Those ads... again

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

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

Post Reply
Bub&Bob
Posts: 6833
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 8:24 am

Post by Bub&Bob » Thu Apr 19, 2007 10:06 am

Sputryk wrote:This is a storm-in-a-teacup to me.
Should that read D-cup?
The dry fart for Barry MacDermot and all the cancer patients in the Glamorgan testicle ward

User avatar
CraigGrannell
Posts: 4734
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 6:15 am
Contact:

Post by CraigGrannell » Thu Apr 19, 2007 10:22 am

seanmcmanus wrote:Writing a letter is going to take the rest of us much more time and have much less impact.
Well, as someone who's been in the industry for a number of years now, I can at least say you're half right.
iPhone/iPod/iPad game/app reviews: http://www.iphonetiny.com

psj3809
Posts: 19015
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 10:28 am

Post by psj3809 » Thu Apr 19, 2007 12:07 pm

Not this old chestnut again ! I do hope there are less porn ads this month as it did seem to go up the other day (ads !) but at the end of the day i know the mags might need them to survive.

Being a Mary Whitehouse and stopping buying it is laughable, and if someones 3 year old kid is looking at it then blame the parents for being stupid not me. If i had a 3 year old kid i would make sure some 'zombie cover' of a PC game wouldnt be near them so they could see it and so on.

What next ? Moaning to a company that your kid can get into a medicine bottle when youve stupidly left it out instead of putting it away in a high cupboard or something ?

Worlds gone mad

User avatar
stvd
Posts: 5137
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 3:51 pm
Location: Scotland
Contact:

Post by stvd » Thu Apr 19, 2007 12:22 pm

merman wrote:Actually, in the past gamesTM has had this sort of advert and still does. But the most recent issue has
- a lot less phone sex ads than Retro Gamer
- text-only ads
I just pulled a couple of random issues from a pile.
Issues 52 & 54 - none of these ads whatsoever.

Surely this isn't wanted, is it?


Image

It basically states that gamesTM readers are interested in videogames and also game development (there are a lot for game dev. opportunities). Photoshop users are interested in Photoshop.
Retro Gamers are interested in old games and sex chat lines.

Obviously this wont be censored judging by your stance on the whole issue.
Last edited by stvd on Thu Apr 19, 2007 12:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Dudley
Posts: 8712
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 7:53 pm
Contact:

Post by Dudley » Thu Apr 19, 2007 12:43 pm

psj3809 wrote: Being a Mary Whitehouse and stopping buying it is laughable, and if someones 3 year old kid is looking at it then blame the parents for being stupid not me. If i had a 3 year old kid i would make sure some 'zombie cover' of a PC game wouldnt be near them so they could see it and so on.

What next ? Moaning to a company that your kid can get into a medicine bottle when youve stupidly left it out instead of putting it away in a high cupboard or something ?

Worlds gone mad
Well exactly. If the Ghouls and Ghosts cover is suitable, the f-ing ads are.

Image
Yesterzine - The Literal Magazine Show
http://yesterzine.co.uk | @Yesterzine on Twitter | yesterzineshow@gmail.com

User avatar
Dudley
Posts: 8712
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 7:53 pm
Contact:

Post by Dudley » Thu Apr 19, 2007 12:44 pm

stvd wrote: It basically states that gamesTM readers are interested in videogames and also game development (there are a lot for game dev. opportunities). Photoshop users are interested in Photoshop.
Retro Gamers are interested in old games and sex chat lines.
And 360 owners are interested in new games and sex chat lines.
Yesterzine - The Literal Magazine Show
http://yesterzine.co.uk | @Yesterzine on Twitter | yesterzineshow@gmail.com

User avatar
stvd
Posts: 5137
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 3:51 pm
Location: Scotland
Contact:

Post by stvd » Thu Apr 19, 2007 12:47 pm

Dudley wrote:Well exactly. If the Ghouls and Ghosts cover is suitable, the f-ing ads are.
Bollocks.

The cover is relating to the content of the magazine.

User avatar
stvd
Posts: 5137
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2007 3:51 pm
Location: Scotland
Contact:

Post by stvd » Thu Apr 19, 2007 12:48 pm

Dudley wrote:And 360 owners are interested in new games and sex chat lines.
That goes without saying!

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

Post by SirClive » Thu Apr 19, 2007 1:41 pm

Dud's, how dare you use my picture against me!
Image

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

Post by SirClive » Thu Apr 19, 2007 1:41 pm

stvd - you have used a rather tame example there. Much worse in the current RG.
Image

Utini
Posts: 811
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 5:33 pm
Location: The Kessel System

Post by Utini » Thu Apr 19, 2007 1:46 pm

SirClive wrote:stvd - you have used a rather tame example there. Much worse in the current RG.
I dunno, though - try going to the site :shock:
Hey, Sweden!
They're not Swedish Mac, they're Norwegian!

User avatar
TMR
Posts: 5756
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2005 10:56 am
Location: Leeds, U.K.
Contact:

Post by TMR » Thu Apr 19, 2007 2:38 pm

stvd wrote:
Dudley wrote:Well exactly. If the Ghouls and Ghosts cover is suitable, the f-ing ads are.
Bollocks.

The cover is relating to the content of the magazine.
That wasn't the badger's point, i believe he was saying that this hypothetical three year old that people are concerned will be flicking through the mag will be just as traumatised by zombies on the cover as they would the sex line adverts at the back. i can see his point and, in the same way i don't let our kids watch 12A films (they're 9 and 11) unless i've seen them myself first, i would be keeping any magazine with a potentially frightening cover away from the aforementioned three year old regardless of it's relevance to the content.

User avatar
andrew_rollings
Posts: 311
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 10:24 am
Contact:

Post by andrew_rollings » Thu Apr 19, 2007 2:42 pm

Personally, I lament that I can't let my 10 year old read the magazine, because he enjoys playing the old games (and they're often more suitable in content that the newer ones)...
However, if it meant the difference between RetroGamer not attracting enough advertising to be economically viable, or displaying sex ads, then I'll take the sex ads, as distasteful, inappropriate and inconvenient as I may find them.

YMMV.

Andrew

User avatar
CraigGrannell
Posts: 4734
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 6:15 am
Contact:

Post by CraigGrannell » Thu Apr 19, 2007 3:03 pm

It is funny how desensitised everyone in the UK and USA seems to be towards violence, but how prudish we are towards sex. Now, I'm NOT condoning some of the adverts in the latest Retro Gamer, but the entire scenario has reminded me of a visit to France I had when I was about 11. Naturally, I made a beeline for the videogames magazines, and I was rather shocked to note how much, erm, 'flesh' was on display, but then this seemed to be the case elsewhere in the store—even on children's books.

It is strange that people will scorn The Sun for page 3 on purely prudish terms (rather than on, say, exploitative ones), and yet will turn a blind eye to bloodshed, guns and violence. Certainly Oli Frey's zombie cover is one of the most horrific images to appear in Retro Gamer, and yet I don't think anyone mentioned it at the time, even in relation to small children reading/seeing the magazine.
iPhone/iPod/iPad game/app reviews: http://www.iphonetiny.com

User avatar
paranoid marvin
Posts: 14272
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 6:28 pm
Location: 21st Century Earth

Post by paranoid marvin » Thu Apr 19, 2007 3:04 pm

The thing is , kids can tell the difference between fantasy and reality better than some people think - I know , I was one a long time ago!

The sex lines blur the distinction , especially some of the more erotic poses and suggestions

I don't think I'd have any trouble letting a 5 year old see a cartoon picture of a zombie , or a gangster with a gun - I would have a problem letting them view adverts very similar in nature to those in top-shelf publications (and are MUCH worse than those in most newspapers)
If you disagree , then your opinion is different to mine , simple as that
Mr Flibble says...
"Game over , boys!"

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests