Originally posted by: arch_8ngel
Originally posted by: tracker465
Originally posted by: arch_8ngel
Originally posted by: Faxanadude
Err.. An unlicensed game was put out by a software company with the intent to pass it off as a real game and distribute it to stores and sell it during the lifespan of the NES to actually turn a profit.
A homebrew is a passion project that some guy in his basement makes 20 years after the NES life span in limited runs and with no intent to distribute.
That isn't true for quite a lot of projects, otherwise RetroUSB wouldn't be in business.
The distinction is really pretty arbitrary, when you realize how small some of the unlicensed developers actually were, back in the day.
We had a really drawn out discussion about this subject, on numerous occasions, and the answer I liked best is:
(1) "period unlicensed" --> unlicensed games released around the production lifespan of the system
(2) "late release unlicensed" --> homebrew
See my response above.
There are going to be times where there is some overlap, and then we are going to be categorizing by separating the products from a single company. I feel that this is inapropriate. To categorize by way of manufacture / production is a better method than by date alone.
Even in the term homebrew itself, it has the word "home" in it, which suggests the way in which it was produced.
I guess my point is, unless you have personally visited those companies in China, you don't ACTUALLY know (a) how large they are, or (b) what type of facility they have for production.
It seems like a total unknown. They actually could just be a handful of guys in a basement somewhere, and you'd never
know.
Even if "back in the day" they had a major production facility, that doesn't mean they are even the same people or facility today. I'm guessing these are private companies and that they don't release any financial data, so again, you have no grounded notion of the scale of their production.
So in the absence of real hard data, I think it is perfectly fair to say that RetroUSB and other modern unlicensed publishers that most of us are aware of, are more comparable than you seem willing to admit.
I think you are failing to acknowledge the point I am making, though. Whether RetroUSB or any other homebrew company likes it or not, they were not in existence during the NES/Famicom's heyday, period. As such, their products are not period products, and can / should be viewed as aftermarket products. Period. I personally admire Brian and the wonders that he brings the community, and also appreciate the efforts of the other guys that develop and produce homebrew games; however, at the same time I feel that they should be viewed for what they are, aftermarket homebrew / fanmade products. Let's face it, if there wasn't a Nintendo Age and noone gave a crap about Nintendo anymore, those games wouldn't be in existence. They are a labor of love.
With that said, the games produced by companies such as Waixing, were produced for the purpose of making a living. Those guys aren't big fans of the Nintendo. They aren't fan projects. And to consider them aftermarket products brings up the sticky situation I mentioned before:
Waixing developed and published games in the late 1990s...these are unlicensed games. The same company developed and produced games during the 21st century, and suddenly they are considered homebrew, even if the production team / company never changed?!? It seems VERY silly to me, to make a distinction based on date, because something like the date of production is unable to encapsulate all of the relevent data, to distinguish between homebrew or not. And the Waixing example is the classic example.
So, how is it that one Waixing game should be considered a homebrew, yet the other should be considered unlicensed, if the company itself remains the same?
