PlanetCrap 6.0!
Front Page (ATOM) • Submission Bin (2) • ArchivesUsersLoginCreate Account
You are currently not logged in.
T O P I C
Retrogaming - Preserving the past or eating companies' profits?
April 8th 2002, 04:09 CEST by DougS

Two weeks ago MAME.DK got the hammer dropped on it by an "unidentified developer" ordering the Archivers to pull their ROMs from the site. MAME.DK not only pulled that company's ROMs but all ROMs on the site, leaving the once great site as now strictly a reference site for old games.

While there were other sites on the web for getting ROMs (not to mention the newsgroups where ROM trading was constantly happening), MAME.DK stood head and shoulders above the rest. It was well researched, well organized, had the bandwidth to handle the flood of users that would descend upon it every time a new version of the MAME emulator was released, and clearly was a work of love by the site's owners. So of course if you're going to try and make some inroads on stomping out Retrogaming, it was the logical place to start.

Retrogaming had been once a fringe scene made up of a loosely knit group of obsessed fans who wanted to bring hard to find old coin operated video games back to life on the PC. But now it's being legitimized by companies like Microsoft and others coming out with PC versions of certain classic games like Batllezone and others. Even companies like Lucas Arts came out with "retro packs" of their old graphic adventure games. But these newer (non-Lucas Arts) versions are not straight ports of the original code  as is the case of "emulated" ROMs, where the code is copied off the chips of coin-op games and then emulated to work on the PC. You play Microsoft's Battlezone and any old timer can instantly see that it's not the same as playing the Coin-Op version, though it is close.

From a legal point of view the ROM dumpers are breaking the law, despite their claims of "fair use". MAME.DK tried to make it look official by saying "You have to own a version of the coin op machine and by clicking Agree you admit that you won't sell the ROM and it is for educational purposes only..yadda, yadda, yadda..." Sound a lot like the B.S. you find on Warez boards doesn't it?

From a copyright point of view, the ROM dumpers are (mostly) doing this without the original author's or companies' blessing. In some limited cases permission was given by the rights holder as long as nobody tried to make money off the ROMs. Further complicating matters is some of the oldest games (pre 1984) came from companies that no longer exist so it's not exactly known who owns the rights.

But from a gamer's point of view a lot of these ROMs come from games you just can't find anymore and in the day and age of FPS and coin-op karate games, who thinks they'll make money off of re-releasing an old black and white 320x240 version of Boot Hill? Or Sea-Wolf? Even "newer" games like Major Havok or Cyberball would have a limited market for profits due to their low graphics.

I myself am a child of the old coin-op era. I stopped playing coin-op around 1989 because the scene was stagnant with Mortal Kombat clones. Even in this day and age most of the coin op games I see have nicer graphics but have no originality whatsoever. Sounds a lot like the state of FPS these days, lots of graphic/performance improvements but no creativity or imagination taking the scene in new directions. So when I found out about MAME.DK I was estatic because I could play games that I haven't played or seen in over 17 years. Who cares about a game made in 1980 these days anyways when we've got EverCrap and AnarchyOnline and Ultima whatever? Apparently some bean counter does otherwise MAME.DK would still be up and running.

Some argued that MAME.DKs downfall was all but sealed when emulation started occuring for games made after 1990. Worse, games that never got past the dev/tryout stage started appearing emulated. There was a huge fight over the fact that some guy had assembled from spare parts a version of Atari's unreleased Marble Madness 2 and wouldn't let anyone emulate it.

Who's right? Who's wrong? Do you care?
C O M M E N T S
Home » Topic: Retrogaming - Preserving the past or eating companies' profits?

|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»|
#1 by BabiG
2002-04-08 04:12:46
Umm nitpick but...Mortal Kombat wasn't around till after Street Fighter 2. Street Fighter 2 didn't come out until '91 or '92. How there were millions of MK clones in 1989 I'd be interested in finding out.

</comic book guy>

"God is dead." --Nietzsche, 1883
"Nietzsche is dead." --God, 1900
#2 by Creole Ned
2002-04-08 04:13:44
Okay, topics are getting posted before i can even VOTE ON THEM!! GRAR!

As for this topic, as long as the copyright is still valid, the companies holding them can do whatever they wish within the boundaries of the law, including stopping the distribution of ROMs.
#3 by BobJustBob
2002-04-08 04:18:14
As for this topic, as long as the copyright is still valid, the companies holding them can do whatever they wish within the boundaries of the law, including stopping the distribution of ROMs.


But that doesn't make it right.
#4 by Matthew Gallant
2002-04-08 04:21:56
http://www.truemeaningoflife.com
Blame the law. If they don't enforce the copyright, they lose it. Consider the profitiability of the reworked versions of Frogger and Pac-Man, and you see what's at stake.

Marketing is a crutch for mediocrity and a handicap to excellence.
#5 by Bailey
2002-04-08 04:26:43
I cared about the ROM scene until I downloaded all my long-lost favorite games and realized they were only great in my golden childhood memories.

Fuck you, ROM scene.

Apparently recession means pop-up windows.
#6 by Martin
2002-04-08 04:27:49
http://www.mocol.nu
Do you care?

No. Not really.

-- Martin
Hunkalicious since 1972!
#7 by Martin
2002-04-08 04:30:32
http://www.mocol.nu
I'm with Bailey on this one. Knightlore was a lot more fun 15 years ago on the Spectrum...

-- Martin
Hunkalicious since 1972!
#8 by Gabe
2002-04-08 04:32:37
http://www.dartpublishing.com
Choose Your Own Adventure books aren't novels.
#9 by Bailey
2002-04-08 04:43:48
You're tempting fate, Gabe!

Apparently recession means pop-up windows.
#10 by Gabe
2002-04-08 04:48:17
http://www.dartpublishing.com
Bring it Fate! Bring it.
#11 by crash
2002-04-08 04:59:32
so, on the one side, we have the "we developed these games and we'd like to make money off of them" group.

on the other side, we have "i have the right to do whatever i want whenever i want" group.

hm.

tough call.

- if you can laugh at it, you can live with it.
- "Hey, how 'bout this: fuck you." -LPMiller
#12 by Bailey
2002-04-08 05:19:27
Isn't it more like "We acquired the licences to these games, and we'd like to make money off of them" in the majority of cases? I'm not saying they have less of a right, just quibbling over details.

Apparently recession means pop-up windows.
#13 by Warren Marshall
2002-04-08 05:48:13
http://www.wantonhubris.com/
crash

lol ... exactly.

I am a magnificent three toed sloth.
#14 by chris
2002-04-08 07:05:12
cwb@shaithis.com http://www.cerebraldebris.com
Every time I've messed around with emulated games, I've come to the same conclusion as Bailey: They're not fun anymore. The bar has been raised countless times, and most of the games from the 80s don't hold up.

Even SuperNintendo emulation pales before just shelling out 75 bucks for the system and a few of the best games, and playing them while sitting on your couch.

There are exceptions, though most occur when you own the real arcade machine. Robotron is still an amazing, addictive game, but you need the machine. Playing it on the PC is worthless. Ditto most other coin-op games I've played. Hitting a nickel arcade with some friends, grabbing a few beers and playing 20 games of Joust on a single dollar is great. Playing it by yourself on your PC? Fuggedaboutit.

-chris
#15 by Ashiran
2002-04-08 08:56:09
Okay what about this situation then.
When you buy a game you buy a license to play rather then a copy of a game right? So when your CD get's into an unfortunate mishap aren't you entitled to another copy then?

I have this situation for Europa Universalis. I bought the game (I have box, reciept and manual to prove it) but the CD broke in its casing when I accidentaly dropped it. It's my fault that it's broke so warrenty doesn't apply. But according to the license I bought I still have the right to install and play the game. So what do I do now? Mail Paradox Entertainment to send me another CD? It will be a cold day in hell before that happens. They might not even have copies left in storage if it's really old. Now if there is an abandonware scene where I can download it is it illegal by doing so?

I don't know much about EULA (it will be an even colder day in hell before I read those) but isn't this a valid point to warrent the existance of the abandonware scene?

"Killing lightsabre-hippies since JK2 release."
#16 by Charles
2002-04-08 09:20:33
www.bluh.org
I'm with the other guys on this one.  I like to keep the nostalgia factor, and not sully memories by replaying old games that have been topped.

Take X-Wing for instance.  One of the funnest space combat sims I ever played.  Yet, after playing excellent games like Freespace and Freespace 2, X-Wing is just missing so much.  It fails to be fun anymore.  It's missing so many little things that add to the gameplay.  

The way I see it, the only way an old game can stay fun, is if nothing has bettered it in it's genre.  Any game that has been topped, regardless of it's original fun factor, is not good anymore.  If you dig it up, and play it, it just won't be the same.  

Now, on to games that are still good, years later, and no longer in production.  SNES roms for instance.  Personally, I'd rather buy the cart if I can find it.  But who are we kidding... even if I do track it down, and own it 'legally', does it make any kind of difference for the company?  When I bought FF3 off of some guy on ebay... did Square make any money from that transaction?  Did they lose money?  How could they, when the game is no longer in production?  Now, sure, someone will proceed to say "But you can buy it for playstation".  Well, the playstation version sucks, and I didn't want the playstation version.  So, I would not have bought the playstation version in any case.  But that raises an interesting question... if I had, would that make the ROM legal for me to use and play?  (note that I can't stand emulation when I can get the real thing somewhere).  

The biggest issue with roms, emulation, old games, and piracy is the fact that these games are hard to find legally.  If people could just walk to the local store, and buy them, years later, there wouldn't be as much of an issue.  But we can't.  Not only that, but there is the issue of games that were never released in our area.  Or weren't released in english, and have been fan translated.  How are we supposed to buy these games legally?

I know personally, I would if I could.

#17 by Bailey
2002-04-08 09:32:04
Funnest?

Apparently recession means pop-up windows.
#18 by deadlock
2002-04-08 11:09:38
http://www.deadlocked.org/
Nova Z:

Owning a license for software on one particular platfrom, or on a certain format doesn't give you an inalienable right to that software on every platform/format that it's available for/on.

you think you're funny ? I'll cut a hole in your head and piss through it...
#19 by "Nathan McKenzie"
2002-04-08 11:12:06
crash:
"so, on the one side, we have the "we developed these games and we'd like to make money off of them" group.

on the other side, we have "i have the right to do whatever i want whenever i want" group."

If you want to be fair to the argument, it'd be closer to say "we developed these games (or, more realistically, paid for them as works-for-hire from creative people who will never see further profits, no matter what) and thus reserve the RIGHT to possibly, if we feel like it, make money from these games, at some point in the future, but unless we do, you simply have no access to the product.  We're glad you have pleasant memories with said product, but go fuck yourself because the law is on our side."

I recognize that plenty of people connected to ROMS behave with the "i have the right to do whatever i want whenever i want" mentality, and it's easy to simply dismiss them all out of hand, but this topic isn't the same as 0-day'ing (if that's a verb) JK2 or MoH and lamely trying to justify it somehow after the fact.  If I really loved Street Fighter 1, and I was really into Street Fighter 1 at arcades, and I wanted to play Street Fighter 1 again, I'm basically out of luck.  Your argument, I surmise, is "Too bad, you don't have a right to player Street Fighter 1."  And you're legally right, of course.  But I have a more complicated time reconciling, on a _moral_ level, my desire to take a brief foray into past nostalgia, which will likely last no more than 30 minutes, with the supposed injustice done to, in this example, Capcom, despite the fact that Capcom will almost certainly never again do anything with Street Fighter 1...  It seems like this is closer in scope to, for example, fan-subbed anime that would NEVER be brought out in the states (but it could be!), people distributing out-of-print video-game music remix albums in .mp3 form that most assuredly never came anywhere near the states (but the publishers want to reserve that right!), or any other similar cases where the monolithic distribution model in place completely lets down people who don't have particularly generic, and specifically recent, tastes.

As I say, I know the legal end of things, but the net result is that 1) people who would like access to works that were meaningful to them are just out of luck, 2) artists, or at the very least the creative types who make games, are denied having the fruits of their efforts enjoyed by others when they could be and 3) corporations make not a single cent anyway.

I have a really hard time shaking the feeling that downloading arcade ROMS from my childhood has about as much moral significance as going 85 mph in a 75 mph zone.  It sure is illegal.

Nathan
#20 by deadlock
2002-04-08 11:12:40
http://www.deadlocked.org/
I mean don't get me wrong, it's a motherfucker that there are certain games that are no longer available, but which were great fun in their day. Given half the chance, there are plenty of Amiga games that I'd love to get my hands on. I'm just pointing out that wanting to play and having a right to play are not necessarily compatible concepts.

you think you're funny ? I'll cut a hole in your head and piss through it...
#21 by Charles
2002-04-08 11:13:21
www.bluh.org
Yes, I know that.  It's true in the conventional reasoning... but then you are also saying that once software is out of production, too bad!  You are screwed!  Damned if you do, damned if you don't.  

It's all bad.

#22 by deadlock
2002-04-08 11:14:49
http://www.deadlocked.org/
But they should be. What Nathan said.

you think you're funny ? I'll cut a hole in your head and piss through it...
#23 by Mank
2002-04-08 11:17:27
Retrogaming is what it is. When you maintain old systems in your closet or attic like I do, it can be a blast to show the PS2 and XBox kiddies what gaming was like in the beginning. It's the nostalgia of it all, and to introduce someone to an experience that they might not have previously had with a certain platform or game title makes it all worthwhile. But the aforementioned is as far as it goes for me, and considering the level of sequelitis that we've seen recently, I can't help but scratch my head and ask why people are wasting creative energy on retrofitting old games.

Does anyone know the extent that Intellectual Property rights apply where games are concerned? One would think that even if a publisher or developer went belly up along the way, the actual Creator or Designer(s) of a game would still maintain all rights under copyright, even after an indescriminate amount of time had passed. Has there been a clear cut precedent set in regards to electronic media that sets the bar for this type of activity?

...on the outside looking in, banned by an epiphany at an EB store....
#24 by Charles
2002-04-08 11:26:28
www.bluh.org
deadlock -

What I'm saying though, is that there should be a method of making it all 'legal'.  I mean, why can't I go to the publisher's website, pay 10$, and get a digital certificate of authenticity (digitally signed of course), saying that I have the legal right to own and operate a particular rom?  Is that so much to ask?  I get a legal copy, the company gets money they'd otherwise not get, and everyone wins!

But no, they'd rather just fling around their legal weight, just because they can.  That, sir, is bullshit, and I'll not stand for it.

I feel about this the same way I do any other law that I don't like:  I don't care.  It's like speed limits on highways.  I think 100km/h is too slow, 150km/h is closer to optimal.  Yes, it's illegal.  Is there any moral reason for that?  No.  

If a law has no reasonable moral explanation, then I say fuck it.  I have no moral reason to abide by any law that I think is bullshit.

#25 by Charles
2002-04-08 11:29:24
www.bluh.org
So to go a bit nerd on the whole conversation, that would make me 'chaotic'.  I'll follow the laws... if I feel like it.

#26 by deadlock
2002-04-08 11:31:40
http://www.deadlocked.org/
Nova Z:
but then you are also saying that once software is out of production, too bad!

Well, that's pretty much it, but hey! If you don't tell the man that I'm d/ling ROMs of archaic arcade games, then I won't!

Personally, I think that there's an oppurtunity being missed here by both the developers of MAME and the companies that own the rights to these defunct games, or possibly even a third-party. Think about it: you get a version of MAME that is specifically designed to play, say, Capcom games (and only Capcom games), distribute it for free, or for a nominal charge and then offer ROMs for download for a small fee (say, 5).

There's another thing that no-one's considered yet, although it was touched on in another thread. Given the increasingly powerful performance of palmtops and the low resoultion of their screens, I could see a lot of companies looking at that as a viable market for these older ROMs.

you think you're funny ? I'll cut a hole in your head and piss through it...
#27 by deadlock
2002-04-08 11:37:33
http://www.deadlocked.org/
Nova Z:
I don't care.  It's like speed limits on highways.  I think 100km/h is too slow, 150km/h is closer to optimal.  Yes, it's illegal.  Is there any moral reason for that?  No.

I'm not going to get into some stupid argument about speed laws, but I think that if there's a speed limit on a stretch of road, it's there for a reason and isn't some number that a theoretical bureaucrat has pulled out of their arse. That said, I have very little problem with breaking the speed limit on a motorway, but I rarely do more than ~10% over on any lesser road. Bear in mind that I'm speaking from an Irish perspective here etc.

Also, what do you mean by 'optimal' ? Optimal for what ?

you think you're funny ? I'll cut a hole in your head and piss through it...
#28 by deadlock
2002-04-08 11:42:03
http://www.deadlocked.org/
To put it another way: I have absolutely no desire to become just another road statistic purely because some cunt thinks that the speed limit is for other people.

you think you're funny ? I'll cut a hole in your head and piss through it...
#29 by Charles
2002-04-08 11:50:38
www.bluh.org
Optimal for travel time without sacrificing safety.

Of course, it depends on the car.  And this is Canada.  Roads here are long and straight for the most part.  With big shoulders.  I follow speed limits for things like blind corners, windy roads, etc.  But when the road is straight for as far as the eye can see, 100km/h is just too damn slow.

#30 by Martin
2002-04-08 12:35:13
http://www.mocol.nu
#29 by Nova Z
But when the road is straight for as far as the eye can see, 100km/h is just too damn slow.

100 km/h is always too slow. Be glad you don't live in Sweden... 9)

Me be gettin' something like this when I can afford it. Then it'll be really unsafe here in Gothenburg. 8P

More pics of Chargers...

-- Martin
Hunkalicious since 1972!
#31 by Terata
2002-04-08 12:37:31
Considering I can go buy Combat for the Gameboy Advance, it IS a bit fuzzy yet...
#32 by Bezzy
2002-04-08 12:59:29
painberry@hotmail.com http://www.antifactory.org
You can't put a copyright on a game.

You can only put a copyright on the representation of a game.

Sick and tired and not impressed with shoehorning art into a profitable industry.
#33 by Tom Cleghorn
2002-04-08 13:26:01
It all rings of something like the dog in the manger syndrome - these companies, for some reason best known to themselves, never seem to try to come up with a solution to the 'problem' (in their eyes) - they just shut down the emu sites as quick as they can. Nova's idea sounds perfect - so why on earth haven't any of these clapped-out coin-op companies (note beautiful guttural alliteration there - autographs later) thought of it themselves?

Hit me - I'm wasting valuable time.
#34 by Neale
2002-04-08 13:30:02
neale@pimurho.co.uk www.pimurho.co.uk
Because they're waiting for someone else (like Nova) to think of it first.

Then they'll think of it themselves.

Eradicators! - www.eradicators.co.uk
#35 by Charles
2002-04-08 13:30:37
www.bluh.org
Oh, that's EASY to answer.

Because the people who make all the decisions at the big companies are always at least 5 or 6 years behind the times.  "Sell stuff on the internet?  You are crazy! No one does that!"

Maybe in 3 or 4 years, we'll see some of these ideas put to action.

#36 by Gunp01nt
2002-04-08 13:33:26
supersimon33@hotmail.com
This comment is brought to you by Smokey the Bear.

Smokey the Bear would like to stress the fact that old SNES and NES games or even the handhelds aren't being sold anymore so that it's not fair for the companies to be charging money for them when they aren't selling 'em.
Of course, NOW they're starting to sell them again now they know there's still a market, but that kinda just isn't fair. Most people who download roms will probably have owned the game on their amiga, atari, snes, nes or whatever but can't play it on their pc. they did buy the game and are entitled to play it, even on their PC. companies trying to make money TWICE out of these people are pure evil!

thus spoke Smokey the Bear.

"I'm not sleeping with a junior high-schooler, I have a life sized doll that looks just like one."
#37 by Marsh Davies
2002-04-08 13:43:55
www.verbalchilli.com
My only interest in emulation is nostalgia, so most of the time I find myself emulating NES games that I already own. I'm just too damn lazy to go up to the attic, braving creaky flooring, asbestos and squirrels in order to retrieve my aging console.

I've got my old favourites at the disposal of my mouse now; Super Mario 1, 2 & 3, Contra, Chip 'n' Dale and of course, the ultimate, the amazing, the stupendous DigDug 2. I still think that is one of the best games I've ever played, even disregarding nostalgic bias.

Though if anyone has Wizards & Warriors, Kid Icarus or Micro Machines... :)

-- ex Spatula Man --
#38 by Martin
2002-04-08 14:11:16
http://www.mocol.nu
gunp01nt: Was the "Smokey the bear" alias used for any particular reason? 8)

-- Martin
Hunkalicious since 1972!
#39 by Gunp01nt
2002-04-08 14:39:22
supersimon33@hotmail.com
martin, no it was inspired by the ad I saw. Save the forest!

"I'm not sleeping with a junior high-schooler, I have a life sized doll that looks just like one."
#40 by Martin
2002-04-08 15:13:23
http://www.mocol.nu
gunp01nt: Ah. Smokey the bear would otherwise be appropriate since the topic touched upon speeding. 8)

-- Martin
Hunkalicious since 1972!
#41 by Martin
2002-04-08 15:18:59
http://www.mocol.nu
That would be the discussion rather than the topic. The topic is not all too concerned with speeding I would say.

-- Martin
Hunkalicious since 1972!
#42 by Neo-Reaper
2002-04-08 15:42:53
neoreaper@excite.com http://octobermoon.homeip.net
The real problem with companies for selling these ancient games is that setting up a payment system (as well as tech support) will offset the very small profit they could make.
The rom scene is so huge because it is "free".

#24 by Nova Z
It's like speed limits on highways.  I think 100km/h is too slow, 150km/h is closer to optimal.  Yes, it's illegal.  Is there any moral reason for that?  No.

Actually, yes.  Diminishing road conditions, deer and moose, wet/slippery spots, yadda, yadda, yadda.  If you think less than 150 km/h is too slow, then you're in too much of a god damn rush.  And before you say its okay because you're a better driver than that, well that's what those other guys thought too...

"Dream of me... and maybe, just maybe, this nightmare will end."
#43 by deadlock
2002-04-08 15:53:13
http://www.deadlocked.org/
Neo-Reaper:
Diminishing road conditions, deer and moose, wet/slippery spots, yadda, yadda, yadda.

Yep, like I said, those limits aren't put there to annoy people, there's a reason that they're set at what they are. They're not just for your safety either - there could be houses along that route as well. Which brings me neatly to...

Nova-Z:
Optimal for travel time without sacrificing safety.

For who's safety ? Yours or other road users ? Pedestrians ? Cyclists ? If you're travelling at 150km/h and you crash headon into another motorist travelling at the same speed in the opposite direction, that's effectively a 300km/h crash; you don't stand a chance. You could argue that the same is true if you crash at 100km/h but reaction times are a factor; the slower you're travelling, the longer you have to react. Plus, of course, stopping distance increases exponentially as roadspeed increases.

Jafd! Warren! Stop bickering I'll be forced to change your opinions manually!
#44 by Warren Marshall
2002-04-08 16:08:40
http://www.wantonhubris.com/
Gunpoint
Of course, NOW they're starting to sell them again now they know there's still a market, but that kinda just isn't fair. Most people who download roms will probably have owned the game on their amiga, atari, snes, nes or whatever but can't play it on their pc. they did buy the game and are entitled to play it, even on their PC. companies trying to make money TWICE out of these people are pure evil!

Let me understand ...

A company stops selling a product but retains the rights to it.  At a future date, they realize they could sell that product again because a viable market exists again, so they do.

And this is evil?

Excuse me while I beat my head against the desk.

Neo-Reaper
The real problem with companies for selling these ancient games is that setting up a payment system (as well as tech support) will offset the very small profit they could make.
The rom scene is so huge because it is "free".

Yeah, this has been debated here before.  I don't think "nostalgia gaming" would be anywhere near as popular if people actually had to pay for the roms.

I am a magnificent three toed sloth.
#45 by Warren Marshall
2002-04-08 16:10:05
http://www.wantonhubris.com/
BTW, Gunpoint, this line ...

Most people who download roms will probably have owned the game on their amiga, atari, snes, nes or whatever but can't play it on their pc.

... is comedy gold!  Thanks ...

I am a magnificent three toed sloth.
#46 by "Ghost in my Shell"
2002-04-08 16:24:46
I enjoy playing older games, but my shit is getting old! Trying to find a replacement NES is a pain in the ass these days. What am I supposed to do when my system dies, and I have my cartridges here lying around collecting dust?

I dont mind buying this stuff if I can find it, but when I do its normally at Funcoland and their bullshit prices. I hate going online spending 10 bucks, 2 dollars on shipping on one game too.

I actually applaud companies re-releasing their stuff, however most of them have been pretty half assed attempts. Squaresoft's FF re-releases for the PSX were horrible, loading time on a SNES cart game for gods sake. Sega's horrible sound with the Sega Dreampack(whatever the hell it was called for the DC, with the 10 genesis games).

I think another thing about roms is the collecting, a gotta-collect them all mentality is involved as well. Most people only play a good 20 or so games they download out of the 1000's that are available.
#47 by Marsh Davies
2002-04-08 16:37:09
www.verbalchilli.com
Warren:
... is comedy gold!  Thanks ...


I don't think that what Gunp01nt says there is all that unlikely. Most of these games are crap in comparison to stuff available today, and, free or otherwise, I wouldn't waste my time downloading them if not for nostaliga... So the only ones I play are, as it happens, ones I used to own.

-- ex Spatula Man --
#48 by Warren Marshall
2002-04-08 16:44:30
http://www.wantonhubris.com/
Ghost
Trying to find a replacement NES is a pain in the ass these days. What am I supposed to do when my system dies, and I have my cartridges here lying around collecting dust?

Not to state the obvious, buy eBay has NES systems all the time.  I see one right now ... closing in a few hours, selling for $20.50.

Martin
I don't think that what Gunp01nt says there is all that unlikely. Most of these games are crap in comparison to stuff available today, and, free or otherwise, I wouldn't waste my time downloading them if not for nostaliga... So the only ones I play are, as it happens, ones I used to own.

Sure, but how apt are you to download games you never owned, but heard were good?  Or maybe one you always wanted to try, but never got around to?  Or ones you wanted, but couldn't afford when they were new?  I'm willing to bet people download a LOT more roms besides ones they used to own.

I am a magnificent three toed sloth.
#49 by "Ghost in my Shell"
2002-04-08 16:55:46
#48 Hence pain in the ass if I have to look on Ebay... I already got scammed on one older system I bought...

It was the newer model SNES, paid 19.99 for it, when it arrived it didnt work.

The person said I should have asked in the first place. I assumed it would at least work, so I just gave bad feedback and swallowed the loss.
#50 by Gunp01nt
2002-04-08 17:13:26
supersimon33@hotmail.com
warren:
BTW, Gunpoint, this line ...
... is comedy gold!  Thanks ...

Courtesy of Smokey the Bear!

Oh and, how polite of you to respond with yet another load of sarcasm while you don't even know what you're talking about.

Do you actually think most people downloading roms are warez kiddies that think MOH isn't interesting?
my, us two certainly are a funny bunch!

"I'm not sleeping with a junior high-schooler, I have a life sized doll that looks just like one."
C O M M E N T S
Home » Topic: Retrogaming - Preserving the past or eating companies' profits?

|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»|
P O S T   A   C O M M E N T

You need to be logged in to post a comment here. If you don't have an account yet, you can create one here. Registration is free.
C R A P T A G S
Simple formatting: [b]bold[/b], [i]italic[/i], [u]underline[/u]
Web Links: [url=www.mans.de]Cool Site[/url], [url]www.mans.de[/url]
Email Links: [email=some@email.com]Email me[/email], [email]some@email.com[/email]
Simple formatting: Quoted text: [quote]Yadda yadda[/quote]
Front Page (ATOM) • Submission Bin (2) • ArchivesUsersLoginCreate Account
You are currently not logged in.
There are currently 0 people browsing this site. [Details]