Decoupling the NES from the Famicom

[Ankos | 505]

@Gaia GensoukiI'd say that all game systems are computers, just with varying levels of specialization. With that being said I do think that marketing does matter. The ability to do something with an object does not define the object in its entirety. A person could take apart a car and put it back together with some new packaging and make a truck. It would still do the same thing, but I would not call that car a truck, because that isn't what it was intended as. You could use a keyboard for teaching typing as a computer keyboard and program with it, but I would still call it an educational tool

[Gaia Gensouki | 1,079]

@AnkosIf all game systems are computers and the NES is a game system, then the NES is a computer. So if both the Family Computer and the NES are computers, then they're the same. Q.E.D.

[fcgamer | 4,833]

I've seen people suggest that some things are different based on how they were marketed (the Pokemon Yellow game, for example...) yet marketing only counts for some items and not others? Weird.

[Ankos | 505]

7 minutes ago, Gaia Gensouki said:

@AnkosIf all game systems are computers and the NES is a game system, then the NES is a computer. So if both the Family Computer and the NES are computers, then they're the same. Q.E.D.

They're both computers, but wired differently to accept different carts with some functionality differences (though only due to being put together differently). The Famicom is the truck, the NES is the car. Both take you where you want to go, and if that is all that is important to you then for your purposes they are the same

[spacepup | 2,448]

Some people will probably just need to 'agree to disagree' on this one.  I mean, I've read the entire thread, and I completely understand where people are coming from.  Despite the differences between the systems, for ME, I'll categorize them as the same general system.  If I were making a database today for NES/FC games, I'd include those in one category, with regional releases listed by region, just as I would do for SNES/SFC and other systems.  I recognize there are technical and other differences between the systems and have no objection there.

Don't agree with me? Ok, no problem.  I'm not gonna write a treatise or fight to convince everyone.  

I'd be interested to see a poll on this to see what most people think

[fcgamer | 4,833]

If things were categorized and listed as FC/NES, some people might be more receptive of the two being grouped together. For starters, Famicom comes before Nintendo Entertainment System alphabetically. Secondly, it was the original. And finally, even if we consider the two machines to be the same, the Famicom is the superior product, in terms of what it offered users. Listing it as NES/FC feels quite western-centric and biased, and brings us back to the idea that had been floating around once on Nintendo Age and elsewhere: I don't like / want to play / collect Famicom games, so I'll just immediately ask someone to "repro" one for me. 

[spacepup | 2,448]

I was making a hypothetical example to illustrate my perspective.  I'm not going to debate further, have a nice day!

[fcgamer | 4,833]

17 minutes ago, spacepup said:

I was making a hypothetical example to illustrate my perspective.  I'm not going to debate further, have a nice day!

No need to debate, I am just pointing something out that has been running rampant in the community for years. 

Pre Nintendo Age era, everyone more or less viewed the machines as the same. This was in the days when Digital Press forums were king, NES World and |tsr's NES Archive were the top resources for anything 8-bit Nintendo, etc.

Around the Nintendo Age era, for some reason people started viewing the machines as different entities, but only when it was convenient, i.e. "reproing' (stealing and bootlegging) Famicom games to play on the NES "to match the set" . I remember asking if it were okay if I did the reverse once, on NA, and everyone got up in arms over the idea - I mean, why would someone even want to play the game on a 60 pin cart and not a 72 pin one?! Preposterous!

 

[darkchylde28 | 1,546]

8 hours ago, fcgamer said:

b. The computer magazines at the time used to print lines of code that reader submitted for FB homebrew. There is quite a bit that has been translated and reprinted.

Why do you guys think I was trying to get my keyboard working? I wanted to enter the code line by line and save it to the cassette tapes I bought, like people were doing back in the day.

Can you provide some samples/examples?  Specifically where it shows that it was homebrew code submitted by enthusiasts?  There were lots of computer magazines back in the day that did similar things, but typically all code was created by the magazines, or at least claimed as so.  I'm not at all saying this didn't or couldn't have happened, but it seems very odd that given how meticulous the Japanese tend to be regarding their electronics that thus far, zero cassettes have surfaced with any sort of user generated content on it.  If people were going to submit code to magazines, surely the same folks would have kept recorded copies as well, which would have been passed along with their boxed up, mint shape hardware as well.

8 hours ago, fcgamer said:

FInally something else entirely, but Study Box runs cassette tapes on a Famicom:

https://www.nesworld.com/article.php?system=nes&data=fc-studybox

Neat add-on, but not created, distributed, etc. by Nintendo.  Because this thing exists, does it mean that the Famicom was really a homework machine?  Did the introduction of Racermate Challenge II mean the NES was really an exercise machine?  Of course not.

8 hours ago, fcgamer said:

There were several FB carts.

Ok, there were two, since the second (Family Basic V3) was actually distributed separately, as its own thing, instead of just replacing the cartridge that came in the box with the keyboard.  Two, however, does not mean "several."  Had it not been for a deliberate, separate release on Nintendo's part, I would have maintained that the second cart to be released was just a revision, but it seems that they updated the name of the cart, etc.

6 hours ago, Gaia Gensouki said:

At this point it really feels a bit like wanting to have a dissenting opinion just to be different/go against the crowd.

It really does, and the telltale sign is looking at exactly who reacted to your comment with "Disagree."  No serious evidence beyond opinion, really.

2 hours ago, phart010 said:

Ok, since my points don’t seem to be taken seriously, I will restate them here comprehensively:

1. The product is called “Family Computer” (yes - @darkchylde28presented unverified information from an unidentified source that said it may have been planned to be called Gamecom, but what value is such information without some level of authentication?). Family computer implies it has different uses for different members of the family. For kids it has games. For adults, may have other purposes.

Fair enough, but what were the "other purposes" that adults used the system, when it came out?  At launch, and for almost a solid year afterward, the only things available for the system were games.  Then came the launch of Family Basic, which gave the possibility of real computer functionality through software, but none emerged in any official capacity beyond a small number of demo games that were included with the Family Data Recorder.  The whole "Family" thing seems to really just come down to smart marketing, and nothing more.

2 hours ago, phart010 said:

2. Failure to include a keyboard at launch doesn’t mean it’s not a computer. Lots of computers today don’t come with keyboards. At launch, maybe there was no software justification for including a keyboard. But they included an accessory port (which resembles a computer accessory port). And the eventual keyboard did connect to this. And as @darkchylde28referenced from the smart folks at NESDev, it is possible to engineer a custom RS232 communication cable for this port.

The problem with your point here is that not only was the keyboard not included at launch, but it wasn't available in any way, shape, or form for almost an entire year post-launch.  ZERO computers today that don't include keyboards fail to have them available for them, whether they're directly created by the manufacturer or some third party.  Failing to provide access to a devices supposed primary function when you launches pretty much spits in the face of that function actually being the primary one.

As for being able to "talk" to the Famicom via the accessory port via a custom RS232 (serial) cable, yes, that's absolutely true.  However, the Famicom itself isn't capable of communicating via RS232 (serial), thus not making that port any sort of computer data access port.  It was designed to allow Nintendo and third parties to create additional accessories for the system, similar to how the modular ports on the front of the NES did.  In fact, the exact same direct communication with the system via TTL is just as easily accomplished via the NES controller ports, whose wiring matches that of the Famicom's controllers.

2 hours ago, phart010 said:

3. As many know, products are often rushed to market without the full feature set being ready on day one.. for example lots of video games are shipped incomplete only to get the full feature set and bugfixes pushed out at a later date. Today we have over the air updates, but in the past the way they did this is they would make things modular so that they could ship to future expansions. There is at least one piece of evidence that indicates Famicom may have been rushed out to market - the initial batch of systems had faulty chips in them and had to be recalled. It’s possible that computer-like features were planned to come after initial release.

Rushes do happen, but it doesn't ever include the primary function of the product being rushed.  How many SUVs would be sold that were unable to be driven anywhere for at least a year after release?  Sure, there's a great entertainment system inside, but the entire drivetrain is proprietary and just absent when they're put on the market.  Just imagine how many Donkey Kong cabinets Nintendo would have sold had they only shipped the cabinets, with a pinky-promise to ship the actual boards a year afterward.

As for the bad batch of systems due to faulty chips, how does that indicate a rush to market?  Any manufacturer can fall prey to bad batches of chips when they're not caught by the fabricator.  The only other implication that would point to a rush on Nintendo's part would be to launch in spite of the faulty chips, meaning Nintendo knew they were bad and shipped anyway, and would be a pretty spectacular bit of malfeasance on their part, if true.

2 hours ago, phart010 said:

4. The fact that computer-like features never came in the vastness we would expect for a computer product has no bearing on what the original intent for the product was. As indicated earlier, products often go to market but then are used by the consumer for a totally different reason than they were originally intended for. If Nintendo noticed that people seemed mostly interested in Famicom for playing video games, then naturally they would focus their attention on the video games aspect of it.

I disagree.  Nintendo didn't really produce anything for the Famicom that would/could be used in the manner that an actual personal computer of the day could be.  The Intellivision had a "computer" add-on that was just as capable, if not moreso, than the Family Basic cartridge + keyboard that was released by Nintendo for the Famicom.  Does it make that console a computer?  Mattel teased a "computer" add-on from launch, but wasn't ever considered "a computer."  The Famicom was always intended to be a game console, but provisions were made to be able to be able to connect add-ons down the line.  Does the existence of the Famicom Top-Rider mean the Famicom was meant to be a "racing simulator?"  People focused on the video game aspect of the system because it was its primary function, and not secondary to any dreams Nintendo might have had of putting out an add-on that would allow full personal computer functionality later on down the line.

2 hours ago, phart010 said:

5. Famicom disk system doesn’t work in conjunction with Basic. Doesn’t matter. By the time that FDS was ready for release, they had already identified the target demographic for the product was people that want to play games. So it was not necessary at this point to make it work with Basic.. Again, it’s still a Family computer, people just aren’t using it for computing and because of this, Nintendo is no longer developing computer-like features for it 

 It does matter if the FDS is going to be used as an example of how/why Nintendo had intended the Famicom to be a personal computer and not a gaming console.  Failing to make its floppy disk drive, arguably the most computer-esque thing ever released for the system, actually compatible with the sole actually computer-esque add-on for the system (Family Basic) indicates that the FDS wasn't actually intended for such purposes.  The FDS came about because magnetic media (floppy disks) were much cheaper and faster to produce than cartridges were.  The fact that Nintendo created kiosks where you could just buy a new game and have it written to a blank side/disk or overwrite an existing game speaks to how this was done for the money and not any sort of illusions of it being to make the Famicom into a computer.

People weren't using the Family Computer for computing because it simply wasn't possible to do so.  Had Nintendo released some tapes with spreadsheet or checkbook balancing programs on cassette for use with Family Basic, or heck, even as stand alone cartridges, or hey, as FDS diskettes, there'd be the basis to an argument that the Famicom was meant to be used as a computer.  But there aren't.  Nintendo never did it, and no prototypes, design drawings, etc., have surfaced to indicate that this was their intention.  I maintain that it all comes down to a clever name meant to capture the public's attention, since so many were enamored of the idea of owning a "personal computer" at the time.

1 hour ago, Ankos said:

@Gaia GensoukiI'd say that all game systems are computers, just with varying levels of specialization. With that being said I do think that marketing does matter. The ability to do something with an object does not define the object in its entirety. A person could take apart a car and put it back together with some new packaging and make a truck. It would still do the same thing, but I would not call that car a truck, because that isn't what it was intended as. You could use a keyboard for teaching typing as a computer keyboard and program with it, but I would still call it an educational tool

Except, in the case of the Rivian, the SUV and truck versions are literally the same design, hardware, etc., under the body that's slapped onto it.  So, at a hardware level (which is what I've been saying, not that the Famicom and NES are quite literally identical--I have eyes and am not insane, you know), they're literally the same machine.  If you took apart a car and literally used the exact same pieces save the body, then put a truck body onto that frame...yes, both vehicles would be the same thing, at the hardware level, with some relatively cosmetic differences.

How about this:  Are the 2001 Mercury Villager and the 2001 Nissan Quest the same vehicle, or totally different ones?  Depending on what options you selected when buying one, they can be literally the same vehicle outside of badging.  Why?  Because the platform was a joint venture between Ford and Nissan, with Ford actually building all of the things.  I own the Nissan version, and it very clearly says "Ford" on the stickers in the door pillar, as well as all sorts of other places.  I've been able to get replacement parts straight off of Mercury Villagers, because they're literally the same vehicle, manufactured by the same company, but marketed differently depending on the badging.

 

Edited January 12, 2023 by darkchylde28

[fcgamer | 4,833]

4 minutes ago, darkchylde28 said:

Ok, there were two, since the second (Family Basic V3) was actually distributed separately, as its own thing, instead of just replacing the cartridge that came in the box with the keyboard.  Two, however, does not mean "several."  Had it not been for a deliberate, separate release on Nintendo's part, I would have maintained that the second cart to be released was just a revision, but it seems that they updated the name of the cart, etc.

There is supposedly also a Family Basic 2, though it would likely be considered more of a revision. 

[darkchylde28 | 1,546]

Just now, fcgamer said:

There is supposedly also a Family Basic 2, though it would likely be considered more of a revision. 

That would be my guess, and notice that I pointed out what was released and not created.  Based on how software development usually goes, V2 was probably slated for release, and then some bug was found and corrected last minute, prompting V3 to be the one to actually make it out the door.  There have been NES games with different revisions released that skipped a few revision numbers between releases, and only the 2 or 3 actually released revisions are counted, so I think that idea should apply here as well.  If we go down the rabbit hole of unconfirmed non-releases, we'd have to account for V2.1, V2.2, etc., all without being able to confirm how many total revisions actually got made before the last one was put into a cartridge and pushed out into the wild.

[fcgamer | 4,833]

8 minutes ago, darkchylde28 said:

Can you provide some samples/examples?  Specifically where it shows that it was homebrew code submitted by enthusiasts?  There were lots of computer magazines back in the day that did similar things, but typically all code was created by the magazines, or at least claimed as so. 

You gotta go onto Famicom World and read the threads there, which post links to the code. Perhaps the author of the threads (the same guy who translated / made the code accessible to a western audience) could share his thoughts, if asked.

Regarding the homebrew / hack scene, I can't offer hard evidence, perhaps @Ankos can offer something more concrete than I, I'm not sure. What I can say though is that I used to think the same way as you (i.e. not really any homebrew stuff going on back then) but was told by a source that I trust that I was mistaken, and that there was a decent underground scene. I do have a few FDS hacks and know of a few others to exist, so there was definitely something going on back then, though to what extent I personally don't know.

[fcgamer | 4,833]

2 minutes ago, darkchylde28 said:

That would be my guess, and notice that I pointed out what was released and not created.  Based on how software development usually goes, V2 was probably slated for release, and then some bug was found and corrected last minute, prompting V3 to be the one to actually make it out the door.  There have been NES games with different revisions released that skipped a few revision numbers between releases, and only the 2 or 3 actually released revisions are counted, so I think that idea should apply here as well.  If we go down the rabbit hole of unconfirmed non-releases, we'd have to account for V2.1, V2.2, etc., all without being able to confirm how many total revisions actually got made before the last one was put into a cartridge and pushed out into the wild.

From my understanding, version 2 does indeed exist - the situation is that it is extremely rare and just housed in a FB1 cartridge, so essentially a revision, though it did make it to retail.

[darkchylde28 | 1,546]

9 minutes ago, fcgamer said:

You gotta go onto Famicom World and read the threads there, which post links to the code. Perhaps the author of the threads (the same guy who translated / made the code accessible to a western audience) could share his thoughts, if asked.

Regarding the homebrew / hack scene, I can't offer hard evidence, perhaps @Ankos can offer something more concrete than I, I'm not sure. What I can say though is that I used to think the same way as you (i.e. not really any homebrew stuff going on back then) but was told by a source that I trust that I was mistaken, and that there was a decent underground scene. I do have a few FDS hacks and know of a few others to exist, so there was definitely something going on back then, though to what extent I personally don't know.

I don't doubt that there were people back then making their own stuff.  What I do doubt was that it was so commonplace as to actually call for designating the Famicom a "computer" in the sense that a "personal computer" is one, which is to primarily function in that capacity.  The Famicom's obvious, first, and foremost function was as a game console.  There was a weak attempt at a true "computer" add-on via Family Basic, but seeing as they didn't even produce or release them for nearly a year after the system, I find it impossible to reconcile the "computer" part of "Family Computer" as being the system's actual primary function.  My hangup on the homebrew not showing up on tapes is that any well established, well used "personal computer" of that era has had examples of official releases as well as homebrew ones surface on the media used by that system.  The Famicom seems to be the sole exception, and my explanation for this was that it wasn't actually a personal computer, and never truly intended to be, otherwise it would have been far better equipped and provided for in that department by its manufacturer, let alone its user base.

8 minutes ago, fcgamer said:

From my understanding, version 2 does indeed exist - the situation is that it is extremely rare and just housed in a FB1 cartridge, so essentially a revision, though it did make it to retail.

It would be neat if that's the case, but I'd really want to "see" a copy first.  With all the Famicom history stuff I've looked through online in the past couple of days, it seems weird that as thoroughly documented as a lot of it has been, there hasn't been a single entry talking about a V2, either as an internal prototype or as a stealth replacement of the original pack-in cartridge.

[Ankos | 505]

1 minute ago, fcgamer said:

Regarding the homebrew / hack scene, I can't offer hard evidence, perhaps @Ankos can offer something more concrete than I, I'm not sure. What I can say though is that I used to think the same way as you (i.e. not really any homebrew stuff going on back then) but was told by a source that I trust that I was mistaken, and that there was a decent underground scene. I do have a few FDS hacks and know of a few others to exist, so there was definitely something going on back then, though to what extent I personally don't know.

I am not super knowledgeable on the history of Famicom homebrew stuff, but I do know that some Bung flashcarts for Gameboy came pre-packed with homebrew games that got submitted during contests, so it would be surprising to me if that sort of thing didn't also happen for Famicom. Here is a link to an archived page on the results of a contest

[fcgamer | 4,833]

15 minutes ago, darkchylde28 said:

I don't doubt that there were people back then making their own stuff.  What I do doubt was that it was so commonplace as to actually call for designating the Famicom a "computer" in the sense that a "personal computer" is one, which is to primarily function in that capacity.  The Famicom's obvious, first, and foremost function was as a game console.  There was a weak attempt at a true "computer" add-on via Family Basic, but seeing as they didn't even produce or release them for nearly a year after the system, I find it impossible to reconcile the "computer" part of "Family Computer" as being the system's actual primary function.  My hangup on the homebrew not showing up on tapes is that any well established, well used "personal computer" of that era has had examples of official releases as well as homebrew ones surface on the media used by that system.  The Famicom seems to be the sole exception, and my explanation for this was that it wasn't actually a personal computer, and never truly intended to be, otherwise it would have been far better equipped and provided for in that department by its manufacturer, let alone its user base.

It would be neat if that's the case, but I'd really want to "see" a copy first.  With all the Famicom history stuff I've looked through online in the past couple of days, it seems weird that as thoroughly documented as a lot of it has been, there hasn't been a single entry talking about a V2, either as an internal prototype or as a stealth replacement of the original pack-in cartridge.

Strongly disagree, this is more or less considered fact.

[Gloves | 12,051]

1 minute ago, fcgamer said:

Strongly disagree, this is more or less considered fact.

"More or less considered fact" is a really funny statement. 

[phart010 | 1,741]

This guy is reviewing the Family Basic program. He mentioned the cart came with a few applications including:

-simple word processor 
-calculator 
-calendar

doesnt seem like much, but then again computers back didn’t do nearly as much as they do today.

Also some one in the video comments mentioned a bunch of programs being archived in the “Internet Archive” I am following up with them for a link

[darkchylde28 | 1,546]

12 minutes ago, Ankos said:

I am not super knowledgeable on the history of Famicom homebrew stuff, but I do know that some Bung flashcarts for Gameboy came pre-packed with homebrew games that got submitted during contests, so it would be surprising to me if that sort of thing didn't also happen for Famicom. Here is a link to an archived page on the results of a contest

How much, if any, of that homebrew code was actually created on a Famicom?  The question isn't whether people were making code for the Famicom, because obviously there were third party products out there, but whether they were actually using the Famicom as a computer, and thus actually using the "Family Computer" in a manner consistent with a personal computer.

1 minute ago, fcgamer said:

Strongly disagree, this is more or less considered fact.

That's your opinion.  What facts is that based on?  Thus far, during this entire debate/debacle, you haven't once actually provided any concrete evidence of this.  Where's the pre-launch flyer from Nintendo espousing how if you buy a Famicom you'll have your very own personal computer and be able to do all the things all the "cool kids" with Sharp and NEC machines are doing?  A product name alone does not provide evidence of intent.

[Gloves | 12,051]

The Nintendo Entertainment System was so named to make it sound less like "just a video game system", same as how it looks - they wanted western audiences to feel it was a solid hardware similar to a VHS player, rather than a video game system, which had a lot of mental baggage for people cuz of the crash. 

Names are just marketing. 

[Ankos | 505]

9 minutes ago, darkchylde28 said:

How much, if any, of that homebrew code was actually created on a Famicom?  The question isn't whether people were making code for the Famicom, because obviously there were third party products out there, but whether they were actually using the Famicom as a computer, and thus actually using the "Family Computer" in a manner consistent with a personal computer.

Again, not super knowledgeable on the history of the Famicom. I'm honestly just here to keep the conversation going and enjoy the ride. On the wikipedia page for Family BASIC it does mention some usage of it for the purposes of game development, though its examples are limited, and its sources are in Japanese so I'm not sure if they're legit

 

Edit: Here is a a site that has some examples of games made for Family BASIC. I hope that helps Link

Edited January 12, 2023 by Ankos
Added link

[fcgamer | 4,833]

13 minutes ago, Gloves said:

"More or less considered fact" is a really funny statement. 

This statement means that I believe it to be true, based on the sources that I heard it from, but as I personally don't own one and therefore cannot confirm it firsthand, I will give myself an out.

[fcgamer | 4,833]

8 minutes ago, Gloves said:

The Nintendo Entertainment System was so named to make it sound less like "just a video game system", same as how it looks - they wanted western audiences to feel it was a solid hardware similar to a VHS player, rather than a video game system, which had a lot of mental baggage for people cuz of the crash. 

Names are just marketing. 

So is Pokemon Yellow a Game Boy or a Game Boy Color game?

[Ankos | 505]

Looks like that gaming alexandria page mentions a family basic v2.0 and v2.1

[Gloves | 12,051]

1 minute ago, fcgamer said:

So is Pokemon Yellow a Game Boy or a Game Boy Color game?

Game Boy! It self-identifies as such, and we have to respect that!