My new site / project
Moderator: Moderators
well Noahs Ark 3D will be unlicensed game. It is not port from another system or hack of another game. And yes it will include mapper details and ROM sizes but not about every cartridge because currently i don't have the hardware to dump my collection... and about how many carts i can't tell because i am not the only one working on it 
and when it is released you will also be able to add to the database
and when it is released you will also be able to add to the database
I believe that everything that's not an official product is pirated. We had a lot of pirated NES cartridges. Why pirated? Two reasons:
1. We never had multi-carts, like 600-in-1 (only 33 unique games, others were hacked versions).
2. Unknown manufacturer. This is important, as a single Rockman 3 rose, orange or black cartridges could be found for sale.
They're not official products.
A game based on Tetris, for example, is homebrew. It's different AFAIK.
1. We never had multi-carts, like 600-in-1 (only 33 unique games, others were hacked versions).
2. Unknown manufacturer. This is important, as a single Rockman 3 rose, orange or black cartridges could be found for sale.
They're not official products.A game based on Tetris, for example, is homebrew. It's different AFAIK.
Zepper
RockNES author
RockNES author
To clarify 3gengames's point: SNES Doom falls into the same category as NES Donkey Kong, NES Mario Bros., NES Klax, SNES Street Fighter II, and SNES Mortal Kombat: authorized ports.
But I guess you're on the right track. Start by documenting all NES and Famicom cart releases not licensed by Nintendo, and categories will emerge.
But I guess you're on the right track. Start by documenting all NES and Famicom cart releases not licensed by Nintendo, and categories will emerge.
I thought it was built on doom, whoops. But still, that's the only game IMO that's hard to determine what it is. It's unlicensed and a half pirate sorta.tepples wrote:Super Noah's Ark 3D is a hack of Wolf3D (pure software), not Doom (Super FX assisted), and rumors still circulate that Id Software licensed the engine to Wisdom Tree in retaliation against Nintendo's censorship policy.
Yeah, and you're not making it any better by recirculating those rumors.tepples wrote:and rumors still circulate that Id Software licensed the engine to Wisdom Tree in retaliation against Nintendo's censorship policy.
At least according to Wikipedia (the book "Masters of Doom" as a reference), the rumor is not true.It's not a pirate, why would it be? Wisdom Tree licensed the engine from ID and used their own music/graphics/game design. "Pirate" means somebody used IP that doesn't belong to them.3gengames wrote:I thought it was built on doom, whoops. But still, that's the only game IMO that's hard to determine what it is. It's unlicensed and a half pirate sorta.
I tend to classify games like this:
Unlicensed - made by a 3rd party that made a game containing all of their own content. No sprites/music/trademarked characters were used.
Pirate - Anything that is hacked (sprite/graphic replacement, NNN-in-1), FDS to cartridge conversions, etc.
Pirate Original - Anything that is an original game (i.e. no stolen graphics or code which is obviously stolen) but uses trademarked characters. i.e. the multiple DKC games, or the Lion King, etc.
Of course there's plenty of grey area here. But this is unavoidable. Stuff like Tengen Tetris is NOT a pirate, it's merely unlicensed (in the respect of categorization). Tengen did indeed buy a license for Tetris, it just happened to be somewhat bogus. The whole thing surrounding Tetris is pretty insane anyways, so I'd call it merely unlicensed... especially since Tengen bought their license in good faith.
Things get sticky when you have a pirate of a pirate original, like a fighting game that has been hacked, but I guess you could just call that a pirate. (it'd be silly to call it a pirated pirate original, haha).
I would also indicate a 4th category just for FDS to cartridge conversions since these are pretty interesting and it'd be nice to know which were converted. I know of at least 8-10 of them so far.
So, if I were doing it, I'd have these 4:
Pirate
Pirate FDS Conversion
Pirate Original
Unlicensed
With possible modifiers, or things that might fall into both categories. One that immediately comes to mind is Action 52, since it uses a ripped off music engine, ripped off music, and that music loop at the start, and they snagged a multicart menu system for their menu... But the rest is all original (cough). So, the A52 would be pirate/unlicensed since it contains elements of both. They are not trying to pass it off as another game (i.e. changing sprites to turn Felix the Cat into Pokemon), so I do not consider it a full-on pirate.
Unlicensed - made by a 3rd party that made a game containing all of their own content. No sprites/music/trademarked characters were used.
Pirate - Anything that is hacked (sprite/graphic replacement, NNN-in-1), FDS to cartridge conversions, etc.
Pirate Original - Anything that is an original game (i.e. no stolen graphics or code which is obviously stolen) but uses trademarked characters. i.e. the multiple DKC games, or the Lion King, etc.
Of course there's plenty of grey area here. But this is unavoidable. Stuff like Tengen Tetris is NOT a pirate, it's merely unlicensed (in the respect of categorization). Tengen did indeed buy a license for Tetris, it just happened to be somewhat bogus. The whole thing surrounding Tetris is pretty insane anyways, so I'd call it merely unlicensed... especially since Tengen bought their license in good faith.
Things get sticky when you have a pirate of a pirate original, like a fighting game that has been hacked, but I guess you could just call that a pirate. (it'd be silly to call it a pirated pirate original, haha).
I would also indicate a 4th category just for FDS to cartridge conversions since these are pretty interesting and it'd be nice to know which were converted. I know of at least 8-10 of them so far.
So, if I were doing it, I'd have these 4:
Pirate
Pirate FDS Conversion
Pirate Original
Unlicensed
With possible modifiers, or things that might fall into both categories. One that immediately comes to mind is Action 52, since it uses a ripped off music engine, ripped off music, and that music loop at the start, and they snagged a multicart menu system for their menu... But the rest is all original (cough). So, the A52 would be pirate/unlicensed since it contains elements of both. They are not trying to pass it off as another game (i.e. changing sprites to turn Felix the Cat into Pokemon), so I do not consider it a full-on pirate.
/* this is a comment */
You guys are making it way too hard.
By definition any game using a trademarked/copyrighted character or idea without permission is unlicensed. Meaning they did not get permission from Disney to use their character. Even if everything is coded and drawn from scratch, but the game is heavily "inspired" by another company's work it would be an unlicensed game as it did not receive permission from that company. For instance the Pacman vs Munchkin lawsuit. Munchkin is not a "pirate" game. Unlicensed games are extremely common, but the burden of proof is too high in most cases to warrant prosecution.
A pirate game is a game that is sold that contains another company's work/product/code without consent. For instance those 100 in 1 carts that contain the games from other companies. Technically all sold ports that contain the exact graphics of the game it emulates (without prior consent) is a pirate game.
A homebrew can be an unlicensed game if contains the IP of another company without first obtaining permission. This includes gameplay elements. tokumaru's game could still be considered an unlicensed game (Even if it used no characters from sonic) by SEGA if its gameplay is too similar to sonic's. If said homebrew contained code and/or graphics from previous sonic games and is sold it would be a pirate game.
I think the big problem here is that people are only viewing a licensed game as one that Nintendo authorized to be made for the system. For example, the game Jurassic park by Ocean not only needed a license from Nintendo, but also Universal in order to be considered a fully licensed product. If it only had the one from Nintendo then it would still be an unlicensed game. Many games that are made today have several licenses, as they use resources from multiple companies.
Edit#3 Pirate games are clearly illegal and tend to take little effort to prove, but unlicensed games are a sticky mess and in some rare circumstances can even be "protected" by certain laws.
By definition any game using a trademarked/copyrighted character or idea without permission is unlicensed. Meaning they did not get permission from Disney to use their character. Even if everything is coded and drawn from scratch, but the game is heavily "inspired" by another company's work it would be an unlicensed game as it did not receive permission from that company. For instance the Pacman vs Munchkin lawsuit. Munchkin is not a "pirate" game. Unlicensed games are extremely common, but the burden of proof is too high in most cases to warrant prosecution.
A pirate game is a game that is sold that contains another company's work/product/code without consent. For instance those 100 in 1 carts that contain the games from other companies. Technically all sold ports that contain the exact graphics of the game it emulates (without prior consent) is a pirate game.
A homebrew can be an unlicensed game if contains the IP of another company without first obtaining permission. This includes gameplay elements. tokumaru's game could still be considered an unlicensed game (Even if it used no characters from sonic) by SEGA if its gameplay is too similar to sonic's. If said homebrew contained code and/or graphics from previous sonic games and is sold it would be a pirate game.
I think the big problem here is that people are only viewing a licensed game as one that Nintendo authorized to be made for the system. For example, the game Jurassic park by Ocean not only needed a license from Nintendo, but also Universal in order to be considered a fully licensed product. If it only had the one from Nintendo then it would still be an unlicensed game. Many games that are made today have several licenses, as they use resources from multiple companies.
Edit#3 Pirate games are clearly illegal and tend to take little effort to prove, but unlicensed games are a sticky mess and in some rare circumstances can even be "protected" by certain laws.
Last edited by HJRodrigo on Tue Nov 15, 2011 6:08 pm, edited 3 times in total.