Official feedback thread for Retro Gamer 79

[sscott]

I love it when magazines give a graphics score of 87% or something, would love a comparison screenshot with a game that got 86%, just utter b0llox!

[TwoHeadedBoy]

Also, "The Definitive Centipede" missed out the game.com version, which is a shame, seeing as it's one of the game.com's only good games. The Definitive Frogger included the game.com version, why not Centipede? If a cartridge was required, it could've been provided.

I've got the game and played it for the feature, but unlike Game.com Frogger it has no uniquely noteworthy interesting qualities, which are the criteria for inclusion in The Definitive. The only thing it has that isn't present in arcade Centipede are occasional big mushrooms, which don't affect gameplay as they're just the same as two normal mushrooms beside each other.

Thanks for clearing that up - I'm no Centipede expert (or fan), but it always makes me happy to see game.com stuff in a magazine, for some reason.

[RMLF]

Brought this un after missing the last one no interest in Lara so gave it a wide berth

Had a quick flick through

Thus far was the stand out Red Dwarf reference on the Back to the 1980's chess Game tags Outstanding as the ep is from the same year as well.

Well I fort eet wuz gud

[The Master]

I thought the Superior Software article was kerfuffing excellent. It should have been flagged up big on the cover with a picture of Repton or Elite or Granny's fuc... I mean, Commander Stryker, or something.

[NorthWay]

I agree that 5/10 is an average score, but many magazines cherrypick their review games, and as such I actually expect 7/10 to be the norm among those reviewed.
If a game is fantastic or at least rather good I'll bet you it _will_ show up in magazine pages sooner or later anyway.

[CraigGrannell]

@Timothy Lumsden: Agreed on points of reference. If mags omit bylines for reviews, they may as well not bother. Frankly, I wish Retro Gamer would add bylines for the short reviews. After all, two characters ('DJ') won't eat into the review.

I agree that 5/10 is an average score, but many magazines cherrypick their review games, and as such I actually expect 7/10 to be the norm among those reviewed.

There's a world of difference between the average score in a magazine being 7 because crap games are ignored, and the 'average' being 7 when an individual game is rated.

[hydr0x]

@Timothy Lumsden: Agreed on points of reference. If mags omit bylines for reviews, they may as well not bother. Frankly, I wish Retro Gamer would add bylines for the short reviews. After all, two characters ('DJ') won't eat into the review.

I agree that 5/10 is an average score, but many magazines cherrypick their review games, and as such I actually expect 7/10 to be the norm among those reviewed.

There's a world of difference between the average score in a magazine being 7 because crap games are ignored, and the 'average' being 7 when an individual game is rated.

I think what he's trying to say is this. You can't actually expect scores to average around the middle of the score range. In all honesty, most games are easily within the it does more things right than wrong territory so it's only natural they end up in the 6-10 range. It's like the 1-15 point scale we have for school grades. They all have a distinct meaning but obviously most people end up scoring in the 8-15 points range with almost nothing under 5. That's not the fault of the system or the "reviewers" but rather a sign that the actual average quality is way above mediocre.

And with all the bad Wii games etc just being ignored by the mags the likely candidates for 1-4 scores are not in the mag. On the other hand, every single 8-10 candidate obviously gets reviewed. So no surprise in having loads of 6-10 scores and almost no 1-4.

[lanky316]

Picked my copy up this morning. Aside from a flick through to see any Lanky quotes (probably the only one who does that, must be the writer/actor part of me desperate to get a credit ) only got a little way in so far and despite no articles being "Hell Yessers" to me on paper, except perhaps Micro Machines which I've always loved, I'm enjoying it so far. No real complaints so far, except it does look like too much has been dedicated to Bub and Bob by giving them the Ultimate and then the "Let's All Play" were it a game/series I love though I'd probably have a different opinion

[Bub&Bob]

it does look like too much has been dedicated to Bub and Bob

A bit harsh

[Cafeman]

Over here in USA, Barnes & Noble still hasn't put issue 78 on the stands yet...waiting...

[Jeremiah Jones]

Anxiously awaiting 79 in the U.S. The David Crane article looks like a great read. Just wish he'd put his Technical Wizardry pieces on more than just iphone.

[CraigGrannell]

I think what he's trying to say is this. You can't actually expect scores to average around the middle of the score range. In all honesty, most games are easily within the it does more things right than wrong territory so it's only natural they end up in the 6-10 range.

If that's his argument, I totally disagree with it. Just because something does "more things right than wrong", that doesn't mean it somehow 'deserves' more than a 5. Rating things shouldn't be a checklist.

I knew one guy who used to start with 10/10 and 'knock off' marks for specific things. That, to me, is a totally boneheaded way of reviewing anything. With games, you can have a product that does everything 'right', but still isn't that much fun. Alternatively, you can have a game that does plenty of stuff 'wrong', but for some reason is utterly compulsive. To my mind, the latter of those would deserve the higher rating, despite doing more things 'wrong'.

[thevulture]

@Craig: -Ed so much it hurt regarding the chap who starts at 10/10 knocks points off.He sounds more like he`s giving a game an MOT more than a review.Anywho, from a professional point of view (IF you don`t mind me asking) WHAT are the key elements you look for in ANY game?.Do things such as it being a port and not really using machines strengths effect review scores?. Just curious as to how 'The industry' people, approach a game for review.Also, just how long is a game given for a review?-Lot of stuff i ended up loving, i LOATHED on 1st play, did`nt touch for weeks, then returned to it, something clicked, totally different view.

[mohicankid]

i read this issue on the train, and i must say, i found it much more interesting than usual! i usualy skirt through it to begin with, then just brows through it when i've nothing to do.....but i couldn't put this one down....the only bit i didn't read was the rainbow island feature!

[hydr0x]

I think what he's trying to say is this. You can't actually expect scores to average around the middle of the score range. In all honesty, most games are easily within the it does more things right than wrong territory so it's only natural they end up in the 6-10 range.

If that's his argument, I totally disagree with it. Just because something does "more things right than wrong", that doesn't mean it somehow 'deserves' more than a 5. Rating things shouldn't be a checklist.

I knew one guy who used to start with 10/10 and 'knock off' marks for specific things. That, to me, is a totally boneheaded way of reviewing anything. With games, you can have a product that does everything 'right', but still isn't that much fun. Alternatively, you can have a game that does plenty of stuff 'wrong', but for some reason is utterly compulsive. To my mind, the latter of those would deserve the higher rating, despite doing more things 'wrong'.

I didn't mean that in a checklist way but rather if there's more elements that are fun than elements that aren't. I never meant to imply you actually count them or anything. Just that as a general rule most reviewed games actually are able to give you a good time for the most part.