the_wizard_666

So here's the piece I alluded to. It isn't much, but it's something. @NESWORLD was kind enough to provide a dumped ROM of his Sharedata Chiller. I took it upon myself to compare the two ROMs, and found one single, solitary byte that is different between the Color Dreams cart and the AGCI cart. Screenshot provided: US ROM on top, SD ROM on the bottom. As you can see, the SD version has a value of "AA" while the AGCI one has a value of "CE." As my knowledge of ROM hacking is limited at best, I leave it to someone else to determine what exactly that byte refers to. Also, just cuz I could, I compared the US and Australian releases as well, and damn near the entire code is switched...although I think it may have been remapped as opposed to flat out redone from scratch. I did notice that they replaced the Sharedata text with AGCI related text in the code, but they're at separate ROM addresses, leading me to the remapping theory. Someone with more knowledge should take a peek at this... EDIT: @0xDEAFC0DE perhaps?

That's a good point too. It's clear they sourced parts from Color Dreams at the start, and reused as much as possible from the process. Like I said, EPROMs don't automatically prove or disprove anything, just that it lends credence to the idea that they may have been demos. For all we know though, it could also be a matter of the early run being manufactured by Color Dreams. I don't know if anyone has any data about that partnership kicking about an old email address or hard drive somewhere, but I'd love to see it... Anyway, thanks to @NESWORLD I have another ace up my sleeve here...may not prove anything either, but it'll still be another piece of the puzzle.

Martin is a GOD! Comparing that to Bootgod's page, it would appear that the only obvious difference is that it uses EPROMs instead of Mask ROMs. This does lend credence to the demo theory, as EPROMs were significantly cheaper and would likely be used in the dev process vs the final build. However, it's just as possible that the switch to Mask ROMs was done by AGCI after taking over...so it's not PROOF per se, but compelling circumstantial evidence nonetheless. When class is through I'm gonna get on the case and start documenting what's already known, what's speculated, etc. Keep it up y'all!

5 is a lot of copies for what may have been a mail-order only version though, especially from a company that was a) unlicensed, and b) completely unknown in the NES sphere. It's not a cut-and-dried thing. To me, it seems less likely that 5 retailer demos would've survived this long than for the same number of retail carts being all that's survived. The carts look production quality, but without proof either way, it's all speculation. Also, we don't know that only 5 exist. Just that only 5 have turned up to date in collectors' hands. There could be dozens out there in grandma's attic, someone's storage locker, or even possibly a warehouse somewhere. We just don't have all the information that we need to conclusively determine what exactly Sharedata Chiller is, nevermind how it got out. Here's a thought - has any of the 5 owners ever opened the cart and taken a picture of the board itself? If it looks different than the AGCI version, it could potentially prove it to be a concept piece, proto, or demo, rather than a retail release.

Actually, Martin has confirmed that to me. @fcgamer was the one who tracked down most of the info on AGCI back in the late '90s. Hence the PM I just sent him

What does AVE have to do with this? Aside from Frick moving on to form the company and subsequently buying Wally Bear, they have nothing to do with AGCI. They're really a footnote at best in this. I'm shooting a PM your way shortly though...similar matter but involves some personal info too.

I got confirmation from Martin. He based his opinion on data from Richard Frick, who was no longer with the company as of February 1990. For what it's worth. I'm getting a wealth of new info from him, but I have class in 5 minutes so it'll have to wait.

You did concede that point, however iirc it was before @Dr. Morbis made his list...or at least most recently posted it. The burden of proof at this point is on him if he still wishes to use that point as an argument. The NESWorld article is clearly stating his personal opinion. Whether that opinion was based on anything concrete, I have no idea. I've sent Martin a message however, so hopefully soon we'll get something from him. I linked the thread in all it's glory for him to read up on, and gave him the option of communicating through me if he'd rather not register, so hopefully we'll hear from him soon. I do agree though, it's tedious at best to watch both @fcgamer and @Dr. Morbis circle the drain like they have, although at least @fcgamer is providing some tidbits of info. @Dr. Morbis just seems to be content with raising his voice and trying to drown out the opposition. I honestly wish he'd put that enthusiasm to use trying to find tangible data that we could use to solve this puzzle instead of just saying "I'm right, you're wrong, we're done" repeatedly like that's gonna help things along. Anyway, I'm thinking I may write up something to use as a data repository...if only to get everything relevant from the thread somewhat organized in one central place. I was gonna just leave that mantle for someone else to grab, but I'm not sure anyone else will at this point. If this is gonna get figured out, someone needs to actually do some figuring. So I'll get on that after my class today. If anyone wants to help, and finds something interesting one way or the other, post or PM me and I'll start the process tonight.

On it...

Except that @Dr. Morbis referenced it as a fact. If it cannot be proven as factually true, or at least shown to even exist, said quote strikes one "fact" from his list - the only one that in any way can point to being evidence that the Sharedata version was not distributed at all to the public in any form. The rest are simply facts that do not work to prove any scenario. Basically, we just have no clue at this point. We need more evidence. Sourced quotations would be an excellent start. Finding people involved, internal documents, public records, news posts, etc would also be great. Everything can be used to build a picture of what went down, but without them we just have nothing to go on but theories and speculation.

https://www.nesworld.com/agci.php If that's the article you're referencing, probably not.

