Darran@Retro Gamer wrote:... There's a retro revival on Oids in the next issue and we're looking at getting similar stuff in the mag...
Darran@Retro Gamer wrote: Maybe a top 25 Atari ST exclusives (although looking at the lists, that doesn't seem to offer a lot of choice
Morden wrote:In fact, I'd like to look at some numbers, like how many magazines are sold within the UK and how many are sent abroad.
That's one of the problems I have with the magazine. Not the fact that they don't review emulated games, but the fact that they do. "The Unconverted" is a bit like those YouTube videos, where kids just play through random games they haven't seen before, and comment on what they see.
CraigGrannell wrote:I've no idea if that tallies with Retro Gamer's figures or not (and I suspect its niche appeal might skew figures more towards subs and worldwide), but the fact remains any UK mag needs to continue to gel with its core market (UK sales) in order to survive.
(...) But from a writer's perspective, I can't see how, say, my piece next month on The Hobbit would have been improved at all if I'd played the game on a real Spectrum as opposed to on an emulator—and the same goes for the vast, vast majority of other articles I've written for the mag. It'd be interesting to hear what other writers think about this.
Morden wrote:The way you explain it almost makes me think of Retro Gamer as a struggling publication, while it's presence and general popularity would suggest otherwise, but impressions and reality can be two vastly different things, and I've seen more than one magazine disappear while they were seemingly doing just fine, or at least not bad. Still, too bad there's no way of obtaining those figures.
To me it's not all about emulation accuracy, but, to a degree, about having respect for the medium and showing it proper appreciation. With that said, I think playing games on genuine hardware can and should impact the review, especially when controls are discussed.
Jagfest_UK wrote:This biggest problem with regards to the Atari ST is that it never gets mentioned at all.
Often when there is a feature on a game that appeared on both the ST and Amiga the poor old ST dosn't even get listed in the available formats!
Bit sad really when for a long time the ST was the best selling computer in the UK and vastly outsold other systems over here that get far more coverage like the prevously mentioned NES.
I myself am the lead writer for Atari User and and have always said that I would be more than willing to lend my knowledge to RG and contribute in any way I can.
Darran@Retro Gamer wrote:we don't tend to focus on the ST for the very reasons Mayhem mentioned.
joefish wrote:Darran@Retro Gamer wrote:we don't tend to focus on the ST for the very reasons Mayhem mentioned.
Err - this seems to me to be a debate about why there's no ST coverage whilst the mag is overflowing with Amiga coverage - which it clearly isn't. Sameyness of games doesn't seem to have been sufficient reason for dropping coverage of 8-bit computer or 16-bit console titles, so I don't see how it works as a reason to ignore 16-bit computer games.
There may have been fractionally more Amiga coverage than ST thus far, but generally, I see b*gg*r all of either.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests