Sharedata Chiller NES Advertisement

[ThePhleo | 2,185]

28 minutes ago, fcgamer said:

AGCI PCBs were manufactured in Taiwan

It all ties in together bro , your idea if trying to compare what an unlicensed budget company does to top tier licensed companies just shows a bit of ignorance, total apples and oranges.

It becomes especially relevant as Sharedata themselves were even licensing their games out to South Korean company.

These companies were all involved together, so whether 60 pins or 72, these guys were all in bed together,

This I fully agree with.

All except Active Enterprises are connected to each other in some way. Though even still, you did find some backwater connection that I’ve admiringly admittingly already forgot about

Edited October 29, 2021 by ThePhleo

[fcgamer | 4,728]

7 minutes ago, ThePhleo said:

This I fully agree with.

All except Active Enterprises are connected to each other in some way. Though even still, you did find some backwater connection that I’ve admiringly already forgot about

I wonder if active just ripped off their multicart menu, or actually licensed it.

[darkchylde28 | 1,546]

10 minutes ago, fcgamer said:

I browsed your above post quickly, I'm at work and can't respond properly; however, here's my thoughts on the above:

My issue with people like @Dr. MorbisIs that all of their arguments are just theories as well, going so far at one point to say "if you called the number, you would have gotten the gray AGCI cart.

What makes his theories and mine any different? The blue Chiller cart exists, as a seemingly retail / final cart.

The theories for camp Chiller Blue seem reasonable, despite little evidence, whereas the crap that Morbis keeps spewing out honestly are just his opinions, which keep getting disproved time and time again when compared to industry standards of that time. 

Did ShareData just decide to go greedy one day and up the price of the Gray AGCI carts by $10? It's possible, for example, but it seems like a large stretch. The other explanation, that they upped the price after making their own molds, boxes, etc seems much more likely.

I didn't say his theory was any more valid than yours.  I said that the point that he was making (before everything completely devolved into both sides coming up with random theories to better explain how their side of the argument might somehow be more valid, all without actual evidence) was valid--that your theory that the blue Sharedata Chiller carts came out via the mail order offer (or standard distribution) doesn't hold any water and cannot be considered as fact because of zero solid proof.  I think @Dr. Morbis's idea holds more weight than yours based on the lackluster number of blue Sharedata carts found, but it's still just a theory and not fact.  The facts, as they stand, are that nobody knows for certain exactly how those five carts came to be, how they came to be in the public's hands, whether they were made as proof of concept samples for marketing or final release products, etc.  So, once again, so the people in the back can hear me, PRESENT SOME FACTS OR DROP IT.  Please.  Quit with your straw man arguments or random swerves into whataboutisms--you're generally better than that, and it does nothing more than degrade your image in everyone's eyes and further sully the validity of the theory you were championing.  It's a good theory, not necessarily the one I think is most likely, but definitely interesting, and sadly without any shred of evidence that it's what actually happened.

6 minutes ago, fcgamer said:

It becomes especially relevant as Sharedata themselves were even licensing their games out to South Korean company.

"Relevant."

It's some mildly interesting trivia, but holds exactly zero relevance to the point of this thread.  If you want to start a thread talking about how any and every pirate, third party, unlicensed developer were somehow all first cousins who were luridly in bed (inbred?) with one another, go for it.  But knock that shit off here, as it has zero bearing on whether blue, Color Dreams clad Sharedata branded Chiller cartridges were ever released to the public via any mainstream distribution channel (via mail order through the GamePro ad or standard retail distribution available in the day).  How someone who is like Sharedata, or even related to Sharedata in the most convoluted, back-asswards way might be fascinating history, but provides zero factual evidence of those those five (and only five) cartridges ended up out in the wild.  Being at work, being tired, having both your eyes gouged out, I don't care, NONE OF THAT is an excuse to not actually read every reply that you respond to and then just going off on a wild, seemingly substance fueled rant into the stratosphere, usually looping in Taiwan and 1-2 pirate cart manufacturers from the 80s/90s instead of directly addressing the points made in the post you're responding to.  Semi-seriously, is it time for an intervention?  Because with each subsequent reply, you come off more and more like the above photo, which is of a guy who is out of his gourd.

