Switch port is the best one now. It has three different versions of the arcade game: original, "later", and international. Original is the original Japanese release that apparently has some bugs. The "later" version is the bug fixed Japanese version. International is what we got in the states. However, the real winning feature is the ability to play it in TATE mode.

Makes sense, the newest Nintendo console should have the best version.

bmoc wrote:In regards to the legal issues, I did a little digging and came up with this from Wikipedia. I think this is why there is so much speculation about the legality of duplicating Donkey Kong's arcade code.

According to some sources in the early 80s, Ikegami developed a number of arcade games as a subcontractor to Japanese video game companies. At that time, computer programs were not recognized as copyrightable material. According to these sources, Ikegami proceeded to sue Nintendo for unauthorized duplication of the Donkey Kong program code for the latter's creation of Donkey Kong Junior (1983, Tokyo District Court), but it was not until 1989 that the Tokyo High Court gave a verdict that acknowledged the originality of program code. In 1990, Ikegami and Nintendo reached a settlement, terms of which were never disclosed.

Got me thinking, what about 8 bit computers? Though in the computer category, they do "plugnplay" with composite cable to TV and have game carts. Commodore 64 Donkey Kong cart pretty decent with a wide range of 2600 controllers to choose from.