Your favorite video game magazines, memories of them, and have they aged well?

[Cynicaster]

I loved EGM through the latter part of the 8-bit days and roughly first half of the 16-bit days.  GamePro was cool too, but I didn't read that one as much.    

 

I didn't always have money to buy the magazines so around the time I knew a new issue should be arriving on news stands, I'd walk up the road to a little convenience store called J&J Variety and just stand there in store and read as much of the mag as I could.  Every time, I'd end up getting crap from the cashier - "hey, this isn't a library... either pay for the magazine or put it back!"  Same line about the library, every single time. 

 

In grade 8 I was in a gifted program where they would put a group of us in a school bus and ship us across the county to a different school every Tuesday.  I remember killing the time on those bus rides reading a lot of EGM and playing Game Boy or Lynx with my friends.

 

As for whether EGM has aged well... not really sure how to answer that.  I got a collection of digital scans from retromags.com a few years ago and I've read through a few of them semi-recently.  I do notice some typos and I agree that the game reviews are a bit on the brief side, but insofar as it's possible to objectively assess a decades-old magazine talking about decades-old games, I still think it's a quality mag relative to its intended audience.

 

A few months ago I went into the old J&J variety for the first time in probably 25 years, and it was largely the exact same.  The magazine rack was not there, though. 

 

 

[newtmonkey]

Computer Gaming World

This week I've been reading issues of this mag, cover to cover, starting from the very first issue.  It's been very interesting reading the first few issues... the quality of writing is much higher than any mag I've been reading (Game Player's comes close in some of the PC game strategy articles).  The early issues are very focused on computer wargames. I've never played a serious wargame in my life, but reading some of these reviews and strategy articles honestly makes me want to try one; Southern Command (Apple II) seems especially interesting.

 

I do have some nostalgia for this mag.  Back in high school, I'd often spend weekends at my girlfriend's place, and my gf's dad had a subscription to this mag.  Lots of good times building computers with her dad and reading CGW (and of course spending time with my gf).

 

I must admit that I get a huge kick out of Chris Crawford's extremely arrogant article in the second issue, where he basically calls every other wargame programmer in the world a dumbass amateur, and (even worse) conveniently forgets to mention he is employed by Atari while praising the Atari 8-bit as the only computer worth owning if you love wargames.  He comes off as extremely slimy and unlikeable, regardless of the merits of his game.  The very next issue contains a polite letter from Joel Billings of SSI addressing many of the issues with Crawford's article.

[newtmonkey]

Computer Gaming World Issue 4

The highlight of this issue is definitely Dan Bunten's page-length letter to the editor, where he complains that his game was reviewed as "only" slightly positive versus a competitor's game that was reviewed slightly negative (even though the magazine does not actually assign review scores), and suggests that the magazine should completely change its organization and review system to, I dunno, ensure that all his games get perfect reviews.

 

The second highlight is the ongoing Chris Crawford drama.  In a previous issue, he took all other wargame programmers to task for not even "solving the problem of hexes in wargames" or whatever, which he solved years ago, but a strategy article on his own Eastern Front game reveals that it doesn't even use a hex map, but instead squares.  LOL

 

I guess I shouldn't be too surprised, but the amount of drama between developers even this early on is something else.  Reading these early issues is like watching the history of computer gaming unfold before your eyes.

[newtmonkey]

I've been reading through a lot of old mags recently, but have mostly been focusing on Game Player's (a nostalgic favorite that I feel has aged quite well) and VideoGames & Computer Entertainment (also nostalgic, but less so).

 

I know that Game Player's has been described as "dry" here in this thread and also elsewhere, but I really like this mag... maybe even more that now as an adult.  It was clearly meant for a younger audience, but the the writing is surprisingly good and treats the audience with respect (it's also a million times better than similar kid-friendly mags like EGM, Nintendo Power, or GamePro [just talking about the quality of the writing here]).  I do have one criticism; console game reviews, in particular, are pretty poor.  The Phantasy Star II review from the Jan. 1990 issue, in particular, is simply embarassing... five paragraphs summarizing the story/setup, and then a single paragaph after that telling you that Sega has made some impressive RPGs and this one is good too.  Is this is even a review?  Did Matthew A. Firme and Chris Slate (are you kidding me.. it took two people to write this garbage?) even play the game?  PC game reviews, thankfully, fare a lot better.

 

I know that VideoGames & Computer Entertainment was a highly regarded mag.  Back then, I liked it enough to pick up a copy at the local magazine shop, but not enough to subscribe.  Having said that, I really don't like this one now.  The reviews are very poor, with most of them being a dumb intro paragraph featuring some amateurish creative writing, 1-2 paragraphs summarizing the story, and then several paragraphs regurgitating information from the instruction manual, or describing the screen... or even explaining concepts like life bars, lives, or continues.  The latest example from the issue I'm reading now (May 1990), a review of Xexyz on the NES*: "A life bar at the top of the screen measures current life status, and each encounter with an enemy shortens this lifeline till it's gone."  I can image needing to explain this in, I dunno, 1985, but in mid-1990???  It makes no sense to even mention this stuff, except to add to the word count.

 

*This review must be read to be believed.  It's like a caveman has woken up from the Paleolithic and is playing a video game for the first time.  He expresses shock at having to jump over and shoot things.  Some enemies die with a single hit, but other enemies take more than one hit to kill; sometimes, you encounter an even harder enemy at the end of the "setting" (his weird term for "level" or "stage") who takes even more hits to kill!

Edited May 13, 2023 by newtmonkey

[newtmonkey]

Video Games & Computer Entertainment (June 1990)

This is a hilarious issue to read in hindsight.  The mag starts off with Andy Eddy's "Letter from the Editor" telling us how excited he is about all the licensed titles coming out for the consoles, and this is soon followed by the horrible cover story on the terrible Total Recall for the NES.  There is so much wrong with this article, from the dull stage-by-stage description of the game, to the slimy quotes from the Acclaim VP about reading the screenplay and realizing it was "an exciting product... that appeals to the NES core audience" and that it "would be a success in Europe and Japan as well."

 

The article ends with what this absolute garbage:

 

"Playing through the game revealed the dedication to quality that both companies strive for... we think that Total Recall is a hit."

lmao

 

I know magazines back then needed to do this kind of stuff to pull in some money, but I found it to be particularly disgusting to just outright quote some executive with dollar signs in his eyes talking about products and core audience appeal, and then to suggest (somewhat indirectly/misleadingly) that Total Recall is a quality game.  I've been reading or re-reading a lot old mags lately, and this is the first time I've seen something so crass.

 

Interesting fact: according to the article, the game was programmed by Brian Fargo!

Edited May 23, 2023 by newtmonkey

[schuwalker]

I'm really digging Game Player's Magazine from the late '80s era to the '90 window right before they switched to a newer font. They also have a great PC rendition I actually starting to go back a collect the missing issues I never purchased.

 

Looking back at reviews of all these gaming periodicals... with adult eyes it makes me chuckle at some of the reviews. There was a certain issue of EGM (think it was when Madden '92 came out) the reviewer bashed it since he's not a sports fan. Kinda unfair bias there... why are you even the reviewer then??? Take those reviews with a grain of salt. In hindsight, I'm not sure these guys had a part of my purchasing selections and choices.

[Tanooki]

That bashing is what EGM did back in the day on whatever hardware manufacture didn't kiss their ring or tickle their fanboy staff nerd boner.  In their earlier days they were a Pro-Sega magazine, then they turned on them and went balls deep into Sony.  Nintendo was always kind of hit and miss being frosty on them with ports, but oddly nice on the unique games where they'd go into out and out printed libelous crap, utter fantasy fabrication if you had the two versions of the same game handy and compared their BS fantasies to reality (you can easily do it now using 2 emulators, 2 ROMS of the same game.)  Other stuff that tried to enter the market if they didn't follow up on their blackmail level demands of what to supply them for reviewing purposes for the full staff their threat was poor to outright hostile reviews.  CDi fell under that, had talked with some of the staff of the US division long ago and they told me what EGM did to Philips wanting each reviewer to have one CDI, one DVR card, and one of every game and accessory...no one shared basically.  When they said NO, you get one of this and that's it or two for controllers where necessary they buried their asses in reviews and preview coverage, snide side comments etc.  EGM knew they were the #1 magazine by a huge percentage on multi-system coverage and abused it for years.

[newtmonkey]

On 5/27/2023 at 10:10 PM, schuwalker said:

I'm really digging Game Player's Magazine from the late '80s era to the '90 window right before they switched to a newer font. They also have a great PC rendition I actually starting to go back a collect the missing issues I never purchased.

 

Looking back at reviews of all these gaming periodicals... with adult eyes it makes me chuckle at some of the reviews. There was a certain issue of EGM (think it was when Madden '92 came out) the reviewer bashed it since he's not a sports fan. Kinda unfair bias there... why are you even the reviewer then??? Take those reviews with a grain of salt. In hindsight, I'm not sure these guys had a part of my purchasing selections and choices.

I agree 100%.  Game Player's from this era has aged quite nicely.  Maybe it's a bit dry, but it has a nice and clean layout, and the writing is surprisingly decent.  Re-reading it now, it's clearly written for kids, but in a cool, respectful way, that makes it fun to read as an adult.

 

EGM can be fun to flick through (especially those giant issues from 1993 or so), but their reviews have always been awful imo.  Reading a review that just says, "I hate sports games, and this is a sports game" is a waste of space and time.  Having said that, looking back now, I do appreciate that EGM was a very fan-focused magazine.  All those guys loved playing video games, and it shows.  It's in stark contrast with VG&CE, which was a more industry-focused mag with editorials extolling the "virtues" ($$$$$$) of licensed garbage, FMV games, etc.

Edited May 28, 2023 by newtmonkey

[Steven Pendleton]

I read a few issues of Gamest recently and I think this is the best game magazine I have ever read. I even bought an issue, the one from September of 1990 with the cool Toaplan interview and a rare look at Out Zone from the time of the game's launch. Go read it if you can!

 

Shooting Gameside is also just as good, although I hesitate to call it a magazine. Naturally, I bought the special Toaplan issue they made, so I have that as well.

Edited May 28, 2023 by Steven Pendleton

[newtmonkey]

I finally finished reading through the 1990 issues of VideoGames & Computer Entertainment.

 

I have mixed feeling about this mag.  It's cool that it covers both consoles and computers.  It's also cool that it's written well.  I actually have fond memories of this mag back in the day.

 

However, there is a LOT of industry shilling in this mag.  The editorials are constantly going on and on about how the future of games is licensed crap.  Reading these mags, it's like, whose side are you on?  No one playing games, then or now, cared about licensed garbage.  It's telling that they went and interviewed marketing executives in a crass attempt to explain why garbage games with a license attached are worth your dollars.

 

The reviews are really hit and miss.  Many of the reviewers spend one or two precious paragraphs on bizarre creative writing exercises or plot summaries.  You can almost always skip at least the first paragraph (this also applies to most game reviews, past or present).  The next few paragraphs are spent telling you the story or regurgiating stuff from the manual, and then you get a paragraph about how good or bad the graphics are.  For PC game review, they usually go into a little more detail, but not always.  You'll sometimes get a review that appears completely positive, until the twist ending in the final paragraph where the reviewer tells you the game is worthless.  Huh!?

 

That leaves you with the strategy guides.  They're fine.  The PC guides are actually quite nice; instead of a bunch of screenshots with captions telling you what exactly to do, they tend to be articles providing general advice.  Definitely worth reading imo.

 

Hopefully, 1991 will be better for this mag!

