Less "repeats", more indepth information.

kiwimike · Post by **kiwimike** » Fri Oct 05, 2012 1:08 am

In regard to nostalgia vs 'history lesson', IMO live and let live. I like the passion of fans of retro games, and accept/appreciate that gamers will enjoy classic systems/games for different reasons much the same way different gamers are fans of different systems. There are always some sections I enjoy more than others, eras of games/systems I enjoy more than others...but appreciate other gamers will have an opposite view. Each to their own. As mentioned though, it does emphasise exactly how hard to is to get the balance of the mag right so the majority enjoy it (you will NEVER get 100% of gamers happy, ever). They do a great mix.
The Apple feature case in point. Some weren't interested- For me, I thought it was outstanding, a highlight for the month and the reason I bought the mag online the moment it was out.

martyg · Post by **martyg** » Fri Oct 05, 2012 2:40 am

It's history, no it's games. Conservative... Labor! Democrat... Republican! Peanut butter... Chocolate! Missionary... Doggy!

Realy it's all about the ballance, which is something that the modern Retro Gamer does well. There's room for both in every issue.

slacey1070 · Post by **slacey1070** » Fri Oct 05, 2012 3:23 am

kiwimike wrote:In regard to nostalgia vs 'history lesson', IMO live and let live. I like the passion of fans of retro games, and accept/appreciate that gamers will enjoy classic systems/games for different reasons much the same way different gamers are fans of different systems. There are always some sections I enjoy more than others, eras of games/systems I enjoy more than others...but appreciate other gamers will have an opposite view. Each to their own. As mentioned though, it does emphasise exactly how hard to is to get the balance of the mag right so the majority enjoy it (you will NEVER get 100% of gamers happy, ever). They do a great mix.
The Apple feature case in point. Some weren't interested- For me, I thought it was outstanding, a highlight for the month and the reason I bought the mag online the moment it was out.

Go along with this . . . I don't read stuff that doesn't interest me (like,iOS) but others enjoy it and I'm one reader. The balance is (for me) about right. And if the mag loses balance, it may well lose readers - i.e. if it became iOS Retro Gamer - then I'd cancel, as it doesn't interest me.

The mix of content is one of the things that really draws me to the mag, when I see a game or bit of hardware feature I know nothing about, I read it.... because it might be something that I'd like to own or play.

I think Darran and the guys do a great job . . . balancing the interest of us miserable gits.

Gabe · Post by **Gabe** » Sun Oct 07, 2012 3:40 pm

CraigGrannell wrote:I think there's truth in that, although I think for me I'd skew your second point a bit. I'm certainly more interested in the history than playing these titles any more, but it's more about finding out about how and why creative decisions were made, in the same way as finding out about the dawn of cinema and popular music. I find it fascinating how rapidly this genre has evolved, and we're lucky enough to be in a position where many of the pioneers are still around to talk about their feats. But these stories are vanishing as creators pass on, and few publications care about getting the stories down before it's too late.

Few publications care because - as with any media - the overwhelmingly vast majority of people just don't care. If they did, well, RG wouldn't be a niche product, for starters. Actually, it's true of anything, ever really; we're far more interested in the end product rather than the creation.

To think that trend would be any different in the case of retro gaming is rather bizarre. (That's not aimed at you Craig, just a general comment).

Post by **CraigGrannell** » Sun Oct 07, 2012 7:42 pm

Gabe wrote:To think that trend would be any different in the case of retro gaming is rather bizarre.

Not really. Most publications are about current events. Retro Gamer by its very nature is about history. Ergo, I would find it very odd if at least a large portion of the readers weren't into the background behind the games, rather than literally just the games themselves. I'd also say that while you're right most publications don't care about gaming history, many do care about film/literary/television/music history. With gaming, I fear in many cases we're simply going to be too late to get these stories, and that's a damn shame. Either that, or we'll have, as in many cases, inaccurate stories, which also isn't great.

Trickster · Post by **Trickster** » Mon Oct 08, 2012 2:47 am

I'm only interested in games as a experience and in the developer's background which lead to certain games, genres, features etc.
Everything too tech related bores me.

But I guess I would be interested in a series where games are highlighted that feature some outstanding technical tricks for their time and machine.

Antiriad2097 · Post by **Antiriad2097** » Mon Oct 08, 2012 8:53 am

Trickster wrote:I'm only interested in games as a experience and in the developer's background which lead to certain games, genres, features etc.
Everything too tech related bores me.

But I guess I would be interested in a series where games are highlighted that feature some outstanding technical tricks for their time and machine.

How tech is 'too tech'?

This is the issue, finding that balance. We need some tech details to get across just how marvellous some games were for the hardware they're running on.

Hi res games on a ZX81 can look cack today, but for the system they were really doing some clever things.

gman72 · Post by **gman72** » Mon Oct 08, 2012 1:20 pm

Antiriad2097 wrote: Hi res games on a ZX81 can look cack today, but for the system they were really doing some clever things.

Agreed.
Whilst i completely recognise the historical value to gamers of this fact I do wonder how many column inches that would take up before it became an intolerable brain drain, also the screen shots in the mag would be drab, monochrome and lifeless... ergo completely uninteresting. Just my opinion.

Antiriad2097 · Post by **Antiriad2097** » Mon Oct 08, 2012 1:30 pm

It was only an example, but it holds true for any system where developers have got the hardware to do things that 'aren't possible' within the limits of the original hardware vision.

Multi channel Speccy music, high res C64 graphics, sprite scaling on the Mega Drive... every generation of hardware has had its barriers broken. Look at PS2, the later games on that system are stunning compared to the early stuff, often well in advance of the CGI mock ups that launched it.

gman72 · Post by **gman72** » Mon Oct 08, 2012 2:19 pm

Antiriad2097 wrote:It was only an example, but it holds true for any system where developers have got the hardware to do things that 'aren't possible' within the limits of the original hardware vision.

Multi channel Speccy music, high res C64 graphics, sprite scaling on the Mega Drive... every generation of hardware has had its barriers broken. Look at PS2, the later games on that system are stunning compared to the early stuff, often well in advance of the CGI mock ups that launched it.

I think it would make for an interesting article. Anything to get some PS2 games in the mag outside of Future Classics.

The Laird · Post by **The Laird** » Mon Oct 08, 2012 2:52 pm

Maybe when the PS2 is retro eh?

crusto · Post by **crusto** » Mon Oct 08, 2012 3:48 pm

Jagfest_UK wrote:Maybe when the PS2 is retro eh?

It is.

Antiriad2097 · Post by **Antiriad2097** » Mon Oct 08, 2012 4:32 pm

...not.

gman72 · Post by **gman72** » Mon Oct 08, 2012 4:58 pm

... an un-retro console.

Darran@Retro Gamer · Post by **Darran@Retro Gamer** » Mon Oct 08, 2012 5:20 pm

You wait until you see next month's future classic...

Retro Gamer forum

Less "repeats", more indepth information.

Re: Less "repeats", more indepth information.

Re: Less "repeats", more indepth information.

Re: Less "repeats", more indepth information.

Re: Less "repeats", more indepth information.

Re: Less "repeats", more indepth information.

Re: Less "repeats", more indepth information.

Re: Less "repeats", more indepth information.

Re: Less "repeats", more indepth information.

Re: Less "repeats", more indepth information.

Re: Less "repeats", more indepth information.

Re: Less "repeats", more indepth information.

Re: Less "repeats", more indepth information.

Re: Less "repeats", more indepth information.

Re: Less "repeats", more indepth information.

Re: Less "repeats", more indepth information.

Who is online