Is Retro Gamer Magazine Back?

[idrougge]

Well, explain why it's "awful", and then we can do something about trying to change that :P

Is it your mag or something?

Well, let's make a list.
For a start, I second Tom's request for professionalism. There are too many factual errors which probably stem from what I call Wiki/Google journalism. The Internet has made it too easy to do tendentious journalism, since anything from spelling to encyclopædic knowledge has no longer to reside inside the writer's head. Unfortunately, that means that if you don't have a critical view of your sources, you're bound to repeat urban legends, just like a spell checker won't tell you the difference between "their" and "they're".
Sometimes, it seems that the editor doesn't care enough about continuity. Two articles in the magazine may state total opposite views. This is not bad per se, if it is made clear that the article is opinion or if it is a column. But if it is seen as representing not only the view of the writer, but also as representing the mag as a whole, it is a bad thing.
Also, I find the layout very uninspired, settling for the current global standard for how a gaming mag is supposed to look. The layout doesn't seem thought-out, and there is little dynamicism in the pages. The art director also needs proper stuff to work with; I want less low-res JPEGs (This is something I've hated with Games TM; if I want to look at blocky pictures with JPEG artifacts, I look at my screen. I certainly don't want to waste trees and hard-earned cash on it.) and more good photographs.
Those are some of the technical issues.

As for the content, I want less coverage of next-gen games. This goes both for systems which some classify as retro but I don't (N64, DC, PSX) and for retro compilations. It's not that I don't think that retro compilations don't deserve to be reviewed, but they shouldn't dominate the reviews like they do now. Why don't you actually review the games which the magazine is supposed to cover? Why not do regular reviews of Platoon, The Super Shinobi or I Ball?
On the other hand, I know that the name of the mag is *Retro* Gamer, but do all games have to be old? There are a lot new games being made, but they're usually just given a cursory glance in the rear end of the mag, whereas mobile phone conversions of old games are met with much more enthusiasm. It seems as though RG doesn't really get in touch with the communities which care for the systems. Perhaps it stems from RG being from the UK, where mags have generally been less technical and more games industry oriented than on the continent. I really don't know, but it seems that way. Really, I want less information about times past, for which I could just as well read Commodore User or Crash, and more about what is happening now in the retro scene.

I really don't mind your covering of the Speccy or the Amstrad, though. I just don't wish you make big "All about the rubber wonder" articles every second issue. And when you make an overview of a particular system, make sure that it stays factual. Each and every such article seems to say that system X was the best system in the world, be it the Lynx, the NES or the MSX.

[Mayhem]

Well thanks for taking the time to write that, I'll try and give some thoughts based on my opinion and experience.

Is it your mag or something?

Heh... sadly not, but I wrote for the old RG and I will be writing for the new RG. Plus I'm in regular contact with the editor, so he usually gets the lowdown on anything that's going on.

For a start, I second Tom's request for professionalism. There are too many factual errors which probably stem from what I call Wiki/Google journalism. The Internet has made it too easy to do tendentious journalism, since anything from spelling to encyclopædic knowledge has no longer to reside inside the writer's head. Unfortunately, that means that if you don't have a critical view of your sources, you're bound to repeat urban legends, just like a spell checker won't tell you the difference between "their" and "they're".

The mantra here is that everyone can't know everything. The problem also is that sometimes a subject may need covering, or be suggested, or have enough interest to run, and no one on the freelance team (which is growing) actually has that directly. So you do have to pull things from other sources quite often as part of your research. Fact of nature. If the net didn't exist, I'd be doing it down the library or other facilities instead.

I consider myself to have a wide knowledge of stuff, considerably bulked up in the last 6 years from being here for starters. But I can't talk about Japanese shooters from the mid 90s much for starters.

There has been an "edict" recently that people need to cut down the errors (or more precisely if they can't verify it, then leave it out or state it may not be true) so that might please you. There's also a push towards articles on games with direct responses and information from the people responsible, to give their side of things, which should provide another angle not currently present online or actually existing in any form.

Sometimes, it seems that the editor doesn't care enough about continuity. Two articles in the magazine may state total opposite views. This is not bad per se, if it is made clear that the article is opinion or if it is a column. But if it is seen as representing not only the view of the writer, but also as representing the mag as a whole, it is a bad thing.

I've noticed that some get credited, and some do not. I haven't figured out a pattern yet, but it does seem to point possibly at no credit for factual pieces, and credit for those which do feature opinion. But that's just my observation.

Also, I find the layout very uninspired, settling for the current global standard for how a gaming mag is supposed to look. The layout doesn't seem thought-out, and there is little dynamicism in the pages. The art director also needs proper stuff to work with; I want less low-res JPEGs (This is something I've hated with Games TM; if I want to look at blocky pictures with JPEG artifacts, I look at my screen. I certainly don't want to waste trees and hard-earned cash on it.) and more good photographs.

Can I ask what you thought of the previous layout as a comparison here? The current layout is an improvement, though similar to GamesTM in some ways. The art director has more than 15 years experience in the business and used to work on a number of high profile UK magazines such as Zzap!64. It's supposed to be professional, though I take the point it may lose some personality as a result.

Photos can be VERY hard to source these days without finding them online (unless you have say items to hand to take pictures of, which is what I often do because I own them!).

As for the content, I want less coverage of next-gen games. This goes both for systems which some classify as retro but I don't (N64, DC, PSX) and for retro compilations. It's not that I don't think that retro compilations don't deserve to be reviewed, but they shouldn't dominate the reviews like they do now. Why don't you actually review the games which the magazine is supposed to cover? Why not do regular reviews of Platoon, The Super Shinobi or I Ball?

There have been other comments about the level of current-gen reviews so they may be tailored down. Retro in the definition being used by the mag (and certainly a lot of other people) is the last gen and back, so expect to see more N64, PS1 and DC stuff (sadly for yourself). Regular reviews of old games has been pretty much nixed, as the argument is, if you want to read the opinion about an old game in that sense, just find a review from the time it came out.

On the other hand, I know that the name of the mag is *Retro* Gamer, but do all games have to be old? There are a lot new games being made, but they're usually just given a cursory glance in the rear end of the mag, whereas mobile phone conversions of old games are met with much more enthusiasm.

Someone else currently does the section where new games for old systems are reviewed, but I have been offered it in the near future if that person doesn't have the time for it due to other commitments. So if I did take it over, expect homebrew reviews (such as the latest 2600, Vectrex and Coleco games) to feature a bit more

It seems as though RG doesn't really get in touch with the communities which care for the systems. Perhaps it stems from RG being from the UK, where mags have generally been less technical and more games industry oriented than on the continent. I really don't know, but it seems that way. Really, I want less information about times past, for which I could just as well read Commodore User or Crash, and more about what is happening now in the retro scene.

I think you might be right there. The first year of RG under Live was quite a bit more technical than the last six months it was alive. The general consensus was that people wanted less "boring" articles about the hardware itself, and more about the games. So that's the direction the magazine has taken. Still expect hardware features (Spectrum and NGPC, with the 2600 coming up in issue 21) but not as long or as detailed as before.

I really don't mind your covering of the Speccy or the Amstrad, though. I just don't wish you make big "All about the rubber wonder" articles every second issue.

The Spectrum was the biggest 8 bit machine in the UK during the 80s. RG is based in the UK. Sorry about that, but the natural interest base and knowledge of the freelance team will by definition be skewed a bit towards the machines that made it in the UK during the time (Spectrum, C64, Amstrad, Amiga, ST, Megadrive, SNES). There are some people who their stuff on the SMS, MSX, 2600, Coleco and so on, but don't expect it to be as many.

Conversely you could say the same about US retro publications; they are quite often heavily weighted towards the 2600 and NES.

RG isn't perfect. It won't cater to everyone. No publication ever could. And with most of the user base being in the UK, it will naturally be UK slanted but there's certainly enough interest, knowledge and demand from the foreign readers for obscure and little known things to be written about in the future.

Anyhow, if you wish for me to pass any of these comments onto the editor, then let me know and I will do so

[chaoticjelly]

It's annoying when NTSC pictures of games are used - the old mag used to do that all the time, not sure if the new mag does that, not so hard to find the proper pictures for a UK oriented mag.

I agree though there is far too much Spectrum and C64 stuff in there and not enough of the SNES, Megadrive etc, seems like all the staffs expertise is only in the old 8 bit computers and they like SNES etc but are not really too into it, I feel that the articles show that

I wrote a letter to the editor but he never bothered to reply, I also emailed the advertisements department as I was interested in having an ad in the mag but they never replied either - not good.. :/

[Mayhem]

Picture wise, well if the game came out worldwide, what's the problem with using NTSC pictures?

Content wise, well as said, it's down to what people know. I guess all the SNES and MD lovers aren't writers heh. Apart from maybe John S. Having said that, I feel part of the split between console and computer, especially in the UK is down to the fact that console games were so expensive back then, that a lot of people just couldn't afford it much.

Compare to during the 80s when you either buy games cheaper and/or copy them, and you see my point. Hard to get into something and love it when it costs much more than the alternatives in the field.

I got lucky... okay partly lucky, I had a good income from doing a year's work before starting uni, and various bits of earning during it to get a good SNES set of games going during the 90s to play, keep and cherish.

The fact when you look at it that games back then were hidiously dear compared to now (comparitively, taking inflation into account, I reckon it costs in real money half, or maybe even less, than it used to) that whilst the 16bit era is probably overall the best that gaming has had, it also had the most prohibitive games costs.

As for contacting the editor and magazine, whilst I can't say anything about the ad, Darran has been working his arse off since he joined to get the first two issues done (two weeks for each) and now only has time to stretch it out to the normal 4 weeks. He probably read the email and never had time to reply. I know he has said he reads everything he gets.

[tom]

Is not quite true that games in UK were expensive, when compared to...for example... Germany.

VCS game in UK 29.00 ukpounds, in Germany at the time: add another 10.00 or 20.00 ukpounds.

(source UK: C+VG 1983, Germany: TeleMatch 1983)

US Disc games for example: The Halley Project (Mindscape) UK: 30.00 ukpounds. Germany 50.00 ukpounds

(source: purchased game myself in 1986 in Germany and again in 1988 in UK)

C-64 in UK at launch: 299.00 ukpounds, Germany: add another 100.00 ukpounds.

Also:
Between 1984 and 1987 I purchased many VCS games from Telegames UK, even with shipping to Germany, I could buy 5 - 10 games at a time and save a lot of money when compared buying in Germany.

So UK'er were very lucky, just like with music, UK was the place to be for purchasing cheap popular culture.

Of course, today it is a different story, as UK is now the most expensive place to buy in Europe, sign of the times...

[Mayhem]

The C64 was 299 in the UK on launch? Hmmm got proof? No way do I think it was that low, but await to be shown to be wrong.

Still, you know SOMETHING is fucked up when at one point, the disk drive cost MORE than the C64 itself in the UK

[tom]

C-64 at launch, 299.00 ukpounds, source: Retro Gamer issue 19 page 42, maybe you should read it Mayhem
(Of course , they are probably wrong as usual)

FDDs were always more than the computer, in USA for Apple ][, XL, or C-64, same story...
in Germany too...

Are you sure you deserve the title 'the daddy' (gamesTM)?

[Mayhem]

Explains why.. it's in the Spectrum article and I didn't read that :P

Still, it was done by Martyn Carroll (the ex RG editor) so it may well have some ring of truth to it. Frankly I don't know to be honest, we got our C64 second hand in 1984 and I'm sure it cost my father more than £300 at the time. I doubt he remembers twenty years on though!

Given how much the C64 price dropped in the US over the first 18 months, it might have been reflected in the European prices when it came to launch there. Still I've got some ideas about where I can perhaps look, so maybe I can take it further if I have time.

As for disk drives, there must have been lots of rich Germans buying C64 and drives then given the popularity of the format compared to tapes. Indeed, I think I've hardly seen any tapes sold on eBay.de past about 1987 release. All seems to be disk only, apart from the odd copy of Giana Sisters and Katakis. Just from my observation.

Certainly disk drives never took off in the UK. Only today with the popularity of collecting disk software and the ease of speed, are drives being bought up lots to use them.