Why the problem?

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

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

kitykat
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 3:53 am

Why the problem?

Post by kitykat » Tue Jan 03, 2006 4:43 am

Hello there,

Having read the last issue of retro gamer. I'm happy with it new format though its still missing my favourite parts of the original (the Atari history was a particular favourite). In those you did have a detailed look at a particular computer, specs, hardware add ons and history of that particular device. Looking at varous forums and letters in your magazine people seem quite against this returning. Though you are called 'retro gamer', I do not see any reason why people should be against this, I'm sure both parties could be catered for. I know most for this info is readily available on the internet and previous magazines, but for some, you just can't get enough of this old waffle!

The other area that annoys me is why one earth people are against later machines being included, the Deamcast is an example. It is a fine machine and well worth looking into, it has some of the best imported arcade conversions evermade, you just keep mentioning as much as possible! Also touch anything upto a PS3 with with no moans from me to which computer is retro and which one is not. In fact fill next issue with X360 vs Colecovision just to annoy those guys who think life stops after the Spectrum.

Thanks

Daniel.

User avatar
LeeT
Posts: 1061
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2005 4:36 pm

Post by LeeT » Tue Jan 03, 2006 5:56 am

Er, wasn't the 'detailed look at a computer' devoted to the Spectrum in Issue 19? :roll:

There are many definitions of 'retro' - Some see it as C64, Spectrum. Others would view it as the MegaDrive, SNES etc. Some see it as Dreamcast, saturn etc. Some people want to see hardware features in RG, some don't. I think that as long as RG keeps a good balance between the different platforms, it will be ok. The old RG went from one extreme (a lot of 8-bit coverage, talking about Matthew Smith all the time) to the other (console coverage, talking about import gaming all the time).

User avatar
Spiff
Posts: 354
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 9:03 am

Post by Spiff » Tue Jan 03, 2006 6:54 am

The N64 seems a bit too recent, let alone Dreamcast, tho wouldn't object to them in small doses.

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

Post by markopoloman » Tue Jan 03, 2006 9:20 am

At the end of the day, you will never keep everyone happy.

I personally think RETRO should cover systems that are no longer available to buy new.

So although I'm a C64 head - the Saturn, Dreamcast, N64 etc. should all get there place in the mag.

also, if you really don't want to read about A system in the current mag - skip the pages! There are others out there enjoying the sections not liked by others.

I'm happy there is a retro mag available off the shelves - I read it, enjoy it, file it and then wait on the door mat for the next one to fall on my head.

psj3809
Posts: 19013
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 10:28 am

Post by psj3809 » Tue Jan 03, 2006 10:32 am

Like others have said its difficult to please everyone.

To me the magazines called Retro Gamer and should be more focused on games rather than machines. I thought personally sometimes in the older RG there was too much techy stuff about the machines, i wanted to know the best games on many different systems.

The Dreamcast is a great machine but when i think of retro machines i think of anything from SNES/Megadrive and before, i wouldnt put N64 or Dreamcast into the same boat

I'm a Speccy fan but i'm quite happy seeing many other machines including like you say the Colecovision or one of the most underrated machines for retro games, the PC Engine.

Because of the relaunch they were bound to go with a big article for either the Speccy or the C64. I doubt a huge relaunch with the Colecovision on the front cover would have got a huge interest would it ?

Touch anything up to a PS3 ? As i said earlier i would say the general concensus is that most retro machines are SNES and before. In years to come this will probably change but i'm happy as anything PS2 games arent reviewed. Be like someone buying a PS3 mag and seeing reviews in it for an old Speccy game. Just be strange

*

Post by * » Tue Jan 03, 2006 6:25 pm

The old RG went from one extreme (a lot of 8-bit coverage, talking about Matthew Smith all the time) to the other (console coverage, talking about import gaming all the time).
How about some console coverage without talking about import gaming all the time?

beesty
Posts: 332
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2005 5:10 pm
Contact:

Post by beesty » Tue Jan 03, 2006 6:37 pm

I think the Dreamcast is a proper retro console due to its limited time on the market.
I do own one and the leap from DC to PS2 was very little if any,but the leap from PS1 and Saturn to DC was a large leap.
I thought it died a horrible death as it was a very good machine with good games to boot.
the c64 was king,and the speccy,and the amiga,and,,,,,ooh u know the rest

User avatar
martin_f
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 8:20 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

Post by martin_f » Tue Jan 03, 2006 7:33 pm

My 2c worth on the hardware / software coverage. Not aimed at anyones comments in particular, just my opinion. The key point at the bottom summarises and furthermore isn't just specific to the hardware / software coverage issue.

For me (and probably many others), a *true* appreciation of any game for a platform can only be attained if I have atleast a basic understanding of that platforms capabilities (and preferably more than a basic understanding). RG documenting the hardware capabilities provides myself, and other readers with the ability to gain that understanding. Sure I could get this info off the net, but hey, I am sure I could also find out the top 10 games for a platform or game reviews off the net aswell.

For example, if a system provides great hardware gfx capabilities, then a game with fantastic gfx on that system isn't such a great deal (and theres probably lots of them) - sure it may still be a great game with great playability, but with an understanding of what the machine can do, the player might be wishing for more out of the game.

Whereas, if a system that provides little gfx capabilities, and some guy creates some amazing gfx through brilliant coding, with the same great game play ... then thats an awesome game in my book !

The atari 2600 is a classic example ! After reading up on it on the net one day, I was amazed at what the managed to achieve out of the machine.

At the end of the day, I am sure RG will get the right mix of content.
If people arn't interested in particular articles (or parts of articles, if it gets too technical etc) then don't read them (or those parts).
If you feel you are getting ripped off because there are articles in a mag you don't want to read - get over it, the mag you are after doesn't and never will exist !

I read everthing in the mag, from page 1 to the last page - wether I am interested/understand it or not. I may end up learning something useful from those articles - and gain an appreciation for something.

Take it easy.

Martin

p.s. how about a hardware RG special one day, document a bunch of machines in reasonable detail in a seperate (i.e. not the usual monthly) mag ...

:P

Manic_Whiner
Posts: 58
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 11:24 pm

Re: Why the problem?

Post by Manic_Whiner » Tue Apr 17, 2007 2:50 am

kitykat wrote:Hello there,

Having read the last issue of retro gamer. I'm happy with it new format though its still missing my favourite parts of the original (the Atari history was a particular favourite). In those you did have a detailed look at a particular computer, specs, hardware add ons and history of that particular device. Looking at varous forums and letters in your magazine people seem quite against this returning. Though you are called 'retro gamer', I do not see any reason why people should be against this, I'm sure both parties could be catered for. I know most for this info is readily available on the internet and previous magazines, but for some, you just can't get enough of this old waffle!

The other area that annoys me is why one earth people are against later machines being included, the Deamcast is an example. It is a fine machine and well worth looking into, it has some of the best imported arcade conversions evermade, you just keep mentioning as much as possible! Also touch anything upto a PS3 with with no moans from me to which computer is retro and which one is not. In fact fill next issue with X360 vs Colecovision just to annoy those guys who think life stops after the Spectrum.

Thanks

Daniel.
Yes - but its the old argument about the length of time it takes for something to be 'Retro'.

Most people agree on 10 years...

User avatar
rossi46
Posts: 4414
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2005 3:14 pm
Location: melrose
Contact:

Post by rossi46 » Tue Apr 17, 2007 3:32 am

I'm not sure retro can be measured. It's all about perception, IMO. For me, the retro thing is a nostalgic look back at past days. Whether that means bugging parents to buy me Master System stuff for birthdays or taking Dreamcast Magazine to work and reading it in the toilet, it's all retro memories to me.

The moment someone manages to quantify or measure the retro thing will be the day they kill the romantic aspect of it and render it sterile.
Thoughts and prayers.

User avatar
woody.cool
Posts: 8809
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 3:29 am
Location: Northampton, UK
Contact:

Post by woody.cool » Tue Apr 17, 2007 3:46 am

markopoloman wrote:I personally think RETRO should cover systems that are no longer available to buy new.
I agree, so therefore 'RETRO' should cover everything from day one (possibly the 2600, but I'm not sure if there was anything before it) right up to PS1, Dreamcast, Saturn, N64 but not GameCube, although it's a good machine, it's still purchasable (brand new) in some shops (Game, GameStation, and I even saw a GameCube in WHSmith). I would completely rule out XBOX and PS2 as being retro cos you can still buy brand new machines from the Argos catalogue!
rossi46 wrote:For me, the retro thing is a nostalgic look back at past days. Whether that means bugging parents to buy me Master System stuff for birthdays or taking Dreamcast Magazine to work and reading it in the toilet, it's all retro memories to me.
I also agree with you, Retro is a personal thing. To me, bugging my folks for a C64 (and them getting me a C16 instead :lol: ), bugging them for an Amiga 500 (and them getting me an Amiga 500+ - even better :D ) right up to me saving what seemed like nearly 6 months of wages (I worked it out, it was actually only 1 month's wages) to buy a Playstation (the original grey horrible looking model) is what I consider to be Retro!
Last edited by woody.cool on Tue Apr 17, 2007 3:52 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
bolda
Posts: 1128
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:53 am
Location: World 1-1

Re: Why the problem?

Post by bolda » Tue Apr 17, 2007 3:51 am

Manic_Whiner wrote:Yes - but its the old argument about the length of time it takes for something to be 'Retro'.

Most people agree on 10 years...
10 years from when it was first released or 10 years from when it was no longer officially supported by the manufacturer?

A system is classed as "retro" once Gamestation starts selling pre-owned games in it's retro section... this is the only criteria I accept! :wink:
GAME OVER YEEEAAAHHH!
ImageImageImage

User avatar
woody.cool
Posts: 8809
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2006 3:29 am
Location: Northampton, UK
Contact:

Re: Why the problem?

Post by woody.cool » Tue Apr 17, 2007 3:54 am

bolda wrote:
Manic_Whiner wrote:Yes - but its the old argument about the length of time it takes for something to be 'Retro'.

Most people agree on 10 years...
10 years from when it was first released or 10 years from when it was no longer officially supported by the manufacturer?

A system is classed as "retro" once Gamestation starts selling pre-owned games in it's retro section... this is the only criteria I accept! :wink:
:shock:

psj3809
Posts: 19013
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 10:28 am

Re: Why the problem?

Post by psj3809 » Tue Apr 17, 2007 3:55 am

kitykat wrote:Hello there,

Having read the last issue of retro gamer. I'm happy with it new format though its still missing my favourite parts of the original (the Atari history was a particular favourite). In those you did have a detailed look at a particular computer, specs, hardware add ons and history of that particular device. Looking at varous forums and letters in your magazine people seem quite against this returning. Though you are called 'retro gamer', I do not see any reason why people should be against this, I'm sure both parties could be catered for. I know most for this info is readily available on the internet and previous magazines, but for some, you just can't get enough of this old waffle!
To me its called Retro GAMER so i'm not really a fan myself of long techy specs, add ons for some computers etc etc. Theres tons of games out there for many different systems, many systems which i never had, would love to know more about the games i'm missing out on.

No one thinks life stops after the Speccy/C64 etc but a vast vast majority of readers obviously had them as their first computers. Now it seems theres more and more people getting RG who were brought up on the Megadrive/SNES etc so obviously arent that interested in older systems.

I do think the Dreamcast/Playstation I should be included as its amazing how old those machines are now. But i still personally think the majority of people here had a Speccy/Amstrad/C64 and seem quite happy seeing articles/game news on these machines. Still a ton to show about the consoles but i'm sure we'll get that in time

Steve Halfpenny
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2005 5:06 pm

Post by Steve Halfpenny » Tue Apr 17, 2007 2:36 pm

I'd say that whilst Speccys, Amstrads and C64s are all worth reading about, your consoles mssrs, DC, PS1, PCE, Neo Geo, etc are all serious collectors items and far more people still play these machines than our favourite UK computers of yesteryear (and when when these old classics are enjoyed again, it's highly probable that'll be through an emulator than the actual machine, for a number of reasons obviously. I don't think I could stomach those loading times now).

Whilst I once questioned RG over the amount of 3D games that were being covered I now think that as long as its retro in spirit it has its place in RG. This includes continuation of franchises like Castlevania, X-Box Arcade downloads such as Geometry Wars and homebrew games that feature that "classic" style gameplay. In this respect, RG is spot on.

I do share your pain relating to the Atari history mind. I'm still gutted that Games That Weren't and Strange Games had to go. Those were my favourite features.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest