The NES and the UK - What really happened?

[Rogue Trooper]

Few more ACE scores:Batman 890
Solomons Key 790
Zelda II 901


Now moving onto C+VG's Mean Machines section:

Rad Racer, which oddly gets reviewed twice! 7/10 1st time around then jumps upto 84% on 2nd review.


*Scoring system gets 'odd' as well, things like graphics+sound still marked out of 10, but overall score is out of 100% in many cases

Pro-Am 6
Zelda 9
Punch Out 8
Pro-Wrestling 5
Mario Bros 80%
Nintendo Soccer 83%
Gradius 87%
**Super Mario II 97%, but then when reviewed in Machine Machines when it was a stand alone magazine, it was awarded 89%
Castlevania 81%
Top Gun 82%
Mach Rider 58%
Baseball 47%
**Double Dragon 83% (MS ver.reviewed alongside, gets 76%), again here new, lower score 2nd time around in M.Machines review, drops to 80%
Mega Man 89%
Wizzards And warriors 74%
**Life Force 87%down to 86% 2nd M.M review
Track+Field II 92%
Cobra Triangle 93%
Double Dribble 82%
Robo Warrior 56%
Batman 92%
**TMHT 89%-Jumps up a tad to 90% in 2nd M.Machines review
Festers Quest 56%
Silent Service 82%
Bionic Commando 81%
Skate Or Die 78%
Spy Vs Spy 84%
Road Blasters 47%
720 80%
Rescue (Aka Hostages) 41%

Black Manta 73%
Bubble Bobble 85%
Robocop 50%
Solar Jetman 94%
Blades Of Steel 79%
World Wrestling 85%
Batman 87%
Off-Road 8%
Mega Man 95%
Probotector 73%
Pinbot 90%
Snake, Rattle+Roll 94%
Bad Dudes 39%

So as Laird notes, UK press did'nt rave over things like Castlevania the away it's now claimed they did, nor did they go that crazy over ALL of  Rare's output, things like Pro-Am, Capt.Skyhawk etc scored average to good, Lot of the press loved things like NES Batman, Super Mario Bros, Zelda etc, but so far, after ploughing through 5 of the UK's multi-formats, i've failed to find anything that says the NES should be any more fondly recalled in todays UK press than the MS and after seeing so many great scores awarded to MS, ST, Lynx games etc, i'm left wondering why they are'nt getting the same degree of coverage.

NES exclusives aside, the reviews i've seen have been conversions from the arcade or the C64 or MSX.Very odd that the NES conversions are always brought up, but not so much the MSX originals.....

[Rogue Trooper]

Closing look at scores and a few (more things) have jumped out, countless times you'd see a NES game get either a new review, or as part of a mini-review guide with a new score attached, just seen Mean Machines booklet NES review guide giving Black Manta 80% now, for example, few other scores jumped up a few points.

The NES CPU seems to be an issue when certain coin-op's were converted see Mean Machines rip into Operation Wolf 53% Slow, visually dissapointing, along with Rainbow Islands 67% ruined by slow gameplay, along with Bubble Bobble, wondering if last 2 are fault of poor coding or the hardware as C64 for example pulled off decent conversions of both.New Zealand Story gets 79%, better sound than coin-op, but far too easy to finish, Ghost's 'N' Goblins gets a mauling 55% as does Ikari warriors 48% again both fared very well on UK C64, Kick Off just as bad on NES it seems, 36%

I've yet to see a score raving about a Wizards+Warriors game Mean Machines gave the orig. 72% and Iron Sword 77%, so rather surprised to see a feature on the series in Retro Gamer a while back, did the series get unfair reviews? i've honestly never read of anyone really praising any of the games, so wonder why it was deemed worthy of coverage in RG?

Also, some very surprising scores for what i'd been led to believe were THE key games on NES by NES fans on various forums and RG articles, mentioned previous scores for Metal Gear and Castlevania, but Mean Machines rated Metal Gear at 52%, Metriod comes in at 80% and Kid Icarus at 68% not the scores i was expecting to be honest.

Boulderdash gets a 90%, Defender Of The Crown 59%-Worse than C64 Disk Ver.i wonder? (Only played ST version), Kung-Fu 72%, Marble Madness 85% (sounds better than the poor C64 version i played, thankfully), Paperboy 30%, Rygar 70 % (so better than awful C64 version), Smash TV 90%, Snakes Revenge 49% (knew that was said to be poor), TMHT:The Arcade Game 64%, Xevious 65% (I've no idea how good/bad a conversion this is, i hate the original, lol), Castelian 73% (always found the C64 version technically amazing but frustrating to play) and system seems to lack a decent Robocop game, Robocop 2 now pulling in 72%.

[DreamcastRIP]

Sterling work, RT.

All these NES game magazine review scores plus the various comments they made regarding the NES hardware itself go to prove that those of us who've thus far posted in the thread all have an accurate memory of things as they happened those years ago.

There's no revisionist history on our part because what you've posted is history as it really happened back then. Such documented evidence as you (and Laird) have provided goes to prove that despite what certain others may claim the NES signally failed to impress the vast overwhelming majority of gamers here in the UK.

Even most of the so-called NES 'classics' failed to impress the gaming media here at the time.

Certain NES fansites, fanzines, ignorant Nintendo fanboys on the internet and nationally published print publications would seemingly have us believe differently. I'd like to think that the very vocal minority of pro-Nintendo revisionists posting on internet forums and the occasional misguided article in RG mean little in the grand scheme of things, i.e. that the majority of older gamers here in the UK remember what actually happened those years ago and roll their eyes when seeing such revisionist nonsense the same way we do here.

That said, there is a very real danger, in my opinion, of many of today's younger generations falling prey to the revisionist agenda and that dismays me. The concerns we're expressing have nothing to do with being 'anti-Nintendo' and everyting to do with not wishing for real history being revised and distorted beyond recognition by those too ignorant to know better and those with an agenda to push.

[onthinice]

Great stuff everyone.

[Rogue Trooper]

I've tried not to bore folks to tears by quoting scores without posting scans of said reviews (i don't have a scanner, plus it'd require bloody hours), but i felt i needed to post them along with comments from reviewers to.....well, just put the message out that i've not seen an ounce of this past history of the NES in UK, i had been led to believe.

Sure, the scores in publications vary, as i expected and some have changed scores in mini-review guides, but not by a margin where a great game is poor or vice versa and i've gone through 5 publications, all multi-format, to try and give a balanced look at way media treated NES, in order to prevent any possibility of 'you cannot trust X+Z they hated the NES1' type responses, i mean:Zero, Raze, TGM, ACE+Mean Machines alone, lot of reviewers there alone, factor in the article from Crash/Zzap where you've C64/Speccy reviewers praising the hardware as being a micro beater in several departments and i'd say the NES was given a very fair evaluation.


The arcade conversions, whilst graphically better in cases, arrived far too late, 8 Bit Micro owners had bought, played and moved on and thier versions were £10 or under, boasted better music in case of say the C64 version, or more playable due to running faster, in Speccy case than that of the NES versions, plus they were playing games with a lot more depth alongside the arcade conversions.

I'm not Anti-Nintendo (LOL, i'd be bloody hard pushed to be so owning GB, GBA, GC,GB Player at present and Ex-SNES and N64 owner) and niether are you (hell out of the 2 of us, you bought a Wii U) and nor is Laird (Wii owner).we are seasoned gamers who grew up in the NES era.

I'll admit i barely gave it a 2nd glance back then, but thought this thread would be chance to correct that.Yes, i was driven partly after reading so many Nintendo based articles in RG, i thought i'd really been blinkered, missed out on a lot of classics, had 'dabbled' with the NES on emulation, mainly to play Solar Jetman, see how NES versions of C64 games fared and hear Tim Follins work on the NES etc.But there was this over-riding 'message' coming from RG that the UK took the NES to it's chest and held on damn tight, i'm going to have to dig out old copies of RG and see what's said about UK reaction to games like Metal Gear, Castlevania, Wizards and warriors etc.It's bad enough the various PS2+PS3 mags seemed to think they were hip+cool talking about the original games on MSX+NES (bet writer was'nt even born when they were released), but i don't expect ANY publication to give me a version of events that never was.

Inspire me to discover a game or series or format i missed out on 1st time around, but don't p*ss on my back and tell me it's raining-any publication who takes that stance is unworthy of my time nor money, if you cannot find someone to write an honest account for an article, scrap the article.

[Rogue Trooper]

Great stuff everyone.

Cheers mate-Trust me, you work night shifts and you'll set your mind to questioning everything you've been reading during tea breaks.Personal gripe of mine is reading that format X was AMAZING or was loved by all, or was utter sh*te and hated by all, when i either know that's not true or have the resources to discover just what real story is.

[Rogue Trooper]

This is a worry, found an example already of my 'concerns' over direction certain publications are taking towards NES related pieces:

The Classic Game:Kid Icarus, 2-page feature, but thing that hit me? 'What The Press Said....ages ago' Magazine quoted Nintendo Power, which just happened NOT to review it as game was 12 months old by time magazine launched, fair enough, use a publication who DID review it then and ohhh i dunno, why not go for a respected, multi-format magazine, such as Mean Machines, here i'll show you how easy it is:Mean Machines review score for Kid Icarus 68%, not difficult was it?.Why not be honest an say game recived a mixed reception?.

Going for a review from a Nintendo only publication which never even reviewed it.....



Then you've the claims that it's the games difficulty that puts people off, ohh really? so same people who perhaps enjoyed Rick dangerous back then or Demon's souls today?.


Article says 1 reason it's so underated is it's extreme difficulty puts people off and they give in before getting past the 1st few screens-so by that logic are they 'suggesting' Mean Machines based the review on the 1st few screens alone and no-one on the team could get past them?.


Article says K.I is just as wondorous and surprising as the big three NES games:Mario, Zelda and Metriod, but more deserving of it's cult status...fair enough, opinion after all, but i wonder WHY magazine never felt it worthy of  such status/coverage until the 3DS version just happened to arrive.

[Rogue Trooper]

The Collectors Guide:NES....

WTF just seriousily WTF....

Europe had NOT been drowning in an 'Ocean of low quality software' (NES had'nt arrived yet (lol), the home micro market was NOT suffering from a saturated market of homemade releases, we were getting original games and better than NES conversions long befor Pal NES conversions arrived.

The NES did high colour, high res visuals very well yes but a stunning audio chip? I know the POKEY and SID chips must be p8ssing themselves here.

Nes hosted software of highest merit did it? look at review scores so far given, plus i left out likes of Balljacks 13% Mean Machines.

The periphals took gaming in previousily unimaginable directions? you what? a light gun? jeez no..i'd never seen such wonders prior to the Nes..it had a...disk drive, OMG...hello writter the C64/Speccy had those, plus you could connect standard CD drives up to them later in life to play games by Codemasters+Rainbow arts on.

The NES PAL libary holds an incredible amount of depth-So, where's say NES Lords Of Midnight? Bloodwych?The Sentinel? Ultima series?Wasteland? Space Rogue? it's wide range of Microprose sims? it's SSI Wargames etc?.

Long before...the Four Score you could find 4 controller ports on the Atari 8 bit Micro, oddly not mentioned in this piece.

Sorry US readers, please do not, if you ever come across this item, take it as true version of how the Pal NES is considered amongst a lot of us who love our retro.It's a neat little system, but i cannot believe what i'm reading here.....opening slags the 2600 for being dated, yet that was exactly what NES was time UK got it....

No idea how this 'article' made it to print, to be 100% fair to RG, in past they'd been more than honest when it came to dealing with the NES, 'happy' to list the flaws with NES arcade conversions like Operation Wolf, Rainbow Islands and Double Dragon, then suddenly they are unable to find a review of Kid Icarus and a collectors article like this appears.

[TL]

Here is that NES advert for you, was a bit of pain to convert to a JPG:

[onthinice]

That helps explain the mystery. Your all closet Nintendo Fans.

[Rogue Trooper]

The History Of Excite Bike, something that left likes of TGM stone cold (58%) in with track editor, but NO, cannot mention that, can though mention how was 1 of best selling Jap launch titles, got ported, yadda yadda.So, again, all 1 sided, no downsides mentioned onto the Little-Known NES Racers section of that piece:

Mach Rider mentioned, hmnn, no sign of poor UK scores (58%, 636/1000 etc).

Rad Racer then any mention of 7/10 score, sadly no, just all praise.

If 'we' on here are happy to put down the flaws in systems we've bought (i've been vocal on downside of MCD, Jaguar etc) then i'd expect equal balance in a professional publication.Why i wonder are flaws in some NES games pointed out, but not others? no game, let alone any system 'classic' is without fault, so why not mention them? explain if they were resolved in future instalments etc?.

And..bloody hell, good or as bad as series are, devoting 8-Pages to them in 1 issue?

Complete history Of Metroid:again, became a huge hit in the west-No mention of how UK press or gamers took to it (or in fact did'nt warm to it to degree they did in the States), just the US point of view, IF RG is trying to appeal to US readership, err how about you inform rather than repeat what they probably already know, if it was a huge hit, chances are your readership bought it! what they might not know, but be interested to find out, is how the UK took to it!.

[Rogue Trooper]

Reading:The History Of Wizards And warriors piece in RG, thinking, this will be good, considering just how the UK press scored the games (well 1st 2) 72%/74% and 77% from reviews i've read...

Hmmn 6 pages devoted to the trilogy, no sign of a 'what the press said ages ago...' box out, mentions 0.5  million sales in USA and 50,000 in Europe (but no UK specific sales figures) for Ironsword, no review scores..ahh whats this? ohh.....'following strong sales and mostly positive reviews of Ironsword....' hang on, woah, back up there, 'mostly positive'.....'mostly'..ok, fine so from who? where? what were they? US reviews? European? want to give us at least 1 publication name or a score? you've done it for other games and looks like the article has the space.No? nothing...how very bizzare.

[DreamcastRIP]

The Collectors Guide:NES....

...



Sorry US readers, please do not, if you ever come across this item, take it as true version of how the Pal NES is considered amongst a lot of us who love our retro.It's a neat little system, but i cannot believe what i'm reading here.....opening slags the 2600 for being dated, yet that was exactly what NES was time UK got it...

Another excellent point there RT and one I hadn't previously considered.

It's bad enough that the likes of RG (and other sources - see previous posts) have been complicit in this pro-Nintendo historical revisionism within the UK but I'd not thought of the wider implication you've just highlighted. RG is indeed also sold in North America so any otherwise ignorant RG readers in the USA would have read said appalling article and be of the impression that NES was a success here too.

As you've posted your own observations with regard to said article from RG issue 101 here's what I posted about it at the time. It's the post which led to a flurry of other folk posting of their shock at how woeful the article's claims were.

What's with this month's 'The Collector's Guide'?

* "Upon its US launch... the NES, refuelled the country's dying videogame industry."
- Implies Nintendo did this alone. See martyg's fine article in RG 100 for what actually happened.

* "Prior to the console's European release, gamers had been drowning in an ocean of low-quality software... while home computers began to suffer from a heavily saturated market of homemade releases."
- Seriously, just how much more wrong could both claims in that sentence be? Revisionist history at its worst or simply plain ignorance?

* "Nintendo was aware of these issues and proceeded to offer gamers the lifeline they had been crying out for."
- Does the writer know anything about what the UK/European gaming scene was like in late '86 when the NES launched here? A time when games for the 8-bit micros were truly hitting their stride and when the ST & Amiga were new on the scene. Utterly ludicrous.

* "... state of the art visuals and a stunning audio chip"
- a gross exaggeration.

* "... the revolutionary console..."
- What, the NES? Seriously?

* "If there is anything Nintendo is known for, it's innovation."
- Oh dear, oh dear, that old chestnut again.

* "The Japanese gaming giant has always known how we want to enjoy our games, years in advance."
- Another ridiculous claim largely without merit.

And finally, the 'Collector Q&A' box-out states, "The NES was a smash hit in every country apart from the UK." Oh really?

Don't get me wrong, articles in RG can be great when they show passion and enthusiasm for any particular game or system. This article at times does something quite different though. It crosses the line into the territory of rabid fanboyism brimming with unproven claims, factual inaccuracies and revisionist history. In such instances the magazine's journalistic integrity risks coming into question, imho. A major let-down in an otherwise excellent issue of RG.

At least with that final quote (highlighted in red) the clearly clueless interviewee (a NES collector) admitted that NES wasn't a success in the UK. The fact that this interview response absolutely contradicts the author's own claims (as quoted) would appear to be lost on the author... to further compound just what an appalling piece of journalism it was.

So, yes, to echo RT's well made point, any American forum members who happen to own RG issue 101 please take note of this thread! RG let loose a clueless Nintendo fanboy to pen that article and quite evidently failed in its duty to the readership to perform even the most cursory of fact checking on it before green lighting it to be published.

There was a time I took what I read in RG as gospel. More fool me. Since reading the article in question I quickly came to the realisation that the magazine is sometimes no better than the nonsense uttered by fanboys on the internet. I still buy the magazine but no longer have much faith that what I'm reading is guaranteed to be accurate any more. A permanent loss of credibility, so to speak. If that sounds overly harsh then I would point out that the very same author has somewhat incredulously been allowed to write another article since issue 101 and that (Mega Drive Collector's Guide) was an afront to quality videogaming journalism too.

[Rogue Trooper]

Not being a NES owner i honestly only skimmed through the articles i've quoted and like DC, took the approach that what was written was pretty much 'Gospel'-Had'nt bothered with the collectors artice before, as did'nt plan to collect for NES.


But as DC points out, there is a real danger of someone from USA or elsewhere who's an interest in the UK scene, could read 1 or more NES related articles in RG and come away with a very false impression.

There was a time i could read an article in the magazine on a subject i thought i knew pretty much the ins and outs of and still find it etertaining and learnt new things on.I fear those days are not going to be arriving with anything NES related.

Prior to starting this thread i thought it was just my reading of the material, folks on here would explain how, in thier experience, whilst the wording might not be perfect, the general gist of the pieces was pretty spot on, thats how the sh*t went down, i should'nt take UK press scores so seriousily on NES, try playing NES games rather than quoting scores or worrying too much.But..having read the responses and now the articles in full, armed with that knowledge, the wording of said articles has left me with a rather sour taste.In a good few cases it's not what has been written, but whats been left out, anything that paints subject material in a less than OMG, we loved it, type light, glossed over or ignored.

That's not good, for a UK mag to act as if the west meant:well States loved it, ergo so did the UK...poor show, poor show indeed.

[TL]

Just hit the motherload, scans of NES reviews from the C&VG console guide: