Indiana Jones Greatest Adventures prototype sold!

Thanks for sharing that info retrospiel . Like all others I'd love to play the game, but yeah the reality is that there is a lot of stuff that makes it harder to just "release to the wild" compared to other low profile games.

And I really can't fault BeaglePuss and MrMark for trying to make some extra funds on a proto. It would be awesome if every game proto was instantly dumped, but their pragmatic approach of buy/evaluate/limited release/rom release/repeat has worked out very well for the Genesis community (at least I think so) in that we have a lot more interesting stuff to play.

Sometimes I feel like and old school game review when I load up a rom on my everdrive and go to town. :cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xelement5x

Thanks for sharing that info retrospiel . Like all others I'd love to play the game, but yeah the reality is that there is a lot of stuff that makes it harder to just "release to the wild" compared to other low profile games.

And I really can't fault BeaglePuss and MrMark for trying to make some extra funds on a proto. It would be awesome if every game proto was instantly dumped, but their pragmatic approach of buy/evaluate/limited release/rom release/repeat has worked out very well for the Genesis community (at least I think so) in that we have a lot more interesting stuff to play.

Sometimes I feel like and old school game review when I load up a rom on my everdrive and go to town. :cool:

---

This.

After reading all these last posts, I believe this is a completely different situation than all previous prototypes which emerged:
- A juggernaut and financially healthy company owns the license to the theme of the game and such license is still super valuable nowadays.
- The developer company was one of the very best at the time.
- A good chunk of the key members of the team who developed and produced the game are still working in the industry; with Chris being super active actually.
- The game is pretty good, complete and playable.

About the rest of the discussion:
- We really don't have any right to ask retrospiel anything other than questions about the game or if he can share some extra info about it; and even so, he is not obligated to answer anything.
- Our community doesn't own anything in this matter. retrospiel's business is retrospiel's matter IMO. And while he's a member of the community we can't really expect him to put the community interests (which aren't defined anywhere actually) over his business; that's insane.
Yes, some people have contributed a lot to the community for free but I think we can't expect or obligate everyone to do the same all the time about everything. OTOH, nobody is obligated to support these business-related actions going on here.
- BeaglePuss and MrMark have done what they wanted and I don't have an issue with it. Several games released to the public and I personally never gave a dime to them, so all I can say is: thank you very much. The negative side of their business mostly affects themselves IMO, since some people will repute them badly for that, they'll always have to deal with different sorts of threats, legal or not. And as long as they don't cry about it in this forum (which I've never seen) I'm very fine with them.
- All other companies (like Piko, WM, SFT, etc) have also "used" the community in one way or another, but it works both ways. As long as they don't deliver shitty products with extreme delay to us, I don't see them as evil. And it's not easy to survive of this niche market of retro games, everything seems to be very iffy and sketchy, to say the least.

All in all, despite some shots fired, I like when people talk more openly about things.
Nobody here is selling drugs or whatever to have to keep all this talk behind the scenes, as long as people can be barely reasonable when reading this stuff; and I think our community should reflect a bit about the subject being discussed here:
- Are we really 100% in favor of ignoring any legal agreements and laws in order to add one more game to our library?
- Are we going to die if a game we never played doesn't get released after all?
- Should we burn retrospiel and all other members who run any kind of business which end up having the community as customer?
- Aren't we part of the problem when we cry for CIB releases of each and every game, despite the legal situations of each one of them?

Yup you can't fault the Nolans when it comes to how they tend to handle protos in the drawn out end of things as they are released out there for anyone to make their own cart or fire up an emulator with it, now however you feel about numbered boxes and so on that's on the side.

But yeah the thing is Indy there is a living franchise and #5 is already dated around 900 days out or something from hitting the theaters too for the 5th and final (probably) run with Ford (definitely.) You have the Factor 5 people mostly around even if that company is toast, same could be said with Lucas Arts too. If the game is even half the quality of the SNES title of the same name, it's their best 16bit system platformer (and more) title as it's more fun to do than the Star Wars titles if you get beyond nerding out over Star Wars.

The other thing though really is that Piko wasn't at fault here or retro. In the end when you buy up a prototype online essentially a crude way to look at this is that you're buying more or less a bootleg pirate cart in a sense. You may own the plastics, the chips, the silicon, traces and stickers, box too if it had one but the game? No. Almost surely not. Even if the company itself is dead, the rights went to somewhere or someone else depending on contracts. Maybe the developer for the company ended up with it, or company B ate up A and B owns it now. So when someone like Piko goes around and puts the foot work in or friends finding these people tied to these lost or pergatory planted games and they get a license to release it, a co-op profit share deal to release it, or they sell it to them to own to release it -- they in fact DO own it, legally. They can tell you to cut that shit out whether you or the community likes it or not. They can attempt to buy up a proto off you, now you're not forced to without some legal court fun forced to turn it over, but you very well will get blocked from sharing it without some kind of legal backlash from it which won't be worth it. Maybe I'm wrong here? But I doubt the Nolan's or anyone else who finds these prototypes online and dumps them for profit, to break even or for fun and museum level efforts legally get the ok to do so first do they? If not, there's really no right to whine and no one should be really casting any sympathy for anything that happens little or large from it.

Good points.

Let's also remember that the Nolans were there before Piko, WM and others even exist. In a time where there was pretty much no one trying to re-publish these games, they were the saving grace for the community in many ways.
Further more, several members of our community asked them to have some repro runs of their protos. So, sometimes what's expressed as the best interest of the community (or a significant part of it) is far from being something 100% legal.

I'd also like to add that not all times it has to be something completely legal to be positive to the community IMO, since a lot of the knowledge we have accumulated until today came from many different sources and several times the access to valuable information was made through methods/moves which would/could be considered ilegal or morally flawed.

I think it's all better when everyone keeps in mind that everything comes at cost, has pros and cons; and things that may look the most positive ones at first may be harmful for the community in the long run.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Barone

Yes, some people have contributed a lot to the community for free but I think we can't expect or obligate everyone to do the same all the time about everything. OTOH, nobody is obligated to support these business-related actions going on here.
- BeaglePuss and MrMark have done what they wanted and I don't have an issue with it. Several games released to the public and I personally never gave a dime to them, so all I can say is: thank you very much. The negative side of their business mostly affects themselves IMO, since some people will repute them badly for that, they'll always have to deal with different sorts of threats, legal or not. And as long as they don't cry about it in this forum (which I've never seen) I'm very fine with them.
- All other companies (like Piko, WM, SFT, etc) have also "used" the community in one way or another, but it works both ways. As long as they don't deliver shitty products with extreme delay to us, I don't see them as evil. And it's not easy to survive of this niche market of retro games, everything seems to be very iffy and sketchy, to say the least.

---

Well, to introduce another angle: Is it OK to profit off of the work that others in the community have done for free? Both the Nolans and Piko used to sell repros of fan-translated games without permission. Others still do.

I personally am not bothered by it, but I do know that it has driven away at least some translators.

(not trying to throw any gauntlets here: just a thought that came to mind)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crom

Well, to introduce another angle: Is it OK to profit off of the work that others in the community have done for free? Both the Nolans and Piko used to sell repros of fan-translated games without permission. Others still do.

---

I don't like it at all and to be honest I wasn't aware of them doing it in the past.

From the perspective of a community, though, I think we should always care about our actions first.
I mean, who among us feeds/supports that kind of practice? 'Cause there will always be people offering such services and some random guys willing to buy it; however, if communities like ours have no moral compass and feeds that market then it becomes a real issue.

Also, which of the following options sucks more:
A) Repros (potentially containing fan-made translations and hacks).
B) Official online emulation services.
C) Regular emulation.
D) Flashcarts used as replacements of entire collections.

I'd say none of those options, with extremely rare exceptions, are benefiting the original creators (I'm not talking about IP/copyright owners here).
OTOH, all of them are fulfilling the needs of our community to some extent, for an example.

Another curve ball is when you think about what Sega is doing now with the Mega Drive's Steam Workshop thing. Actually, they are making money with that thing thanks to the fan-made translations and hacks. And none of the content creators are receiving any share of it.
Does the ownership of the original game rights make Sega any "cooler" than the repro sellers in this particular case?

And another one: hackers/translators who ask for money. Some guys nowadays want money for a specific project and many others have Patreon accounts.
What about that?
The main guy responsible for Sonic Megamix started a patreon campaign last year and it generated some good controversy inside the Sonic Retro community. Fast forward a few months, and now the guy is publicly stating that he's going to focus on other projects and it's supposedly OK since he didn't get a lot of contribution through Patreon. Do you think it's cool with those who contributed to his campaign in the last months (and let's not talk about YT people like Mark who is complaining for not reaching the USD 10k/month threshold and having difficulties to sustain his family)?
OTOH, his hacks are still among the best, most popular and most played over the years; shouldn't he get something for that?

From another angle, though, how much has Ken and the rest of the Sega-16's staff asked to conduct countless interviews and write tons of articles and reviews to be available for everyone?

A lot of hackers complain about having their work used without permission but have they gotten any permission from the original developers prior modifying those games? I've always questioned myself if the original developers would be happy with what they do to their work.

This subject is very complex and answers only get consistent if you put the burden of the consequences on your choices instead of putting it on the options other people provide to you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Barone

A lot of hackers complain about having their work used without permission but have they gotten any permission from the original developers prior modifying those games?

---

Both are totally different : the original games were published 20 years ago, the original author already profited from it and doesn't profit any more, and the translation is intented for people who couldn't play the original game (so people that anyway wouldn't generate miney). Also, the fan-translator put a lot of efforts in it.

To the contrary, the repro maker did almost nothing, and is making profit from the work of someone else, who originally stated he didn't want to do so.

The only common point between repro maker and fantrad is that both are illegal.

Of course you're aware of these points, so I find your unfinished remark a little stinky. Maybe it's just bad sleep...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tryphon

Both are totally different : the original games were published 20 years ago, the original author already profited from it and doesn't profit any more, and the translation is intented for people who couldn't play the original game (so people that anyway wouldn't generate miney). Also, the fan-translator put a lot of efforts in it.

---

Some hacks are already 10+ years old at this point, though, and I'm not only talking about translation.
There's people out there bitching about optimized Sonic 1 routines being re-used by other hackers without permission. That kind of thing seems pathetic to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tryphon

To the contrary, the repro maker did almost nothing, and is making profit from the work of someone else, who originally stated he didn't want to do so.

---

Sure.
Yet there's people begging for those repros.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tryphon

The only common point between repro maker and fantrad is that both are illegal.

---

Now fantrad is not illegal anymore IF you're willing to give it to Sega and let them make all the profit. :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tryphon

Of course you're aware of these points, so I find your unfinished remark a little stinky. Maybe it's just bad sleep...

---

I'd say you didn't read it the best way.

Barone I like your train of thought there a couple posts ago. I used to bring this up on another site about the whole hypocrisy of whining over work being stolen in the case of hacks and translations because neither had permission. Same with the arguing about taking a prototype and then selling it like it is your own because you have a few parts and can run off labels and the sort. It's all not even gray area, it's illegal in some form, but people have decided that it is the cool thing to double talk stuff on forums where it's OK to ban people for linking ROM sites, yet the same guy can sell ROMs in a pretty wrapper (cartridge) and peddle what is classically known as 'warez' without being shown the door. There's always some weak justification that it's for the community, or they didn't do it so we did it, or other rubbish, but it's just a lie wrapped in another lie to make people not care or feel bad/think about it. It's like that old Goebbels quote where if you tell a lie enough time it becomes the truth, that's where these so called reproductions fall under. They should be called bootlegs plain and simple. A true honest reproduction is done with permission or ownership of the contents.

I don't care if it's illegal. Many things are illegal and everybody does illegal things. Dump all prototypes and stop being a square is my moto.

I'm not so square about the illegality I tire of the hypocrisy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tanooki

Barone I like your train of thought there a couple posts ago. I used to bring this up on another site about the whole hypocrisy of whining over work being stolen in the case of hacks and translations because neither had permission. Same with the arguing about taking a prototype and then selling it like it is your own because you have a few parts and can run off labels and the sort. It's all not even gray area, it's illegal in some form, but people have decided that it is the cool thing to double talk stuff on forums where it's OK to ban people for linking ROM sites, yet the same guy can sell ROMs in a pretty wrapper (cartridge) and peddle what is classically known as 'warez' without being shown the door.

---

If it's for resellers/collectards, it's ok on that 'other site.'

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tanooki

Even if the company itself is dead, the rights went to somewhere or someone else depending on contracts. Maybe the developer for the company ended up with it, or company B ate up A and B owns it now.

---

The rights did go somewhere: the public domain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gentlegamer

The rights did go somewhere: the public domain.

---

Not necessarily, some people will actually buy the rights to something when a company bellies up because they might be interested in doing something with it in the future, furthermore copyrighted works only go into public domain if either

A. The copyright holder chooses to make it PD (highly unlikely unless nobody buys the rights)

or

B. The copyrights themselves expire (IE: they're not used or renewed when it's time to renew them) and since copyrights legally last for 70 years from the day the copyright is filed and approved (at least here in America) the only way something goes into PD before then is if the company or copyright holder chooses to make it PD.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Superrayman3

Not necessarily, some people will actually buy the rights to something when a company bellies up because they might be interested in doing something with it in the future, furthermore copyrights to something only expire and go into public domain if either

A. The copyright holder chooses to make it PD (highly unlikely unless nobody buys the rights)

or

B. The copyrights themselves expire (IE: they're not used or renewed when it's time to renew them) and since copyrights last for 70 years from the day the copyright is filed and approved (at least here in America) the only way something goes into PD before then is if the company or copyright holder chooses to make it PD.

---

See my post above on the legal fiction of "intellectual property."