The actual article would be a good start. I may have seen it, but I can't recall where, but everyone's saying this guy was quoted, but where is the quote? Not to mention who made the quote in question? Was it the CEO, the janitor, or someone in between? We can't even begin to discuss it's veracity if we can't even verify the quote exists. We don't need to reinvent the wheel here if the writer of the article can be reached and they still have their notes...but at this point, I have no idea if this referenced article even exists.

No Man's Sky was decent after a few patches though. I wouldn't call it great, but it's way ahead of where it started. As for Urban Champion, yeah, I dig the game, but not THAT much. I would've hated it as a rental because I'd be done after like an hour at most. It was fun to play on my buddy's multicart though.

#2 can be answered easily by going to Bootgod's website. They're AGCI branded boards. Death Race: http://bootgod.dyndns.org:7777/profile.php?id=1223 Shockwave: http://bootgod.dyndns.org:7777/profile.php?id=548 And for good measure, here's Chiller: http://bootgod.dyndns.org:7777/profile.php?id=1159 The shell patent may never have been granted either (shells are embossed with "AGCI Patent Pending"), but the application date should be findable. Regardless, it specifies AGCI on it, so it would've been done after their February 1990 incorporation. As for books and mags, all mine are back in Calgary so I won't be seeing them any time soon. But Archive.org has a TON of magazine scans and such that are either viewable or downloadable, which is how I found the advert spanned four issues. If anyone wants to dive down that rabbit hole, I'd suggest starting from 1989 and moving forward through to 1991. I also recall reading a few things in some of those "Ultimate Unauthorized" books from the time period. Maybe someone with immediate access can look through those ones. This is the first in the series for anyone unsure which ones I'm talking about: There's a ton of info in them about various unreleased titles too. The reviews and strategies are shite, but they're still cool books to thumb through periodically. I sort of agree here. AGCI shared the address, much like Ultra and Konami did, but even if they were only separate entities on paper, they should be considered separate until we know how the company was set up. If it was a slew of the same people running it, then yeah, we don't need to make the distinction as it's likely just a paper brand. But if there were different people calling the shots, well, then yeah, it's separate. And either way, people don't count Ultra and Konami as the same publisher. If they did, @Dr. Morbis would have a much different looking shelf organization Until that interview can be produced, I wouldn't call that a fact. Find the source...not the article that mentions the source, the actual source. Until then, who knows who this guy is or what he actually said. All we have are interpretations of his testimony, not his actual testimony. I would ask that if you're quoting things like that, you quote sources. That way any interested party can go to your source, read the entire article, build a timeline, etc.. It's an interesting point though...just that print dates aren't necessarily written dates. Those articles could've been written days (newspaper) or weeks (magazine) before the street date...and with mags, the street date is usually around a month prior to the date written on the mag. This is why the source is as important, if not more so, than the quote itself.

I may look into getting a few. Once I have money of course

What are BitBoxes? Might be something to look at for the repros I've been making...

@darkchylde28 You just hit the nail on the head there. I spent time researching a theory about how it could've got out. I do want to reiterate that it is in no way meant to be anything more than that. I was merely trying to show a possibility through the evidence we have, so that someone with more resources, connections, and/or willpower could put the time into finding further data to either debunk it or to prove it. Sometimes all we have is a credible theory, much like rental only F2 or SE being recalled. Those may have been debunked, but only because a credible theory existed that people wanted to prove or disprove for certainty's sake. That's what's needed here - but it also needs to be done in as unbiased a way as possible so as not to taint the results. While the theory is plausible, and in my opinion likely, that doesn't make it evidence of reality. And sadly, the more time passes, the harder it is to find the information we need to figure it out 100%.

The same could be said for every year since 2009...this hobby's just fucking nuts sometimes.

Do you have a voltmeter? Might be worth checking the continuity and making sure everything is properly connected. Some of the traces look a bit rough. Aside from that, it's probably as Tulpa suggested, although I have yet to encounter that particular problem in my travels.

I thought that was a prize in a Nintendo Power contest. Thought the grey carts were the only ones actually sold...

I honestly don't think the Aladdin specifically WAS released. Another Etler artifact if you will. But I'd love to see evidence to the contrary.

And the completely unique-to-the-Aladdin Dizzy the Adventurer! I agree it's a cool thing to get, but again, it's an artifact of Etler's List and not something that should be counted as an "official" NES release. That said, it's only in my collection because of said list, so yeah

I wouldn't call that a caveat though. It still requires the Aladdin to play it. No Aladdin, no Dizzy. It'd be like if Nintendo launched the Disk System here and had SMB/DH as the pack in for the Nintendo Disk System rather than the console itself. Because you would need to play the game through the adapter would make it a Disk System game, regardless of whether or not it came with every Disk System.

Bald is beautiful. And so is my beard

Yeah, that's just crazy talk The Aladdin carts should technically count as a separate thing tbh, much like the Famicom Disk System is separate from the Famicom, or the 32X is separate from the Genesis. The Aladdin was basically an add-on, thus the software is specific to the add-on and not the original system. Case closed.