"Why Edge-Online's Whole Team Quit"

[Ed-E]

Why don't you enlighten us then oh wise one?

I don't think I'm in a position to, sadly, given working relationships I have with both sides of this argument. Doesn't stop what's been posted in this thread from being grossly unfair though.

[sentient]

Never thought I would but I stopped buying Edge. Not sure what it was, but I guess I outgrew it in some way. I think it was when GTA4 was such a let down - the preview they ran hyped it up so much I stopped being interested in games journalism. Going back and reading some issues, I think Edge takes itself and gaming too seriously for my tastes that i'd read it again.

Sad really: There wouldn't be an RLLMUK without Edge.

[Majora]

Take that back, you crazy, crazy man.

The only stuff of any vague quality I found was on Edge Online, like this absolute gem of a feature:

http://www.edge-online.com/magazine/state-...-%E2%80%98em-up

Unless that was printed in the actual magazine? Because JESUS. Why the fuck is it, whenever I pick up the actual magazine itself, it doesn't have anything even remotely of the quality of the above online article?

Because absolutely every drop of content I've seen in the magazine itself has been absolutely horrendous, fucking SHITE!

If the above online article was actually printed in Edge at some point, then I slightly retract my statement. But whenever I read it in a store it lacks any semblance of intelligence.

That was from the magazine. You might notice a subtle hint by virtue of the word 'magazine' being at the top of the page in capital blue letters.

[pancho]

I guess he's gambling that people will assume Future are up to their mean old corporate tricks again, and overlook the fact that the Edge website was a fucking embarrassment.

I suspect that's what he's convinced himself as well. Far easier to believe that the decision was made by a publishing dinosaur that doesn't understand the internet than because you failed at your brief...

[Ed-E]

This.

Although I suspect that's what he's convinced himself as well. Far easier to believe that the decision was made by a publishing dinosaur that doesn't understand the internet than because you are not very good at your job and have failed at your brief...

Woah!

That's a bit unfair, goz...

[EdCarnby]

You must admit though he's a thorough journalist.

It's moving from San Fransisco to erm.....er..... the West of England. That's a fucking big office.

[pancho]

Woah!

That's a bit unfair, goz...

Yeah, it was. I toned it down a bit in an edit.

Whether or not you agree that there was a difference in editorial quality between the site and the mag I don't think anyone would disagree that there was a difference in tone between the two. For that reason it seems reasonable to assume Future believed that the EO team failed in their self-evident remit to be the online voice of the magazine and I think that's why the decision to try to bring EO closer to the mag is a reasonable one and not, as Campbell portrays it in that blog post, the act of a deluded publishing dinosaur.

[sir stiff_one]

Take that back, you crazy, crazy man.

The only stuff of any vague quality I found was on Edge Online, like this absolute gem of a feature:

http://www.edge-online.com/magazine/state-...-%E2%80%98em-up

Unless that was printed in the actual magazine? Because JESUS. Why the fuck is it, whenever I pick up the actual magazine itself, it doesn't have anything even remotely of the quality of the above online article?

Because absolutely every drop of content I've seen in the magazine itself has been absolutely horrendous, fucking SHITE!

If the above online article was actually printed in Edge at some point, then I slightly retract my statement. But whenever I read it in a store it lacks any semblance of intelligence.

Haha, look everyone, it's a plant!

[Cacophanus]

Yeah, it was. I toned it down a bit in an edit.

Whether or not you agree that there was a difference in editorial quality between the site and the mag I don't think anyone would disagree that there was a difference in tone between the two. For that reason it seems reasonable to assume Future believed that the EO team failed in their self-evident remit to be the online voice of the magazine and I think that's why the decision to try to bring EO closer to the mag is a reasonable one and not, as Campbell portrays it in that blog post, the act of a deluded publishing dinosaur.

...except that the magazine is dying in terms of circulation:

28,898 (Jul 08 - Dec 08)

31,304 (Jul 07 - Dec 07)

35,145 (Jul 06 - Dec 06)

...and the website was and is generating far more interest. Whether people here think that the site was tarnishing the "editorial standard" ( ) of the magazine is immaterial, as print media is dying. The site is a convenient lifeboat for the brand as the print based version really can't sustain it for very much longer.

Campbell is right about one thing though; running Edge-Online like a magazine will utterly kill it off.

[Harlen Quinn]

What is it about Edge that it invites mass walkouts?

mass(-ive) egoes?

[SeanR]

I heard it was only 7/10 staff that walked out.

[smac]

I heard it was only 7/10 staff that walked out.

Yeah, but it's a different story if you actually read the review . . .

[footle]

...except that the magazine is dying in terms of circulation:

28,898 (Jul 08 - Dec 08)

31,304 (Jul 07 - Dec 07)

35,145 (Jul 06 - Dec 06)

...and the website was and is generating far more interest. Whether people here think that the site was tarnishing the "editorial standard" ( ) of the magazine is immaterial, as print media is dying. The site is a convenient lifeboat for the brand as the print based version really can't sustain it for very much longer.

Campbell is right about one thing though; running Edge-Online like a magazine will utterly kill it off.

Hey - EDGEs circulation going down while we enter the middle of a hardware cycle shock.

[Cacophanus]

Hey - EDGEs circulation going down while we enter the middle of a hardware cycle shock.

...except online games sites have had their traffic grow exponentially over the same period. It's not just EDGE that is dying in its print form, games magazines on the whole are becoming far less viable.

[Big Gus]

"Quit"? Sounds like they were sacked...

This is exactly what I was thinking. You don't "quit" then work out notice. That's the moment you stride in, call your boss a cunt then walk out the door whistling in the direction of the local Jobcentre.

[Eighthours]

Edge-Online always struck me as being a bit rubbish. And clearly Future agreed. That is all.

[ianinthefuture]

...except online games sites have had their traffic grow exponentially over the same period. It's not just EDGE that is dying in its print form, games magazines on the whole are becoming far less viable.

All print media is. It's why newspapers are so panicked/consolidating all their offices into one building (see: the Manchester Evening News) and sacking everyone (see: err... the Manchester Evening News).

[Comrade]

All print media is. It's why newspapers are so panicked/consolidating all their offices into one building (see: the Manchester Evening News) and sacking everyone (see: err... the Manchester Evening News).

Yeah, long-term this is obviously a plan to move Edge into being wholly internet based if/when magazines are finally completely unprofitable. But Edge weathers the storm better than most, so that's still probably quite far off.

This guy's main problem was his erronous belief that the website was more important than the magazine, which it clearly isn't. Maybe Edge-Online has more actual readers, but it's Edge Magazine that everyone talks about in the forums.

[mushashi]

This guy's main problem was his erronous belief that the website was more important than the magazine, which it clearly isn't. Maybe Edge-Online has more actual readers, but it's Edge Magazine that everyone talks about in the forums.

That should be the case for any related website though, zero barrier to reading entry (apart from an internet connection obviously) compared to paying for the product should ensure significantly higher readership by default.

[Cacophanus]

Yeah, long-term this is obviously a plan to move Edge into being wholly internet based if/when magazines are finally completely unprofitable. But Edge weathers the storm better than most, so that's still probably quite far off.

This guy's main problem was his erronous belief that the website was more important than the magazine, which it clearly isn't. Maybe Edge-Online has more actual readers, but it's Edge Magazine that everyone talks about in the forums.

Have you just arrived from 1998? Outside of a very small clique in the UK, when people refer to the EDGE brand they're doing so in relation to the site not the magazine. Far fewer people actually pay to read magazines these days, as they can go online and find out what they want to know quicker and for free.

[footle]

Have you just arrived from 1998? Outside of a very small clique in the UK, when people refer to the EDGE brand they're doing so in relation to the site not the magazine. Far fewer people actually pay to read magazines these days, as they can go online and find out what they want to know quicker and for free.

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Why rebrand from NextGen then?

[Xevious]

This is exactly what I was thinking. You don't "quit" then work out notice. That's the moment you stride in, call your boss a cunt then walk out the door whistling in the direction of the local Jobcentre.

And then get taken to court for failing to abide by your employment contract. Great idea.

Have you just arrived from 1998? Outside of a very small clique in the UK, when people refer to the EDGE brand they're doing so in relation to the site not the magazine.

Rubbish. The Edge website was a niche if anything.

[SeanR]

Edge has a website?

[Cacophanus]

Rubbish. The Edge website was a niche if anything.

Hardly, look how much it was linked across the blogosphere. It's been on Kotaku a lot recently as well and daily traffic from that alone eclipses EDGE's magazine monthly sales figures.

[Comrade]

Have you just arrived from 1998? Outside of a very small clique in the UK, when people refer to the EDGE brand they're doing so in relation to the site not the magazine. Far fewer people actually pay to read magazines these days, as they can go online and find out what they want to know quicker and for free.

You're right Cacky, I'm so deluded about Edge magazine.

On an unrelated note - how's your shadowy clan of games industry insiders' plan to destroy Edge going? Has your meticulous database of their errors aided them in their efforts?

[Rudderless]

Hardly, look how much it was linked across the blogosphere. It's been on Kotaku a lot recently as well and daily traffic from that alone eclipses EDGE's magazine monthly sales figures.

See, it's very easy to say that, but magazines have a far more captive audience than websites. How many people do you think clicked on the Edge link from the Kotaku story? I'd wager that the vast, vast majority just read the condensed version and moved on. And how large a percentage of that daily traffic read that particular story, and how many glossed over it because it was boring industry rubbish and ooh let's click on that link where it says LOL SONY because they think their console's dick is the biggest?

Sure, that's an equally sweeping statement, but you see my point I'm sure.

The fact is that the Edge name stands for a lot, regardless of how many people actually read it. Hell, if we're all about using single sites to represent everyone's opinion, the monthly thread on NeoGAF always bangs on about how awful/brilliant/important/meaningless its scores are, to the point where it gets more attention than any US mag, with the possible exception of Game Informer when it has a particularly meaty early exclusive.

[MK-1601]

Hardly, look how much it was linked across the blogosphere.

It wasn't very much at all, compared to most sites doing the same basic thing (e.g. gamasutra, gamesindustry.biz, eurogamer).

Because it was generating far less interesting new content than any of those.

[Alex W.]

Hardly, look how much it was linked across the blogosphere.

Yeah, mostly to reprints of Edge magazines articles.

[footle]

Hardly, look how much it was linked across the blogosphere. It's been on Kotaku a lot recently as well and daily traffic from that alone eclipses EDGE's magazine monthly sales figures.

I'm sure Future are rolling in money, if Kotaku readers are occasionally clicking through to ignore whatever ads they've got. EDGE, the magazine, is basically somewhere for games companies to dick-swing their recruitment adverts, isn't it? You don't really get that opportunity online...

[WibbleWorldGiddy]

I sympathise that the author is upset that his EDGE gig is over, but my sympathy turned to humour when I read the following:

Game industry editorial is no longer something that is simply crafted by writers and consumed by readers. It is a conversation between the people who make the games and the people who play them.

His Marxist vision of a magical utopia in which game developers and game players link hands and sing songs sounds quite nice. However, there are a few problems:

1) The number of game developers that actively frequent forums remains quite small and many developers are too close to their product to accept criticism. Instead, it's likely that the company PR department will converse with game players; and

2) he's telling people that his former role (as EDGE online editor-in-chief) and, by extension his current job are obsolete. If true, why should people pay Colin when we can get unsubstantiated rumour from 13 year old Fred Blogg's blog?