Probably NCL tells them which games they can release or not, and then they decide which of those games they are going to release. I don't buy that NCL makes all the calls, nope I don't.

You buying it or not has exactly nothing to do with the reality of the situation.

Reality of the situation? Link? Or are you just assuming things?

I mean, what you say has as much validity as what anyone else here says, so I don't think I'm buying it.

Link? None. But the proof is in the pudding. Since you brought up Mother 3, we're going to talk about that. Or, rather, we're going to talk about EarthBound and the Virtual Console. Mother 3 ties into it.

The primary reason we're not going to be seeing Mother 2 or Mother 3 stateside are primarily legal: see http://earthboundcentral.com/2009/02/earthbound-music-similarities/ and more importantly http://earthboundcentral.com/2009/02/earthbound-legal-issues/ for some perspective on that.

Now, can NoA change the things that would be problematic? Sure. They changed certain things for the localization of EarthBound back in 1995, they have the resources and the knowhow to clip out of change a few seconds of a song. The question, then, is why tey don't do it. The answer to that is that in order to do that, they have to get permission from the home office - which is NCL. NCL is not budging on that particular issue of content change.

I'm not saying Nintendo of America doesn't have some autonomy, but it is ultimately going to be NCL that holds the vice grip on what regions get what. NoA are marketers more than anything else.

http://starmen.net/ebvc/ Throwing this out there too, since it specifically talks about the problem with NCL.

I would like if someone could clarify about this, since my rants have gone always to NoA, and perhaps like you said it's mostly NCL's fault.

But I still say that NCL gives them the choices and then NoA decides what is it that they will release. For example Captain Rainbow was probably never given as a choice, but Disaster was and was ultimately declined by NoA. If I remember correctly, Reggie said the game wasn't enough quality to get released on the Wii, which sounded like BS, since it was already voice acted with American voices and was one of the big games at E3 2006.

But Nintendo isn't too keen in answering these kinds of questions, so I think we might never know the actual truth.

I gave up on blaming Nintendo of America for these things. Reggie can't give me EarthBound, and that says a lot about the control he has.

I might want to start ranting against NCL then lol. Japan is seeing lately many games that don't end up here. I wonder what the reasons are, because most of them have performed really badly there and they could sell a lot more here.

Comparing old games with new copyright issues with new games with no problem at all don't look a smart thing to do.

It's Nintendo we're talking about, they are one of the few that develop "niche" games just for the ones who are part of it. I don't think I need to develop this point, right?

After read about some of Reggie comments (just the president of NoA, not a random internet guy) about the games HE is not interested in, so he won't bring in (and, in fact, he boycotts the game that was about to release in others regions), well... If that wasn't to blame, then I don't know.

The only FACT considering the "absolute determinations" of NCL is about the WiiWare/DSiWare/Virtual Console release dates in all regions, but even about this NoE and NoA make their own decisions too, it's not that they are tyrants and all...

i'm glad i'm not the only nintendo fan that feels this way