The essence of great games on the NES

[6502freak]

SMB shows a good game can be basic hardware, but SMB3 shows a good game can be more advanced hardware too.

I think both SMB and SMB3 are not only good, but revolutionary games.

The difference is, in order for SMB3 to exist, there had to be SMB first, adressing exactly my point: core idea and playability are the primary factors which make a game great. Especially on a retro system like the NES, where you simply can not fool your audience with graphics and sound.

If someone feels a good game NEEDS a complex mapper, there are lots of examples which clearly show that this is not correct. I personally think that if you can't design a fun game in 8K VROM and 32K PRG ROM, you most probably won't succeed with the best mapper in the world.

I mean, if people don't feel any fun in trying to achieve maximum effect with minimal hardware, why are they coding for the NES at all? Why not taking the limitations as a creative opportunity?

[Celius]

Some people think the fact that it's on the NES is enough of a limit. I kind of feel that way too. As long as you can stick it in the same machine without modifying it (with the exception of disabling the lockout chip), and it outputs good graphics, sound, and gameplay, do whatever you want. The NES itself has limits that no mapper/board can eliminate.

As for me, I am trying to achieve -really- great visuals and good sound. I want parallax effects, polygonal sequences, and other cool things which really are only achievable with CHR RAM. CHR RAM isn't exactly some NES-defying mapper specific cheat or anything. I also want people to save their games, so SRAM is a must. Other than that, just a good chunk of plain old PRG ROM will do. That's not exactly over-the-top. I'm still abiding by the 8 sprites per scanline, 64 sprites on screen, 2x2 attribute blocks, etc. rules that pretty much any other game has to stick to as well.

I do agree that you don't need a complex mapper to make a fun game. Sometimes, there just isn't enough to add as much complexity/variety in graphics or level layouts as one would like. In this instance, choosing a more powerful mapper is good.

[Banshaku]

But most people aren't looking for a super mapper, they are looking for something around MMC3 level.

That's what I meant. If we could have a MMC3/VRCIV/VI clone, that would be nice. I would stop cracking up game and just use that instead.

I don't want to "improve" the graphics, just want to be able to have more space and more functionality to be able to make some fan game similar to the platformer in the end of the nes era. Which mean some split screen, some extra counter if the need arise. But it doesn't mean that I will use all the features: it just good to know that I have access to them if I feel like it.

I have no interest in a one screen game with almost no artwork at all, I always personally hated those ones. I started to like nes games when stories and side scrolling elements were added.

[tokumaru]

I don't want to "improve" the graphics, just want to be able to have more space and more functionality to be able to make some fan game similar to the platformer in the end of the nes era.

Exactly. We don't want to go all the way back to...

a one screen game with almost no artwork at all

We want to pick it up where developers back then left off. When the NES died commercially, MMC3-level mappers were the standard, it's just fair that we have that kind of functionality available today without having to butcher old carts.

Having features available can't hurt, because nobody will be forced to use them. People will forever be able to continue making NROM games, but it's just fair that the ambitious fellows have a chance to play with more advanced features.

[Banshaku]

We want to pick it up where developers back then left off. When the NES died commercially, MMC3-level mappers were the standard, it's just fair that we have that kind of functionality available today without having to butcher old carts.

This explain my motive even better than what I said. I'm glad to see that someone agree with me

Having features available can't hurt, because nobody will be forced to use them. People will forever be able to continue making NROM games, but it's just fair that the ambitious fellows have a chance to play with more advanced features.

Right on. Once I can make something interesting with a MMC3 mapper, I wouldn't mind to see how much we could push the nes further with a more advanced mapper but right now I don't have that interest.

[6502freak]

I don't want to "improve" the graphics, just want to be able to have more space and more functionality to be able to make some fan game similar to the platformer in the end of the nes era.

Exactly. We don't want to go all the way back to...

a one screen game with almost no artwork at all

Does this apply to SMB? Excitebike?

We want to pick it up where developers back then left off.

If that would be the case, your next game AT LEAST would have to match the artwork, gameplay and fun of the best NES games released. Like SMB3 or Kirby's Adventure for example.

When the NES died commercially, MMC3-level mappers were the standard, it's just fair that we have that kind of functionality available today without having to butcher old carts.

And perhaps that's exactly the problem: you just want to go the direct route and skip everything which experienced NES developers had to work with before, and yet still made fantastic games while they were at it. Or in other words: starting with MMC3 will automatically make you more experienced and skilled than the people who designed SMB, Contra and Zelda.

Having features available can't hurt, because nobody will be forced to use them. People will forever be able to continue making NROM games, but it's just fair that the ambitious fellows have a chance to play with more advanced features.

Ambitious developers most certainly don't rely on mappers. They work on the gameplay until it's perfected.

That, and only that, was the reason the NES was successful. From a technical standpoint, the NES never was impressive. It was a lot weaker than other systems at the time, like the Sega Master System. The Sega system however, did never take off because it lacked the killer games the NES had.

Like I said, people gravely underestimate how much work went into the DESIGN of those games. Adjusting the game mechanics until they play perfectly.

That's exactly why I have to chuckle when people here talk about impressive graphics, streaming megabytes of PCM sound, building all kinds of gadgets into the cartridge etc, because it's a 2009 mentality struggling with the realities of a 1983 hardware design. You guys picked the NES because it is cool, yet secretly you want to work on something else, because you feel intimidated by the restrictions.

The NES is an old and weak system. So seize the opportunity, free yourself from the burden of technology, and try to find the essence of great games. Just what the developers did back in the day.

THIS is MUCH HARDER than designing any kind of super mapper. But also far more impressive. And I know most of you are now being pissed at me for pointing that out, because you know it is true.

[Bregalad]

I agree with 6502 freak entierely. If you want to experience what the developpers back then did, you must first do some smaller game with low ROM/RAM/Mapper, and then make sequels with higher features, and eventually switch to a better system. Starting at MMC3 level isn't "Bad", but not what the developpers did back then. Altough it's true that even by starting with NROM, you could say you skip the atari crap, so this is agruable. I still feel presonally more like starting to do 1986-area games and then doing 1990-area games only once I'm able to do the former.

[6502freak]

What I am trying to hint at is the following schizophrenic situation: thinking first in terms of technology and the gameplay comes second. People will buy my game because it looks and sounds more realistic than the previous games before. This is the 2009 way of doing games on modern systems.

The schizophrenic part is in applying this way of thinking to an obsolete and inherently weak hardware system.

If you want to pick up where developers left, code on the SNES. You don't like the slow CPU of the SNES, because you can not realize your brilliant game ideas?? Pick a Playstation 1. Damn, if I just had more texture memory, I could make WAYYY much better games... and so on.

I think it totally avoids the spirit and feeling why the NES is a great system. It is ONLY because of its games. They may look primitive and dated, but the best of them are all-time classics, because the designers constantly confronted themselves with the question: what MAKES a great game? How do I motivate the player? How can I make him/her come back to get some more?

They HAD to do it. No safety net. No way of fooling the player with graphics and sound.

If you realize that, you don't need a fancy mapper. Heck, you don't even need a system as advanced as the NES.

[Banshaku]

I don't know where your trying to get to with your point but you know, if Celius want to use X mapper because he feel like it, it's raining with some wind coming from the north-east or I don't know, the sky is green with purple dots that day, I guess it his own business after all

It's pretty obvious from the get go that no mapper you select will make a better game and I'm sure that everybody knows it. Just look at the popularity of the Wii as an example. Not the best hardware but the game sells (only Nintendo ones and third party get shafted but that another story...).

But what if you goal is not to make games but just experiment with the hardware? Some people like to fool around with those things you know.

As for my self, I never selected to program on the nes because it was cool, never came to my mind this way. I'm just a programmer that decided to fool around with a machine that I have been using as a kid and still remember about it. Always wanted to know how it worked, what kind of hardware they usede etc. I may or may never finish a game for it, who knows. But for now, I'm just happy to fool around with it.

If your goal is to make a great game to sell then you chose the wrong platform in the first place. Go try something on a Ipod touch and see what you can do with motion sensors and a touch screen then.

[6502freak]

If your goal is to make a great game to sell then you chose the wrong platform in the first place.

Now how does it sound if I remove your carefully chosen "to sell" from your statement?

Go try something on a Ipod touch and see what you can do with motion sensors and a touch screen then.

And again, do I need a touch screen and motion sensors to make a great game?

I guess I have a totally different POV on the NES than some people here. I always thought the everlasting appeal of the NES were the carefully designed games.

But it's kind of senseless to discuss this any further, because in the end, everyone chooses his/her own way of spending his/her free time. My posts are only adressed to people who think that a fancy mapper will make them create better homebrew games.

[Jarhmander]

If that would be the case, your next game AT LEAST would have to match the artwork, gameplay and fun of the best NES games released. Like SMB3 or Kirby's Adventure for example.

Ah, Kirby 's Adventure... I hardly beleived it was a NES game, only the sound really tells it's a NES game

[Banshaku]

Now how does it sound if I remove your carefully chosen "to sell" from your statement?

I Didn't carefully chose that word for any specific reason.

And again, do I need a touch screen and motion sensors to make a great game?

My point it that you had a limited interface to interact with the hardware so you need to use your creativity to do something interesting. Same thing for the Wii. The nes has similar limitation but on a hardware based level, not input device level.

I guess I have a totally different POV on the NES than some people here. I always thought the everlasting appeal of the NES were the carefully designed games.

I guess every one has a right to their own opinion and we cannot change that.

I won't comment any more in this thread since it seems to just add oil on an open fire. I don't know your purpose but It almost feels like your main goal is to provoke people for some reason (?). What are you looking for? Can we move back to the original topic?

If you don't agree to this topic you can start a new one and I'm sure many people will be more than happy to discuss about it. This thread is getting way too much off topic now.

[tepples]

If your goal is to make a great game to sell then you chose the wrong platform in the first place.

I'm almost willing to suggest that one chose the wrong industry. Every open (PC) or semi-open (iPod Touch) platform is flooded with free games, and the production values expected of a paid game (even one with NES graphics like Mega Man 9) usually need a team of at least half a dozen people.

[6502freak]

The best way to enhance a NES cartridge is using an FPGA, map the dual port RAM to the PPU address and data bus so you can access it any time, and throw in a small blitter which can perform logical and arithmetical operations on the RAM. You could even generate new grahics modes that way, totally ignoring the PPU addressing scheme and just constantly feeding your own data to it, which is being displayed. This way, you can easily have things like 32 column vertical scrolling.

Alternatively, pick a fast and cheap microcontroller, program it with your game code, and make it interact with the 6502 CPU by using a very simple FIFO command interface, passing parameters between the 2 chips. You may even use it to count PPU address changes and generate NMI's for the 6502. That way, the 6502 is only a display data mover, which serves the PPU to feed data and change registers.

Alternatively, I think you could easily implement VROM/PRG ROM Mapping and a rastercounter in a 64 macrocell CPLD.

The big question is now: who would buy such a hardware? For what purpose?

[Banshaku]

Alternatively, I think you could easily implement VROM/PRG ROM Mapping and a rastercounter in a 64 macrocell CPLD.

The big question is now: who would buy such a hardware? For what purpose?

Geeks like us that like to experiment with a dead platform like the nes?