Retro Gamer Issue 112 - Feedback Thread

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

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

Post Reply
Syntesis
Posts: 304
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 8:27 pm

Re: Retro Gamer Issue 112 - Feedback Thread

Post by Syntesis » Sun Feb 03, 2013 4:02 pm

HalcyonDaze00 wrote:collectors guides suck balls and should be removed from the mag, they are all complete sh1te and the biggest waste of pages since the appalling LAP.
I agree, I don't see who they are aimed at. For full-set collectors? Surely someone that obsessive already knows which games are rare/expensive and have access to an online checklist.

I would prefer a feature that identified the GOOD hardware, the GOOD games, the GOOD controllers and accessories and what mods and hookups are available so new collectors know what to buy to get the most enjoyment out of that system instead of whining about sports games. The Thunderforce 3 inclusion as a PAL rarity... sorry but that was ridiculous.

User avatar
hydr0x
Posts: 2164
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 1:31 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Retro Gamer Issue 112 - Feedback Thread

Post by hydr0x » Sun Feb 03, 2013 4:29 pm

Syntesis wrote:The Thunderforce 3 inclusion as a PAL rarity... sorry but that was ridiculous.
Why? It's as much as PAL game as any other cross-region cart, like the games by EA. It has a manual specifically produced (professionally, NOT by some importing shop) for a European market. It's not some shoddy black and white print out manual. It's a mass-produced color manual, albeit with a lousy translation. Although all that does is prove that is was not produced by some German shop or whatever, cause no German would ever use such a wrong title for the manual.
Image

User avatar
The Laird
Posts: 8496
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 11:01 am
Location: Luton
Contact:

Re: Retro Gamer Issue 112 - Feedback Thread

Post by The Laird » Sun Feb 03, 2013 5:01 pm

hydr0x wrote:
Syntesis wrote:The Thunderforce 3 inclusion as a PAL rarity... sorry but that was ridiculous.
Why? It's as much as PAL game as any other cross-region cart, like the games by EA. It has a manual specifically produced (professionally, NOT by some importing shop) for a European market. It's not some shoddy black and white print out manual. It's a mass-produced color manual, albeit with a lousy translation. Although all that does is prove that is was not produced by some German shop or whatever, cause no German would ever use such a wrong title for the manual.
There are TurboGrafx 16 games with "European" manuals stuck inside, doesn't make them official PAL releases.

Syntesis
Posts: 304
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 8:27 pm

Re: Retro Gamer Issue 112 - Feedback Thread

Post by Syntesis » Sun Feb 03, 2013 5:11 pm

It's also like the people who claim there was an American release of Sonic on the Master System just because some PAL versions were imported over and a sticker placed on the case to cover the barcode and now that one sticker is "worth" $200. Give me a freaking break...

In fact the Thunderforce 3 thing is even more ridiculous than that given it has a completely different system name on the front cover, manual and cart. Talk about being completely out of place in a PAL Mega Drive collection.

User avatar
Mayhem
Posts: 4741
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 7:05 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Retro Gamer Issue 112 - Feedback Thread

Post by Mayhem » Sun Feb 03, 2013 5:15 pm

The American release of Sonic 1 is somewhat unusual, because it was actually done by Sega afaik, and yes, all it chose to do was put a new barcode on the box. In regards to Thunderforce 3, if the manual wasn't produced by the company that released the game, then it isn't official, and shouldn't be in the list. Just my opinion on matters. If I took a Japanese only game for a system that will work on a PAL system without issue, professionally printed a translated manual, and resold the game with it included, does that make it official and due for consideration? No, in my eyes.
Lie with passion and be forever damned...

Image

kleinemaus
Posts: 145
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 7:29 am

Re: Retro Gamer Issue 112 - Feedback Thread

Post by kleinemaus » Sun Feb 03, 2013 5:56 pm

One gripe again is the lack of research concerning A8, Pengo (page 52) for computer had the original cartridge conversion on Atari computer, it was failed to mention, mentioned was 2600, 5200, GG and C64. Why mention C64 and not A8? This failing of mentioning the A8 keeps happening many times, I would like to know why this is so.

User avatar
hydr0x
Posts: 2164
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2008 1:31 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Retro Gamer Issue 112 - Feedback Thread

Post by hydr0x » Sun Feb 03, 2013 6:22 pm

Mayhem wrote:In regards to Thunderforce 3, if the manual wasn't produced by the company that released the game, then it isn't official
But it was produced by the company that released the game. Its trademark and copyright notices are all over the place. Germany isn't a lawless country too, so you'd be a fool to counterfeit a German manual, make it look official and then distribute it through the normal retail channels. Besides, it is obvious no German shop did these manuals as otherwise the German on the manual front wouldn't be so blatantly wrong. It's same kind of crude "Deutsch Anleitung" translation that a lot of official manuals back then used.

@Syntesis
As for the argument of the cartridge saying Genesis, well, guess what, a lot of MD games have cartridges that say Genesis. This was commonplace for MD games. There is no real technical distinction between PAL and NTSC for these, all that does differ between US and European releases is the packaging and manual. There are other games where there's just a Mega Drive sticker on top of the Genesis logo, and some official Australian "PAL" releases also just say Genesis.
Image

User avatar
r0jaws
Posts: 1860
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 3:48 pm

Re: Retro Gamer Issue 112 - Feedback Thread

Post by r0jaws » Sun Feb 03, 2013 6:55 pm

kleinemaus wrote:One gripe again is the lack of research concerning A8, Pengo (page 52) for computer had the original cartridge conversion on Atari computer, it was failed to mention, mentioned was 2600, 5200, GG and C64. Why mention C64 and not A8? This failing of mentioning the A8 keeps happening many times, I would like to know why this is so.
I had to look up what you meant by a8 myself, are you referring to Atari 8 bit computers like the 800? It doesn't appear in Wikipedia, so that's probably your answer.

User avatar
The Laird
Posts: 8496
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 11:01 am
Location: Luton
Contact:

Re: Retro Gamer Issue 112 - Feedback Thread

Post by The Laird » Sun Feb 03, 2013 6:56 pm

r0jaws wrote:
kleinemaus wrote:One gripe again is the lack of research concerning A8, Pengo (page 52) for computer had the original cartridge conversion on Atari computer, it was failed to mention, mentioned was 2600, 5200, GG and C64. Why mention C64 and not A8? This failing of mentioning the A8 keeps happening many times, I would like to know why this is so.
I had to look up what you meant by a8 myself, are you referring to Atari 8 bit computers like the 800? It doesn't appear in Wikipedia, so that's probably your answer.
A8 = Atari 400/800/XL/XE

kleinemaus
Posts: 145
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 7:29 am

Re: Retro Gamer Issue 112 - Feedback Thread

Post by kleinemaus » Mon Feb 04, 2013 11:06 am

The Laird wrote:
r0jaws wrote:
kleinemaus wrote:One gripe again is the lack of research concerning A8, Pengo (page 52) for computer had the original cartridge conversion on Atari computer, it was failed to mention, mentioned was 2600, 5200, GG and C64. Why mention C64 and not A8? This failing of mentioning the A8 keeps happening many times, I would like to know why this is so.
I had to look up what you meant by a8 myself, are you referring to Atari 8 bit computers like the 800? It doesn't appear in Wikipedia, so that's probably your answer.
A8 = Atari 400/800/XL/XE
Correct, an earlier nic was Atari Classic, but nowadays A8 is the overall term for the Atari 8-bit range of computers. So it should have been mentioned that Pengo was avaiable on cartridge for te Atari XL. It happened previous with Rally Speedway, and numerous times before in previous issues concerning other 8 bit titles. It is not acceptable.

User avatar
r0jaws
Posts: 1860
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 3:48 pm

Re: Retro Gamer Issue 112 - Feedback Thread

Post by r0jaws » Mon Feb 04, 2013 5:01 pm

I'll hazard a guess that the Atari 8 bit computers were probably not mentioned in either article because they were quite a small feature in the UK market. I know for a fact that I didn't even see one until I started to attend retro shows in the UK. It's quite possible that they did not know that Pengo was even available for these systems.

User avatar
The Laird
Posts: 8496
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 11:01 am
Location: Luton
Contact:

Re: Retro Gamer Issue 112 - Feedback Thread

Post by The Laird » Mon Feb 04, 2013 5:23 pm

r0jaws wrote:I'll hazard a guess that the Atari 8 bit computers were probably not mentioned in either article because they were quite a small feature in the UK market. I know for a fact that I didn't even see one until I started to attend retro shows in the UK. It's quite possible that they did not know that Pengo was even available for these systems.
Did you know it was the second largest selling import 8-bit computer in the UK and as a whole range it sold more units than the Amstrad CPC?

kiwimike
Posts: 3711
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 3:20 am
Location: Chch, NZ

Re: Retro Gamer Issue 112 - Feedback Thread

Post by kiwimike » Tue Feb 05, 2013 12:45 am

The Laird wrote:
r0jaws wrote:I'll hazard a guess that the Atari 8 bit computers were probably not mentioned in either article because they were quite a small feature in the UK market. I know for a fact that I didn't even see one until I started to attend retro shows in the UK. It's quite possible that they did not know that Pengo was even available for these systems.
Did you know it was the second largest selling import 8-bit computer in the UK and as a whole range it sold more units than the Amstrad CPC?
Yes I did. I often find it amusing- From an outside neutral position- That books like Ultimate history are accused of being 'US centric' because they include little UK computers...yet UK publications can be exactly the reverse. You only have to look at how many 'I'm not interested in the Apple II' comments there were in the forums after various features.
It's just interesting... :)

kleinemaus
Posts: 145
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 7:29 am

Re: Retro Gamer Issue 112 - Feedback Thread

Post by kleinemaus » Tue Feb 05, 2013 2:21 am

r0jaws wrote:. It's quite possible that they did not know that Pengo was even available for these systems.

That is no excuse and only makes Retro Gamer look bad.

kleinemaus
Posts: 145
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 7:29 am

Re: Retro Gamer Issue 112 - Feedback Thread

Post by kleinemaus » Tue Feb 05, 2013 2:21 am

r0jaws wrote:. It's quite possible that they did not know that Pengo was even available for these systems.

That is no excuse and only makes Retro Gamer look bad.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests