Official feedback thread for issue 28

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

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

Post Reply
hobgoblin
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 4:57 am

Re:

Post by hobgoblin » Sat Aug 19, 2006 6:42 am

Another great issue - nice cover too. I thought it looked very summery, somehow!

Got to say though that I'm a bit reluctant to leave any feedback in case the writer of the articles come at me with threats like in this one
Rev. Stuart Campbell wrote:
If you don't find them interesting, that's fair enough, though you seem to be in a minority. But if you're going to call the Definitive features "lazy", when in fact they're each about 10 times as much work as I've ever done on any other article in my life, then you're looking to get your lights punched out, laddie. I nearly bloody killed myself getting to the bottom of Bubble Bobble, so call it boring, call it rubbish, call it anything you like except "lazy" if you like your teeth where they currently are.

:evil:
Is this the new editorial policy? Threaten any readers who don't share the 'correct' opinion? Maybe all posts should be vetted by this guy to ensure that only high praise for every written word is posted on here. Or perhaps the people on the tills at WH Smiths should interview buyers to make sure they are worthy to read your magazine?

Well, like I said, another terrific issue. Thank you very very very much for letting me read it, and please thank all your writers for every wonderful word they slaved over - we, the humble readers, are forever in your debt. If my opinions are wrong, please don't hit me. I'll try harder next month.

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

Post by markopoloman » Sat Aug 19, 2006 6:54 am

Hobgoblin, did you read the post from Gabe???

Not the most constructive post by him - and TBH, I agree with Stuart and his amusing reply :wink:

User avatar
SirClive
Posts: 20261
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 2:25 pm
Location: Planet Sinclair
Contact:

Post by SirClive » Sat Aug 19, 2006 6:59 am

Totally agree Marko.

Surely if you read the mag, you know Stu's sense of humour.
Image

User avatar
Cornelius
Posts: 597
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 11:28 am
Location: Cork, Ireland
Contact:

Post by Cornelius » Sat Aug 19, 2006 9:37 am

So then... Dig Dug: Digging Strike got 68% eh?

I guess it's a higher mark than expected considering Darran isn't a fan of the original.

I'm still buying it when it comes out next Friday though! :)

Weblaus
Posts: 289
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 1:01 pm
Location: Germany

Re:

Post by Weblaus » Sat Aug 19, 2006 12:01 pm

Antiriad2097 wrote:
kaiserpc wrote:but what's with the full page porn adverts
Good, aren't they.

I like them there.
Somebody enlighten us non-Brits, as the website of that place isn't entirely conclusive (despite the rather rude language used and one quite explicit small picture): Is this at least real porn or the softcore T&A only overly prude people or Americans would get excited about?

User avatar
Darran@Retro Gamer
Posts: 6771
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2005 11:34 am
Location: Bournemouth
Contact:

Post by Darran@Retro Gamer » Sat Aug 19, 2006 12:58 pm

It's T&A. My personal motto is 'If there's no penetration it's not porn'
Image

User avatar
SirClive
Posts: 20261
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 2:25 pm
Location: Planet Sinclair
Contact:

Post by SirClive » Sat Aug 19, 2006 1:26 pm

No, you are wrong. The full page advert is for full porn. It doesn't show anything (which is why I don't have a problem with it), but the TV channel is full on porn. Er, apparently... so I've heard... :oops:
Image

Weblaus
Posts: 289
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 1:01 pm
Location: Germany

Re:

Post by Weblaus » Sat Aug 19, 2006 2:20 pm

Darran@Retro Gamer wrote:It's T&A. My personal motto is 'If there's no penetration it's not porn'
Exactly.

By the way, about the slightly modified screenshot #42 on page 49.. is there some rule/law in the UK requiring you to do so? Or could you have left the picture untouched if you had wanted to? (I can imagine (ha! pun!) why you wouldn't want to, though I personally see no harm in a few bare pixels.. certainly nobody over here would even bat an eyelid about this).

NorthWay
Posts: 1630
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 11:02 am
Location: Grimstad, Norway

Post by NorthWay » Sat Aug 19, 2006 4:51 pm

Just started #28 after it arrived in the mail yesterday, but from an initial thumb-through I wonder why you labeled Breakout 2000 on Jaguar as the next step in the Breakout heritage?
I had a 3D breakout game on my C=64 at least 20 years ago. Not officially named of course, and like most 2D to 3D translations it was pretty shitty. But still...

Gabe
Posts: 292
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 8:24 am

Re:

Post by Gabe » Sat Aug 19, 2006 5:33 pm

Rev. Stuart Campbell wrote:
Gabe wrote:I've only had a brief flick through and it certainly looks enticing, but one thing. If you are going to have Stu Campbell as a regular contributor, can you actually get him to do something other than just list the various titles in a franchise, and his opinion on them? It's very lazy writing and not that interesting.
If you don't find them interesting, that's fair enough, though you seem to be in a minority. But if you're going to call the Definitive features "lazy", when in fact they're each about 10 times as much work as I've ever done on any other article in my life, then you're looking to get your lights punched out, laddie. I nearly bloody killed myself getting to the bottom of Bubble Bobble, so call it boring, call it rubbish, call it anything you like except "lazy" if you like your teeth where they currently are.

:evil:
Hmm, having re-read my post when I'm not falling asleep I duly apologise, for my point was rather aggressively made (except about Shane, he really isn't interesting).

That said, I stand by it. I don't think they are particularly interesting (and yippee for being in a minority), and whilst lazy isn't the right word, listing titles in a franchise essentially is a list article. Sure, you may have spent a lot of time doing the research and playing them, but anybody with the time to spare could have done it (whether it would be as accurate or in-depth really isn't the point). Having read a fair amount of your stuff, you can be more creative than that, and that is what I would expect to see from you in RG.

Gabe
Posts: 292
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 8:24 am

Re:

Post by Gabe » Sat Aug 19, 2006 5:34 pm

SirClive wrote:Stu-pot has a point. I don't think anything in the mag can be classed as lazy (except maybe the proof reading :wink: ).

I think the definitives are the best addition to te mag since Daz took over.
What about the reader-rated top 100 retro games? :P

User avatar
Rev. Stuart Campbell
Posts: 1084
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 4:28 am

Re:

Post by Rev. Stuart Campbell » Sat Aug 19, 2006 6:17 pm

Gabe wrote:That said, I stand by it. I don't think they are particularly interesting (and yippee for being in a minority), and whilst lazy isn't the right word, listing titles in a franchise essentially is a list article. Sure, you may have spent a lot of time doing the research and playing them, but anybody with the time to spare could have done it (whether it would be as accurate or in-depth really isn't the point).
Um, it's exactly the point. The entire purpose of "The Definitive..." is to set the record straight. It drives me mad to see mags just parroting out the first piece of random rubbish they found on Wikipedia and screwing with history as a result. Yes, they're list pieces. They're supposed to be, because that's the clearest way to present the information, and clarity is the objective. (I try to get a few jokes in too, but after an exhausting month trying to make sense of 13 contradictory storylines and tell the difference between six separate games with identical titles, it's not always easy to summon up comedy.)

Like I said, if you don't like 'em you don't like 'em. I don't mind that at all (although personally there's very little I've written that I'm more proud of), you can't please everyone. I just objected to the accusation of laziness because they're just about the hardest work I've ever done. There's weeks and weeks and weeks of research in each one - the only reason I do them for RG's less-than-lavish rates is that I've already put in a lot of the groundwork over the last few months and years for my own personal edification. If every one had to be started from scratch there isn't a hope in hell that there'd be one every month. In terms of the sheer volume of information packed into every last sentence, parenthesis and caption, I doubt you'll find better value anywhere.

Tell you what, though - if you think it's easy, see how many Lode Runner games you can find (and accurately document the key features of) before Issue 29 hits the streets, and we'll compare notes the day after, 'kay? (Yeah, I've had a bit of a start, but then again I have to have the finished piece in two weeks before the mag's out, so you've plenty time to catch up...)

Gabe
Posts: 292
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 8:24 am

Re:

Post by Gabe » Sat Aug 19, 2006 6:58 pm

Rev. Stuart Campbell wrote: Um, it's exactly the point. The entire purpose of "The Definitive..." is to set the record straight. It drives me mad to see mags just parroting out the first piece of random rubbish they found on Wikipedia and screwing with history as a result. Yes, they're list pieces. They're supposed to be, because that's the clearest way to present the information, and clarity is the objective. (I try to get a few jokes in too, but after an exhausting month trying to make sense of 13 contradictory storylines and tell the difference between six separate games with identical titles, it's not always easy to summon up comedy.)
Yeah, but anybody could do that if they wanted to. Whether it would be as good as yours matters not - they could still do it.
Rev. Stuart Campbell wrote:Like I said, if you don't like 'em you don't like 'em. I don't mind that at all (although personally there's very little I've written that I'm more proud of), you can't please everyone. I just objected to the accusation of laziness because they're just about the hardest work I've ever done. There's weeks and weeks and weeks of research in each one - the only reason I do them for RG's less-than-lavish rates is that I've already put in a lot of the groundwork over the last few months and years for my own personal edification. If every one had to be started from scratch there isn't a hope in hell that there'd be one every month. In terms of the sheer volume of information packed into every last sentence, parenthesis and caption, I doubt you'll find better value anywhere.
Again, lazy was the wrong word. It just isn't very creative writing, I feel. Anyway, it value broadly speaking a subjective association? In which case I don't feel it gives any value to me whatsoever, given that I don't like them.
Rev. Stuart Campbell wrote:Tell you what, though - if you think it's easy, see how many Lode Runner games you can find (and accurately document the key features of) before Issue 29 hits the streets, and we'll compare notes the day after, 'kay? (Yeah, I've had a bit of a start, but then again I have to have the finished piece in two weeks before the mag's out, so you've plenty time to catch up...)
Prey tell why I would want to do something that I have no interest in? What would the point in that be, exactly?

User avatar
ToxieDogg
Posts: 8356
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 8:54 am
Location: Vice City, a.k.a. 'Liverpool'

Post by ToxieDogg » Sat Aug 19, 2006 7:29 pm

Capcom's advert for their new Ghosts 'n Goblins games on the PSP baffles me. On the first 'Wanted' poster thingy on Page 83 of the mag, why have they suddenly decided to rename Red Arimer as Red Devil?

User avatar
Rev. Stuart Campbell
Posts: 1084
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 4:28 am

Re:

Post by Rev. Stuart Campbell » Sun Aug 20, 2006 3:58 am

Gabe wrote:Yeah, but anybody could do that if they wanted to. Whether it would be as good as yours matters not - they could still do it.
Um, I know all the rules of football, and I have two legs. Therefore I could play as centre forward for Chelsea this afternoon. I might not be as good as Andriy Shevchenko, but that matters not - I could still do it.

Except I think you'll find that it does matter to Jose Mourinho and 50,000 Chelsea fans. I think you'd find that they cared quite a lot about it, in fact. And I care that when people read a mag like RG, they get features done properly by people who know what they're talking about and give a damn whether they do the job right or not. I suspect that most of those readers, having paid five quid a time for an issue, care too.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest