Retro Gamer Now X-rated

Want to air your opinions on the latest issue of Retro Gamer? Step inside...

Moderators: mknott, NickThorpe, lcarlson, Darran@Retro Gamer, MMohammed

Locked
User avatar
Crunchy
Posts: 2123
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 10:43 am
Location: Claymorgue Castle

Re:

Post by Crunchy » Mon Apr 17, 2006 11:47 am

Dudley wrote:I was wondering how 15,000 people, of which going by this, 10,000 didn't notice it, 4,000 didn't care and 3 got their panties wadded, would suddenly call several million times.
You think the readership of RG is 15000? LMAO! :D

User avatar
mel the bell
Posts: 462
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 8:42 am
Location: near whitby
Contact:

Re:

Post by mel the bell » Mon Apr 17, 2006 11:53 am

paranoid marvin wrote:I would agree that there are more male gamers than female-although I wouldn't say it was overwhelming.
why wouldnt you say its overwhelming?

how many games are made purely for wimin? not many at all
how many games attract wimmin? not many more
how many wimmin do you see on gaming forums? not many
how many on retro gaming sites? even less

its prolly about 99% blokes post on here and retro survival and wos
On 2003-12-08 20:15, cyborg wrote:
You're all corporate bitches if you buy a console - face it. Unless it's a Phantom - in that case you're just stupid - because even if it did exist it'd be crap

User avatar
Ash
Posts: 624
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 4:52 am
Location: Bournemouth
Contact:

Post by Ash » Mon Apr 17, 2006 12:04 pm

"Wimmin"? Do you really need to ask why reader reviews are a bad idea?

User avatar
Crunchy
Posts: 2123
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 10:43 am
Location: Claymorgue Castle

Re:

Post by Crunchy » Mon Apr 17, 2006 12:11 pm

Ash wrote:"Wimmin"? Do you really need to ask why reader reviews are a bad idea?
Deliberate spelling mistake I think tbh. "wimmin" as an affectionate term for the opposite sex.

User avatar
FatTrucker
Posts: 4724
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 12:23 pm
Location: Essex

Post by FatTrucker » Mon Apr 17, 2006 12:18 pm

Deliberate spelling mistake I think tbh. "wimmin" as an affectionate term for the opposite sex.
I always thought it was a water based activity for people with a hair lip :twisted: .
Darran@Retro Gamer wrote:I've played all the Bratz games and Barbia Horse Adventures, due to having two girls and they are not rubbish in the slightest.
Feel free to add me on XBL.
Image

User avatar
mel the bell
Posts: 462
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 8:42 am
Location: near whitby
Contact:

Post by mel the bell » Mon Apr 17, 2006 1:18 pm

i like swimmin' with bare wimmin errrrrrrrrrrrrrm
On 2003-12-08 20:15, cyborg wrote:
You're all corporate bitches if you buy a console - face it. Unless it's a Phantom - in that case you're just stupid - because even if it did exist it'd be crap

User avatar
paranoid marvin
Posts: 14272
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 6:28 pm
Location: 21st Century Earth

Post by paranoid marvin » Mon Apr 17, 2006 1:57 pm

Like I said,I'm not basing what I said on any figures,just the people I know
Admittedly,few of the people I know play games at all (which is one of the reasons why I use this forum).But of those few,a fair percentage are female

Also when you go in Game/Gamestation,it's not all male shoppers.
Certainly when I was a kid (15 years ago) I knew no female gamers at all,and hardly ever saw a female in the local games store

The main point I was getting at in my earlier post was the age of gamers interested in retro-gaming,and therefore interested in using these kinds of 'services'.

If the average age of a gamer is 15-30,I'd be suprised if this was also true of readers of RG
Mr Flibble says...
"Game over , boys!"

User avatar
markopoloman
Posts: 11657
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 9:03 pm
Location: Poole, Dorset

Post by markopoloman » Mon Apr 17, 2006 2:13 pm

Bloody helll! Been at work all day and we are still hot on this subject! :shock:


As I said before, I disagree with the ads - but if the amount of space stayed the same and the content of the ads stayed the same then It really isn't too big an issue.
If however the ads started creeping into half/full page - then that would be a different matter.

And the wimmin thing.........

Wimmin = washing up.

Blokes = Gaming.

:lol:






The last part was a joke before daggers start flying :shock:

User avatar
Dudley
Posts: 8716
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 7:53 pm
Contact:

Re:

Post by Dudley » Mon Apr 17, 2006 7:09 pm

Crunchy wrote:
Dudley wrote:I was wondering how 15,000 people, of which going by this, 10,000 didn't notice it, 4,000 didn't care and 3 got their panties wadded, would suddenly call several million times.
You think the readership of RG is 15000? LMAO! :D
Darran wrote: RG used to do around 5-7 thousand, every now and then it would shoot up with a good disk.
Someone much smarter than crunchy wrote: From the EPOS information I saw, issue 2 dipped to 14,000, but issue 3 went up to 18,000 no doubt thanks to the Gremlin disc. Issue 4 dropped to 10,000 and the magazine hovered around this level until the last few issues really, when it dipped to around the 6,000 mark.
So, assuming that people occasionally let other people read their mags, and that it's probably safe to assume the Imagine version is at least matching the 10k the Live version did for most of its run would you like to tell me exactly what's wrong with a 15k estimate?

Of course if it's less than 15k in your books, that only strengthens the original point about the sexline customer base that you conviently skipped over in order to have a go at me, despite having been warned less than a page ago.

--


As for the gender balance dabate, RG probably reflects the gender balance of 10-15 years ago more than it does todays. So yes, it's probably pretty overwhelmingly female. The fact that I can't think of a single female writer in the entire history of RG might lend some credence to that too.
Yesterzine - The Literal Magazine Show
http://yesterzine.co.uk | @Yesterzine on Twitter | yesterzineshow@gmail.com

User avatar
Opa-Opa
Posts: 4304
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 3:35 pm
Location: Kent UK
Contact:

Re:

Post by Opa-Opa » Tue Apr 18, 2006 4:07 am

Dudley wrote:The fact that I can't think of a single female writer in the entire history of RG might lend some credence to that too.
Maybe you should check out the other threads from time to time Dudley, rather than just arguing about everything and anything...

http://www.retrogamer.net/forum/viewtop ... ght=female

I am pretty sure you would argue black was white just for the fun of it.

User avatar
Crunchy
Posts: 2123
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 10:43 am
Location: Claymorgue Castle

Re:

Post by Crunchy » Tue Apr 18, 2006 5:45 am

Dudley wrote:
Crunchy wrote:
Dudley wrote:I was wondering how 15,000 people, of which going by this, 10,000 didn't notice it, 4,000 didn't care and 3 got their panties wadded, would suddenly call several million times.
You think the readership of RG is 15000? LMAO! :D
Darran wrote: RG used to do around 5-7 thousand, every now and then it would shoot up with a good disk.
Someone much smarter than crunchy wrote: From the EPOS information I saw, issue 2 dipped to 14,000, but issue 3 went up to 18,000 no doubt thanks to the Gremlin disc. Issue 4 dropped to 10,000 and the magazine hovered around this level until the last few issues really, when it dipped to around the 6,000 mark.
So, assuming that people occasionally let other people read their mags, and that it's probably safe to assume the Imagine version is at least matching the 10k the Live version did for most of its run would you like to tell me exactly what's wrong with a 15k estimate?
A 15k estimate is way too high. RG is currently selling around the 7k mark if it's lucky. The old RG had a subscriber base in the region of 2k but it's significantly lower than that with the new user base. With a 15k readership you assume that every single reader gives somebody else the opportunity to read their mag which is frankly bollocks. I didn't mention the chatline thing because I'm not bothered about it. What I found funny is that yet another person sees RG as more important saleswise than it actually is. It's a niche mag for a niche hobby and has niche sized sales to match yet people within the hobby always, always exaggerate the mainstream attraction of their chosen field of interest. 7k is a good turnaround for a mag like RG and the readership is probably rising slowly. There's no need to big it up.

User avatar
Darran@Retro Gamer
Posts: 6773
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2005 11:34 am
Location: Bournemouth
Contact:

Re:

Post by Darran@Retro Gamer » Tue Apr 18, 2006 6:55 am

Crunchy wrote:
Dudley wrote:
Crunchy wrote: You think the readership of RG is 15000? LMAO! :D
Darran wrote: RG used to do around 5-7 thousand, every now and then it would shoot up with a good disk.
Someone much smarter than crunchy wrote: From the EPOS information I saw, issue 2 dipped to 14,000, but issue 3 went up to 18,000 no doubt thanks to the Gremlin disc. Issue 4 dropped to 10,000 and the magazine hovered around this level until the last few issues really, when it dipped to around the 6,000 mark.
So, assuming that people occasionally let other people read their mags, and that it's probably safe to assume the Imagine version is at least matching the 10k the Live version did for most of its run would you like to tell me exactly what's wrong with a 15k estimate?
A 15k estimate is way too high. RG is currently selling around the 7k mark if it's lucky. The old RG had a subscriber base in the region of 2k but it's significantly lower than that with the new user base. With a 15k readership you assume that every single reader gives somebody else the opportunity to read their mag which is frankly bollocks. I didn't mention the chatline thing because I'm not bothered about it. What I found funny is that yet another person sees RG as more important saleswise than it actually is. It's a niche mag for a niche hobby and has niche sized sales to match yet people within the hobby always, always exaggerate the mainstream attraction of their chosen field of interest. 7k is a good turnaround for a mag like RG and the readership is probably rising slowly. There's no need to big it up.
Your figures are wrong Crunchy. Both for the current issue and the old. I do agree with your other comments though, I guess it's because people feel part of something special, so just want to big it up.
Image

User avatar
Dudley
Posts: 8716
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 7:53 pm
Contact:

Re:

Post by Dudley » Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:47 am

Opa-Opa wrote:
Dudley wrote:The fact that I can't think of a single female writer in the entire history of RG might lend some credence to that too.
Maybe you should check out the other threads from time to time Dudley, rather than just arguing about everything and anything...

http://www.retrogamer.net/forum/viewtop ... ght=female

I am pretty sure you would argue black was white just for the fun of it.
Or perhaps I just wasn't aware of that fact. "the fact that I can't think of"

not

"there wasn't".

I wouldn't argue black is white. You however would probably argue grey should be banned in case your kids saw it.

I'd still say the proportion of female readers (and probably writers) of RG is lower than say, Official PS2.

--

As for the readership thing, the lower the readership, the stupider Jonathon's "Millions" looks.
Yesterzine - The Literal Magazine Show
http://yesterzine.co.uk | @Yesterzine on Twitter | yesterzineshow@gmail.com

psj3809
Posts: 19053
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 10:28 am

Post by psj3809 » Tue Apr 18, 2006 10:09 am

I do think people have gone over the top and have turned into Mary Whitehouse.

I wasnt some pikey scum when i was younger but i did know a fair few swearwords as a kid and obviously knew about top shelf mags and other stuff !

People seem to think kids should be wrapped in cotton wool ! Damn most kids i see hanging around chip shops all night are much much worse than my generation (jesus i sound like my dad !), seriously though in my years in school in the 80's most kids swore, the ones who didnt were normally the squares who got a kicking.

I dont like the sex phone ads myself but to think some 14 year olds are shocked by stuff like that is laughable.

Its aimed at retro games, the vast majority of people reading the mag will be over 20 and probably not shocked by any of this. Yes of course there will be a younger element but retro gaming is enjoyed more by older people.

As for kids ringing those numbers i'm sure many of us when we were younger phoned up chatlines etc for a laugh when they first came out. Remember one kid at school disconnecting the school modem and phoning up the US and other chatlines for a laugh !

Nowadays on TV before the watershed you have people saying 'p*ss' and other light offensive words. What you hear in schools is much much much worse.

I'm not a fan of these adverts in the mag at all but being older i'm not offended by them. Children see much much worse things going on.

Sorry i just personally think people go too far when they criticise stuff like this.

The worlds a funny place, kids play games where they have to blow people up and kill them, but parents moan when theres some semi-clad advert in a mag ! The percentage of under 15 year old readers for RG must be very very small. Its like when people moan about a program and the BBC have to issue an apology when 20 people complain. How about the other 8.6 million who werent bothered ?

Kids could easily pick up a copy of the Sun or the News of the World and see some of the dodgy numbers in the back and so on and so on. In Retro Fusion theres an advert saying 'bullshit' , again some parents might find that bad for their kids but i'm sure their kids know a lot worse. I turned out alright despite the 'shock horror' ads of Barbarian and playing Sam Fox Strip poker on my Speccy when i was about 13.

The name calling here on this thread is laughable though, as normal you get online rambos. Its a controversial subject for sure. I'm just happy we still dont get those dire adverts in the original Retro Gamer from that company selling boring cd-roms

User avatar
paranoid marvin
Posts: 14272
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 6:28 pm
Location: 21st Century Earth

Re:

Post by paranoid marvin » Tue Apr 18, 2006 12:56 pm

psj3809 wrote:
In Retro Fusion theres an advert saying 'bullshit'

I was quite suprised by this advert,I would have thought it wouldn't get by Advertising standards
Has anyone seen it in other mags?
Mr Flibble says...
"Game over , boys!"

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests