Retro Gamer Issue 104

[ncf1]

You dont want pieces written like the Kick Off feature *all* the time, no of course not, but I love how it was from out of nowhere, really different, and thats precisely the thing about RG that is great; trying different things out, keeping it fresh, mixing it up, perfect. Once in a while though, something like that is just great in my opinion, I havent had a good hearty laugh like that for ages. So I say keep up the great work!!

[The Beans]

I'd like to see more articles written like the Kick Off one.

Actually, yes, thats a really good idea. A monthly opinion piece, positive or negative, about a well known retro game or series presenting an alternative viewpoint would be very refreshing.

I just see it as deliberately trolling parts of the readership and I don't see that as a good thing for the magazine. The KO piece has bugged a lot of people off. Not everybody enjoys being provoked by a fanboy or hater. I find polarised opinion to be worthless anyway, something for the forums to bleat endlessly about but not something I'd like to pay for in a magazine. I really, really don't want to see Retro Gamer turn into this forum.

[Antiriad2097]

Freelancers aren't supposed to write opinion pieces, and don't write in the first person.

Says who? They'll write what they were commissioned to do by Darran, so if he wants an opinion piece from a freelancer he'll get it.

Some of you lot wouldn't have lasted five minutes as an Oric owner, practically everyone is negative about it.

[The Beans]

Freelancers aren't supposed to write opinion pieces, and don't write in the first person.

Says who? They'll write what they were commissioned to do by Darran, so if he wants an opinion piece from a freelancer he'll get it.

Some of you lot wouldn't have lasted five minutes as an Oric owner, practically everyone is negative about it.

Yes. It's up to the editor to get a handle on what's what. In the case of the "definitive" articles it's probably time for a name change. One person's opinion isn't "definitive". There's certainly nothing definitive about the KO article judging by the response. I think the fact the article is presented as the final word on the games has stirred the pot to some extent.

I'm an Oric owner although it doesn't get much play time.

[Antiriad2097]

There's certainly nothing definitive about the KO article judging by the response.

Judge it by the facts within the article and you'll find a definitive guide.

[The Beans]

There's certainly nothing definitive about the KO article judging by the response.

Judge it by the facts within the article and you'll find a definitive guide.

It's an opinion whichever way you look at it and that makes it a subjective thing, which means there's room for debate.
A definitive thing should brook no argument. At all. That any journalist sees their opinion as definitive is laughably hubristic IMO. They've got an opinion just like everybody else and that's all. It may be a more informed opinion but it's still just an opinion.
A true definitive guide should be an absolute resource of fact and that's all.

[kiwimike]

I like the Vectrex feature...that's my definative opinion

[slacey1070]

All we asked for was a balanced article but clearly this is not an acceptable request, so I simply don't want to read more articles of hate.

That's the nub of the matter, why do you want a balanced article? Why can't RG print an entertaining opinion piece?

He's probably the same as me. He wants to read an article about a game rather than what somebody thinks about a game. Fact and information rather than opinion. If I want opinions I can visit a forum.
This KO2 row is why I prefer writers to maintain some distance from the readership. It looks as if the author was a bad choice because he's apparently widely regarded as being biased in favour of Sensible Soccer. It doesn't even matter whether that's true or not, it's the perception by others that counts here. A perception that was always going to colour people's view of the article.
When I pay money for a magazine I expect the writers to know their stuff and I expect no bias or hidden agendas. If there's an opinion piece I want both sides. I want a balanced article. Even in a review I want the pros and the cons. But the author must have credibility, even if it's an illusion created by distance from the readership. It's the difference between a fanzine and a professional magazine to me. The difference between a worthy article and just another mouth putting out a forum post because they have an axe to grind
When you don't know much about the author you tend to read without any preconceptions. When the author is known, and outspoken, it's too easy to project their personality into the article and see a lot of things that aren't there. And also see the obvious negativity that actually is there.

I'm hoping it's a one-off.

Don't always (often??) agree with your posts The Beans, but I certainly do with this - sums it up much better than I have managed.

I want to read about the facts, I don't need the opinion bit thanks. I have my own.

If the mag is going to go all "opinion" then its of much less interest to me.

As for the "definitive" tag - clearly it isn't. Uncertainty over what formats there was availability on (acknowledged by the author), opinion based upon... err... Youtube videos? Little mention of some versions... Its not definitive. . . that doesn't have to detract from the piece . . . then there are the "don't take it literally" bits...

Anyway, its done, published, out there... I don't like the piece (others do), some of the responses here haven't helped, some are frankly rude (on both sides).....

And heres a fact for you . . . Sensi soccer was a better two player game... as one player, it was WAY too easy. KO2 was a better one player game... because it was actually a challenge.... so there

[goonergaz]

Twist it all you like but you did state several times how Sensi sold vastly better than KO did. You also stated several times how KO didn't sell at all well.

What I didn't do, however, was claim that as the reason why it was a better game.

You seem to use that as part of your 'evidence' to help back your "crushing mountain of evidence" that Sensi was a "vastly superior successor".
If this is not part of that "crushing mountain of evidence" please explain what is.

totally ignoring the valid points made throught this thread.

Such as?

Just one to prove the point:
Quote from mag; "at a time when there were barely 100 games in total that had been created for the machine"
This is totally and utterly wrong.

it may not be many but clearly saying the game is sXXt is just totally wrong

No it isn't. I think you'll find that concludes the debate.

I think you'll find there is indeed quite a bit of evidence to suggest it is you that is sh*t at a good game and you have an unhealthy hate for it.

[greenberet79]

26 pages and counting.

[joefish]

EDIT: I also don't really recall ever seeing a first-name-only in an article intro. What could be more explicit than putting the author's name in the intro, anyway?

No, you're right, it's just something I've noticed in the past. This issue does include names just about everywhere, though it's still a bit inconsistent compared to having some sort of common signature, ID or initials at the end.

I appreciate there aren't sketches of all the freelance contributors, but there is the name mentioned in the intro in most articles this issue (except the Skooldaze one). It's still a bit confusing though where the reviews are introduced by one person, then another face appears above a couple of the reviews, then nothing against the others. Are we supposed to assume some sort of heirarchy and system of fall-backs?

Anyway, as for the piece in question. Well, I've read some of the pieces on Stuart Campbell's website and they've all been highly opinionated. I've no favourites in the genre of sports games, but I agree with The Beans - I expect more balance from the in-depth articles. If you want Stuart Cambell to write for the magazine, give him his own column. I'd read it. But looking back on games, I'd rather see more balance and information.

For one thing, I found the style of the piece arrogant - not the dismissive nature of it but the way opinion is presented as fact. Use of the word 'we' when it's clearly a personal slant. In the past tense, I assume he means his former co-workers, but in the present, is he speaking for all the contributors and editor too? Who does he think he is? The Queen? Thatcher? If you're going to put your name to a piece like that, have the nerve to say 'I'.

And frankly, it's boring. I couldn't be bothered to finish it. I get the premise. The series brought a new viewpoint to the home footy genre, though may not have been the best of games and not entirely original. Then it dragged it out over re-release after re-release with only minor innovations from one to the next. And football fans were daft enough to go on buying it. So far, so sports game. But then to drag that premise out over 8 pages with nothing new to say is stretching it all a bit thin - not to mention highly ironic given the subject matter.

P.S. Rest of the mag - great. Keep up the good work. etc. etc.

[DRS]

Only got my issue 104 at the weekend (cheers Daz!) but having read this thread as it grew to extraordinary lengths, I could have been forgiven for thinking there was only one article in the mag :s

In fact, this issue has a cracking selection in... the PONG piece was fascinating. Loved all the little bits of detail, like Ted cutting a hole through a wall to 'expand' and the shenanigans with Bally, and the quotes from Ted and Al really brought it alive (i do like it when you do that Marty!). Then there was Stu's cracking In the Chair (Nick sounds like a top bloke), Mike's lovely little I, Ball piece and I've just begun JD's Electric Dreams piece which also looks the business

And as for the Rev's Kick Off piece, it did make me smile, especially the increasing exasperation evident in the last two pages.... however, I was most intrigued by a comment that Daz made when defending the article in this thread. He said that Mr C was the only RG writer allowed to write in the first person (actually, Stu doesn't write in the first person, using the royal 'we' like other freelancers, but i get what Daz means - Stu C is allowed to express his opinions pretty freely).

Now, I'm assuming Stu has this privilege partly because he doesn't shy away from a slanging match (that isn't a criticism by the way - I like seeing a bit of personality in someone's writing) but also because of his status as a 'veteran' games journalist (again, that's a compliment not a criticism...). He's earned it. What has intrigued me is when exactly do you qualify as 'veteran'? Are we going for the 'ten year rule' as some have suggested for what constitutes 'retro'? If so, then the mag itself will be retro around the start of 2014 and surely this means that a whole swathe of us contributors (Merman, you're already there because of Commodore Format ;]) are officially 'veteran'?

Thus I propose RG127 should contain articles ripping into the Mario and Zelda series, why Robotron is vastly over-rated and why Strider is an insult to purple lycra.

It will also generate a feedback thread 142 pages long.

[the_hawk]

Would people genuinely prefer a list of dry auld facts you could find within 5 minutes of a google search rather than reading the opinions of someone with a passion for something (be it positive or negative)?

I can't imagine that if someone wrote an article slating my favourite games say Speedball 2, Robotron or Football Manager I'd get so wound up about it. In fact I'd probably have a chuckle about it, then go back to having another go on them & think more fool them, they're missing out a great game.

[slacey1070]

A Stu column would be good.... his style is better suited to that, than "definitive" pieces. A rant about something.... an 8 page rant about KO was OTT... and a waste of space. I'd have rather had 2 pages of KO and another 6 of vectrex.

I'd love a column about why Strider is bobbins....

[Rev. Stuart Campbell]

Yes. It's up to the editor to get a handle on what's what. In the case of the "definitive" articles it's probably time for a name change.

You noticed that the piece WASN'T called "The Definitive Kick Off", right?