Edited July 7, 2023 by newtmonkey

[newtmonkey]

VideoGames & Computer Entertainment - May 1991 (Issue 28)

I guess I have to admit that, at this point, I am sort of "hate reading" this magazine.  There is so much wrong with this mag.

 

There was the infamous editorial where the editor flipped out over Dr. Mario, because it might convince kids to raid their parents' medicine cabinets and overdose on pills.

 

There's the bizarre forced attempt at establishing the word "computerist" to describe someone who plays computer games.

 

There's their weird fixation on how "violent" games are nowadays.  This is well before stuff like Mortal Kombat and Night Trap.  One memorable review complains about how the Genesis Dick Tracy game is based on the "violent" movie from 1990 and not the wholesome comic (actually, more violent than the movie).  Keep in mind, this mag was attempting to be the "mature" alternative to EGM, etc.

 

The weirdest thing about this mag is how the editors don't seem to understand what CDs are.  They keep talking about it as this separate thing other than video and computer games, like it's not just a storage medium, but it's own graphics technology or something.  They'll say things like, "which will survive? video games, computer games, or CD games," as though a video game or computer game couldn't be on a CD.  They'll suggest that CD technology could somehow make FMV interactive, since the drives can seek faster than laserdisc drives, or whatever.  There was a mention about how the Phillips CD-i will make CD games interactive, because the "i" stand for "interactive."  WTF?  Even EGM got this stuff right straight away.

 

This is a mag written by established industry vets, and they are being completely hoodwinked by slimy execs selling them dreams and fantasies.  Or, they know it's all bullshit, and are just going along for the ride.  Either way, it's a bit disgusting, honestly.

 

I'll end on a positive.  Their PC game strategy section toward the end of the mag is always really good, with lots of great advice from people who clearly have played the game extensively.  Reading these makes me want to play the games, even game I would normally have no interest in (puzzle games, wargames).

Edited July 19, 2023 by newtmonkey

[newtmonkey]

Electronic Gaming Monthly

I've been (re)reading this mag through in chronological order, and I'm at 1991 at this point.  This is a nostalgic favorite from my adolescence, and it's a really fun mag to flip through even today.

 

You don't read the mag for the writing.  There are tons of typos and the grammar is all over the place, though it's generally not horrible.  The reviews are way too short to really be worth much of anything, but you do get the sense that the people writing them actually like video games and played the games in question, which is in stark contrast to many reviews in competing mags at the time where the reviewer would just summarize the story from the manual, describe a couple of the backgrounds or a few enemies, and then end it with "you'll like it if you like these kinds of games" (a very common occurrence in the console game reviews in VideoGames & Computer Entertainment and Game Player's).

 

IME the mag peaked in 1993/1994 during the height of the 16-bit console wars, and when the first generation of 32-bit consoles were being released.  They maintained the sense of breathless excitement they had during the early 90s, but added a bit of mid 90s 'tude that's either charming or annoying depending on your perspective.  One thing I really like about this mag is that it's clearly written by and for video game fanatics.  There's something likeable about how a bunch of grown men can flip out in excitement over some Dragon Ball Z import game.

 

Anyway, the early 90s issues are also a lot of fun.  The layouts are great, with lots of use of in-game graphics even outside of the screenshots.  I get a kick out of the Genesis screenshots (clearly composite video), which look ridiculously oversaturated, but strangely clear and attractive.  I also like how many pages they devote to Japanese games even this early on... it makes the mag fun to flip through even today, and I have been keeping a mental list of games I'd like to check out.

Edited July 21, 2023 by newtmonkey

[Wayler]

On 7/19/2023 at 7:28 PM, newtmonkey said:

VideoGames & Computer Entertainment - May 1991 (Issue 28)

I guess I have to admit that, at this point, I am sort of "hate reading" this magazine.  There is so much wrong with this mag.

Not having read a single word from that publication, you can expect trouble just by their name and scope. All the console gaming and all the computer gaming under one magazine? It's either a complete centerline lukewarm scrape of the entire industry or too many "experts" in charge of too many platforms. 

 

You have to specialize in something to have impactful substance. How on earth did they get to issue 28?

[newtmonkey]

@Wayler

 

I think a combined console and PC game magazine could work (Game Player's was pretty good), if you respect what's good about 90s console and PC games.  But VG&CE is just weird.

I was reading one of the '91 mags today, and was thinking, woah, this mag all of a sudden got good?!?  I then realized that all the console games they reviewed were PC ports or otherwise strategy games.  I came to the realization that these guys just hate platformers and shooters.  Meanwhile, a few months ago, they were telling PC game developers to dumb everything down and release platformers like on the NES, if they wanted to sell more than 10,000 copies, etc.

 

Anyway, their hatred of platformers and shooters (90% of console games at the time) definitely explains why they foolishly embraced FMV and "CD games" - they were just desperate for any video game that was not a platformer or shooter.

Edited July 21, 2023 by newtmonkey

[schuwalker]

6 hours ago, Wayler said:

Not having read a single word from that publication, you can expect trouble just by their name and scope. All the console gaming and all the computer gaming under one magazine? It's either a complete centerline lukewarm scrape of the entire industry or too many "experts" in charge of too many platforms. 

 

You have to specialize in something to have impactful substance. How on earth did they get to issue 28?

Not true at all. I loved gaming mags that covered the entire oeuvre of the game scene and not particular being too centric on one system - hello EGM. Like Newt mentioned Game Players did it as well around this era (they did have their own computer PC guide as well). Since I was a big PC gamer as well as console... it was perfect!

 

 

[newtmonkey]

After an enjoyable diversion into EGM territory to read the last of the 1990 mags, I'm back to

 

VG&CE

Issue 31 Aug 91

A pretty frustrating issue!  Bethesda Softworks sends in a letter complaining about the previous issue's really awful review of Wayne Gretzky Hockey 2, in which the reviewer complained that the stat-based hockey sim is not an arcade game.  The reviewer responds with a bunch of nonsense, about how the game is not a "computer sim" but a "computer game" and because "Game" is in the name of the mag, they had to review it as a game and not a sim.  Makes no sense.

 

We then get a review of the Genesis version of Might & Magic II, which is actually a pretty good port of the beloved PC RPG.  It's basically a one-page version of EGM's notorious "I don't like RPGs and this is an RPG 5/10" reviews.  He complains that the game doesn't have "action" combat, like in his example of fast-paced action combat, Phantasy Star II.  His other major complaint is that you have to equip weapons and armor to use them (unlike Phantasy Star II, I guess...).  Even worse, he spends three to four entire paragraphs complaining about bugs in the pre-release version they reviewed.  Here's an idea: how about waiting until the game is finished before you review it?

 

The portable gaming column is totally bonkers at this point.  He starts out editorializing about how violent movies and games are now.  I could understand if this was written after Night Trap and Mortal Kombat came out, but the "violent" games he's discussing include the likes of Kung Fu Master, Ninja Gaiden, and Operation C.  His discussion of Operation C is especially hilarious, because he was sent the game without an instruction booklet, and goes on at some length about how he had no clue about the "objective" of the game, and had to figure it out through a process of "trial-and-error."  It's a shooter.  You move to the right and shoot everything, what's there to figure out?

 

It's like these guys have been thawed out from cryogenic suspension and are playing video games for the first time in their lives.  Bizarre.

 

---

 

I think I was being a little too harsh on EGM when I described their reviews as worthless.  I think I definitely prefer their poorly written reviews, which actually criticize games based on how they play or how they stack up to other games in the same genre, to... whatever it is the reviewers in VG&CE are attempting to do.

 

Your typical console review in this mag is an intro paragraph talking about whatever (whether the title is cool, what the reviewer ate for breakfast that day, whatever), a paragraph or two summarizing the story from the manual (or the reviewer going on at length about how dumb the story is and he refuses to talk about it), a dry rundown of each stage, and then a final paragraph about how you'll love this game if you like games like this.  If you're gonna just write all this meaningless stuff, just give me a three-sentence review like EGM.

Edited July 23, 2023 by newtmonkey

[newtmonkey]

VG&CE

Issue 33, Oct. 1991

A very strange issue.

 

The letter column opens with a pissed off letter from an Accolade representative taking the magazine to task for publishing reviews of beta releases without mentioning the games are unfinished, explaining that the betas were sent for preview, and definitely not for review.  The editor replies that there must have been some kind of misunderstanding or miscommunication because they "typically" don't preview games, and would never review a pre-release version of a game.  This is total nonsense.  Besides the two games mentioned in the Accolade letter, the Might & Magic II review from just two issues ago spends several paragraphs complaining about they received a beta version of the game and how buggy and incomplete it was (yet the mag still decided to publish the review).

 

There's also a feature covering the Summer CES show, in which it's clear that the writers/editors still do not understand what a CD is, remarking that "conversion to CD formats is fairly easy" and so "many titles coming for the TurboGrafx CD, PlayStation, CDTV, and Sega... will also reach computer-based CD systems."

Edited July 26, 2023 by newtmonkey

[CapitanClassic]

@newtmonkey, I look forward to your review of June 1993 VG&CE magazine. This was my first issue of the magazine, due to the insert with a $20 year subscription ($1.66/issue). I liked the writing (and that particular issues game selections, which seemed to have a high number of hits).
I just quickly glanced over the issue and didn’t see any glaring errors. Just the normal inflated scores that are typical of video game magazines due to their close relationship with the software publishers / their ad department and early access to games.

 

I think you misunderstood VG&CE’s stance on reviews of games. I think they were conveying that they don’t do in-depth previews in the sense of a 1-2 page article about an upcoming game (they only get 1-2 paragraph blurbs in the news section). Additionally, they don't expect their preview copies of the games to be much different than than official gold-master release copies. When they do get supposed differences, and the company warns things like, “the sound isn’t complete,” VG&CE mentions that.

[newtmonkey]

@CapitanClassic

It will be interesting to reach that point!

 

I must say that, while I really dislike their console coverage, their PC game coverage has been consistently great so far... compared with the console stuff, it's like reading a completely different magazine.  However, the amount of PC coverage seems to have been dropping over 1991, or maybe they just added pages and increased the amount of console coverage.  It makes sense since the 16-bit console wars were just getting started around this point, but it also means pages and pages of reviews of platformers and shooters by reviewers who clearly detest those kinds of games.

 

As for the review/preview incident, I guess then what they were trying to say is that they review pre-release games under the assumption that the games are feature complete?  I understand that all the mags probably had to review pre-release versions so that their reviews would actually be timely, but I don't like how VG&CE handled the situation.  It just seems ridiculous to me to review and rate clearly unfinished games, especially if the reviewer doesn't mention anything about it (or if he does, and marks the game down for it).

Edited July 27, 2023 by newtmonkey

[newtmonkey]

VG&CE

Issue 34, Nov. 1991

 

The console game reviews in this issue are completely bonkers.

 

There's the absolutely shameful review of Dragon Warrior III, in which the reviewer complains about having to fight monsters, after rating Shining in the Darkness as an 8/10 masterpiece.  Yes, there's lots of combat in DWIII, but the combat is excellent with plenty of options and tactics, while the combat is SitD is just as frequent if not more so, and yet completely brainless.  He also claims that DWIII has no dragons in it, proving that he didn't even get 1/4th of the way through the game (or maybe even start the game, as there's a giant dragon standing right there on the first screen when you start the game).

 

Then, we've got a review of the NES version of The Bard's Tale.  Hilariously, the photos are all taken from the NES port of AD&D Pool of Radiance.  The reviewer spends eight of his ten paragraphs describing the screen layout, one paragraph talking about how the game probably has a story but he can't describe it because the game didn't come with manual, and then the typical VG&CE conclusion of "if you like this type of game you'll like it."  Is the combat hard?  Is the game balanced?  Are there cool items to find, any interesting monsters to slay?  What about the puzzles and secrets?  Who knows?  There is not a single sentence in this review that suggests that the guy completed, or even played, the game.

 

This is my biggest issue with the console game reviews in this mag.  The mag tries to present itself as some sort of publication for the discerning gamer, staffed by people who have been there from the very beginnings of the industry... but the reviewers just spend paragraph upon paragraph describing the screen, regurgitating the story from the manual, or going into excruciating detail about how the life meter works in random platformer #9123.  Even with all their experience over 20 years or whatever, they seem incapable of providing actual criticism.  What works in this game?  What doesn't work?  Why is that game better than this one?  It's all a mystery to these guys.

 

Your typical VG&CE shmup review gives you an introductory paragraph about how all shmups are dumb, another couple paragraphs about how the story is dumb (but then relays the story), and then a few more paragraphs about how all shmups are the same, but this one is pretty good.  Finally the typical "if you like these types of games you'll like this one, but if you don't, skip it" nonsense.  I'm no serious shmup player, but even I recognize that there's a wide range in quality within the genre, and it's ridiculous for this mag, during what was probably the peak console shmup era, to just write off the whole genre as total garbage not worthy of serious discussion.

 

They do the same thing with platformers, and the review of Squashed is among the worst I've read in this mag.  It's paragraph after paragraph of the reviewer trying to sound clever, without actually discussing how the game plays at all.  Finally, in the last paragraph, he says it "might as well be Super Mario Bros. 4," which I guess is meant as a joke, but it reveals something about these reviewers.  They see absolutely no difference between something like Super Mario World or Ninja Gaiden III, and some third-rate platformer like Squashed or Darkman or Wolverine.  I mean, the screen layouts are the same, right?  So the games must be identical.

 

I must mention this gem, from the review for Champions Forever Boxing for the TG-16: "My only real complaint is one that applies to a lot of other games for all of the game systems. In the city where I live, Champions Forever could cost as much as $67 when state and local sales tax are included." I'm sorry, am I reading a fanzine now?  Is this some post on CompuServe or something?  Why on earth would the editor leave this in?  It has nothing to do with the game, or anyone not living in the reviewer's city.

 

I mentioned this before, but reading through this mag has given me a new appreciation for the guys at EGM around this time.  Having four reviewers review a single game was such a good idea, because it avoids the issue of having one guy who clearly doesn't like or get RPGs or sports games or whatever, reviewing an RPG or sports game. I mean, these lugheads could barely string a sentence together, but at least they would tell you, in their ridiculous three-sentence reviews, whether a game is challenging but fair, or just hard, or whether a game plays like garbage.  You get a sense that, even if they weren't completing the games, they were at least playing them enough to form valid opinions, and were capable of comparing one game in the same genre to another.

Edited July 28, 2023 by newtmonkey

[newtmonkey]

Game Player's PC Strategy Guide

Vol 3, No 2 (March/April 1990)

 

Really good mag!  I've always liked regular old Game Player's in its first incarnation, and it's still fun to read through today; it's clearly written for a younger audience, but never tries to sound "hip" or talk down to the reader.  So, I was very excited to discover that they had a separate magazine dedicated completely to PC games, written for an older audience.  The first few issues were less magazines, and more catalogs of previews, and the magazine really came into its own in 1990 imo.

 

One mark in any magazine's favor back then was having William R. Trotter writing for it.  He was an excellent writer, and covered mostly war sims and strategy games.  The guy really knew what he was talking about, and besides writing for game mags, he was also a published (amateur) historian and classical music expert.  He peppers his reviews with historical information about whatever subject the game is covering, so you even end up learning a thing or two.

