"Full set" always requires a qualifier to truly mean anything. "Full licensed set" or "full licensed/unlicensed set" or "full variant set." The platform(s) is/are one of the qualifiers too.
Sure, we use it without qualification all the time, but one can usually be assumed. We do the same thing with the word "vintage," which is supposed to be qualified with a time, year, or era.
Historical: For people that are trying to catalog the games and write down what actually happened and occured, it becomes a bit harder when a vast majority of the community doesn't care about some portion of the set, or even worse, claim to own a full set of games themselves, even if it isn't nearly complete.
Resellers: It sucks for resellers / selling collectors too - You have a rare game, it should be worth money, but since it is now popular to exclude, rather than include, suddenly your rare game is worth peanuts.
I disagree with both these points.
First off, history doesn't care how many people own it. Whether or not people count Sachen games toward their fullset doesn't magically erase them off the store shelves 20 years ago. While whether or not they were sold in America is under contention, 10 people saying "F it, I don't consider them part of the *Full Set*" doesn't push the truth one direction or another.
A game doesn't have a *should* price. It's not just rarity, but demand. No amount of telling people you don't think their fullset *counts* will make Sachen games spike in price. The idea that a game *should* be worth something is inherently flawed. The PCEFX crowd crows about how TG-16 games *should* be cheaper, but the reality is, they aren't. They are the prices they are. Likewise, a game shouldn't be worth more, just because you want it to count towards someone's set. Finally, someone isn't *hurt* because an item in their collection doesn't have a theoretically high value. And if you are a reseller... buy low, sell high. Don't depend on *should.*
Everyone claiming to have a full NES set please post a picture of your copy of Retro Gaming Expo 2009 Chunkout 2 Champion. Everyone who doesn't have this will have their NA award immediately removed.
When people say full set around here without any qualifiers i take that to mean the na list of 768 games. You can agree with that list or not, but thats what i assume to be the "official" (or as close.of a consensus as we can get) full us set of games.
If your strategy of collecting depends on how others define a full set, then you're doing it wrong.
The only rule in this hobby is to collect what YOU want to collect. The is no magical collusion here. The majority of people decide that THEY want to collect licensed. It's not like they asked others what to collect and decided to pursue licensed only. They've made that decision for a reason, and if you disagree then maybe the hobby isn't for you anymore. That decision has already been established and this is the hobby going forward.
"full licensed set minus SE" isn't a full licensed set and isn't really a set at all.
so strange that usa people don't think the aladin deck enhancer games are included in the full set, but the uk people think codemasters games are included in the full set. almost as if the people 'making' these 'sets' have something to profit from not including them
I think just about everyone knows that a full licensed set would include Stadium Events. However, most people will never have the funds nor the ability to ever get a Stadium Events. If they want a 'full licensed set minus SE,' then more power to them. As long as someone isn't doing something deceitful such as trying to sell a "full licensed set" without clarifying the exclusion of something like Stadium Events, then who cares if someone wants a full set minus SE? I'm not after a full-set by any of the definitions here, but even if I was, I sure as heck wouldn't be trying to get a SE.
This is supposed to be fun. The NA badges are supposed to be fun. It's not like you get any true special benefit by having a full-set NA badge. It's like a trophy or achievement in a video game.
I understand the viewpoint of someone who may believe someone else's trophy maybe isn't 100% technically earned because of a technicality in the definition, but in the end, it really isn't that big of a deal.
Since the closest thing I can think of for me personally to relate to this type of collecting is my goal for collecting Atlus games, I guess I'll think of it this way. I'm trying to get all the Atlus games. Some of them are very expensive (not SE expensive but expensive to me). Let's say that I have all of the US releases except Jack Bros (virtual boy). And I go around telling people I have a full-US Atlus collection minus Jack Bros. First - it is somewhat just about vanity or 'bragging rights' to a degree. Second - how else do I talk about my collection? Do I say "full Atlus set minus jack bros"? Do I say "most of the Atlus games but not Jack bros"? Do I say "I don't have a full Atlus set because I don't have Jack Bros"? All of them are just about the same thing and it is really silly to get super-nit-picky and specific about exactly what language someone uses to describe their collection. Again, as long as someone isn't trying to be deceitful or trying to scam someone, I just don't think it's that big of a deal.
Edit: I don't think people are trying to alter the definition of 'full-set' for everyone. They are altering it for themselves. Me saying that a 'full-set' for me personally doesn't include Stadium Events, is not me saying that the definitive full-set NES collection does not include Stadium Events. Is it a cheap way out? Is it a modification to make a goal easier for some to obtain? Is it perhaps a cop-out? Sure, maybe. But I don't think there is any REAL loss of historical fact or truth about what's going on.
