Thread

1. Panzerschrek · 1790742316 · focus · HN ↗

   Was it allowed to use such cover art having nothing to do with in-game (pretty-limited) graphics?

   1. krapp · 1790742517 · focus · HN ↗

      Yes. And it's actually part of the reason the video game market crashed in the 80s, because of how misleading the artwork was.

      This is why the first Nintendo games released in the US had explicit images of the game graphics on the cartridges.

      1. vunderba · 1790745312 · focus · HN ↗

         Yeah I think the first-party early titles (Excitebike, etc) were definitely more representative of the game play.

         But third parties definitely didn't respect this. I'm sure everyone who grew up in this era remembers the infamous Megaman cart by Capcom [1].

         One of the things that Nintendo learned from Atari was that massive amounts of shovelware did not help their cause.

         As a third party company, you were actually limited to a certain number of games you were allowed to release per year in North America (five I believe). There were ways around that, like Konami forming the subsidiary Ultra.

         Additionally they locked the system behind the 10NES chip that made unauthorized game production difficult (unless you pulled the classic Taiwan voltage snap trick or just blatantly copied the source from the US Copyright Office like Tengen).

         [1] - <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;imgur.com&#x2F;a&#x2F;5hUUDnM" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;imgur.com&#x2F;a&#x2F;5hUUDnM

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.