[OptOut | 8,889]

1 hour ago, Dr. Morbis said:

Seriously FC, nobody cares how some backwater Taiwanese shit unlicensed companies did their business thirty years ago.... NOBODY!!!  (and if one of you smart Alecks rings in here to say otherwise, I swear to God!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

[fcgamer | 4,728]

@darkchylde28Why are you in such a hurry to get this thread closed?

I'm going to post a bunch of things once I get home, which are things everyone else should have looked into already, no matter which camp they were in, if they want to uncover the truth.

[Dr. Morbis | 2,089]

1 hour ago, fcgamer said:

@darkchylde28Why are you in such a hurry to get this thread closed?

I'm going to post a bunch of things once I get home, which are things everyone else should have looked into already, no matter which camp they were in, if they want to uncover the truth.

One day you're going to run out of pirate garbage in your apartment to take photographs of and post on this forum, and on that day, two things will happen:

1 - I will throw the biggest party an NES nerd has ever thrown in the last thirty-six years, and

2 - you will officially have not a single thing left to talk about on this entire forum, and I can only presume that you will then pm Gloves and request that he delete your account permanently....

[Dr. Morbis | 2,089]

Oh, and if the "bunch of things" you're going to post are actually relevant to the topic of this thread and help to prove this game's release or non-release, then I will retract my above post and apologize profusely. 

[Dr. Morbis | 2,089]

Oh and @fcgamer, I'll help give you a head start:  This is what we know (posted below), what can you add to it? And NO, NONE OF THE PIRATE/UNLICENSED GAMES IN YOUR APARTMENT ARE RELEVANT.  DO NOT POST MORE PICTURES OF THEM!

 

FACT #1 - Five or so Sharedata Chiller carts are known to exist in Color Dreams shells with no distinct boxes or manuals

FACT #2 - Sharedata put an ad in FOUR issues of GamePro, a leading videogame magazine of the era (printruns?)

FACT #3 - A former employee was questioned and believes that the Sharedata version was never sold and explains that AGCI was created as a subsidiary specifically to sell video games.

FACT #4 - Hundreds or Thousands of AGCI Chiller carts exist, many with boxes and manuals and majority with SHAREDATA TITLE SCREENS!!!!!

[ThePhleo | 2,185]

4 minutes ago, Dr. Morbis said:

Oh and @fcgamer, I'll help give you a head start:  This is what we know (posted below), what can you add to it? And NO, NONE OF THE PIRATE/UNLICENSED GAMES IN YOUR APARTMENT ARE RELEVANT.  DO NOT POST MORE PICTURES OF THEM!

 

FACT #1 - Five or so Sharedata Chiller carts are known to exist in Color Dreams shells with no distinct boxes or manuals

FACT #2 - Sharedata put an ad in FOUR issues of GamePro, a leading videogame magazine of the era (printruns?)

FACT #3 - A former employee was questioned and believes that the Sharedata version was never sold and explains that AGCI was created as a subsidiary specifically to sell video games.

FACT #4 - Hundreds or Thousands of AGCI Chiller carts exist, many with boxes and manuals and majority with SHAREDATA TITLE SCREENS!!!!!

 

In his defense, the famicom library has a much blurrier line as to what "Pirate" really is

https://bootleggames.fandom.com/wiki/Donkey_Kong_Country_4

In Famicom-land, this is considered "Unlicensed" because the developer made all assets themselves. It doesn't matter that it's IP theft. Even if the artwork is a blatant rip from the source it's copying.

In the USA we have Tengen Tetris that can correlate. There's also a couple Sachen games like Gaiapolis, Pang, Pang 2 that can be considered pirates or unlicensed depending on what qualifiers you put on it.

That being said, Tengen Tetris is allowed on the US unlicensed list I assume because

1. Atari / Tengen was operating under the assumption that they had legal rights to Tetris.
2. No one cared to make the distinction back when the original list was compiled.
3. It's a cool piece of video game history.

I personally think the rules should be put universally and let the cards fall wherever they fall. But that's not how the real world works.

 

And Dave,

You're not going to win over the hearts of everyone with Famicom carts. No matter how unique they are.

The 60/72-pin gap is unbridgeable. Even the video game illuminati is barely making it work with Super Mario Bros.

[OptOut | 8,889]

34 minutes ago, Dr. Morbis said:

One day you're going to run out of pirate garbage in your apartment to take photographs of and post on this forum, and on that day, two things will happen:

I can GUARANTEE you that day will never come...

I've seen the pile...

[Dr. Morbis | 2,089]

1 hour ago, ThePhleo said:

 

In his defense, the famicom library has a much blurrier line as to what "Pirate" really is

https://bootleggames.fandom.com/wiki/Donkey_Kong_Country_4

In Famicom-land, this is considered "Unlicensed" because the developer made all assets themselves. It doesn't matter that it's IP theft. Even if the artwork is a blatant rip from the source it's copying.

In the USA we have Tengen Tetris that can correlate. There's also a couple Sachen games like Gaiapolis, Pang, Pang 2 that can be considered pirates or unlicensed depending on what qualifiers you put on it.

That being said, Tengen Tetris is allowed on the US unlicensed list I assume because

1. Atari / Tengen was operating under the assumption that they had legal rights to Tetris.
2. No one cared to make the distinction back when the original list was compiled.
3. It's a cool piece of video game history.

I personally think the rules should be put universally and let the cards fall wherever they fall. But that's not how the real world works.

 

And Dave,

You're not going to win over the hearts of everyone with Famicom carts. No matter how unique they are.

The 60/72-pin gap is unbridgeable. Even the video game illuminati is barely making it work with Super Mario Bros.

I agree, and a lot of the relationships between various unlicensed manufacturers is very interesting to NES collector folks like me.  HOWEVER!  The question at hand is whether or not a particular game was released in America...

Where the PCB was manufactured is IRRELEVANT...
What overseas companies the manufacturer had ties to is IRRELEVANT...
Who the publisher licensed out their games to outside the USA is IRRELEVANT...
ETC, ETC, ETC!!!!

@fcgamer is completely obfuscating the topic we are trying to get to the bottom of and muddling up this thread with pictures, relationships, licensing partners, strawmen, etc that are TOTALLY IRRELEVANT!!!  That's my problem with his posts.  And I know damn well whatever he posts below me in this thread while I'm sleeping tonight will be IRRELEVANT as well. His pictures belong in a different thread for people who enjoy seeing unlicensed Asian stuff, not in this thread about whether an American company released a particular game in America.

END    OF    LINE

Edited October 29, 2021 by Dr. Morbis

[fcgamer | 4,728]

Here are some things I think we should be looking into, if we want actually want to uncover the truth:

1. @Ferris BuellerChiller demo cart pictures, inside and out

2. Pics of Deathrace and Shockwave PCBs and chips

3. When AGCI applied for their cartridge shell patent

4. Any trademarks licensed for AGCI? When?

5. Company records for both ShareData and AGCI

6. Books and magazines that featured Chiller. I seem to remember one that my brother has, I'll try to ask him this weekend for pics of the article, issue number, and date.

And the list goes on. At this point in time I think it's highly unlikely that we'll be able to get the answers 100% that we are looking for, but dinosaurs or historical artifacts, we can make a better guess as to what actually happened with the more information we uncover.

I'll start with something I looked up the other day, which I'm surprised no one else bothered with:

I compared the address of one of the ShareData PC games to the address listed for American Game Cartridges, and they are the same.

We should not make the mistake and claim that ShareData = AGCI though; even if in the same building and address, at the point we do not know how much involvement each company had with the other, and at least on paper (for tax purposes, branding purposes or whatever), the two companies are different.

 

[fcgamer | 4,728]

The time of the advert was a very dark time for ShareData; they were hemorrhaging money, and struggling to keep their doors open.

Here's a few things I've found (please see attachments). The articles are all from about the second or third week of March, 1990.

It's interesting that Color Dreams was mentioned in one of the articles, despite them having been around since 1989.

Tonight I messaged the former CEO of ShareData too, hopefully I'll hear back from him and we can take things further. He's an old man though, so who knows.

 

[Ferris Bueller | 495]

4 hours ago, fcgamer said:

Here are some things I think we should be looking into, if we want actually want to uncover the truth:

1. @Ferris BuellerChiller demo cart pictures, inside and out

2. Pics of Deathrace and Shockwave PCBs and chips

I've got a box of randomness that came from somebody close to the company, which how I got the Chiller "Demo" cart. I think I also have shells that were loose and now I can't remember if they had anything in them. This was for all three of their games. Keep at me I'll see if I can remember where I put all that stuff. Hopefully not storage, I think it's in the game room.

I sealed up Blue Chiller. Nobody seemed interested till now. Should've brought this up a year ago!

[Code Monkey | 2,011]

Personal attacks on each other is where I step out of this thread.

