Seth

Ah, I see now that I misunderstood your question. It *does* have to be aftermarket (released 1996 or after), so I think at least MC&DH would be ineligible?

You gotta like Nintendo Hard, tho.

Fair enough! I hear you. As I said, I think Blade Buster is great. I have it ranked (would have to check) second or third among all NES homebrew shooters ever. And I personally dislike GunTneR.

A great and too-little recognized game, IMO!

Either!

I like Blade Buster! But there are definitely shooters that are as good or better, from Astro Ninja Man to HaraForce to HaraTyler to Haradius Zero to Over Obj to Star Keeper. And those who like quirky games will say GunTneR or Oratorio.

Gloves, just to be clear, that categorization I gave for VGS related *only* to the part of this site I linked to—the pinned three posts on Homebrewpedia: the marketplace, homebrew almanac for collectors, and alerts on upcoming games to buy(!) I would never have thought to call all of VGS a marketplace. I have been lurking for years, and very much know it is not that! I hope you will click the link to see what I mean, but if you want the link further clarified or narrowed I will do that. I did not limit it exclusively to the marketplace post because I didn't want anyone to sleep on the excellent other work Scrobins is doing to catalogue games that folks can buy.

I love and will take these votes! (But do know that you get ten games per voting slate, if you want!)

Hi all, My publication RETRO has been publishing a free, link-laden archive of all NES homebrews ever made for a few years now (the listing sits at around 1,600 titles in the volume of the series about to be released) and in 2022 I held a vote for the Indie NES Game Hall of Fame that resulted in five NES homebrews—Böbl, Dungeons & Doomknights, Micro Mages, Spacegulls, and Witch n’ Wiz—getting voted into the Hall. The second round of open voting (which allows everyone to repeat or change their votes, the only rules being that you should avoid voting for games already in the Hall, need to vote for ten games, and cannot vote for any game you were involved in making) is happening right now, and the three voting sites are NESmakers (on Facebook), the NESDev Forum, and here. I thought VGS would be a great voting site because I saw that back in 2020 you guys had an amazing thread about the best homebrew games out there. I thought maybe you'd like to have a go at it again? It takes just a few moments to vote—you can literally just list the games in a comment on this thread—and it helps to answer the age-old question: what NES homebrews would I recommend to someone I'm hoping will get into retro-homebrew gaming? The Hall voting (like the homebrew archive it is part of) is very much a community-service project. I really hope you'll consider participating! Just let me know if you have any questions. The free RETRO archive listing all known NES homebrews (minus the 100 or so about to be added in the next volume of the series, and the 25 I've already found so far for the volume after that, which will likely come out this summer) can be found here. All the best to all of you, Seth (PS) I am hoping to wrap up voting by May 15 if enough votes come in, and May 31 if not.

Just dropping in here 21 months later to say that if this game had ever been completed it would have been one of the best NES homebrews ever made. I have played 1,600 homebrews (all listed on my website) and this even as a demo is clearly deserving of being universally played—and even as a demo impresses at a level well beyond the most famous NES homebrew demo ever, Super Bat Puncher (though I suppose Halcyon is up there too; I would say this exceeds Halcyon, also). This is a totally jaw-dropping game, and it is also one of the first times I have ever thought to myself, I would pay a lot of money to support this game being completed.

I am coming to this fascinating conversation almost three months late, so likely almost no one will see this comment, but I did want to throw in my two cents from the standpoint of a consumer, collector, and critic who is not also the fourth "c" (a coder). My sense is that consumers, collectors, and critics do not care about the distinctions between the terms indie, homebrew, and aftermarket—they are more concerned with whether something is wholly original (which in a sense keeps repros and hacks in their own separate categories, as I think we all agree is important). It is coders who, totally understandably, feel some anxiety about how these three terms are deployed. The reasons range from the initial Sole Goose/KHAN complaint—misuse of terms could overshadow or undermine the hard work of certain coders—to from-scratch, solo-artist coders who are for good reasons circumspect about competing with (variously) NESMaker, large-indie, or even corporate projects that could include a large workforce and/or tools that make coding work much easier. The problem, just in my own opinion—take it for what it's worth—is that this particular sort of taxonomic anxiety is a bit ahistorical. Consider: unlicensed games competed with licensed games during the run of the NES; certain licensed games game from huge studios and others from much smaller studios, and as between unlicensed games you had everything from Tengen and Codemasters to games that surely only had two or three people working on them. The bottom line back in the 1980s and 1990s was that anyone writing code for a game on a given system was necessarily competing with everyone else doing the same thing, with the only distinction being Nintendo deciding who to give a Seal of Quality to (a fundamentally esoteric corporate distinction that was based on eldritch Nintendo policies, and cannot resolve an issue like the one you all are discussing here that arises decades later). Any game released after the lifespan of the NES is aftermarket, that's true. And any game released by anyone but Nintendo or (I might argue) any of the publishers that published NES games during the lifespan of the NES is an indie game inasmuch as it is a project to release a game for a system that is no longer on the market by individuals who were not ever participants in that market on the producer side—which marks any such effort as an indie endeavor, even if the endeavor has a lot of resources behind it (i.e., it is indie because it is happening outside any well-constructed, extant market for the hardware in question and being advanced by people who had no cultural capital in that market). As for homebrew, it is honestly (again just IMO) a pretty bad term, even though I use it all the time in my video game journalism and NES collecting and regular gaming practice, because (a) it does, I think, imply things about the quality of and resources behind a game that may or may not be true as to a given title, (b) it technically—by its dictionary definition—a "homebrew" video game would have to include hacks (which I agree it should not) because the term "homebrew" is about where and by whom and to a lesser extent how a game was made and not about whether it is wholly original, and (c) it makes all sorts of assumptions about how many people helped on the project, how widely these makers wanted to sell the game, and so much more. It is, in short, wildly over-prescriptive. But the thing about the term I was surprised no one mentioned here is that it runs afoul of some key variables wrought by the fourth dimension of time. Here's what I mean: are we going to call a well-financed LLC-born game created by two coders in 30 days *not* a homebrew, and a game made by one person over six years a homebrew, just because of an outside funding stream that no gamer or gaming historian does (or should) care about? Because it is the *latter* game that is, paradoxically, almost certainly going to be more polished and seem less like a "homebrew" than the former. Ignoring this turns "homebrew" into merely a financing term, and I hope we can all agree that that would be a bit silly. Money matters, of course, but who wants to foreground financing streams when we're all hoping to talk about games on their own terms? The simple fact is that it is not the number of coders or even the financing that determines whether a game is polished, but how talented the maker(s) are, how long is taken on a given game, and even the aesthetic vision of the maker—as we can all agree that "polish" is a subjective term, some makers actually value a seeming lack of polish as a charming gameplay component, there are plenty of gamers out there who do not attach their enjoyment of a game to the amorphous concept of "polish" to begin with, and as noted above polish can be achieved with time no matter how many people or how many resources have been dedicated to a game. (I think we are all aware of NES developers who take 5+ years on each game, and these games invariably come out quite "polished.") My humble suggestion is that "coder's anxiety" must be put aside because it simply aids no one—not consumers (i.e. "mere" gamers), not collectors, not critics, and not coders. If you make an aftermarket NES game you are, rightly or not, competing with everyone else doing so for the attention of everyone in the 21st c. NES-gaming community. Maybe you will spend less time and money on your game than the Mall Brawl guys did, but people will like your game much more! Or maybe you have a lot of time and money and, strangely enough, despite working alone end up spending *more* time and *more* money on your game than the Mall Brawl guys did and (sadly) people will nevertheless like it less. The market of attention is always based on the enthusiasm with which a game is received, full stop. All this other stuff cannot be the source of any taxonomy, I think, because it is not finally probative of which games people like and talk about and want to share with others or (just as important) lump together in the way they *talk* about such games. In the end, it seems like trivia. Trivia that matters quite understandably to a lot of people, but in the long view of history still trivia. In my NES aftermarket-game review series at Retro I have switched to using the term "indie" as a signifier that a game was released after the lifespan of the NES (which means, yes, I include late-1990s games made in Asia and unfairly called "bootlegs" as a way of elevating the 2000s North American homebrew scene; while I know the NES had an extended lifespan in certain Asian countries, I do not think that should have been used to erase certain Asian developers from the history of wholly original "homebrews"). "Indie" is a term people know, respond to, and do not make presumptions about (in terms of an object's quality) on the basis of, as of course we are in a moment in history when so much amazing art is indie art (e.g., in music). I do not use the term "aftermarket" for three reasons: (i) it is cold-sounding and gets no one anywhere excited (i.e., it does nothing to frame the art, only categorizes it like someone archiving detritus in a dusty warehouse would), (ii) it has a negative connotations that carry over from other fields (e.g., would you rather have a new carburetor or an aftermarket one; the aftermarket one could be amazing, sure, but it could also be dodgy, so "aftermarket" has the ring to some people of "used" or "ad hoc" or "cobbled together [potentially irresponsibly]"), and (iii) it really just doesn't mean anything beside the fact that the NES's lifespan ended decades ago. We already know that, so the term seems like a backward-looking historical footnote rather than a way to pitch a new game as exciting because it has never been seen before by NES gamers. "Indie" signifies new, innovative, and potentially exciting—and the product of someone somewhere's hard work—in a way that "aftermarket" does not and cannot. My two cents, anyway.

OK, going back on the subject of this thread now: I like the idea someone here had of bringing Star Keeper to Famicom, so if the OP would allow that I think it would be great (as long as the branch game permitted can be nearly identical to Star Keeper). I know I would buy that game and I suspect many here would, so perhaps that is a solution to the dilemma posed by this thread.

Only responding here in one long sentence because I was called out and need to respond but also do not want to take the thread further off-topic: for the first edition of the rankings I devised a methodology sui generis, then I asked for input and changed the methodology based on that input as any decent and honorable person who cares about the NES homebrew community would do, so now the review series (which is on Vol. 8 ) has a totally different methodology that reviews ALL NES homebrews (1,350 so far) without any regard whatsoever for physical release format—hence me buying an AVS and hundreds of homebrews at my own expense, and hence the site having a de minimis monthly subscription fee.

Sorry... how in the world do you know what I do? I happen to have an AVS and own 200+ homebrews in physical form. Also, I really don't care who reads RETRO or not (about 5,000 people subscribe but I do not hunt for subscribers here), but I literally have listed and ranked 1,300 NES homebrews (with links, with developer names, categorized by genre, with screenshots of many) at that publication, so being told 1,000 NES homebrews don't exist and then having some dude I don't know opine on my NES-playing habits is... like, *wow*. Seriously, what the hell? I've been a video game journalist for years, have taught video games as a college professor, and never rank a game I have not played to a sufficient degree to rank it with professional accuracy. I also, unlike some cowards who take potshots at people pseudonymously, post under my real name.

Hi all, I have just now gotten caught up with this thread. My only message to @zxdplay would be this: thank you for making a wonderful NES homebrew. I wish you only the best in all things. The rest of what I have to say is directed toward everyone else in this thread, and the thrust of it is that I think we all must agree, a month into this thread, that everyone here is wasting their time and words out of a desire for something to happen that is never going to happen. Every single person on this thread has told the OP that his plan is foolhardy, nonsensical, counterproductive, and just downright logically (perhaps even ethically) bankrupt. Many posters have offered (in great detail) infinitely better plans that would enrich the OP, honor original-edition collectors (though not sure why this is an actual value anyone would hold, given the tacit "buyer-beware" foundational premise behind all high-end collectibles), and most importantly get this great game into more hands. Some here have even offered to directly aid the OP in getting linked up with some of the most talented, successful, and respected NES homebrew publishers in the United States—and this is a group of people, here at VGS, with the sort of connections and know-how to make good on those offers. The OP has categorically rebuffed even single piece of advice that would require deviation from his current plan and ignored every offer of aid or else provided a justification for his view that the aid would be counterproductive or somehow beside the point. Has anyone here ever entered a room with 50 people who make up the desired audience for an idea you have, been told by all 50 people in no uncertain terms that your idea is a disaster, and been as recalcitrant as the OP has been in not changing your mind even a single iota? I would doubt it. It takes a special gumption to ignore so many wise people so gregariously. So please accept that the OP is not interested in doing anything but what he has already decided to do, and trying to convince him otherwise is fruitless. The OP is a non-lawyer who says he cannot afford a lawyer but is offering a deal based on a legal contract that requires the services of a lawyer. The OP wants to sell NFTs to a community whose leading members have told him in no uncertain terms that they (and the community they are part of, broadly writ) are anti-NFT. The OP has said that he is concerned most about homebrew gamers, but has concocted a plan that would enrich him without him doing any work, protect wealthy collectors, and do absolutely nothing for gamers or bring gamers any closer to what they want: to be able to play a very specific NES homebrew. When the OP is told that even collectors would be fine with a new release of the game, the OP does not budge. When the OP is told by his prospective IP fan base that no one cares about the IP but only the game itself, the OP does not budge. When the OP is given examples of others who simultaneously made money, protected first-edition collectors, and shared their games with the world by working with (e.g.) LRG, Mega Cat, or VGS, the OP does not budge. When the OP is told that the transnational and unprecedented (not in a good way, as the OP supposes) nature of this transaction alone would make it unlikely that anyone would interested in it, or that the Star Keeper IP (not the game itself) is so derivative that it lacks value, or that NFTs are increasingly despised among U.S. gamers, or that nothing the OP says he wants to do actually honors the values that he says he has, the OP does not budge. It is over. Let the OP do what he wants. It is clear to me and I think to others that—sadly—this ends with the game being pirated somehow, perhaps first to FC and then to the NES, and that the reason for this is because the OP is foreclosing the many roads that would lead to a different outcome while claiming to fear piracy above all else. And candidly, the fear of piracy expressed here causes me to feel that the OP does not understand this community at all. This is a community that wants to own games, not pirate them, and those who want to pirate them are not really part of the community. What this means is that even were the game pirated, it would still sell a ton of copies to legitimate non-pirating buyers, as is evidenced by the many successful releases by LRG, Mega Cat, and VGS (heck, LRG regularly releases, with great success, NES titles that anyone could emulate at any time; again, this is a community that wants to buy and play and collect games, not pirate and emulate them). Anyway, this is my two cents, and I felt compelled to offer it as this thread has gotten progressively more depressing. The right answer has been given to the OP over and over and over and over again, but either stubbornness, disingenuousness (as to motive), or some unstated mystery is making a sensible resolution of this situation impossible. Only a nonsensical, embarrassing NFT sale that will either never happen or be a disaster is left, and for that reason, I find myself not wanting to follow this conversation anymore. We cannot save people from their own foolhardiness. We should try—and folks here did try—but I think that effort has to come to an end at some point, and it does seem (from the slowing down of this thread) that we have arrived at that point. And I say all this as the video game journalist who ranked Star Keeper as one of the best NES homebrews ever, after playing 1,000+ NES homebrews. So if the OP has lost me, he probably should have lost all of us by now. S.