3 ms·

They may not have had access to them, other than what would be in the ROMs. There weren't standard digital art tools in the early 80's. Things may have been p

They may not have had access to them, other than what would be in the ROMs. There weren't standard digital art tools in the early 80's. Things may have been physically drawn on graph paper, manually converted to binary, and then the drawings disposed of or otherwise inaccessible due to things like contracting situations, etc.

JohnBooty 7y ago
Yes, but that's what I'm talking about. It's crazy that the developers never made some effort to preserve the source materials and get them to the porters. Even a very minimal effort would have surely yielded some large results relative to the effort expended. At the very least, you'd think they'd want to protect their company name by not having it attached to garbage ports. A lot of those design materials were indeed saved, btw. This book and its sequel collect a lot of them: https://www.forbes.com/sites/olliebarder/2014/11/12/the-untold-history-of-japanese-game-developers-vol-1-book-review/#42f939b85156 https://www.forbes.com/sites/olliebarder/2014/11/12/the-unto...
- derefr 7y ago
  Games were small back then, so there was less often an ongoing relationship between a publisher and a developer, and more often just a one-time exchange: software, already finished, for a lump sum. As if the publisher had contracted out work on the game and didn't know it until the contractor showed up at their door. Basically, games as "piece work." At that point, the developer walked off with money, and the publisher walked off with a game binary they could resell and market however they liked (including taking the IP rights and licensing them to a porter.) But the publisher didn't retain any right to the developer's time; and often, the "developer" was just some college kid who developed just the one game, moved on to other pursuits, and now can't be found.

3 ms·

They may not have had access to them, other than what would be in the ROMs. There weren't standard digital art tools in the early 80's. Things may have been p

by tenebrisalietum 7y ago

JohnBooty 7y ago
Yes, but that's what I'm talking about. It's crazy that the developers never made some effort to preserve the source materials and get them to the porters. Even a very minimal effort would have surely yielded some large results relative to the effort expended. At the very least, you'd think they'd want to protect their company name by not having it attached to garbage ports. A lot of those design materials were indeed saved, btw. This book and its sequel collect a lot of them: https://www.forbes.com/sites/olliebarder/2014/11/12/the-untold-history-of-japanese-game-developers-vol-1-book-review/#42f939b85156 https://www.forbes.com/sites/olliebarder/2014/11/12/the-unto...
- derefr 7y ago
  Games were small back then, so there was less often an ongoing relationship between a publisher and a developer, and more often just a one-time exchange: software, already finished, for a lump sum. As if the publisher had contracted out work on the game and didn't know it until the contractor showed up at their door. Basically, games as "piece work." At that point, the developer walked off with money, and the publisher walked off with a game binary they could resell and market however they liked (including taking the IP rights and licensing them to a porter.) But the publisher didn't retain any right to the developer's time; and often, the "developer" was just some college kid who developed just the one game, moved on to other pursuits, and now can't be found.