[fcgamer | 4,728]

6 minutes ago, Code Monkey said:

Personal attacks on each other is where I step out of this thread.

From my part, it's in good fun, no idea regarding Dr.Morbis's part. 

Either way, I think you're a day late and a dollar short with your post, as I'm trying to bring things back around to a nicer level of discussion.

[OptOut | 8,889]

1 hour ago, Ferris Bueller said:

I sealed up Blue Chiller. Nobody seemed interested till now. Should've brought this up a year ago!

Thank GOD for loose cart grading, huh...

@Gloves 

[fcgamer | 4,728]

Anyone else catch this, btw?

[fcgamer | 4,728]

Earlier in the thread, The Wizard dug up that AGCI seemingly existed on paper in mid Febs of 1990, about a month before the newspaper articles that I posted above, the game advert, etc.

ShareData was having huge money issues though, heading into the new year, as depicted here:

"AS 1989 ended and the new year began, Sharedata Inc. was struggling to survive after the loss of the only profitable products it ever had, computer game versions of the popular television shows ''Wheel of Fortune'' and ''Jeopardy.'' Insiders were funneling in cash, and the company was paying interest rates of up to 30 percent to keep the doors open."

Their computer "office" package wasn't selling well, and by March of 90 they weren't allowed to sell their PC games either. The AGCI division might have been created for this reason, to obtain loans or reduce liability or something?

 

[the_wizard_666 | 1,325]

7 hours ago, fcgamer said:

Here are some things I think we should be looking into, if we want actually want to uncover the truth:

1. @Ferris BuellerChiller demo cart pictures, inside and out

2. Pics of Deathrace and Shockwave PCBs and chips

3. When AGCI applied for their cartridge shell patent

4. Any trademarks licensed for AGCI? When?

5. Company records for both ShareData and AGCI

6. Books and magazines that featured Chiller. I seem to remember one that my brother has, I'll try to ask him this weekend for pics of the article, issue number, and date.

#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.

8 hours ago, fcgamer said:

We should not make the mistake and claim that ShareData = AGCI though; even if in the same building and address, at the point we do not know how much involvement each company had with the other, and at least on paper (for tax purposes, branding purposes or whatever), the two companies are different.

 

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

13 hours ago, Dr. Morbis said:

FACT #3 - A former employee was questioned and believes that the Sharedata version was never sold and explains that AGCI was created as a subsidiary specifically to sell video games.

 

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.

1 hour ago, fcgamer said:

Earlier in the thread, The Wizard dug up that AGCI seemingly existed on paper in mid Febs of 1990, about a month before the newspaper articles that I posted above, the game advert, etc.

ShareData was having huge money issues though, heading into the new year, as depicted here:

"AS 1989 ended and the new year began, Sharedata Inc. was struggling to survive after the loss of the only profitable products it ever had, computer game versions of the popular television shows ''Wheel of Fortune'' and ''Jeopardy.'' Insiders were funneling in cash, and the company was paying interest rates of up to 30 percent to keep the doors open."

Their computer "office" package wasn't selling well, and by March of 90 they weren't allowed to sell their PC games either. The AGCI division might have been created for this reason, to obtain loans or reduce liability or something?

 

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. 

[fcgamer | 4,728]

@the_wizard_666That quote came from a New York Times article, IIRC.

I'll send you a pm.

[darkchylde28 | 1,546]

15 hours ago, fcgamer said:

@darkchylde28Why are you in such a hurry to get this thread closed?

I'm going to post a bunch of things once I get home, which are things everyone else should have looked into already, no matter which camp they were in, if they want to uncover the truth.

I'm not, just that once I got to reading things, I got really, really tired of you chasing your tail and Dr. Morbis chasing you down for it.  From what I've seen below this post, it looks like you've changed gears, so thank you for that and good job.

8 hours ago, fcgamer said:

Here are some things I think we should be looking into, if we want actually want to uncover the truth:

...

5. Company records for both ShareData and AGCI

6. Books and magazines that featured Chiller. I seem to remember one that my brother has, I'll try to ask him this weekend for pics of the article, issue number, and date.

While the other things you listed might be interesting, and could provide some flavor or context once more facts are known, the last two in your list are really the only ones that can provide any relevant facts regarding if the blue Chiller carts were officially distributed or not.

8 hours ago, fcgamer said:

I compared the address of one of the ShareData PC games to the address listed for American Game Cartridges, and they are the same.

We should not make the mistake and claim that ShareData = AGCI though; even if in the same building and address, at the point we do not know how much involvement each company had with the other, and at least on paper (for tax purposes, branding purposes or whatever), the two companies are different.

Per the quote that Dr. Morbis provided previously that apparently came from an interview with a Sharedata employee, AGCI was created as a subsidiary of Sharedata in order to sell video games.  Based on the information in the article clippings you provided (name(s) and date(s) of the publication(s) would help there), its seems they may have anticipated Nintendo going after them for producing unlicensed carts, and it would seem to make good business sense to shift such a venture into a company owned by Sharedata but technically and legally distinct from them in order to at least initially bypass any and all injunctions Nintendo might throw their way.  Please note that these ideas are my theories based on the facts presented in the article clippings you posted.

While Sharedata and AGCI may have been technically legally distinct from one another, AGCI being a subsidiary of Sharedata would make the concept that Sharedata = AGCI (and vice versa) basically true, if a very simplistic way of looking at things.  If that relationship was as stated, while AGCI might have its own head person, the head person at Sharedata would technically trump them, leaving both companies with essentially the same main boss.

25 minutes ago, the_wizard_666 said:

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.

While I understand where you're coming from, where, exactly, do you draw the line at believing evidence produced by people other than yourself?  If the source of the article @Dr. Morbis presented regarding the recollections of a Sharedata employee regarding AGCI was provided, do we really need to go back and bother the specific employee about the same things once again?   How many people need to ask the direct source the same questions in order for it to be accepted?  I get that the paraphrased quote about this leaves something to be desired in the analytical documentation that's now being built about this, but seriously, if you can get the article where that specific quote came from or contact the writer of that article to ask questions about anything that wasn't 100% clear in the article, does the same ground need to be re-covered, and if so, why?

[fcgamer | 4,728]

3 minutes ago, darkchylde28 said:

While I understand where you're coming from, where, exactly, do you draw the line at believing evidence produced by people other than yourself?  If the source of the article @Dr. Morbis presented regarding the recollections of a Sharedata employee regarding AGCI was provided, do we really need to go back and bother the specific employee about the same things once again?   How many people need to ask the direct source the same questions in order for it to be accepted?  I get that the paraphrased quote about this leaves something to be desired in the analytical documentation that's now being built about this, but seriously, if you can get the article where that specific quote came from or contact the writer of that article to ask questions about anything that wasn't 100% clear in the article, does the same ground need to be re-covered, and if so, why?

Where is this quote though?

All I am literally seeing is the theories of a Danish game collector, and then the recollections of an article by @Hollywoodcaddy of an article that no one else here has seen.

Where's the quote from the employee, either paraphrased or direct quote? Am I crazy, well probably, but in this particular instance I'm not seeing the quote at all.

[darkchylde28 | 1,546]

26 minutes ago, fcgamer said:

Where is this quote though?

All I am literally seeing is the theories of a Danish game collector, and then the recollections of an article by @Hollywoodcaddy of an article that no one else here has seen.

Where's the quote from the employee, either paraphrased or direct quote? Am I crazy, well probably, but in this particular instance I'm not seeing the quote at all.

The paraphrased quote is the blurb about a Sharedata employee recollecting that they didn't commercially distribute the blue-shelled Sharedata-branded Chiller copies.  I don't recall seeing a source cited in the thread for where that came from, and source documentation should definitely be added.  This absolutely sounds legit, but without a source for it, it's just as theoretical as the conclusion that an early ad means that the blue copies went out to retail.  If that source can be tracked down, it would certainly seem to put a nail in the coffin of the theory that the blue Chillers were ever officially, intentionally distributed through retail channels.

[fcgamer | 4,728]

14 minutes ago, darkchylde28 said:

The paraphrased quote is the blurb about a Sharedata employee recollecting that they didn't commercially distribute the blue-shelled Sharedata-branded Chiller copies.  I don't recall seeing a source cited in the thread for where that came from, and source documentation should definitely be added.  This absolutely sounds legit, but without a source for it, it's just as theoretical as the conclusion that an early ad means that the blue copies went out to retail.  If that source can be tracked down, it would certainly seem to put a nail in the coffin of the theory that the blue Chillers were ever officially, intentionally distributed through retail channels.

Please post the paraphrased blurb I'm honestly not seeing it...