Interest Check: Monster Party Beta Reproductions

[nerdynebraskan]

There's no standard or precedent of adding those kinds of labels, P. And unreleased prototypes are probably the most popular, common, and successful of all repros made. Every maker sells an Earthbound Zero, Bio Force Ape, and Drac's Night Out. And I've never seen anyone bother to include a disclaimer of that kind.

To be frank, repros of unreleased prototypes really don't break my heart. If the company couldn't be bothered to actually release the game, they already forfeited their right to make money and fame off of it. (Of course, repros do still offer a bit of extremely-belated fame, since the label art typically includes the company's name/logo.)

[L___E___T]

To be frank, repros of unreleased prototypes really don't break my heart. If the company couldn't be bothered to actually release the game, they already forfeited their right to make money and fame off of it.

Just to jump in, it's not about effort, it's about business and in particular stock risk.  Let's take something like Flintstones 2 as an example.  If the game came out while SNES was popular and NES games were hardly selling, that means the amount of copies likely to be sold has taken a nose dive from what you originally thought it would abck when the game was designed.  Now, if it costs Taito (or whoever) $20 to manufacture every copy, you simply can't afford to have hundreds of thousands of copies lying around in a  warehouse.  So then, you look to see if the release is still viable if you make only 20,00 copies.  It is just about.  The shops don't want it though, so it becomes non-viable again, until a rental chain offer to buy those 20,000 copies straight off the bat as long as you can promise they're the only people who can sell it.

In this loose case, the game was released but in many others the game was not released.  Not because somebody couldn't be bothered, but because no company can afford to lose money on what is a very probable outcome.

I wish this game had been released, but I can assure you it not a case of a company or developer not being bothered, it's generally about circumstances not allowing the game to be brought to market.  Retro gamers often talk about gems like Gimmick or other high quality games and wonder why they didn't come out but a rubbish sports game did.  The answer is usually just market conditions at that time.  They're not so relevant to us as gamers now, but for publishers back then they were very relevant.

[80sFREAK]

Title

Interest Check: Monster Party Beta Reproductions

but

There will be no mention of reproduction on the label.

or is it ok now to take someones code and "release" it with no mention of reproduction? 

It's never been "ok," but the alternative is less appealing.  Would you prefer the cart/code rot in some private collector's hands like it has for so long already? 

When I release the rom (for free), you're welcome to make your own cart and place reproduction on the label.

Ok, i will try to simplify question.

Is this your code? Did you created(not dumped) it?

[P]

This is copyrighted material and that won't change no matter what you put on the label. But one can argue that he is taking money for the reproduction work (reproduction in casual terms).

[L___E___T]

Yes you can say you are charging for the cost of goods, hence why the file will be released wide for free.

Charging for a repro of an unreleased game is no different to charging for any repro, so let's avoid that assumption, nobody's releasing source code.

[BeaglePuss]

Title

Interest Check: Monster Party Beta Reproductions

but

There will be no mention of reproduction on the label.

or is it ok now to take someones code and "release" it with no mention of reproduction? 

It's never been "ok," but the alternative is less appealing.  Would you prefer the cart/code rot in some private collector's hands like it has for so long already? 

When I release the rom (for free), you're welcome to make your own cart and place reproduction on the label.

Ok, i will try to simplify question.

Is this your code? Did you created(not dumped) it?

You didn't simplify the question, you asked a completely different question....

I do not own the the code nor did I create it, but you already know that.  Making reproductions is as unethical as making a flash cart containing other developer's work though, something you don't seem to have an issue with.  Pot, Kettle; you know the saying.

Now, let me ask the question once again (not a completely different question mind you):  Would you prefer the cart/code rot in some private collector's hands like it has for so long already?  I certainly wouldn't, and I'm sure most others here (and elsewhere) agree.

I've been dealing with the same types of questions, concerns, and attacks since I began releasing prototypes to the community so many years ago.  These statements have never made me reconsider my stance or change my approach.  I've released roms for unreleased NES games including Hoppin' Mad, Ktty's Catch, Chuck Yeager's Fighter Combat, and Dino Hockey.  I've released roms for unreleased Genesis games including Dragon's Lair, Beastball, Danny Sullivan's Indy Heat, Swamp Thing, and Time Trax.  I've also released dozens of prototype roms for released games with minor/major changes. 

I own none of the code listed above, and had nothing to do with the programming involved.  With that said, I'd gladly do it all over again.

[Raverrevolution]

80sFreak, with all due respect, just end it man!!  How on earth can you argue on such a nitpick to the person that spent thousands on a sought after prototype and is releasing it to all to enjoy??  

He can do as he wishes with it since he put up the money to buy it.  It has been unreleased so he is completing the last step of the "production" it has never received.

Absolutely anyone associated with this game could have taken the initiative to release it anytime they wanted, but hey they didn't, so it's like BeaglePuss said, it'll either rot somewhere or we can enjoy it the way it was meant to be enjoyed.

If the creator of the game was so worried about being compensated he would have destroyed any trace of it once it got canceled.

In my eyes this is not a re-production, it is a production as it's never been produced otherwise technically every cartridge you ever played should have reproduction on it since it had to have been duplicated from the first.  BeaglePuss didn't create the game, but he's giving it the life it should have had, in our Famicoms connected to our TVs.

[BonBon]

I have two unreleased reproductions runs in the works (one for the Genesis and one for the SNES).  Monster Party will not begin production until those two sales are completed.  We're moving in the right direction though.

Can you give any kind of time frame on a release date?

[BeaglePuss]

I have two unreleased reproductions runs in the works (one for the Genesis and one for the SNES).  Monster Party will not begin production until those two sales are completed.  We're moving in the right direction though.

Can you give any kind of time frame on a release date?

It's tough to say.  The Genesis release is almost completely done.  I'm just waiting to get new cart shells in.  They've already been ordered, I'm just waiting for them to ship.  The game is out the door as soon as they show up, and I'm hoping that's within the month.  Fingers crossed. 

The SNES run is being done by a third party manufacturer.  They have received the rom and are about to begin production within the next few days.  When I get the carts in I will still need to take care of art, cardboard boxes, poster, etc.  That release is a few months off as a result.

Monster Party should see a release before Christmas, that's the goal.  It might happen sooner if things come together quickly.  Like I mentioned earlier, this is my first Famicom release.  As a result, I want to be sure to take my time and do it right.  I plan on posting updates with each benchmark reached, so stay tuned.  I just have to get these other two out the door first.

[80sFREAK]

Look, i do not want to stop it or get cart rot in private collection. I even didn't argued the price(but quantity) 
All that i want is to see fine print on the label "reproduction", since it is not an official release and TS is not a copyright holder.  Clear?

[L___E___T]

I probably wouldn't buy one if it said 'reproduction' on the label, it's like having a big fat 'FAKE' tag on.  It obviously isn't an original release, so why does it need to be there?  I wouldn't buy any other repro that had that written on the label.

[FamilyMan]

Thanks so much for your contribution. Don't let these nay-sayers stop you. I've released unreleased games to the public and love the impact I had on the community. Anyway, id love a copy as well!   

[P]

I have to say that I agree with 80sFREAK. A small text somewhere (on the backside maybe) that says it's a reproduction run of an unreleased prototype, mainly in order to not cause confusion in the future whether the game was released or not. But I guess such a thing would be bad for business.

[fcgamer]

Funny how you guys don't jump on this guy's case at all:

http://www.famicomworld.com/forum/index.php?topic=9965.0

And I never hear diddly squat over the hacks and stuff posted here with souped up artwork and case designs, looking like legitimate Famicom releases.  Why the big deal suddenly on this title?

[nerdynebraskan]

I'm as surprised as Dave. Counterfeit copies of released games get offered here, and the response to that is relatively quiet. And that is something that genuinely confuses collectors and other gaming historians. Why is there a burning need to stamp "repro" on this unreleased prototype, when I've never heard that demanded before?