Towards the end of the second video, 3:50-ish they mention how Nintendo is being anti-competitive by fully controlling what (and how) software can run on their systems, and their reasoning is "quality control". Sounds familiar?
In that time the code and "assets" (such as they were) didn't reside in RAM (it was all in the cartrige), so this was only for a game state. Still, other home computer systems at that time (while addmittedly a few times more expensive) had plenty more ram, measuring in kilobytes!
I have the impression that the NES was the first device whose manufacturer tried to license the developers of compatible software. Does anyone know an earlier example?
The TI-99/4A home computer (1981) restricted software to licensed vendors through a lockout chip. This was one factor that led to the failure of the TI-99/4A.
Huh, I hadn't been aware of that example. But Wikipedia seems to think that the lockout chip came in in 1983 in a revision of the TI-99/4A design and that earlier models didn't have it. In that case, it might be roughly tied with the NES.
The NES shipped in limited quantities in 1985. The Family Computer shipped in 1983, and it lacked any sort of lockout technology, leading to the proliferation of unlicensed games in Japan and ultimately the development of the 10NES system for the North American NES.
Activision ended up paying Atari royalties on VCS game sales, but it's not clear if you'd consider that an attempt to license 3rd party devs or a reaction to ex-employees who quit because you treated them poorly and the royalty was the result of a court battle not a mutual negotiation.
yes and no, I think. The aggressive gatekeeping might have been popularized by them, but Xbox Live Arcade in late 2004 was probably the first mass-market implementation of that model even if iOS's store quickly became the biggest one once it launched in 2008.