At the end of the day, it doesn't give you any real-life trophy if you get a "full set" of any kind. I know I'll be stuck at 676/677, and I'll never own SE. I'm okay with owning an almost complete set. Now I couldn't care less if people don't count Dino Peak/SE and say they have a full set of 675. What does that take away from me? About hurting the value of rare games, I don't think so. Normally exclusions are for rare and almost unattainable items. If I decide that the Panesian games are not included in the unlicensed set because they are too expensive for me, how does that hurt the value? The rare stuff I believe will always be expensive, no matter what people think what should or should not belong in a set.
I'm glad this thread was started. Now we have two active threads discussing what counts as a full set and what doesn't. And two threads is always better than one.
"full licensed set minus SE" isn't a full licensed set and isn't really a set at all.
so strange that usa people don't think the aladin deck enhancer games are included in the full set, but the uk people think codemasters games are included in the full set. almost as if the people 'making' these 'sets' have something to profit from not including them
Racial Descrimination: Yes, many games are descriminated against just because of their color. Blue games, black games, silver and gold games. All discriminated against just because they look different, don't fit in. Even games that are smaller or with special adapters, again get discriminated against.
Dave,
I appreciate people sharing their opinions on here, and I encourage people to discuss what they like and not completely discount someone's opinion just because it is different. I realize that this particular subject is important to you and I think it is fine to discuss to a degree.
I know you are going to get a lot of heat for this thread and I almost didn't respond with my thoughts about the above statement because I don't want this thread to turn into a 'bash the OP' fiasco - and I do want to remind all of us to be polite in any disagreements of opinion we may have.
I find issue particularly with the above comment of yours because I think it is perhaps disingenuous, even if not intended, or maybe just a poor word choice. There is nothing racially motivated about people's desire to collect this cart or that cart. Maybe people like uniformity in their collections in certain capacities, but this has nothing to do with race. I think attaching the term 'racial discrimination' in this application is unnecessary and inappropriate, and I believe will actually alienate you from intellectual discussion on this entire subject because people will discount the notion entirely.
I think discussions can be had one way or the other for the remaining points of yours, but I just find this one a bit incendiary and not applicable - again, perhaps that wasn't your intention.
I have a full US SNES retail set, cart only, minus the Speed Racer/ Mountain Bike Rally combo cart. When I discuss this with people, I usually say "Yea, I've got every game for the SNES except one, and it's a rare combo cart of two games that have individual carts that I own."
Do I want the combo cart? Yes. Would I pay what people are asking for it now? No chance in hell. Do I care if anyone else says "well, you don't have an actual full set then!"? Nope. And no one here should. Jone Bone is right, just collect what you want to collect. I'm completely satisfied with my "set".
I have a full US SNES retail set, cart only, minus the Speed Racer/ Mountain Bike Rally combo cart. When I discuss this with people, I usually say "Yea, I've got every game for the SNES except one, and it's a rare combo cart of two games that have individual carts that I own."
Do I want the combo cart? Yes. Would I pay what people are asking for it now? No chance in hell. Do I care if anyone else says "well, you don't have an actual full set then!"? Nope. And no one here should. Jone Bone is right, just collect what you want to collect. I'm completely satisfied with my "set".
This is the internet. We can't let people just go about their lives being happy about something.
i feel the same way, but with people mislabeling their games as CIB, when they actually aren't....
i don't mean lesser items like registration cards (something we never really had included here in Europe)
but more inserts like for example the well known? MIMP figure + original smaller styrofoam piece....
if you have that game as "CIB" listed in your collection,
but are missing those 2 items, than you don't actually have a Monster In My Pocket CIB.......
just the styrofoam itself, doesn't count either.....
here in Europe we had Astérix on the NES, a CIB of this game ALWAYS has the same poster....
if you don't have it included, then you simply don't have it CIB....
same goes for the poster that comes with the Smurfs CIB for the NES....
Sounds to me like your CIB abbreviation = Complete In Box, but for many, CIB stands for Cartridge, Instructions, Box. Most collection lists allow you to separately place a check on C, I, and B, for games, as opposed to a CIB tag that replaces the C tag... so, I would speculate that most collectors see the abbreviation as having the latter definition. It's really a question of consensus and group norms.
I never saw cart, instruction, box until I came here. To me it was always complete in box. Though, I don't really care about the flyers and other things that people want to have them as 'complete'. So having the cart, manual, and box was always complete enough for me.
"full licensed set minus SE" isn't a full licensed set and isn't really a set at all.
The set of 676 is as valid as the set of 677 or 768 or 804 or 805 or the black box set or the set of my childhood favorites. None are full sets. They're all just small subsets of the real "full set" of every single game that no person on Earth actually owns. Collectors divide things up into subsets because it is not possible to own every single cartridge ever made for NES and goals are fun.
I have really no business posting in this thread whatsoever, but I don't understand why everyone gets so bent out of shape about full sets and whatnot. I think people should collect what they want or like out of the set or what they just have got to have. I might get attacked for this but I don't care...
I collect how, what, when and where I want. "Why" I collect shouldn't be a problem. Likewise, how other people collect or what they define as a full set of something doesn't bother me.
I guess all that's left is "who" I collect... which sounds weird. lol
I don't think the point is that the OP is criticizing how people want to collect, it's that saying you have a 'full set' without owning every game ever produced is disingenuous.
Comments
Sure, we use it without qualification all the time, but one can usually be assumed. We do the same thing with the word "vintage," which is supposed to be qualified with a time, year, or era.
Historical: For people that are trying to catalog the games and write down what actually happened and occured, it becomes a bit harder when a vast majority of the community doesn't care about some portion of the set, or even worse, claim to own a full set of games themselves, even if it isn't nearly complete.
Resellers: It sucks for resellers / selling collectors too - You have a rare game, it should be worth money, but since it is now popular to exclude, rather than include, suddenly your rare game is worth peanuts.
I disagree with both these points.
First off, history doesn't care how many people own it. Whether or not people count Sachen games toward their fullset doesn't magically erase them off the store shelves 20 years ago. While whether or not they were sold in America is under contention, 10 people saying "F it, I don't consider them part of the *Full Set*" doesn't push the truth one direction or another.
A game doesn't have a *should* price. It's not just rarity, but demand. No amount of telling people you don't think their fullset *counts* will make Sachen games spike in price. The idea that a game *should* be worth something is inherently flawed. The PCEFX crowd crows about how TG-16 games *should* be cheaper, but the reality is, they aren't. They are the prices they are. Likewise, a game shouldn't be worth more, just because you want it to count towards someone's set. Finally, someone isn't *hurt* because an item in their collection doesn't have a theoretically high value. And if you are a reseller... buy low, sell high. Don't depend on *should.*
Well this is silliness.
This is nothing lol, check out that NES serial ## thread
Well this is silliness.
I thought it was a troll post at first.
i don't mean lesser items like registration cards (something we never really had included here in Europe)
but more inserts like for example the well known? MIMP figure + original smaller styrofoam piece....
if you have that game as "CIB" listed in your collection,
but are missing those 2 items, than you don't actually have a Monster In My Pocket CIB.......
just the styrofoam itself, doesn't count either.....
here in Europe we had Astérix on the NES, a CIB of this game ALWAYS has the same poster....
if you don't have it included, then you simply don't have it CIB....
same goes for the poster that comes with the Smurfs CIB for the NES....
The only rule in this hobby is to collect what YOU want to collect. The is no magical collusion here. The majority of people decide that THEY want to collect licensed. It's not like they asked others what to collect and decided to pursue licensed only. They've made that decision for a reason, and if you disagree then maybe the hobby isn't for you anymore. That decision has already been established and this is the hobby going forward.
so strange that usa people don't think the aladin deck enhancer games are included in the full set, but the uk people think codemasters games are included in the full set. almost as if the people 'making' these 'sets' have something to profit from not including them
This is supposed to be fun. The NA badges are supposed to be fun. It's not like you get any true special benefit by having a full-set NA badge. It's like a trophy or achievement in a video game.
I understand the viewpoint of someone who may believe someone else's trophy maybe isn't 100% technically earned because of a technicality in the definition, but in the end, it really isn't that big of a deal.
Since the closest thing I can think of for me personally to relate to this type of collecting is my goal for collecting Atlus games, I guess I'll think of it this way. I'm trying to get all the Atlus games. Some of them are very expensive (not SE expensive but expensive to me). Let's say that I have all of the US releases except Jack Bros (virtual boy). And I go around telling people I have a full-US Atlus collection minus Jack Bros. First - it is somewhat just about vanity or 'bragging rights' to a degree. Second - how else do I talk about my collection? Do I say "full Atlus set minus jack bros"? Do I say "most of the Atlus games but not Jack bros"? Do I say "I don't have a full Atlus set because I don't have Jack Bros"? All of them are just about the same thing and it is really silly to get super-nit-picky and specific about exactly what language someone uses to describe their collection. Again, as long as someone isn't trying to be deceitful or trying to scam someone, I just don't think it's that big of a deal.
Edit: I don't think people are trying to alter the definition of 'full-set' for everyone. They are altering it for themselves. Me saying that a 'full-set' for me personally doesn't include Stadium Events, is not me saying that the definitive full-set NES collection does not include Stadium Events. Is it a cheap way out? Is it a modification to make a goal easier for some to obtain? Is it perhaps a cop-out? Sure, maybe. But I don't think there is any REAL loss of historical fact or truth about what's going on.
"full licensed set minus SE" isn't a full licensed set and isn't really a set at all.
so strange that usa people don't think the aladin deck enhancer games are included in the full set, but the uk people think codemasters games are included in the full set. almost as if the people 'making' these 'sets' have something to profit from not including them
My NES set is a full licensed set minus 434 games. I am quite happy with it. I had like 10 games growing up and had to rent everything.
I like your style, Lol. That sounds alot like me towards my attitude on collecting.
That tells me everything I need to know.
Labeling people "fakers" because they don't fit your specific vision of what a "full set" is super pretentious and frankly makes us look like Dicks.
Racial Descrimination: Yes, many games are descriminated against just because of their color. Blue games, black games, silver and gold games. All discriminated against just because they look different, don't fit in. Even games that are smaller or with special adapters, again get discriminated against.
Dave,
I appreciate people sharing their opinions on here, and I encourage people to discuss what they like and not completely discount someone's opinion just because it is different. I realize that this particular subject is important to you and I think it is fine to discuss to a degree.
I know you are going to get a lot of heat for this thread and I almost didn't respond with my thoughts about the above statement because I don't want this thread to turn into a 'bash the OP' fiasco - and I do want to remind all of us to be polite in any disagreements of opinion we may have.
I find issue particularly with the above comment of yours because I think it is perhaps disingenuous, even if not intended, or maybe just a poor word choice. There is nothing racially motivated about people's desire to collect this cart or that cart. Maybe people like uniformity in their collections in certain capacities, but this has nothing to do with race. I think attaching the term 'racial discrimination' in this application is unnecessary and inappropriate, and I believe will actually alienate you from intellectual discussion on this entire subject because people will discount the notion entirely.
I think discussions can be had one way or the other for the remaining points of yours, but I just find this one a bit incendiary and not applicable - again, perhaps that wasn't your intention.
Do I want the combo cart? Yes. Would I pay what people are asking for it now? No chance in hell. Do I care if anyone else says "well, you don't have an actual full set then!"? Nope. And no one here should. Jone Bone is right, just collect what you want to collect. I'm completely satisfied with my "set".
I have a full US SNES retail set, cart only, minus the Speed Racer/ Mountain Bike Rally combo cart. When I discuss this with people, I usually say "Yea, I've got every game for the SNES except one, and it's a rare combo cart of two games that have individual carts that I own."
Do I want the combo cart? Yes. Would I pay what people are asking for it now? No chance in hell. Do I care if anyone else says "well, you don't have an actual full set then!"? Nope. And no one here should. Jone Bone is right, just collect what you want to collect. I'm completely satisfied with my "set".
This is the internet. We can't let people just go about their lives being happy about something.
i feel the same way, but with people mislabeling their games as CIB, when they actually aren't....
i don't mean lesser items like registration cards (something we never really had included here in Europe)
but more inserts like for example the well known? MIMP figure + original smaller styrofoam piece....
if you have that game as "CIB" listed in your collection,
but are missing those 2 items, than you don't actually have a Monster In My Pocket CIB.......
just the styrofoam itself, doesn't count either.....
here in Europe we had Astérix on the NES, a CIB of this game ALWAYS has the same poster....
if you don't have it included, then you simply don't have it CIB....
same goes for the poster that comes with the Smurfs CIB for the NES....
Sounds to me like your CIB abbreviation = Complete In Box, but for many, CIB stands for Cartridge, Instructions, Box. Most collection lists allow you to separately place a check on C, I, and B, for games, as opposed to a CIB tag that replaces the C tag... so, I would speculate that most collectors see the abbreviation as having the latter definition. It's really a question of consensus and group norms.
"full licensed set minus SE" isn't a full licensed set and isn't really a set at all.
The set of 676 is as valid as the set of 677 or 768 or 804 or 805 or the black box set or the set of my childhood favorites. None are full sets. They're all just small subsets of the real "full set" of every single game that no person on Earth actually owns. Collectors divide things up into subsets because it is not possible to own every single cartridge ever made for NES and goals are fun.
I collect how, what, when and where I want. "Why" I collect shouldn't be a problem. Likewise, how other people collect or what they define as a full set of something doesn't bother me.
I guess all that's left is "who" I collect... which sounds weird. lol
Since we're talking about "fakers":