 

There was one nasty incident, unfortunately, in an otherwise excellent career, where he reviewed a game positively in PC Gamer without mentioning the fact that he had also written the strategy guide for it and therefore had a vested interest in the game selling well. Also unfortunately, the game was Ascendancy, which was apparently released in a state where the AI so was so broken it was basically non-existent.  Of course, nowadays, where the games media is basically the unofficial PR arm of the games industry, no one would bat an eye at this.  Back then, it was a career-ruining move.

 

Anyway, Trotter has two nice articles in this issue, and the best is a survey of tank sims.  I typically don't care for these kind of summary articles, and mentioned this in my thoughts about VG&CE.  My issue with these articles is that they tend to be really shallow, with each game given a single paragraph telling you the basic overview (made-up example: "In Origin's Ultima VI, you are the Avatar, and you are back to investigate a Gargoyle invasion. Good graphics and a big world. In SSI's Curse of the Azure Bonds, you wake up with mysterious tattoos on your body, and your party of adventurers must discover why. Lot's of combat similar to Pool of Radiance.")  It's just a means to fill pages.

 

In contrast, Trotter has clearly played all of these tank sims extensively and knows what he's writing about, so it's almost like reading a bunch of mini-reviews.

 

Anyway, I'm very pleased with this mag so far.  The writing is really excellent, and I also have to mention the screenshots, which are really excellent.  They're obviously photos taken of computer monitors (the curve in the screen gives it away), but they are really clear and sharp.

Edited August 13, 2023 by newtmonkey

[+Spriggy]

C64 Zapp magazine!  The end!

http://www.zzap64.co.uk/

[newtmonkey]

@Spriggy

What did you like about that mag?  Any fond memories of reading it back in the day?

Edited August 13, 2023 by newtmonkey

[+Spriggy]

17 hours ago, newtmonkey said:

@Spriggy

What did you like about that mag?  Any fond memories of reading it back in the day?

The C64 (128d to be exact) was my next gaming machine after the 2600 ... and I smashed it.  It was just nice to read Zapp64 for all the reviews, up and coming games, peek and poke cheat codes etc.  Plus the layout was full of colorfull pictures and screen grabs. Just drew you in.  Plus you would get cassette tapes and later floppy discs with demo games attached to the front of the magazine.

[newtmonkey]

I've been going back and forth through issues of Nintendo Power and EGM from 1991 lately.  These mags can be pretty fun to flip through, but reading them is a real drag.

 

NP continued to improve year after year (up to a certain point imo), but in 1991 it's still a bunch of Nintendo propaganda and and mostly screenshot-heavy partial walkthroughs, with nothing else worth reading.  The last issue I read, which had Battletoads on the cover, was absolutely nuts.  I don't hate Battletoads, and I think it's technically quite impressive, but did it really deserve a complete walkthrough with maps until the last boss, and ALSO some horrible comic book throughout the issue.  They really were pushing this to be the next TMNT at this time.

 

It sure is a good looking mag, though, even back in 1991.  Back in the day, this was a great resource, but now it's really style over substance.  It's still fun to flip through, though, even if just to appreciate the layout, maps, and screenshots.

 

EGM is funny because it actually started out pretty interesting, with full page reviews and reviewers going on and on about how awesome Ultima: Exodus on the NES is.  I only mention that now, because within only a year or two they would have no interest whatsoever in anything more complicated than "move to the right and shoot."  Having said that, the reviewers really did have good taste with games where you "move to the right and shoot."  I've now read through all their issues up through early 1991, and I think every single one of their shooter/platformer reviews is 100% on point.

 

The biggest "problem" with EGM at least up through early 1991, is 90% of the mag is just screenshot-heavy previews, where the only text at all is some brief summary of the story (for a shooter????), and then some captions that are barely worth reading.  Like NP, this was a valuable resource back in the day, just to get a preview of what might or might not come out, but reading the mag now is a chore.  When I read through an issue today, I end up skipping through most of it, because it's just screenshots.

 

Having said that, even in 1991, their layouts were fantastic.  I know GameFan got a lot of praise back in the day for its layouts, but I think EGM is just as good if not better.

Edited August 16, 2023 by newtmonkey