Post by: Jonnyboy117 on November 29, 2004, 05:06:08 PM
The Treehouse Interview
Post by: HyuugaYuurei on November 29, 2004, 06:48:24 PM
Post by: Jonnyboy117 on November 29, 2004, 07:05:57 PM
Post by: Myxtika1 Azn on November 29, 2004, 07:38:48 PM
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on November 29, 2004, 08:46:16 PM
Post by: HyuugaYuurei on November 29, 2004, 08:50:00 PM
Post by: ruby_onix on November 29, 2004, 09:04:08 PM
Quote
PGC: Is Treehouse involved in the approval of 3rd-party titles as well?
Trinen: No, that's "lot-check." The Treehouse does also include the game evaluation function, where 3rd parties can submit their games for evaluations by Nintendo. Nintendo will evaluate the game, you know, give them a score, give them feedback, things that Nintendo thinks they can do to improve the game.
PGC: Is that required?
Trinen: It was at one point, I don't think it is anymore.
Here's a flashback to those old days. It's refreshing to hear the "new NOA" talk about things, but they're really going to have to keep it up for a long time before people stop worrying about a possible relapse to the old ways.
Quote
Trinen: A lot of people don’t understand about how the rating system works. If you get a rating you weren’t expecting to get… The ratings effect where you can advertise a game. If you say for instance, you're expecting to get an 'E' rating for a game, and you buy, in advance, because you have to buy in advance, TV and print ads, you know, in magazines, that will accept E-rated games, but wouldn't accept, for example, T-rated games, or even E-rated games with some descriptors, once you get that rating that's not what you thought it was going to be, you just wasted all this advertising money, because you can't advertise it there. And, so, really, it's not so much, "We're Nintendo, we make kiddy games" - it's that "A: we're Nintendo, and we make games that we think appeal to all ages and B: because they appeal to all ages, we want to be able to market to all ages" and then it's important to get that E rating.
So Nintendo occasionally makes small sacrifices to their game content, in order to satisfy a small handful of magazine publishers? That's not cool. How about this? Plan ahead for one ESRB grade beyond what you expect that you're going to get. If that means you can't deal with the most "kid-friendly" magazines because of that, don't you think that might be a good thing for your image problems?
Oh and, before I feel sorry for Nintendo about this kind of thing, I tend to think back to those "good old days" mentioned above...
Edit: tiku tiku tiku!
Edit2: typo/grammar fix
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on November 29, 2004, 09:29:50 PM
Anything with Pokemon, monster farming, card collecting/battling, gets tossed into their own magazine.
All other games to be featured/given mention must be approved by a committee consisting of Infernal Monkey, RABicle, and myself. Sorry, Gordeneye: LOL Agent.
We get monthly demo discs (of pre-approved games) that don't wipe out our memory cards.
The inside cover (page 2?) will always feature an editorial by REGGIE covering his latest conquests and self-realizations on the subject of ASS KICKING.
Post by: Bill Aurion on November 30, 2004, 12:56:36 AM
So only games with lots of fanservice, catgirls, and nothing that may seem like weakness...Oh dear Lord...Well, I guess I would like more catgirls...
Post by: joshnickerson on November 30, 2004, 03:08:31 AM
Post by: TheYoungerPlumber on November 30, 2004, 03:59:55 AM
Post by: Jonnyboy117 on November 30, 2004, 04:37:12 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: ruby_onix
So Nintendo occasionally makes small sacrifices to their game content, in order to satisfy a small handful of magazine publishers?
No. The ESRB itself has strict rules about where games can be advertised based on their ratings. The rules were put into effect a couple of years ago after legislators complained that games were being accurately rated, but M-rated games were still being advertised in children's venues, which made it seem "cool" to play M-rated games.
Post by: Kulock on November 30, 2004, 06:22:27 AM
Post by: Hostile Creation on November 30, 2004, 06:29:28 AM
I was wondering how some of that stuff worked, the ESRB and all that. It was cool that they mentioned Mario and Luigi so much, too. That was an awesome game, and it was insane.
Post by: Ian Sane on November 30, 2004, 07:44:30 AM
WHAT?! How come no one told me about this?! That's awesome!
So Nintendo's actually planning on the new Zelda being rated 'T'. Well that's certainly interesting. At least now we won't have to worry about them turned red blood green in re-releases and stuff like that. The 'T' rating gives them some more flexibility. I suppose there's some concern that upping the rating will alienate a large portion of Zelda's audience but I don't think that will be the case. The 'T' rating is the best rating to have to attract mass appeal. Kids think it's cool because it's a little more violent and adult than an 'E' rated game but at the same time it's not so adult that parents are going to freak. And teens and young adults like it because it doesn't look tiku tiku tiku! . And it doesn't change the game enough to turn away the fans. A 'T' rating is a good way to attract the superficial but without pissing off the existing fanbase.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on November 30, 2004, 11:17:24 AM
FRODO STILL LIVES
Post by: gally on November 30, 2004, 02:05:38 PM
Quote
A 'T' rating is a good way to attract the superficial but without pissing off the existing fanbase.
You're not kidding. I can't stand the whole "it has to be cool" crowd, the people who refuse to watch PG and under movies, etc. Then again, Ocarina of Time was rated E and sold pretty well.
I hate how the rating system now has its own politics, but you're probably right. An E or a T would be fitting, just so long as it doesn't seem like Nintendo specifically tried to get a T. For example, adding blood would be out of the question - I can't see Miyamoto wanting that for his own creations, nor do I think it would fit, regardless of what the "dark, mature, blah blah blah" crowd thinks.
Post by: Captain_Commando on November 30, 2004, 02:20:12 PM
There's a couple things I would have wanted to know though, such as why some changes were made to the second printing of Ocarina of Time (Ganon's blood to green, minus the chanting and Islamic symbols in fire temple). Was that ESRB reevaluating the game or just changes based on user or localization feedback? It would also be interesting to get inside info on localization in the past such as removing religious connotations from the early Castlevania games though it will probably match up with the things I've heard.
As always, interviews like this are great (though I assume rather difficult to get), so keep it up!
Anyway, great site - I've got it as my homepage.
Post by: KnowsNothing on November 30, 2004, 03:50:07 PM
See, I kind of have this rivallry with this 8 year old down the street. He beat windwaker without any help from anybody or anything, and started putting me down when I snuck a look at a guide..and even though I probably beat it faster and with more done than him, it's still a pretty bad feeling when a 8 year old is putting you down over videogames the only thing I have left...... He can beat me at Kirby Air Ride too.
I was waiting for the new zelda to come out so I could pwn him, but he probably won't be able to get it if the rating is "13 or above" or whatever "T" is....
EDIT: *looks at next post* Yeah, sorry, that's what I was getting at. His parents won't let him get it.
Post by: Jonnyboy117 on November 30, 2004, 04:32:51 PM
Post by: ruby_onix on November 30, 2004, 05:57:50 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Jonnyboy117
No. The ESRB itself has strict rules about where games can be advertised based on their ratings. The rules were put into effect a couple of years ago after legislators complained that games were being accurately rated, but M-rated games were still being advertised in children's venues, which made it seem "cool" to play M-rated games.
Okay, so it's not some random publisher that's making the demands. But I think the principle is still there.
- NOA buys ad in Disney Weekly News (I don't know if that actually exists).
- NOA notices some minorly "mature" content in their game that they didn't notice before, and says "Oh no! We're going to lose the money we gave Disney!"
- NOA censors the game.
They're not censoring because they like making kiddy games. They're censoring because they like advertising in Disney Weekly News.
Yes, I know that censorship not a major problem with Nintendo right now, I just don't like the idea of it. It tells me that Nintendo doesn't like making games, they like selling them. Which is probably 100% true, but I usually don't like to think about that.
Like a bad game, a censored game is censored forever, and for everybody. If they don't want to lose their advertising money, they should avoid putting it in "risky" places. Considering Nintendo's currently-damaging image problems, AND Nintendo's longtime marketing problems, they should really consider making a total philosophy change, not just putting more effort into fixing things. Make "games first". Marketing can be second, but games are first, and can't be messed with.
Post by: Bill Aurion on November 30, 2004, 06:39:03 PM
Since when has censorship ever affected gameplay? Oh wait, never...
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on November 30, 2004, 08:08:14 PM
Post by: Deguello on November 30, 2004, 11:22:36 PM
Post by: Lokno on December 01, 2004, 06:24:56 AM
Where was there a white-chalk-outline in the japanese verison of PM2?
Post by: Ian Sane on December 01, 2004, 06:26:33 AM
EAD, Intelligent Systems, HAL, and Retro Studios likes making games. NOA likes selling them. Looking at Nintendo's censorship practices during the NES and SNES days that shouldn't be much of a surprise. It sucks but this isn't really new information to me. It's pretty hard to find an American publisher with any sort of artistic interest in games so I'll still take NOA over a company like EA or THQ. Most publishers try to con people into buying inferior product so be glad that Nintendo's method of attracting sales is by making a quality product.
Post by: Finnegan on December 03, 2004, 12:06:13 AM
Bill Trinen: "Yeah, that game is like, the magic of the original Super Mario Brothers to me. Just pure brilliance." I don't think its possible to say anything more positive about the game....
