Xbox 360 snags classic 3rd-Party Nintendo title

by Vladimir Cole { Mar 2nd 2006 at 7:30AM }

The first classic Nintendo title to arrive on a next-gen system will land on the doorstep of Xbox 360 owners via a port of ~~Midway's~~ Atari's classic 1984 arcade hit, Paperboy by Midway, according to GameSpot. (Technically, game was released for the NES and many other systems years after its initial arcade appearance, but most readers will have experienced it first on the NES).

Which memorable NES classics sit in third-party vaults outside the control of the Nintendo corporation? Those are the next candidates to be picked up, dusted off, and ported to Xbox Live Arcade.

[Thanks, Sense]

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)

Sloopydrew @ Mar 2nd 2006 7:43AM

That's a great score for the XBOX Live Arcade. I spent hours playing that game in the arades. I played it for hours more when it hit the Nintendo. I always think of it as a forerunner to games like Crazy Taxi. Only without a taxi, or all the craziness.

Hopefully they'll upgrade the graphics (they're really dated) and add online multiplayer. Seeing a Nintendo game on a Microsoft console is sort of depressing, even if it is nothing more than a third-party title.

SilverSurfer @ Mar 2nd 2006 7:56AM

Greg Canessa, XBLA Manager - "A lot of those Nintendo games, you know, aren't gonna hold up."

And what does he do? Goes right out and gets a Nintendo game that "wont hold up" for XBL. What a hypocrite.

Nintendo's first party games especially will be huge for Rev, you cant deny that.

x23 @ Mar 2nd 2006 7:56AM

i experienced it first on an Apple //. or maybe it was a ][. i forget.

Tom @ Mar 2nd 2006 7:59AM

I don't think its fair to call this a Nintendo game. I also had it for the good ole Atari Lynx and wikipedia has this to say on the subject of paperboy ports:

Paperboy was ported to several home systems for personal use, starting in 1986. In some of these versions, the player could assume the role of a papergirl instead of a paperboy. Paperboy was ported to Acorn Electron (by Andy Williams, 1986), Commodore 64 (by Chris Harvey and Neil A Bate, 1986), ZX Spectrum (1986), DOS (1988), Nintendo Entertainment System (1988), Apple IIGS, Game Boy (1990), Game Boy Color (1999), Atari ST (1989), Amiga (1989), Atari Lynx (1990), Sega Master System (1990),Game Gear (1991) and Sega Genesis (1991). Unlike the arcade version, several of these versions inspired a sequel, Paperboy 2 for the Super Nintendo, and a 3D version for Nintendo 64 called Paperboy 64. More recently, Paperboy was included in Midway Arcade Treasures, a compilation of arcade games for the Nintendo GameCube, PlayStation 2, PlayStation Portable, Xbox and Windows released in 2003.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paperboy_%28video_game%29

pocketcalc @ Mar 2nd 2006 8:04AM

Err, how is this a Nintendo title? It was released by Atari in the arcades, and I played it mostly on my old C64. Sure, it was released on some Nintendo consoles, but it was also released on most home computers, some Sega systems, etc.

This whole article seems to be very misleading - surely you mean 'Xbox360 snags classic Atari title'?

modeps @ Mar 2nd 2006 8:11AM

Yeah, I'm going to have to agree with the other posters here. It's not a Nintendo title at all. It was an arcade port to many home systems... most of which never recreated the enjoyment of the original arcade title.

Eligio Rosa @ Mar 2nd 2006 8:17AM

Wasn't this game realease by Tengen?

If yes then is not an official NES title.

Agent X @ Mar 2nd 2006 8:25AM

I know it's already been said, but it bears repeating: THIS IS NOT A NINTENDO GAME. It was originally an arcade game by Atari Games, and was released on other systems before it ever came out on any Nintendo system.

Regula Blique @ Mar 2nd 2006 8:28AM

Yah we alll know its not from nintendo, but I guess the point Joystiq is bringing out is that many people like myself remember it on the NES, I never knew it was on another system to some of yall started ranting.
It probably has its most memories for people on the NES because that system made it main stream I was like 5 when I firsted played it now Im twenty-one. So its kinda a blow seeing that I remeber it on nintendo and its going to xbox, but I do have it emulated on my psp so I guess its str8 :0

saboola @ Mar 2nd 2006 8:29AM

I played this in the arcades first, then on my commodore 64, eventually losing interest by the time the NES port came out. Why was this same headline not used for Gauntlet when it came onto xbox live? Gauntlet "appeared" on the NES as well.

strider_mt2k @ Mar 2nd 2006 8:33AM

My main experience with this game was Paperboy 2 on the SNES, so I didn't think twice about it until I read the comments above.

The Game Boy version was terrible I know that.

RetroElectro @ Mar 2nd 2006 8:38AM

Slow news day? C'mon, this is no Nintendo game. Vladimir is just trying to create a story when there is none. Classic Nintendo would be Super Mario Bros, Zelda, Metroid, Excitebike, etc. Hell, I'll even throw in some 3rd party games like Contra and Tecmo Bowl. These are games you could only play on an NES or waw popularized on it. I remember playing Paperboy at Showbiz Pizza and then on my C64 WAY before the NES showed up. By the time they did port it to the NES, it's shelf life was definitely over. This is just Blair sexing up the intelligence. What's the next headline-- Live gets classic SNES Street Fighter 2 and classic NES Ms Pac Man?

DG @ Mar 2nd 2006 8:39AM

I remember going to friends' houses when I was a kid and playing Paperboy on their computers. I understand the intent behind calling Paperboy an NES game, but I don't think that works. It's like calling Mortal Kombat a Genesis game because most people played it on that system, even though it was ported everywhere (if that makes any sense). Or maybe calling Ghouls & Ghosts an SNES game even though, again, it was ported elsewhere.

SilverDogg @ Mar 2nd 2006 8:42AM

i think the bigger part experienced this on the nes, and liked it. the reason nobody mentioned gauntlet being a nes-title is probably because it sucked donkeypoop. but, thats just what i think.

what i think about this? good for them! who knows, maybe we'll see this game on rev aswell ;D.

Martin @ Mar 2nd 2006 8:56AM

I fully support the Joystiq staff if they so choose to delete ANY COMMENT containing the phrase "slow news day" in any form.

It's a freakin' blog, not CNN!

DG @ Mar 2nd 2006 9:04AM

"This is just Blair sexing up the intelligence. What's the next headline-- Live gets classic SNES Street Fighter 2 and classic NES Ms Pac Man?"

That's great. I like the Blair line, but I do take exception to the SF2 line. If you were playing the original SF2 at home (or Turbo for that matter), you were playing it on SNES. SF2:SCE on Genesis was terrific for that system, but not nearly as good as the SNES version and I'm also sure it didn't sell nearly as well. I don't know anyone who bought the Turbo Duo version.

But to contradict myself, SF2 is more an arcade game than anything else.

Watership @ Mar 2nd 2006 9:07AM

This topic almost made my eyes roll back inside my head.
Just because Nintendo makes a crappy port of an arcade game, doesn't mean it nintendo title.

I was playing Tetris on my pc in 1986, yet people to this day keep telling me it's a Nintendo game.

J B Cougar @ Mar 2nd 2006 9:11AM

At 17:

You make a good point, but I'd argue that without Nintendo, that game (Tetris, Paperboy, or otherwise) would have died on the table that year or the next. Sure, they were great games, but it is solely because of the NES that they became the widespread hits they still are today.

Anyway, the reason I posted initially was this: Anyone else notice this Paper "Boy" has gone completely gray?

Adam @ Mar 2nd 2006 9:20AM

Damn, that brings back some good memories. I mostly remember this game being a bit faulty and i spent ages blowing in the cartridge to get it working.

Jay @ Mar 2nd 2006 9:22AM

Was the Spectrum here. Not a NES :)

Mrs.EB @ Mar 2nd 2006 9:25AM

All I want to know is... can we get the handlebars to go with it?

Case @ Mar 2nd 2006 9:32AM

#4, you're right, and the last part of your post really drives the point home:

"More recently, Paperboy was included in Midway Arcade Treasures, a compilation of arcade games for the Nintendo GameCube, PlayStation 2, PlayStation Portable, Xbox and Windows released in 2003"

Don't remember anyone reporting when "Nintendo" games were going on the PS2 and Xbox :P

For the record, first time I played Paperboy was on the Genesis. I was a little behind the curve on that one. The only reason "most" people played it first on NES was because that console had like a 99% market share.

Hell, by the same logic, you could call Burnout 3 (PS2, Xbox) a PS2 game. But now there's a 360 Burnout coming out. OMG! They're taking a PS2 classic from Sony!!1

Now if Capcom took the old Mega Man games that were only on the NES and SNES, and put them all in a collection, (perhaps to celebrate his anniversary or something like that), and then released it on non-Nintendo consoles, that would be a bigger story.

divxz @ Mar 2nd 2006 9:33AM

I think it would be valid to call it a Nintendo game if the game going on Xbox Live Arcade is a port OF the NES version of the game (ie. a port of a port). If its ported from the original arcade version, then its just lazy to call it a Nintendo game (3rd party or not).

KilgoreTrout XL @ Mar 2nd 2006 9:50AM

Vlad: giving paperboy the "nintendo" moniker has spared us the comments that always infect arcade posts, e.g. "XBLA SUXorrs look at my PC WoW arrrrgh *mumbles...*", "$400 for bejeweled!?!", "Sony you and bluray complete me"- ad infinitum & ad nauseam.

So thank you, Vlad.

I remember playing this first on my C64 first, and my friend had it for his crappy spectrum (or was it an Amstrad?) I remember playing it on the Amiga, but could've sworn it was before 1989, #4. Maybe I'm mistaken.

crYm fYtr @ Mar 2nd 2006 9:50AM

can anybody tell me if this is a Nintendo game?

Vejadu @ Mar 2nd 2006 9:59AM

Paperboy was released on the NES by Mindscape, who also released the NES version of Gauntlet II (both Atari games). Gauntlet was released by Tengen, which is kinda strange because Gauntlet was unlicensed but Gauntlet II was.

Brian @ Mar 2nd 2006 9:59AM

BRING BACK BATTLETOADS!!!!

That's right, Rare's evil NES masterpiece. Sure it was impossibly hard, but I'd pay 10 bux to play it again on the 360. C'mon Microsoft, you own Rare! Use their back library!

Mikey @ Mar 2nd 2006 10:05AM

Let 'em have it!

DG @ Mar 2nd 2006 10:06AM

"Now if Capcom took the old Mega Man games that were only on the NES and SNES, and put them all in a collection, (perhaps to celebrate his anniversary or something like that), and then released it on non-Nintendo consoles, that would be a bigger story."

There was a Mega Man collection on Sega Genesis. I'm pretty sure it was called Mega Man: The Wily Wars and was a Sega Channel exclusive. As no one subscribed to the Sega Channel, it wasn't a very big deal.

EtotheZ @ Mar 2nd 2006 10:13AM

I really hope Nintendo does a paperboy remake for the Rev - trying to perfect the newspaper-flinging motion would be a natural fit for that controller

KimiSan @ Mar 2nd 2006 10:16AM

Greg Canessa, XBLA Manager - "A lot of those Nintendo games, you know, aren't gonna hold up."

And what does he do? Goes right out and gets a Nintendo game that "wont hold up" for XBL. What a hypocrite.
=
Yeah I know it's not actually a Nintendo game but it still stands like that.
I can't believe no one commented on that post.

gameclu @ Mar 2nd 2006 10:25AM

I respect Joystiq's right to publish anything they like. So I hope they respect my right in saying this article is horrible, ill conceived, and a huge stretch of the imagination. Paperboy is not a Nintendo title, was originally released for the arcade, and is already available for the Gamecube, Xbox, and PS2.

Pip @ Mar 2nd 2006 10:28AM

This is stupid sensationalist reporting. Paperboy was never an "NES" title first. We all experienced this at the ARCADE, and then on our Commodores. The NES version was pretty much crap at the time anyways.

So no, the "XBOX 360 ISNT OMG OMG GETTING A NINTENDO CLASSIC !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Cripes. It's getting an old Atari arcade port. Great.

in5ane @ Mar 2nd 2006 10:32AM

No way would I associate Paperboy with Nintendo. But I like the Crazy Taxi reference from one of the comments: short-lived arcade game at it's best! Did anyone bother the play past the silly BMX obstacle course at the end? It was like Atari needed a way to game you over quicker, 'cos otherwise you'd notice just how repetitive the level was :)

Pretty Obvious @ Mar 2nd 2006 10:45AM

In bigger news then this, Microsoft also announced at the same time that Ultimate Mortal Kombat 3 is coming to XBLA. Why is Paperboy getting the most press here?

Spiza @ Mar 2nd 2006 11:07AM

The important news here is that I don't see "exclusive" on any of midway's titles. They will most likely end up downloadable on the revolution. The 2 biggest players to me are sega and nintendo. I have a feeling that sega games are going to be downloadable on the revolution. Do you remember that chart of most valuable franchises that was on joystiq? Where did sonic games sell best? On nintendo's hardware.

Damn, it takes forever to post a comment on this sight. I would probably post 10x as much if it weren't for it taking forever after I hit the "add your comments" button and then had to go to my email to get the comment to actually pop up.

Kevin @ Mar 2nd 2006 11:28AM

So the Xbox 360 is a next gen console in the online game market or what?

How about something new?

Isurus @ Mar 2nd 2006 11:39AM

"In bigger news then this, Microsoft also announced at the same time that Ultimate Mortal Kombat 3 is coming to XBLA."

Could you please provide a link to this? I haven't heard anything about this, but it would be awesome if it were true.

wait for it... @ Mar 2nd 2006 11:42AM

The fact of matter is that Greg Canessa didn't just say that Nintendo' s games wouldn't hold up, he supported his claim with some pretty rediculous arguments. Considering that this game came out on an old Nintendo system, his comments look even more inappropriate; thus, this announcement gets more press than one that is far more compelling. Microsoft fans should be the most objective of all "fanboys" (as you like to call eachother); surely, you can see that what Canessa said borders on hubris. XBL is surely (thus far) in a league of it's own, but you didn't pay $300/400+ for Geometry Wars, so why did Canessa feel it was a good idea to poke fun at the Grandaddy of gaming (Nintendo dates bake to the 1800's if I'm not mistaken). Any objective person can see that while XBLA is a nice addition, Nintendo's Virtual Console will be the reason many of those who purchase it will want it. Maybe, he got caught up in the nonsense about about this being Nintendo' s last system, but since Nintendo continues to profit of it's machines (plus all that Pokemon money... Pokemoney...pocket money) it will continue to be a "competitor" (except, of course, in Nintendo's own eyes) he should spend time making XBLA even better and try to maintain a more dignified corporate vaneer facade.

Paranoised @ Mar 2nd 2006 11:49AM

This was probably the first proper PC game that I played as a child. I remember that it wouldn't run natively on Windows 3.1 so I had to launch it from DOS.

Mmmmm...

Can't wait to spend my Gamer points (or whatever they're called) on it.

naivri @ Mar 2nd 2006 12:04PM

Yeah.....this was a C64 arcade conversion all the way baby! Also at #17, I agree, the C64 version of Tetris kicked the gameboy version into touch. People talk about the gameboy music for it, you haven't lived until you've heard the SID generated Tetris music on the C64

Anyway, good luck to XBLA, I play games on there more than XBOX360 games now. Its a good infrastructure and it support the programmers well enough (no distribution costs - 70% profit programmers 305 M$). I'll grab it to play for nostaligic reasons.

PS, I hope they dont update the graphics, keep it classic!

Sleuth @ Mar 2nd 2006 12:20PM

The headline is misleading. It's a classic arcade title. Sure the game was on NES, however it's not as if Microsoft managed a coup to steal (snag) the title from Nintendo, as the headline implies.

Master X 24 @ Mar 2nd 2006 12:33PM

Motal kombat 3 on xbox live link
http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/692/692899p1.html

Barranger @ Mar 2nd 2006 12:42PM

Three things...

1) Who cares if the article referred to it as a NES game? I mean really, is that even important?

2) Why is it that when Midway announces that they are releasing another 5 games, games that include Mortal Kombat III, all joystiq reports is that Paper Boy is coming?

3) About Greg Canessa, while I'm not defending his somewhat idiotic comments, I'm pretty sure what he means by this is that with XBLA games you have the addition of leader boards, acheivements, and (in some cases) online play. Nintendo, from what everyone is hearing, is going to be releasing exact copies of the original games

epobirs @ Mar 2nd 2006 12:45PM

I think it's unanimous. That there was once an NES version of a game that originated elsewhere does not make it an NES title in a historical sense. I would give that distinction to titles like the early Mega Man games because they were exclusive to Nintendo�s machine for a substantial number of years. Although it is a third party brand it was established on Nintendo�s machine. By the time the ported collection appeared on the Sega MegaDrive in Japan and obscurely on the Genesis via the Sega Channel the association between Mega Man and Nintendo was well established in the minds of most gamers. When Capcom took the franchise to the Playstation it was remarked upon in the same manner as Nintendo losing the Final Fantasy franchise. The loss wasn�t as severe financially but it helped characterize Nintendo�s fall from utter dominance of video game publishing.

I think the remarks of the XBLA exec are being misinterpreted. I really doubt he was regarding the entire NES library as unworthy of continued availability. I believe he meant that out of the vast number of NES games only a small subset had any lasting appeal in their original form. Super Mario Bros. is a nearly perfect introduction to platform games but you can easily identify a couple hundred NES platformers that had nothing to make them memorable contributions to gaming history. Without that level of quality why would anyone want to look at an NES game at this point?

In those instances where something great was done on the NES the game can earn its presence in the Virtual Library. But for every one of those there are a hundred more clones and knockoffs that also appeared on the NES or any other major platform. It gets even worse when one considers adaptations of arcade hits that lost a great deal in the translation. This was a big problem with the NES Classics on the GBA. Why play an incomplete version of Donkey Kong when the reasons for that incompleteness are so trivial today? The Famicom version of Xevious was a huge seller in Japan but who really wants to play that version today when the arcade perfect version is so easily done? If they wanted to offer a package deal where you got both so you could appreciate the difference between arcade and home versions for a very low price. That would be fine. But I suspect most of the actual playing will go to the arcade version. Street Fighter II on the SNES has a lot of historical significance but when it comes to laying down your money in 2006, which version do you want, the arcade original or the SNES? You might take both but only if the SNES version was thrown in as a bonus.

I was never a big NES user. Around the time the NES got big in the US I was doing most of my gaming on the Amiga computer after years of Atari 800 and C64 use, making the NES look decidedly primitive. So the nostalgia value to the machine itself isn�t there for me. But the same can be said for the games I played on the systems I did have. I spent a fair amount of time playing the DataSoft versions of Zaxxon but today you wouldn�t get me to pay for anything less than the arcade version. There is only so much time in one life for games. Why waste it on a compromised version of a game when your hardware is capable of reproducing the original?

murph @ Mar 2nd 2006 1:33PM

how can you diss Atari by calling this a Nintendo game? did the Nintendo version come with a BMX Bike Handle controller? i think not. and that's how i remember first playing (and being attracted to) Paperboy. i was god-awful at the game but kept feeding it quarters anyways.

wait for it... @ Mar 2nd 2006 1:44PM

1) The appearent contradiction between what was said earlier by Canessa and what is actually happening with XBLA. Paperboy? After what he said about games probably not being as fun as remembered. Paperboy? Obviously he would never imply that ALL of Nintendo's library wouldn't hold up (he said some), but nothing is known about online for Nintendo or Sony. For all we know it might be like carpet you can play online. Sure he was asked what he thought and displayed confidence as he should have, but a 16 player online Paperboy bonanza is not going to make people want Xbox 360. The same basic version of Mario Brother's (undoubtly still the most recogniseable video game franchise) will get people to look at the Revolution. Any implication (which there most certainly was) that this is not the case is categorically false. He was absolutely right that ALOT of Nintendo games won't hold up, but the idea that any special online feature (no matter how craptastic) included by a competitor would not take away from the allure of the 360 is utter nonsense. They want non-gamers to buy their stuff too, so anything that even breifly sounds better or more interesting could distract from the xbox 360. Add the fact that people are wary of microsoft, the first xbox's less than stellar but o.k. sales, the price, and the botched launch (who cares why), and you see that anything that could reflect poorly on Microsoft (like arrogance) should be avoided: otherwise, YOU GET ARTICLES LIKE THESE.

slow news day @ Mar 2nd 2006 2:01PM

Yeah, when I first read the article I thought maybe they were porting the NES version of Paperboy to the Xbox 360. I'm assuming it'll be the original arcade port and NOT the Nintendo version.

The arcade version rocked. Most of the ports were just okay. The Apple II version was ho-hum. The Amiga version wasn't bad. The PC version... ick. Honestly, I don't even recall the NES version.