Why do you buy Retro Gamer?

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

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

User avatar
stvd
Posts: 5137
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 7:51 pm
Location: Scotland
Contact:

Re: Why do you buy Retro Gamer?

Post by stvd » Mon Sep 08, 2014 4:52 pm

Darran@Retro Gamer wrote:How do you know people didn't play the game because its gameplay mechanics weren't feature in the article then?
Just by talking really. Nothing special.

Back to Star Wars though. If you reviewed the film and 3/4 of the review had nothing to do with the film then that review would be, more than likely, classed as worthless.
Image

User avatar
Antiriad2097
Posts: 26621
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 7:48 pm
Location: http://s11.zetaboards.com/RetroLeague/
Contact:

Re: Why do you buy Retro Gamer?

Post by Antiriad2097 » Mon Sep 08, 2014 5:41 pm

But these features are not reviews.

Though I do agreed some basic game description is useful.
The Retro League - Where skill isn't an obstacle
Retrocanteen, home of the unfairly banned
Tom_Baker wrote:I just finished watching a film about Stockholm syndrome. It started out terrible but by the end I really liked it.

User avatar
ianpmarks
Posts: 457
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2014 3:49 pm

Re: Why do you buy Retro Gamer?

Post by ianpmarks » Mon Sep 08, 2014 5:45 pm

I welcome the fact that gameplay will be talked about more in articles - even if only for a trial period.
I like a good technical article, but I also like to have some idea how a game plays. Hopefully RG will find the right balance for me... I am aware how selfish that sounds.

User avatar
stvd
Posts: 5137
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 7:51 pm
Location: Scotland
Contact:

Re: Why do you buy Retro Gamer?

Post by stvd » Mon Sep 08, 2014 6:45 pm

Antiriad2097 wrote:But these features are not reviews.
Fair enough I suppose. :)
Image

User avatar
Megamixer
Posts: 14890
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 11:18 am
Location: Staffs, UK

Re: Why do you buy Retro Gamer?

Post by Megamixer » Mon Sep 08, 2014 7:56 pm

The way I see it...reading about how a game was made is fantastic if you've actually played said game already. Case in point: I loved one of the Tekken spreads a while ago when the developer revealed stuff about team members randomly adding in things behind the backs of others'. Having played the hell out of these games, it was great to read about how features I assumed were pre-determined were actually the result of meddling.

If there's no description of what the gameplay involves then the article can make a game out to be as amazing or groundbreaking as it wants but it still won't be telling me why I should be playing it.
Retro is a state of mind, and cares not for your puny concepts like dates and calendars.

User avatar
martyg
Posts: 330
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2008 8:43 am
Location: Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
Contact:

Re: Why do you buy Retro Gamer?

Post by martyg » Mon Sep 08, 2014 9:21 pm

I haven't had a chance to read the article in question (hasn't hit on my side of the pond yet) so my comments are purely based on what I'm seeing claimed here and only discussing factual topics. Not taking sides.
ianpmarks wrote:]
By 1984 the arcades were full of games such as 1942' Paperboy and Pacland...
By late 1984 early '85. None of those games were even out when the 7800 was first announced and test marketed during the early summer of '84. 1942 was released in December 1984. Paperboy was by an entirely different Atari company (Atari Games), etc.
The 7800 launched with built in Asteroids a game from 1979!
No it didn't. That was later in the UK and it was the 7800 version of Asteroids from 1984. The console itself was launched with the original grouping of launch titles programmed by GCC.
The games were out of date in 1984 so who in 1986/7 wanted a system to play Centipede or Joust on?
Actually most of the titles in the original '84 launch lineup were still top earners in arcades, and games like Food Fight and Pole Position II were less than a year old (Pole Position II was released in arcades in December '83).
My point was not to say the 7800 was not a capable machine, but to say surely there were better games for the system to highlight than conversions of old arcade games. I know there are, I own some of them. You listed another 5 exclusives in your last post.
It seems the issue here is an unfamiliarity with the licensing market at the time (and again I have no idea how well the article did or did not get this across). When The 7800 was originally produced under Atari Inc. in 1984, that company had it's own arcade division and an extensive licensing network. The library of course would have continued to expand with the latest arcade titles (arcade to console was normally a year to a year and a half in those days), besides original titles. However the company that launched the 7800 in 1986, Atari Corp., was a completely different company. No arcade division to rely on games from, no in house team (that was just being started up again) and almost no licenses available because most of the "hot" arcade titles at that time were either snapped up by Nintendo's predatory licensing arrangements (which even kept developers from developing for anyone else) or made in house by Nintendo (and SEGA). That's precisely why Katz had to go and seek licenses for titles that had formerly been only on personal computers. Likewise, people seem to forget that the majority of the NES's early titles during it's launch were "older" arcade games (even by your 2 year standard) mixed with a smattering of original titles. 10 Yard Fight was from 1983, Kung Fu Master was from 1984, Wild Gunman was from 1974 (yes 1974), etc. Even the bulk of those original titles had been previously done in 1984. That "original title" renaissance on consoles, or shift from arcade titles on consoles to mainly original titles, really occurred during the NES era after it's rise to popularity. It seems people look at that in hindsight for comparison rather than realize it was an evolution. Prior to the NES' pushing of original titles on their console, the bulk of the in demand titles on consoles were '79-'84 arcade titles, regardless of how "old" it's claimed they were.
Last edited by martyg on Tue Sep 09, 2014 12:12 am, edited 1 time in total.
Marty

ClassicGaming.Com
Atari Gaming Headquarters - http://www.atarihq.com
Midwest Gaming Classic - http://www.midwestgamingclassic.com
Electronic Entertainment Museum (E2M)
Syzygy Company - http://www.syzygycompany.com/

User avatar
Darran@Retro Gamer
Posts: 6735
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2005 4:34 pm
Location: Bournemouth
Contact:

Re: Why do you buy Retro Gamer?

Post by Darran@Retro Gamer » Mon Sep 08, 2014 9:23 pm

stvd wrote:
Darran@Retro Gamer wrote:How do you know people didn't play the game because its gameplay mechanics weren't feature in the article then?
Just by talking really. Nothing special.

Back to Star Wars though. If you reviewed the film and 3/4 of the review had nothing to do with the film then that review would be, more than likely, classed as worthless.
Great point, except our making ofs are not reviews, they are articles on well known retro games, hence why background info is not typically supplied. It's assumed that people like yourself actually know about well established games such as knightlore. As I've already said though, we'll look at adding small bits on gameplay mechanics where relevant, because some newer readers may not be aware of well known classics.
Image

User avatar
Antiriad2097
Posts: 26621
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 7:48 pm
Location: http://s11.zetaboards.com/RetroLeague/
Contact:

Re: Why do you buy Retro Gamer?

Post by Antiriad2097 » Mon Sep 08, 2014 9:39 pm

How do you define 'well known'?

I have a colleague at work, only 10 years younger than me, who misses just about every pop culture reference I make. Today I discovered he's not read any significant sci-fi or fantasy books, not even stuff like Asimov (no idea who he even was) or Lord of the Rings. Music, movies, TV shows, you name it, he probably has never heard of it. He has played some computer games, does have a passing nostalgia for them, but if he were to pick up RG in the newsagent practically none of the contents would be 'well known' to him. He might just get a Mario reference.

Weirdly, he knew the Iggle Piggle song though.
The Retro League - Where skill isn't an obstacle
Retrocanteen, home of the unfairly banned
Tom_Baker wrote:I just finished watching a film about Stockholm syndrome. It started out terrible but by the end I really liked it.

User avatar
crusto
Posts: 5586
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 1:18 am
Location: Birmingham

Re: Why do you buy Retro Gamer?

Post by crusto » Mon Sep 08, 2014 10:25 pm

Darran@Retro Gamer wrote:
stvd wrote:
Darran@Retro Gamer wrote:How do you know people didn't play the game because its gameplay mechanics weren't feature in the article then?
Just by talking really. Nothing special.

Back to Star Wars though. If you reviewed the film and 3/4 of the review had nothing to do with the film then that review would be, more than likely, classed as worthless.
Great point, except our making ofs are not reviews, they are articles on well known retro games, hence why background info is not typically supplied. It's assumed that people like yourself actually know about well established games such as knightlore. As I've already said though, we'll look at adding small bits on gameplay mechanics where relevant, because some newer readers may not be aware of well known classics.
I have owed a vast amount of titles through the years. Knight lore was never one of them, I have no idea what the game mechanics are. Just a general (and old) idea that it "must’ve been good". So that's a defo +1 from where I'm sat. For me, not having such a small bit of simple yet vital information could quite easily come across as a bit elitist to newer readers imo.

Ie: "If you don't already know about titles like Knight-lore then what are you doing reading the mag in the first place?"
Image

Eat your nans pants

User avatar
ianpmarks
Posts: 457
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2014 3:49 pm

Re: Why do you buy Retro Gamer?

Post by ianpmarks » Tue Sep 09, 2014 7:26 am

martyg wrote:I haven't had a chance to read the article in question (hasn't hit on my side of the pond yet) so my comments are purely based on what I'm seeing claimed here and only discussing factual topics. Not taking sides.
ianpmarks wrote:]
By 1984 the arcades were full of games such as 1942' Paperboy and Pacland...
By late 1984 early '85. None of those games were even out when the 7800 was first announced and test marketed during the early summer of '84. 1942 was released in December 1984. Paperboy was by an entirely different Atari company (Atari Games), etc.
The 7800 launched with built in Asteroids a game from 1979!
No it didn't. That was later in the UK and it was the 7800 version of Asteroids from 1984. The console itself was launched with the original grouping of launch titles programmed by GCC.
The games were out of date in 1984 so who in 1986/7 wanted a system to play Centipede or Joust on?
Actually most of the titles in the original '84 launch lineup were still top earners in arcades, and games like Food Fight and Pole Position II were less than a year old (Pole Position II was released in arcades in December '83).
My point was not to say the 7800 was not a capable machine, but to say surely there were better games for the system to highlight than conversions of old arcade games. I know there are, I own some of them. You listed another 5 exclusives in your last post.
It seems the issue here is an unfamiliarity with the licensing market at the time (and again I have no idea how well the article did or did not get this across). When The 7800 was originally produced under Atari Inc. in 1984, that company had it's own arcade division and an extensive licensing network. The library of course would have continued to expand with the latest arcade titles (arcade to console was normally a year to a year and a half in those days), besides original titles. However the company that launched the 7800 in 1986, Atari Corp., was a completely different company. No arcade division to rely on games from, no in house team (that was just being started up again) and almost no licenses available because most of the "hot" arcade titles at that time were either snapped up by Nintendo's predatory licensing arrangements (which even kept developers from developing for anyone else) or made in house by Nintendo (and SEGA). That's precisely why Katz had to go and seek licenses for titles that had formerly been only on personal computers. Likewise, people seem to forget that the majority of the NES's early titles during it's launch were "older" arcade games (even by your 2 year standard) mixed with a smattering of original titles. 10 Yard Fight was from 1983, Kung Fu Master was from 1984, Wild Gunman was from 1974 (yes 1974), etc. Even the bulk of those original titles had been previously done in 1984. That "original title" renaissance on consoles, or shift from arcade titles on consoles to mainly original titles, really occurred during the NES era after it's rise to popularity. It seems people look at that in hindsight for comparison rather than realize it was an evolution. Prior to the NES' pushing of original titles on their console, the bulk of the in demand titles on consoles were '79-'84 arcade titles, regardless of how "old" it's claimed they were.
As you say the UK release was with Asteroids. Theres a picture of the box in the article, with it saying includes Asteroids. I am aware though that this was the 7800 version of Asteroids, and it didn't come with an actual Asteroids arcade game. Also it seems we can all argue anything as the machine has about three different release dates.

I'll concede to most of your points though, even if it was a very long reply to what was in my initial post one line that simply implied the games were old. It's a bit like being blinded by science, there are definitely people on here that think long technical answers always win the day. Still good points made Martyg, and you are right, I don't understand the early eighties licensing stiuation... Why would i? The article however went no way towards explaining the eighties marketing situation.

User avatar
ianpmarks
Posts: 457
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2014 3:49 pm

Re: Why do you buy Retro Gamer?

Post by ianpmarks » Tue Sep 09, 2014 2:55 pm

On a brighter note I've just read the Making of Feud article in the current RG.
It seemed to me to have the balance right on gameplay/technical. I've never played Feud (it came out after I'd swapped my Spectrum for an Amstrad 1512) but after reading I feel Ihave a good idea what sort of game it is and whether I want to play it... I certainly do, and will be firing up the emulator tonight. The article had plenty of technical/programming information too.

It was written I see by Darran himself, so he can certainly lead his team by example

psj3809
Posts: 18735
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 3:28 pm

Re: Why do you buy Retro Gamer?

Post by psj3809 » Wed Sep 10, 2014 8:13 am

Yeah i like these types of articles, ones which jog my memory about some old classic game which i might have passed over. Feud i remember playing back in the 80's and probably due to having so many games on tape (ahem) i probably didnt give it much time.

Now with an emulator and tips from websites its quite cool to load up some of these old classics and get much further in them then you ever did back in the 80s. Again so many classic games out there, this feud article is a great example of one which makes me want to find that game and play it again

User avatar
Timothy Lumsden
Posts: 2994
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 10:07 am

Re: Why do you buy Retro Gamer?

Post by Timothy Lumsden » Thu Sep 11, 2014 11:51 am

At first it was a bit of a nostalgia fix, but as a lot of the games in it now are ones I never played, I think it's become more of a general fascination about gaming culture. My favourite articles are those like from the archives, with the amusing stories of software houses etc.

The great physical look of the mag is also a power attraction

User avatar
Eric
Posts: 665
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 6:58 pm
Contact:

Re: Why do you buy Retro Gamer?

Post by Eric » Sun Sep 14, 2014 4:34 pm

Timothy Lumsden wrote:At first it was a bit of a nostalgia fix, but as a lot of the games in it now are ones I never played, I think it's become more of a general fascination about gaming culture. My favourite articles are those like from the archives, with the amusing stories of software houses etc.

The great physical look of the mag is also a power attraction
I like the look of the mag too. Think it is the way it looks brand new and up to date yet contains the retro games I like to read about.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest