NOTICE: All our homebrews are not ~real~ games

What the hell. Is this for real? "Not a Homebrew game"?

This is exactly what we needed... not only we have to constantly fight to inform people that those SMB hacks with swastikas aren't really "homebrew games", but now we also need to deal with people trying to discredit everyone else's effort by pushing some sort of "Homebrew = shitty games, my product = REAL GAME" distinction.




Way to go "Collectorvision", the same people who adapted real SG-1000 and MSX games like Star Soldier (Hudson), Elevator Action (Taito) and others without a license into Coleco carts and sold them as "homebrews". I'm really surprised there has been no real backlash against them on the internet.

Image from their page: https://collectorvision.com/shop/snes/s ... -of-death/

There's a whole lot of ignorance about what Homebrew means, just listen to Mike Mattei talking.

Sadly, this is true. Semi off-topic, but: I like Mike (we've talked in DM on Twitter, and I even mailed him my old analog joystick for his Apple IIE), but his (and James Rolfe too) understanding of what actual homebrew is a bit lacking. I don't think anyone's taken the time to write him something concise and with example that makes it clear to him. Despite his on-screen demeanour, Mike's quite friendly and receptive, so I'm sure he'd appreciate it + explain in some video that he didn't have full knowledge of the situation + play some actual homebrews.

It'd be important to explain the difference between "repackaged" games (read: not romhacks), and actual romhacks -- and the different tiers of the latter (ex. JP/EN/other translation vs. little kid hacks (turning Mario into a penis) vs. full-on and serious revamps (involving a LOT of assembly rework) vs. highly modified engines or maps (e.g. SMW, Zelda 3, Mega Man 2, etc.) that allow for practically creating a whole new style of that particular game).

The more I think about this, the more I feel strangely inclined to do a video on the subject, given my weird one-foot-in-snesdev/nesdev-the-other-in-romhacking background. Too bad I'm so rambly.

It's not a homebrew game in the sense that its homebrew programmer likely does not get a majority of the profit on it.

So what do you call a romhack that is built from a full rebuildable disassembly of the game? At that point, it's sort of a cross between Homebrew and Rom hacking. It's still based on someone else's code, but you have the full ability to change anything as if you had the source code.

Just a really really advanced romhack?

Need clarification on this: do you mean literally this process and nothing else?

1. Disassemble existing ROM (or use an existing disassembly somewhere)
2. Reassemble disassembled results into a working ROM file (and verified it's 100% identical to the original, if possible)

If that's all that's done, then this isn't a romhack or homebrew, it's instead pointless. :-)

If between steps 1 and 2 there's some kind of modification done, then it's a romhack. A good example is how I did the FF2j/FF2e intro for Neo Demiforce:

1. Demi sent me an IPS patch with all of his work + the CRC32 of the source ROM he used
2. I applied the IPS patch to the same ROM
3a. I disassembled the now-patched ROM
3b. ...split it up into relevant PRG portions
3c. ...reverse-engineered a good portion of the existing intro
3d. ...reworked badly-disassembled stuff (data vs. code)
3e. ...commented a bunch of Square's functions, made labels for them (I re-used theirs due to limited free space)
3f. ...wrote the intro, as well as an RLE compression routine in Perl and an RLE decompression routine in 6502 since the graphics BiGWiERD did were too large to fit natively
3g. ...added my own code using .incsrc equivalent, making sure it fits, nothing breaks, blah blah
3h. Reassembled results
3i. ...made sure all label-ised addresses were the same (orig vs. intro-ised), just in case existing game routines happened to have something I missed in step 3d that would do something like JSR $addr where now it should be JSR $addr+12 due to the intro injection
3j. ...did a binary compare to ensure the only changed stuff was related to the intro
4. Made an IPS patch vs. the original ROM (so IPS patch included translation + new intro)
5. Gave Demi the IPS patch

In this case, the romhack genre falls into the category of Translation/Translated, because that's what the goal was.

Well Homebrew does have a bad name. In that they are more "look I did a thing" rather than an actual commercial quality game. I've seen points made that there are so many other games from "back in the day" that while average back then are super cheap and still better. Homebrew is usually associated with pirates and hackers as normally you need those two to make homebrew possible. I speak from a place of privilege where Homebrew doesn't exist though.

If you modify a game, its a hack. If you reverse the entire game and make modifications then its gets to a tipping point I guess. Garrys Mod is a 'hack' but its was such a big one that it became its own game. see also Counter Strike, and that base building game with humans and raptars that I can't remember the name of.. However as none of the Old Engines are released to use any of them means you need to hack them, so it could be argued that even if you completely change a game, its still a hack on X.

When I do a Google search for new NES games, I type "NES homebrew". If I type "Indie NES games" I get mostly Retro Magazines, and sometimes Android games that have a retro look.

Like it or not, professional developers are stuck with "homebrew" just to connect to their audience.

And producers of hacked cartridges are stuck with "repro".

Sometimes Ebay/Etsy sellers will throw a "homebrew" label on their hacks, but I suspect that's to fly under the radar, to prevent their products from getting removed as an illegal copy.

Do not forget how people have now been saying that rom hacks and fan games are inherently evil, despite its goals. People who profit from work based on years of rom hacking research are now saying that doing a fan game is an evil thing to do. They say that doing some work that contains copywritten material is evil, even if you're just showing your love for that IP and releasing it for free, with consent from the original developers. It does not matter, you're evil. So it's natural that suddenly everything our dirty community does is automatically considered bad, amateurish and low quality.

I've always thought that what this community excels in technical understanding it lacks in marketing. Internet presence and PR is based on marketing skills and proactive advertising. When you don't do that you're going to be an obscure hardcore nerdy thing no matter what. Gone are the days that media outlets would actually do research. Their research is now to simply follow select social networks members and wait for news. If we're worried about bad rep to the mainstream public this needs to be addressed.

Let's not kid ourselves. No major original NES developer has consented to this.

There are modern games, where mods are encouraged. Mostly, developers of games "official" policy is to oppose this, to protect their IP.

Big N does NOT consent, but sort of looks the other way.

That's bad
The situation here is not very different from ebay.

In Mercado Livre, (more or less the brazilian's ebay) there's a lot of pirated games and emulators packaged with ROMs being sold as "patchs".
In the announce the vendors usually say that it was developed by him and his "team".
Some cartridges I bought were sent as "memory card" declared on the envelope.

Too bad a somewhat big project is detrimenting a whole community just to promote it's own product.
I sincerelly hope the hardware is not composed of 3v parts directly connected to the console.
What could be more badly produced than that?
I can only think of the rat's nests I do on my modded stuff, but I'm not claiming it to be professionally made or even selling it.

Yeah, the vast majority doesn't care because it's a niche thing. There are a few rare cases where the original developers like the hack. That's what I meant. IE. David Crane complimenting my Super Pitfall hack. Granted, he's not the current owner of the IP. Even then it's still "evil". Go figure.

Post the script here before you make the video and we might be able to help. Here is an incomplete list of categories that you might want to distinguish:

• Original unlicensed game small in scope - example: Love Story
• Original unlicensed game large in scope - example: Battle Kid, Nova the Squirrel
• Infringing fan adaptation of a proprietary product identity* - example: Final Fantasy VII (Famicom), LJ65, AM2R
• Total conversion mod - your "full-on and serious revamps"
• Fan translation mod
• Little kid hack

Do you mean the sense that the producer is someone other than lead programmer, which is also true of things like The Curse of Possum Hollow? Or do you mean that it's an adaptation of an existing product identity, and the royalty for that product identity exceeds what any team member made on that project?


Copyright infringement. To me, legal compliance is one of the biggest deciding factors between what's a game and what's an unauthorized mod.


Would that be my "small in scope" category?


That's because fan games misappropriate proprietary games' product identity. The view adopted by other opponents of fan games reflects that supported by applicable law: Reverse engineering of a game console is supposed to produce a platform on which to build a game around an original product identity, not someone else's without consent.


How do fans obtain consent from the owner of a product identity to adapt it into a game at all? As others have mentioned, Nintendo has a policy of blanket rejecting consent for its own product identities.


And that's the key difference: it's "evil" precisely because they're not David Crane's rights to give.


* A "product identity", sometimes confusingly called an "IP", is defined in the d20 System's Open Game License to include things such as titles, logos, character names, likenesses, setting elements, plot points, and the like.

A lot of people tend to accept "what is legal" as "what is moral" uncritically when it comes to things like copyright law.

There are examples of IP owners that are ok and actually like mods to their games. That does not only apply to games, either. So there's nothing inherently evil about making fan games and derivative works. It's just a terrible generalization.

Well everyone has their own moral compass so yeah you got to follow "what is legal" as "what is moral" in this kind of discussion otherwise it's all a waste of typing. Shitty as modern copyright laws are they're still the law, after all.

It's unfortunate that they decided to take a symbolic dump on the hard efforts of the homebrewing community to promote their game. It's even more frustrating that youtuber John Riggs mirrored their marketing at the very start of his review: "Is it just another homebrew, or is it worth the three years' wait to play this game?" He then goes on to state he's a huge fan of homebrew, so i guess that evens it a little. But it is still a wierd opening line to me.

edit: he mentions it is lincensed. i guess Syndey hunter is a license? But it kind of comes of as if this was a licensed SNES game?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AjMJZbLpVcE

Honestly, most of the games i think are worth playing today are precisely homebrews. Just because there's a D.I.Y spirit in a lot of it and that the quality range is very wide, naturally doesn't mean it's all crap. But i'm preaching to the choir here.

Is it just another homebrew, or a mediocre Flash game, that anybody can play for free?
https://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/619706

I've come to the conclusion that most homebrew games are low-effort garbage.

Then again, wouldn’t that be true for games in general? Lots and lots get made. Few stand out.

For the purposes of this reply, define "homebrew" as hobbyist games for a platform as well as commercial games published after the conclusion of a platform's commercial era, and "mainstream" as commercial games published during its commercial era. So even if you follow Theodore Sturgeon's recommendation to judge based on the 90th percentile in quality, the 90th percentile of homebrew games is lower than the 90th percentile of mainstream games.

In this case I would love to see the (in)famous "Nintendo Seal of Quality" on it.
I couldn't find it on the pictures, did someone else find it?

I can't facepalm hard enough for this.

There are two orthogonal meanings of "licensed". One is "approved by the console maker", which covers (for example) everything in Apple App Store, PlayStation Store, Nintendo eShop, etc. The other is "using a well-known product identity subject to exclusive rights". All four combinations are attested in the pre-1997 NES library:

• The Terminator is licensed (by Nintendo) and licensed (by Hemdale, owner of copyright in the film The Terminator).
• Journey to Silius is licensed (by Nintendo) but not licensed (by Hemdale, who chose LJN instead, forcing Sunsoft to create an original product identity instead).
• Road Runner is unlicensed (by Nintendo) but licensed (by Warner Bros. Pictures, as it's an adaptation of Looney Tunes short films).
• Bible Adventures is unlicensed (by Nintendo) and unlicensed (The Bible is old enough that its copyright has expired, as has copyright in early modern English translations).

I don't think size is the critical factor, although in the "tech demo" I pulled a neat trick like mid frame pallete changes etc would be the small in scope case. I think its more when the release comes with the "unexpected Oscar acceptance speech"
Guy's I've always wanted to make my own NES game since I was a kid and thanks to all of your help today I realised that dream and here is my "...." thank you all so much.. I'm now going to fly out the window like Tuxedo Mask... bye "

There are people who look down on Indie games as not really being "real" games. I.e if your game is good enough and quality, why isn't it being published by a publisher? Homebrew is a tier below Indie games.

I really see no problem in someone being proud about his work and wanting to share his excitement with a community that helped him, directly or not, to push through the end.

So, (edit - insert: according to those who hold the view that indie isn’t real) a ”real” game needs to have the actual content creators being alienated from their work to some degree? And broad strokes decided by sales experts? That’s kind of contrary to the game landscape i grew up in as a kid, with sid meiers civilization, commander keen, and diablo. These were all largely successful pc games where the creative direction still resided within the content creating team. Or going further, some of my best game experiences where in the mac shareware scene, completely indie/no publisher.

A lot of good music has been record label-less. Today, it’s even hard to find good music on the major outlets. It’s all made for one cardinal purpose. If something is good, it has become almost accidental.

There is nothing wrong with it, if fine for people to do it.

This made me laugh.

Also, for some reason, made me wonder about the legal issues related to hacks. Like, if a hack author of a very popular licensed game was angry that a repro maker was selling copies of his game. He would have, probably, no legal recourse for stopping that.

Or, if it LESS bad to hack an unlicensed game that was an illegal clone of a real licensed game. Like, I can't think of an example. Never mind.

Taking my ironies and bad jokes aside, I think it would be fine to the guys diminish the homebrew community if, and only if, they didn't get any kind of help from it.
But if they're telling homebrews are not real games, but got help from this same community, it's like using all the hard work of these people as a disposable doormat.

Homebrews can be bad? Sure!
But I think there's enough great homebrew games to simply disallow this kind of generalisation.
This case is even a lack of knowledge about homebrews or simply another case of ingratitude.

Looks like whoever's marketing strategy worked.
Would not have heard about this game if not for the "edginess", pardon the 90's term.

Good discussion tho.

Aladdin? Also, this game has been hacked: http://www.romhacking.net/hacks/2181/, http://www.romhacking.net/hacks/2107/

It didn't help, but the situation was already I think unrecoverable. The word homebrew is used in an extremely broad fashion in numerous contexts. I've seen people apply it to:

Hacks
Reproductions
Original games
Fan games on PC

And sometimes people use the word "homebrew" right alongside: "hack" as though it is almost synonymous. There's an air of illegitimacy, underground, or illegality when it is used. Most of the folks using the term are not technical. Some of them may have unspoken assumptions that ANY new game from an old console is necessarily a hack. Or homebrew. Or something. They don't know, they haven't spent more than a few seconds total of actual thought about the meanings of the words because they flat out don't care. Retro game fans just play the games and echo the words others used, and unfortunately the word homebrew, with the exception of the development community, is irrevocably tainted.

So in a way I don't necessarily blame folks for wanting to distance themselves from the word. Any original homebrew is also an indie game, so might as well call it an indie game, to help clarify for the masses it is a labor of love somebody spent years making, often with a professional mindset.

They could've called it officebrew(ed).

Ultimately, this is a definition debate. This is to be expected, as one way of stating Layne's Law of Debate is that every substantial debate goes through at least some phase as a definition debate. To resolve it, we need to suggest definitions and figure out which are most useful.

The proposed term "officebrew" would appear to describe one of the four situations that make up the Cartesian product of full- or part-time and age of platform.

• Original indie game on modern platform developed by part-timers: "indie game on Itch"
• Original indie game on modern platform developed by full-timers: "indie game on Steam"
• Original indie game on old platform developed by part-timers: "homebrew"?
• Original indie game on old platform developed by full-timers: "officebrew"?

I use "part-timers" here to reflect the criteria for inclusion on BootlegGames Wiki, which exclude games that are "made as a hobby and usually don't have a full-time development team behind them."

An "old platform" could mean either one no longer supported by its manufacturer or operating system publisher or a hardware platform whose patents have expired (which means 20 years).

As for the term "indie": User "ceoyoyo" on Slashdot argues that it means funded without access to venture capital.