No Half-life 2 Review Again In Gametm?

[Burai]

So presumably features on games' development, various analyses of past games, interviews with games dev perosnalities, that's all to shift code?

Of course it is.

All Edge's development section ever does is pimp some new middleware thing and I don't know what interviews with developers you've ever read that aren't in some ways attached to some forthcoming title/s.

The retrospectives are just the extra fluff that make up the package to make you buy X book of adverts over Y book of adverts.

[Guybrush]

Where's the review on their website I can't see it. Yes, I'm crap.

We're still waiting, I see...

[Mogget]

Right, I get it. Games TM are actually the heroes in this little saga. By refusing to pander to the terms and conditions set by Sata......sorry, Valve.....they have demonstrated that they are immune to the threats imposed by tyrannical software empires hell bent on world domination.

Scary stuff

[Andy_Tanner]

Of course it is.

All Edge's development section ever does is pimp some new middleware thing and I don't know what interviews with developers you've ever read that aren't in some ways attached to some forthcoming title/s.

The retrospectives are just the extra fluff that make up the package to make you buy X book of adverts over Y book of adverts.

what's this got to do with anything ? sorry for sounding dismissive but i can't see your point.

[Graham S]

pretending that magazines exist for any other reason than to generate business for the games industry is hugely delusional.

That they give me something to look forward to that I really enjoy reading every month* is just a happy side effect. Hurray for capitalism!

*That's Edge I'm talking about. Don't want the GamesTM staff to think I've switched sides or anything. Whizzer is great! Down with Chips!

[Holburn]

Sorry to bring this to the top again, but what if Jonathon Woss refused to review "Return Of The King" because he hadn't been invited to view a preview of the film?

What have Games TM achieved by not reviewing HL2? Anything? Thought not...

[Uncle Nasty]

I wonder how this is going to affect their regular monthly round-up of "must haves" for the various systems? Surely the PC section must feature HL2 as a must have title at some point? I haven't bought the mag for a few months but the feature was still there the last time I looked, I'm interested to see how they deal with this. I can't imagine how they expect their readers to take that feature seriously with such a blatant omission.

[Wools]

I dont see the problem.

They've stated why they hadent reviewed it and it's due to the publisher not sending any code and it's been months since it's been reviewed in other publications.

Everyone knows it's good but if the publisher dident want people to know that then fine.

[Alex W.]

It's a bit of a lose-lose situation.

If they post up a review, they're the magazine that didn't review the next big thing until two months after their contemporaries.

If they don't post up a review, they're the magazine that didn't review the next big thing.

[Holburn]

If they post up a review, they're the magazine that didn't review the next big thing until two months after their contemporaries.

I disagree. As mentioned previously, Edge printed their review of GTA3 late, but explained why, and my sympathies were with the magazine. The same would have been the case with HL2. Perhaps GamesTM didn't want to admit they hadn't been invited to the party?

[Alex W.]

The retrospectives are just the extra fluff that make up the package to make you buy X book of adverts over Y book of adverts.

You mean recruitment agency pages, in Edge's case, surely?

To be honest, though, I find it a spectacularly cynical POV when you view all magazines as a self-sustaining advertising vector which just happen to have some discursive writing attached. And that's coming from me, Cynical Mc. Cynic of the Clan Cynic.

[Alex W.]

I disagree. As mentioned previously, Edge printed their review of GTA3 late, but explained why, and my sympathies were with the magazine. The same would have been the case with HL2. Perhaps GamesTM didn't want to admit they hadn't been invited to the party?

*reads the bit of my post you quoted*

I stated that they'd be the magazine which posted up their review after their contemporaries.

How are you disagreeing with that statement? If they post it up after the Future magazines... it's after the Future magazines. I posted sweet fuck-all about sympathies and parties.

[Alex W.]

Aaanyway, it all comes down to damage limitation in the end. Of the two choices open to GamesTM, both are equally rubbish in terms of trying to grab sales. You won't attract Johnny Punter with "Half Life 2 Review!" after he's already bought a magazine for a Half-Life 2 review. So not a whole lot to gain in terms of circulation of the magazine. Although I'd have chosen the "Late review and explaination" option, GamesTM's editors have long since explained why they chose otherwise.

Of course, it's not all about circulation, there's the regular readers to consider as well. The fans ask for a review as they'd like to hear something of GamesTM's opinion of the game... and they post up a review on the magazine's site, right?

Job done, I guess. Issue over.

[Holburn]

I don't care if they post the review after their contemporaries. GamesTM aren't a kids magazine - they don't have to conform to the playground "me-first with the review of game x" mentality.

I'm sorry but it just smacks of toys-out-the-cot pettiness. They didn't print a review to prove a point.

It's just unprofessional, imo.

[Alex W.]

I don't care if they post the review after their contemporaries. GamesTM aren't a kids magazine - they don't have to conform to the playground "me-first with the review of game x" mentality.

I'm sorry but it just smacks of toys-out-the-cot pettiness. They didn't print a review to prove a point.

It's just unprofessional, imo.

Well, I've kind of laid out the good magazine-market reasons for them to not waste time and possibly a cover on a review that may not attract extra circulation, so I really must disagree. I'd say that they were being very professional about it, and merely ran into problems with satisfying regular readers/subscribers (which, let's face it, aren't a huge slice of the magazine market this side of the Atlantic).

[Burai]

You mean recruitment agency pages, in Edge's case, surely?

To be honest, though, I find it a spectacularly cynical POV when you view all magazines as a self-sustaining advertising vector which just happen to have some discursive writing attached. And that's coming from me, Cynical Mc. Cynic of the Clan Cynic.

Well let's just look at a magazine.

Demo Disc- 5 minute playable chunks and videos of games that you might want to buy.

News - Press releases selling stuff, press conferences selling stuff, trade shows attended by exhibitors selling stuff.

Previews - Early code, details and flattering screenshots courtesy of PR departments who want you to want to buy their new game as early as possible so you put your money aside for the eventual day.

Reviews - The final listings of the features that sell games to you, finalised with a number based on any combination of the following things: Opinion, What the magazine thinks you'll think, What the publisher paid for, The price of early code.

Tips - Kindly regurgitated from the web/press releases by some minimum wage typing monkey, sponsored by Datel/some shitey tips phone service/the magazines sister tips guide (out now, priced £3.99).

High score challenge - Sponsored by someone who wants to sell you the competition prizes if you don't win.

Features - A combination of developer interviews where they talk about their forthcoming games that they want you to buy, round-ups of games that people want you to buy, pieces on museums/TV shows that they want you to pay money to go see/watch to justify their advertisers' faith and genuine articles about stuff that isn't directly related to selling you new games because they like to give their writers some feeling that they aren't just pouring their hearts and souls into a demoralising by-the-numbers book of adverts.

Next month - Little snippets of the adverts you'll be reading next month which, when combined, forms it's own Power Rangers-esque Mega-Advert for the next issue which they want you to buy.

[Alex W.]

Sure, that's the vast majority of magazines (and games websites for that matter), but I make a point of not reading shite like OXM or OPS2 these days (no offense OXM, but you're shite), even if I do sometimes buy for a demo disk.

Usually when I read decent previews or reviews there's some sort of insight or an interesting opinion, or read the making of an old game there's some interesting anecdotes, or a feature on minority groups in gaming or developing for old systems or something.

[biglime]

There are no magazines with any attitude, that's the truth.

There's a gaping big hole in the market.

[Andy_Tanner]

There's a gaping big hole in the market.

dude that is the market.

[MK-1601]

There are no magazines with any attitude, that's the truth.

There's a gaping big hole in the market.

Whenever mags get discussed on this forum this point gets raised.* There aren't any mags that don't give a fuck, in the 'unconventionality' sense, as opposed to the 'starstruck semi-literate hacks with no personal standards' sense.

And then someone will say that we're hardly representative of the general public at large. But I don't see how that is a problem. Needlepoint, Angling and Classic Motorcycles aren't pastimes indulged in by the majority of the population either. The recent spate of retro mags (despite being universally worthless crap) managed to find an audience, and they're not trying to sell you the latest greatest thing on every page. (Rather, they're cynical rip-offs in themselves, but that's beside the point.)

If a mag is good enough, well marketed enough and doesn't cost some ridiculously inflated price then we'd all buy it, and 'normals' would buy it. More people would recommend it to their friends (not something that I would do of Edge or GamesTM unless it was someone I really disliked), and so on.

I am increasingly of the opinion that this is one of those situations where the desired thing doesn't exist purely because accepted wisdom (and possibly people from Future Publishing brandishing hammers) has dissuaded anyone from trying.

*unless lime's being sarcastic or something and I'm missing it.

[ianinthefuture]

Why did Amiga Power have to die?

[RJames]

Why did Amiga Power have to die?

To be honest, I reckon Commodore going bust and the Amiga becoming obsolete as a games machine had something to do with it?

Or am I barking up the wrong tree here?

[ianinthefuture]

To be honest, I reckon Commodore going bust and the Amiga becoming obsolete as a games machine had something to do with it?

Or am I barking up the wrong tree here?

I think it still has a strong market.

This is why I am a failed businessman.

[biglime]

Whenever mags get discussed on this forum this point gets raised.* There aren't any mags that don't give a fuck, in the 'unconventionality' sense, as opposed to the 'starstruck semi-literate hacks with no personal standards' sense.

And then someone will say that we're hardly representative of the general public at large. But I don't see how that is a problem. Needlepoint, Angling and Classic Motorcycles aren't pastimes indulged in by the majority of the population either. The recent spate of retro mags (despite being universally worthless crap) managed to find an audience, and they're not trying to sell you the latest greatest thing on every page. (Rather, they're cynical rip-offs in themselves, but that's beside the point.)

If a mag is good enough, well marketed enough and doesn't cost some ridiculously inflated price then we'd all buy it, and 'normals' would buy it. More people would recommend it to their friends (not something that I would do of Edge or GamesTM unless it was someone I really disliked), and so on.

I am increasingly of the opinion that this is one of those situations where the desired thing doesn't exist purely because accepted wisdom (and possibly people from Future Publishing brandishing hammers) has dissuaded anyone from trying.

*unless lime's being sarcastic or something and I'm missing it.

No, I'm deadly serious.

I want to read a magazine that pisses off the industry, says what it thinks, says what WE all think, has a pop at its competitors, and just forges its own path.

I'll have to make it myself.

[ianinthefuture]

No, I'm deadly serious.

I want to read a magazine that pisses off the industry, says what it thinks, says what WE all think, has a pop at its competitors, and just forges its own path.

I'll have to make it myself.

Count me in, you big Scotch man you.

[robdood]

I'm sorry but it just smacks of toys-out-the-cot pettiness. They didn't print a review to prove a point.

It's just unprofessional, imo.

Well to be honest, you could argue the same about these people (and not you just personally, mate) who are whining about the lack of a HL2 review. I'm not saying either side of the argument is 'correct', but I've said it before and I'll say it again: does it really (and I mean REALLY) matter?? I can understand that you may want to read gamesTM's opinion about said game, but at the end of the day I'm sure there a lot worse things that could happen.

PS - I'll help you Lime!

[RJames]

I think it still has a strong market.

This is why I am a failed businessman.

[sandman]

Well to be honest, you could argue the same about these people (and not you just personally, mate) who are whining about the lack of a HL2 review. I'm not saying either side of the argument is 'correct', but I've said it before and I'll say it again: does it really (and I mean REALLY) matter?? I can understand that you may want to read gamesTM's opinion about said game, but at the end of the day I'm sure there a lot worse things that could happen.

PS - I'll help you Lime!

It matters to me, because it affects the intergrity of the magazine. Schoolboy tactics do not bode well for the future of the magazine IMHO. This whole situation has done little to improve the repuation of the mag and I would not be surprised if it loses readers as a result.

[Disgraced Toblerone]

Once, in France, there was some kind of satirical weekly mag about PC, games and all, which was quite funny, quite reliable, and loved to tell "fuck off" to the industry as well.

It was ad-free. That's the secret.

[Aardvark]

No, I'm deadly serious.

I want to read a magazine that pisses off the industry, says what it thinks, says what WE all think, has a pop at its competitors, and just forges its own path.

"Says what WE all think," sounds awful to me, if you want a independent minded mag that says what it thinks and says what you think then either you're the writer or it's just pandering to the readership rather than the publishers.

Every time a mag does actually say what it thinks rather than what they think we think everyone is up in arms.

I'll have to make it myself.

Yep, you will.