Indeed you are correct. I was referring to the S/NES when I said held hostage.
"Do what we say or no seal of approval!" - 1989 Nintendo, probably.
They didn't have to do that. The licensing agreements that third parties signed already did most of that. With Nintendo of America's quality control measures however, a game would get rejected if it were anything like Action 52 (which was rejected) or if it violated the content policies NOA had at the time (usage of drugs and alcohol, usage of religious symbols or themes, sexual content).
However, I do kind of wish the Seal of Quality would make a return. I'm not going to exaggerate and say that Nintendo's quality control elimainated the possibility of low quality content. After all, if that were true then James Rolfe would't have an internet show. If Nintendo had the same policies during the 2000's that they had during the 80's, much of the shovelware for the Wii and DS would not have been approved. Had Sony and Microsoft adopted quality control measures like that, we would have broken games at launch like we do now.
A lot of people could call Nintendo oppressive for their actions but they were right all along. If a third party could get away with releasing a shoddy product, then they most likely will. We saw that before Nintendo's dominance and we're seeing it again today.
Check out my art blog: http://jon-erich-art.blogspot.com