nesdev.com

Category 1:

• This category is reserved for games. Any tools or toys should be submitted as category 2.
• Mapper 28 compatible entry up to 64KB with NO PRG-RAM
• Prizes as follows:
  1st Place - $512
  2nd Place - $256
  3rd Place - $128
  4th Place - $64
  5th Place - $32
• Limited Edition multicarts for all meritorious entries (at judges discretion)
• Judging criteria and full submission requirements - WORK IN PROGRESS
• Anonymous entries are allowed if you wish to opt out of receiving a prize, but would still like your submission included.
• By submitting an entry into this contest, you are giving full consent to use the entry on the multicart. Submissions must meet multicart standards to be inlcuded (see below under general guidelines)
• See General Guidelines below.

• Contest runs until January 31, 2018.
• Entries should be submitted by February 1st 12:00AM CST
• Commercially released entries, and previously submitted entries with no changes are discouraged.
• Multiple entries are allowed and encouraged.
• Only one cash/cartridge/other physical prize will be awarded per entrant across all categories. If multiple submissions place in a cash winning position, the greatest prize will be awarded, and the runner up will receive the prize. You can only win one cash prize*. You can only win one cartridge**. You can only win one other physical prize.
• Entries must be original. Plagiarism and copyright infringement will result in disqualification.
• Use of existing tools/libraries/code qualify as long as permission has been granted by the author.
• Collaborations are allowed, prize distribution will be decided by those who collaborated on the project. This decision should be known by the person who submitted the entry as they will be our primary contact. Please make these decisions beforehand.
• There are no restrictions on submissions including explicit content.
• Publishers and organizers reserve the right to request changes to your entry for content exceeding E10+ ESRB rating prior to inclusion on published cartridges.
  
  *In the event that a single entrant wins multiple cash prizes, regardless of who collaborated on the projects, the person who submits the project represents the whole. i.e., Project A and Project B won 1st and 2nd respectively. They were submitted by Bob. Larry was a collaborator on Project B. There will still only be one cash prize for the two projects.
  **If the entry is a collaboration, additional cartridges may be purchased at cost for fellow collaborators (or deducted from a cash prize if applicable).

Category 2 (the non-contest):

• Anything Goes - old unreleased stuff, modified existing stuff, whatever. If it runs on the NES/FC feel free to submit it.
• There will be no cash prizes awarded for this category.
• Multicarts and possible physical prizes for all entries included on the multicart (at judges discretion)
• Depending on the configuration of the entry, it may not be possible to include it on the multicart, however, at the judges discretion multicarts and physical prizes will be awarded. For exceptional submissions, extra effort may be done to adapt the game/cartridge hardware to support being included in the multicart.
• Entrants are not required to consent to multicart inclusion upon submission.
• Since this category will not be ranked or judged, it will also not be under the strict submission dates and times. If it is submitted before the multicart is released, then it is fair game. Keep in mind, the sooner it is submitted the better chance it will have at making it onto the multicart.
• Entries in this category will also not be under the restriction of the General Guidelines above, but material you do not have rights to will not be considered for the multicart.

Category 2 is intended to give publicity to homebrewers by having their work placed on the nesdevcompo website, and to encourage entrants to finish their projects.

Please reply on this thread, PM me, or email NESHomebrew@gmail.com with any questions or clarification. Thanks and GOOD LUCK to all entrants!

Don't want to say June 1st is the start date, as it implies that people can't start until then. If we really need a start date, I would use Feb 1st, the day after the previous compo ends. In reality, IDK why we need to give an explicit start date though. We really don't techincally have one in the sense that you can't start working towards your entry until a specific date. So I'd prefer to not list a start date at all.


Perhaps a clearer way to explain this would simply be that the goal of the cartridge release is on par with an E10+ ERSB rating. IMO originally released NES games fall in the E-E10 range, which sets the tone for what people expect from the console's content.

_________________
If you're gonna play the Game Boy, you gotta learn to play it right. -Kenny Rogers

Isn't that kinda restrictive? I mean, I understand (but don't necessarily agree with) avoiding nudity and sex, but such a rating doesn't even allow blood! More often than not, games are about fighting enemies, so guns and violence are frequently present, and being able to represent those elements exclusively in cartoony ways is extremely limiting IMO.

We're all adults here, so it seems silly to me to restrict the creativity of the contestants because of the relatively small number of kids that'll be playing these games. Maybe we should rate the games individually, and possibly isolate or even hide games with "questionable" content, and have the parents monitor their children to make sure they aren't being exposed to content they consider inappropriate, instead of blindly giving them a stack of cartridges and walking away. It's not fair that the whole thing has to be watered down because of parents who don't want to actively monitor what their kids are doing.

I'm just trying to come up with clear guidance beyond "any parent is comfortable with" which is widely open to interpretation, many parents may not even permit video games.

Considering the graphical limitations of the system accurately depicting gore without coming off as cartoonish is a challenge IMO. We have never had a submission with blood before, so I have a hard time seeing the limitation. That said, personally I don't have an issue with 'mortal kombat' blood in general.

It may be best to simply state the goal of E10+, and recommend entrants ask for input on specific content that pushes that limit.

I've brought this up in the past, but perhaps making it this more clear in the rules/guidance would help. The censoring is not on the compo entry alone, maybe it shouldn't be in the official rules at all. Put whatever you'd like into the game, express yourself however you choose. Explicit content does not disqualify one from earning any placement in the compo. But if your entry might have a hard time earning votes from your peers if it's excessively offensive. The censoring is only subject to content seeking approval for publishing on the annual cartridge. If there are enough people that want to create explicit entries and make a separate dedicated release any member of the community is welcome to head up that effort. I may even be willing to publish it myself if there is enough content/interest. If someone disagrees with me so strongly that they'd like to take over responsibility to publish the cartridges I'd happily hand over the reigns if the community supports it.

_________________
If you're gonna play the Game Boy, you gotta learn to play it right. -Kenny Rogers

I don't see the big deal, because if you have to censor your game for the multicart nobody stops you from publishing it unaltered afterwards, elsewhere.

_________________
http://www.mojontwins.com

How about this wording for the rules:

There are no restrictions on submissions including explicit content. However publishers and organizers reserve the right to request changes to your entry for content exceeding E10+ ESRB rating prior to inclusion on published cartridges.

EDIT: typo fixed!

_________________
If you're gonna play the Game Boy, you gotta learn to play it right. -Kenny Rogers

Correct the spelling to "ESRB" and I think you have a winner.

OK, the requested changes have been made. Anything else?

Looks pretty good, but I'm wondering if we should change the language to give us more freedom on dev. edition, limited edition, regular edition, numbering etc until we're preparing for the release.


proposing the following instead:
-Limited Edition multicarts for all meritorious entries (at judges discretion).



proposing:
- Multicarts and possible physical prizes for all entries included on the multicart (at judges discretion)
- Depending on the configuration of the entry, it may not be possible to include it on the multicart, however, at the judges discretion multicarts and physical prizes will be awarded. For exceptional submissions, extra effort may be done to adapt the game/cartridge hardware to support being included in the multicart.

_________________
If you're gonna play the Game Boy, you gotta learn to play it right. -Kenny Rogers

Trying to iron out a few question marks i have. If i would team up with more than one competing entrant (doing graphics, sound, and probably have shared design responsibility), how does that work? I take it it's the entries that compete, but we have rules for multiple entries from the same person. Or entrant. The one submitting might be what counts?

The cash prize for teams has been made clear. I interpret it as "submitter wins representing the team, any splitting can be dealt with between team members and should be split". How about cart prizes? A large team winning could be cumbersome economically if every team member gets one (production, shipping...) or is that a small matter - or maybe there's only one cart? If so, wouldn't it be better if the team got a "voucher" representing the cost of making a cart, and be able to split it as a discount for for getting a cart each. Probably not the best way to express it as a rule... just seeking clarity on team rules.

_________________
http://www.frankengraphics.com - personal NES blog

The rule as it stands is that all prizes (including the one cart) are split amongst team members.

I realize this might be lame for a team working on an entry. I've proposed in the finances thread, to allow contributors to purchase regular edition copies at cost. After all, it's not our goal to turn a profit on the contributors themselves.

However considering the state of our funds, there's room to be more generous with rewards to entries with team members. Coming up with a fair way to reward teams vs solo entrants is a challenge, to which I would like to see what others propose.

If we want to reward a team with multiple cartridges per member, at a minimum I think the contributors all need to be listed with their areas of contribution in the submission blurb. Additionally perhaps we should put a cap of ~3 copies..?

An idea in between those two proposals would be to allow the contributors in a team to purchase a limited edition cart at cost. If the entry places high enough for cash prizes, the cash reward would cover at least 1+ copies. Hard to be much more fair that that I suppose..

_________________
If you're gonna play the Game Boy, you gotta learn to play it right. -Kenny Rogers

I'm game if everyone else is to allow collabs to purchase extra carts at cost. Also, any last suggestions before we put things in stone?

User case scenario:
A Collaborant is involved in two entries with different entrants, to an extent that satisfies the rules. They happen to score, say, 4th and 5th place.

Both entries have separate entrants, so as per the rules, both entries win a cash prize. (Besides, having a common collaborant shouldn't disable participation on equal terms for the entrants). How is the cash prize divided, then? What is fair?

I think my suggestion would be:
Since the collaborant scored (via proxy of the submitter) both 4th and 5th place, the highest scoring place is 4. The collaborant gets to split that prize with the submitter of that entry, but not the one scoring 5th. In effect:
Submitter, game A, 4th place: 32$ (half)
Collaborant, game A & B, 4th place: 32$ (half)
Submitter, game B, 5th place: 32$ (full)

Thus, a submitter can't score more prizes than anyone else, but be rewarded for the highest ranking submission s/he contributed significantly to. Same as anyone else.

Is this reasonable? Are there any holes?

_________________
http://www.frankengraphics.com - personal NES blog

I would keep it between the teams. If you agreed to get half with A and third with B, you should get those no matter how A and B score.

My reasoning is that it fixes something i percieve as a loophole where the status of a contributor can give you a better chance at scoring a cash prize than one having the status of a submitter (most often if not historically always the coder or main coder). What's your thoughts on that? Also, the absense of rules on team wins requires actively making deals (which may amount to nothing), repeatedly. A collective agreement is energy and time saving, perhaps a bit more secure, thus encouraging team efforts.

Hm, but perhaps the rules shouldn't explicitly specify how hypothetical prizes are split between team members, though, since contributions can vary, and/or if you think that is discouraging teaming up.

_________________
http://www.frankengraphics.com - personal NES blog