DailyRadar.com Closes 149
Fervent writes: "At first it seemed like an April Fool's joke but Daily Radar has closed. Apparently the same bug that's bitten every other game web site (like CNet's GameCenter) got to Daily Radar. Now for major publications we have GameSpot. And, uh... GameSpot." And don't forget OMM - there's a whole slew of sites in this area -- it will be interesting to see who can last through this downturn.
Fuzzy Logic (Score:1)
Scooby Dooby
"I never put on a pair of shoes until I've worn them at least five years."
Samuel Goldwyn
Another alternative..... (Score:1)
Re:woah.. (Score:1)
Another good riddance to Daily Radar (Spammers) (Score:2)
Re:Reminder about the Advertising (Score:2)
I had read NexGen Online then DR for a few weeks and haven;t been back in a year.
Noooooooooo (Score:3)
Shugashack (Score:4)
As is Blue's News [bluesnews.com]
Other Gaming Sites (Score:5)
A good number of the above are fairly major publications. Snowball.Com is in trouble as well, but IGN is their biggest crowd attraction, and IGN Games has to be near the top too, so it should last a little while. Core is a major publication in Japan with a real circulation. ZDNet + C|Net together have enough muscle to keep GameSpot going.
Re:GamesDomain.com has always been my first choice (Score:5)
Well, I'm from another competing site [gamerspress.com], and that's generally what we do, too. Of course, there are always some exceptions, [gamerspress.com] even dramatic ones. [gamerspress.com] But we buy our own games, occasionally score an interview, and pretty much have fun losing money, since it's about the hobby and a chance to share a good game (and scorn a bad game) with other gamers.
Plus the junkpile reviews are great (so cool of an idea, I took over them)--you know we aren't getting subsidized for those!
I wonder if it is time for a simpler game site.... (Score:1)
You would keep your bandwidth relatively low, which in turn would keep cost low.
The only problem I see would be industry contacts.
Vermifax
The industry fell for the Graphics über alles lie. (Score:1)
Vermifax
Re:Don't forget... (Score:3)
If I can just keep GZ online... (Score:1)
We'll end up being both the first video game magazine on the web [gamezero.com], and the last ;p
To bad all of our writers got real jobs and we quit doing print. :(
On the plus side, I think we actually update more frequently than OMM... cough...
Re:33% of my daily read gone (Score:3)
It's like when cells grow large then divide... (Score:2)
I think of it as being like living cells, which can only get so big before they either divide or die of bloat.
USENET was like that too, back in the day. There was a real online community there, and there were rules you had to learn or you'd be voted off the island (and they could make it stick!). It worked even though it was huge, because accounts were largely metered out by colleges and universities. So, every fall a new batch of students would arrive and go online, but by the end of September they would have been mostly civilized, and things would calm down again. This worked up until 1993, when AOL came online and there was a flood of newbies that never ended (Hence the term "The September that Never Ended"). The result was that large swaths of Usenet effectively died of overpopulation and spam, because the constant flood of newbies just couldn't be acclimitized before the next newbies showed up, and that culture was pretty much crippled. Fortunately, many smaller newsgroups that the masses just aren't interested in still survive (anything involving strenuous thought is generally safe).
You even see the same thing happening in radio and TV. If your college has a single radio station, its programming is split up to try and cover every possible interest on the one channel. In a metropolitan area, though, there are lots of channels, and so the dominant formats each get their own stations, and the fringe formats get time in the late-night shifts. Sometimes a fringe format gets big enough to take over a station, like hip-hop or talk radio. But nobody listens to every channel at once.
I'm assuming someone has already postulated this as a law of sociology, but since I never studied sociology, I wouldn't know.
Jon Acheson
Re:Not really the last (Score:2)
UGO network is also still around but I believe their future is questionable. I do know they have a booth at E3 though.
Let me clarify though, Gamespy is going to close down at some point - and that does include all of the planet sites. That really sucks. A lot.
Not really the last (Score:3)
Namely IGN - which shows no slow down in its Vault sections. Gamers.com is still around as is VoodooExtreme.
I wont count Gamespy as they are ready to close down shop as well. Lots of sites are losing hosting in that deal.
And so the internet hosting/banner/funding debacle claims another.
What about Neil Manke's stuff. (Score:1)
Bummer.
Voodoo Extreme? (Score:2)
In my opinion, its one of the best sources for gaming news, and has been for a very long time. So as long as VE &
-Julius X
Re:I liked Timothy's article better (Score:1)
Re:Gamecenter (Score:1)
Gamecenter (Score:3)
Gamecenter didn't close because it was losing money, but because CNET bought the ZD whores and their game site Gamespot was slightly more popular and has an international presence. Now Gamespot has been spun off as a separate company owned by CNet, instead of just being a ZD site. That notwithstanding, Gamecenter was a lot better than GS will ever be.
ZDNet - Diluting quality since 1995(TM)
Re:Gaming's taken a dive.... (Score:2)
Try the FreeSpace series. Really very good (and the "Descent:" part on the first one is a misnomer, and only exists because Interplay originially didn't think FreeSpace could do well on its own).
While it's true there's little left in the way of adventure gaming these days, why not try out Gabriel Knight 3, Escape From Monkey Island, and The Longest Journey?
Try the first two Fallout games (yes, they're post-apolcalyptic, not fantasy, but they're good role-playing games), or the Baldur's Gate games and expansions. Or on the console front, check out Final Fantasy IX.
As you see, there are plenty of current games that fit the bill. Sure, they may not be King's Quest 26, or Wing Commander 18, or Ultima 10, but that's okay -- I'm of the opinion that a series can only go so long without getting stale and unimaginative.
Re:33% of my daily read gone (Score:3)
I know this is in jest, but I couldn't help but respond. Fucked Company won't ever be on Fucked Company, because Pud has a clue -- Fucked Company isn't a company at all. He's ripped on fucked companies time and time again for hiring a shitload of people to do nothing, while he runs a successful site essentially by himself (I'm sure there are a few more FC "employees", but I doubt they number more than 10 or 20, certainly not in the 100s or 1000s that many dot-bombs felt they needed).
<obvious>Besides, if Fucked Company gets fucked, who would run the Fucked Company list to list them?</obvious>
Re:Gaming's taken a dive.... (Score:4)
I've seen this attitude a lot, and in more areas than just gaming. People will always rave about the "Good ol' days", while simultaneously blowing off all but a very few of the current crop of <whatever we're talking about>.
What people fail to realize is that when you look back on the past, you don't remember all the failures. You only remember the successes. Yes, all the successful games had great gameplay (and lots of them had groundbreaking graphics, for their time -- such as Final Fantasy 6j/3us and Chrono Trigger, to name a few from the recent past). However, for every one of these great games, there are tons of bombs. Anybody remember the Home Alone games on the NES and SNES? How about the deluge of bad Simpsons-inspired NES games? Or to get away from the licensed games, what about the "original" clunkers, like Vortex (a StarFox rip off, and one of the few games to utilize the original SuperFX chipset)?
The point here is that while most of today's games may be crap, we're going to look back in five years and only see the "good" games (for whatever definition of good), like Half-Life, Unreal Tournament, Quake 3, Tribes (to get the FPS games out of the way), Black & White, the Fallout series, the later Final Fantasies (oddly, everybody thinks FFVII just plain sucked, yet I really enjoyed it -- had a great story), and more. We'll all have forgotten about games like SiN, Soldier of Fortune, Frogger 3D, and all the other lamer games. And of course there will be a few that will take on "Atari ET" status, like Daikatana, and most likely Duke Nukem 4Ever (assuming it ever ships).
Looking back on the past fondly is one thing, but to hold up the worst of today's games to the best of yesterday's and proclaim that all of today's games suck is just being naive. Don't live in the past. Seek out the good games of today. I guarantee you that you'll find more than a few worth spending some change on.
One notable addition (Score:3)
Don't forget Jeff K. (Score:1)
He also reviews the PC games that matter, and wrote a brilliant editorial on the upcoming console wars.
you read blue's & stomped, but not captured? (Score:1)
Re:GamesDomain.com has always been my first choice (Score:2)
It might be an elaborately contrived ruse, but I've yet to play a game that rated well on GD that sucked.
GamesDomain.com has always been my first choice... (Score:3)
Good reviews, excellent demo archives...what else do you need?
Comment removed (Score:3)
Next Generation... (Score:1)
Daily Radar made me disable Javascript (Score:3)
Like the other post, I was going to leave for good as well - but I still liked the site for some things, so I stuck around.
I think the thing that probably canned the site though was that despite all of the factors you mentioned, they had to use a LOT of bandwith. I downloaded a lot of preview movies, most between 5mb and 20mb. Even with a bandwith limiter of some place (I could only get 10k/sec when I used to be able to get 160k/sec long ago), I still downloaded a lot of movies... That cost must have been too much to bear even with all of the other great things going for them. I think a site with all of the factors you mentioned woul;d be able to survive just fine with smaller content.
Re:Sites without banners? (Score:1)
S.
I see duplicate posts. (Score:3)
They don't know they're duplicate posts.
magicbox and gia (Score:1)
www.the-magicbox.com
i also love The Gia.
www.thegia.com
Re:PXCL (WSJ.com is a good pay site) (Score:1)
I think alot of media companies are going to realize they can't give their commodities away. It'll only be time till the magazines (time, usnews) and newspapers (mainly, the NY Times) start to charge for content. It HAS to start denting their paper sales eventually. Besides, I'd pay for an NYT online subscription (if it is a bit cheaper than paper of course.)
Re:i got sick of gameing... (Score:1)
--
Re:PXCL (Score:1)
--
more than just Gamespot (Score:2)
There's more than just Gamespot out there. Check out Stomped.com [stomped.com]. I know one of the news guys, Sean "redwood" Martin, and he's quite dedicated. And yes, it's more than just "Quake" ;)
NOOOooooooo (Score:1)
--
Alternative (Score:3)
Still, I'm gonna miss the peep show. I'm sad to see you go, Daily Radar.
--
Re:Other Gaming Sites (Score:1)
About three days after the death of the internet (it would have been the day, but it took a bit to learn why Slashdot wouldn't load):
Señor Budda Elf Duder: Lesse, I'll stick the archie server on 192.168.0.1 and the gopher one on 192.168.0.2, use my 56k to log into 192.168.0.3, and...
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Even though I am from a competing site.. (Score:4)
GameSpy closing shop? I think not. (Score:4)
Possible solution?? (Score:2)
What I think could happen is content / ISP partnerships where you pay say 19.95 for the basic Earthlink account, 21.95 gets you subscribtions to ESPN and CNN, 25.95 gets you even more, etc etc. The ISP splits the marginal revenue with the content sites, and everybody makes a little more money without bankrupting the consumers. They could even start to segment - have a sports subscription with access to all the premium sports content, a gamers subscribtion, etc. You get the idea...
Re:Gaming's taken a dive.... (Score:2)
Um, yeah. B&W has a good reputation. Now, I haven't actually played it, and I have friends who've been hooked by it, but most of them seem to still admit minor problems. I found FiringSquad's [gamers.com] review [gamers.com] (78% [slashdot.org], blam!) refreshing.
Re:PXCL (Score:1)
Re:Loser Posts (Score:1)
Tee hee.
"Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"
Could this happen to Slashdot? (Score:2)
-----
Here's my personal list... (PC Games only) (Score:5)
VoodooExtreme [voodooextreme.com]
Shacknews [shacknews.com]
Stomped [stomped.com]
Computer Gaming Online [cdmag.com]
GamesSpy [gamespy.com]
3D News [3dnews.net]
Firing Squad [firingsquad.com]
Avault [avault.com]
Games Domain [gamesdomain.com]
GamesMania [gamesmania.com]
IGN News (PC) [ign.com]
The next logical step. (Score:4)
I know for certain that Valve would be one of the first to jump in. Counter-Strike is the major reason why Half-Life is still selling well today, over 2 years after its original release. Valve has always been supportive of the community, and I see them pioneering a service like that to support their fans.
-------------------------
Add PCXL to the list... (Score:1)
-----
Re:What happened to the excitement? (Score:3)
The only way I can see out of this is virtual isolationism. As more people find that the net is mostly useless, I suspect they'll start either moving off it to private networks run by individuals or VPNs, using the internet only for transport of their encrypted packets.
Re:Loser Posts VS naked women (Score:2)
woah.. (Score:3)
gamecenter gone because of cnet - zdnet merger (Score:1)
That was, of course, according to the message posted at gamecenter on closing day, and could have been outright lies for all I know.
Re:Gaming's taken a dive.... (Score:1)
Wing Commander 1-4, Privateer
King's Quest 4-7
Dagger of Amon-Ra, Gabriel Knight 1
Loom, Fate of Atlantis, Sam and Max
Ultima 4-7
Now I play... almost nothing. Where are the modern equivalents? Now I spend all my 'gaming' time trying to reverse-engineer Ultima7.
Re:Awww (Score:1)
I knew their death was on the wall when you couldn't browse the site with out getting pop-up ads all over the place. That was already with the banner ads that were already plastered on the page and clever little link box ads for Online Gambling (Did they even think about their Demographic audience?) that would pop-up if you left your mouse cursor idle.
Screw Daily Radar and screw Imagine Publishing [imaginemedia.com] for creating it. I still blame the death of many good websites(NGO, PC Gamer Online)on Daily Rader and it won't be missed in my opinion. There are much better websites out there.
Backyard Boxing online? [stevesbackyardboxing.org]That's unpossible!
ICQ:47685501
Re:Reminder about the Advertising (Score:3)
Too bad, I wonder how they didn't make money (Score:1)
____________________
Remember, not all
Imagine media as a whole seems to be goin under (Score:2)
Meanwhile, I suscribe to Maximum PC back in Feb. I still have yet to recieve an issue. I emailed them last week and even though their web site promices replies within 48 hours, I have yet to get a responce. They owe me money for that too!
So I think the whole damn company is in trouble.
Re:the man who pulled the lever (Score:1)
psxndc
Re:Don't forget... (Score:2)
FYI, Lowtax went off and created SomethingAwful [somethingawful.com], and while he's had horrendously bad luck with various hosting networks, the site is pretty cool. If you haven't checked it out yet, make sure to spend some time in the Jeff K and Cliff Yablonski sections. :-) Lowtax was also able to bring along one of my favorite parts of PQ, Cranky Steve's map reviews. The reviews aren't done by Lowtax anymore and are lacking in quality, but it's a nice blast from the past. (Even if this past is just two years ago.)
Coincidentally, Lowtax recentally brought the afore-mentioned Fragmaster on board as a guest editor. Now if only Frags would resurrect Walter. ;-)
GameSpy's only redeeming value is FilePlanet. I know a lot of people here hate it, and I agree that the format and bandwidth suck, but I usually have better luck downloading from FilePlanet than anywhere else.
--
Re:What happened to the excitement? (Score:3)
57 million channels and nothing on.
Re:Not really the last (Score:3)
Re:Not really the last (Score:4)
Sure it does. They just recently closed 10 Vault Network sites, and the company that owns IGN, Snowball (Nasdaq: SNOW [quicken.com]), is being delisted.
Gamers.com is still around as is VoodooExtreme.
VoodooExtreme is on UGO, which is no longer paying affiliates and likely won't survive the balance of the year. Last time VE was on a network like that (GameFan [slashdot.org]) the network just suddenly went down one afternoon. I should know, my site was one of the ones that was thrown out in the cold along with VE.
And Gamers.com is likely in the same boat though I admit I don't know any details about their situation. Take a look at their site and see if they're selling anything. Think about how they're making money. Apparently, they're not (banner ads don't make money anymore). They likely won't be around much longer either.
And the worst part is... the more sites that go down, the more traffic it drives to the remaining sites, which increases their bandwidth costs and quickens their demise.
The VC has dried up. The end times for all the large sites are drawing near. You'll either be paying for quality content soon, or you'll be scrambling to find small, poorly-put-together sites that are the only kind that can afford to stay free.
Re:Don't forget... (Score:3)
Joystick101 (Score:3)
Good place to find some intelligent, thoughtful discussion on just about anything gaming related. I invite everyone to check it out.
Re:GameSpy closing shop? I think not. (Score:3)
Re:GamesDomain.com has always been my first choice (Score:2)
GamesDomain's gratest yirtue, IMO, is that they take a week or two to actually play games before reviewing them. Where other review sites give you the reviewer's impression based on perhaps 48 hours of gameplay, GamesDomain reviewers can actually comment on how much replayability and lasting appeal a game has.
TheFrood
Surprise surprise (Score:4)
Advertising is a great way for sites to help recoup the costs of hosting, but definately not paying the salaries of dozens of employees (with a few exceptions, obviously). I count 34 employees on their website. Even if many of them were part time, that's a lot of money simply in payroll.
In the end, this model may work for a very few popular commercial businesses (Yahoo, for example), but most of these websites will either be bought out or go out of business. The best thing is for a decent website to be bought out by a decent non-online company. This way, the parent company can afford to lose some money on the child company as long as it helps branding (thus making the child company an advertising expense). Granted, the Go Network [go.com] isn't my favorite search engine/portal, but they do seem to have survived ok after being purchased by Disney.
Reminder about the Advertising (Score:5)
Just before Daily Radar closed down, they started experimenting with advertisements. When banner ad revenues dropped precipitously, they added affiliate programs, popups, floating javascript banners, interactive ads, site sponsorships, and more.
What frustrates me is recognizing that these ad technologies - despite being clever, and, in rare cases, useful - did nothing to improve the site's revenue position. Daily Radar had pretty much everything a web site can ask for: daily rotating content, a loyal and excited fan base, community building features, a direct link to sales tools (they had buy buttons on every game review), and more.
What does this say about the state of every other website out there? Daily Radar did not appear to be mismanaged, nor did it appear to lack technical innovation. Most of the attributes Daily Radar had, I have come to regard as essential for a website's success.
I think this means that if you run a website that provides content:
You are probably out of luck.
What happened to the excitement? (Score:4)
It's strange but it's like a world of overloaded sensors, and we're all so numb we just don't give a crap anymore.
Seriously though when "The Internet" was but a network hooking a couple of colleges, local BBS' with a very limited market had vibrant online communities, incredible download sections where you fervently awaited the next issue of Commander Keen (I recall begging a sysop to extend my time limit so I could download the Falcon 3 demo as at 600KB I just didn't have enough time...wow is that game really that old...). Now we have enormous bandwidth and literally a world of people to converse with and generally the sense of community has disappeared. I don't want to sound like an "old-timer" talking about how good things used to be, and of course it could be just my perception, but there certainly doesn't seem to be the interest in the computer game market, or really online communities. Have we all been there/done that?
I'm crying (Score:2)
Good sites closing? Bad ones still here? (Score:3)
Think about it. The best sites with the most traffic have the highest bandwidth costs. Since they cost the most to maintain, they're the first to close.
Then, you bookmark the not-as-great site, but so do the other 100,000 people. Soon, THEIR bandwidth costs are too high, and they have to close.
Then you go to the somewhat-crappy-site, and the closings go on...
Eventually, the only gaming sites will be on Ziff Davis-type sites, which will rate and evaluate all games on a scale of 85%-100%.
OMM [omm.com] is the only site on the web I would donate to.
Re:PXCL (Score:3)
Ahhh... they didn't pay for it because the need wasn't there. They could fulfill the same needs at other (free) websites.
The sites that will be successful at pay-per-view will be the ones that generate great content. I consider CNET News.com one such source. I've even emailed them, begging them to let those of us who read them all the time to pay a monthly fee, and get an ad-free view of their site. Jai Singh (editor) seemed interested, asked me what I'd be willing to pay, and said they'd look into it.
Just like Eudora, CuteFTP, et. al. offer versions of their software for free with banner ads, I think you'll start seeing content sites offering the reverse -- an ad-free subscription to their site.
There are only a few sites I'd pay for if they didn't offer their content for free. News.com. ESPN. Maybe CNN.
The best-of-breed content sites will survive and flourish as their crappier competitors go down the tubes.
Re:Surprise surprise (Score:4)
Right. For a while, when so much ad and click-through revenue was there for the taking, it appeared (to the shortsighted) that there was a simple ad-based business model for nearly any web-based company. But the bottom line is (and always was): A viable business must deliver something of value to a willing customer for a fair price. Therefore, the only valid ad-based business model delivers...well, valuable ads. Like TV Guide or Playboy, with a proven track record of delivering or influencing sales through advertising. And NOT like a game site that displays annoying banner ads to clever dudes who just ignore the lame ads.
I wish that every 'new economy' company decision-maker were forced to read your post.
Re:Gaming's taken a dive.... (Score:3)
I would argue that games like Half-Life (a little old, but still alive and kicking), Deus Ex, Unreal Tournament, Baldur's Gate II, and Icewind Dale are all good examples of a group of dedicated designers trying to appeal to gamers using their prior experience with games. Admittedly, Unreal Tournament was kind of a graphic romp, but it had very solid and open-ended gameplay nonetheless.
I'd say the best example of a (somewhat) recent game that strictly appealed to a group of hardcore gamers was System Shock 2. I suggest you pick up a copy post-haste to see what I mean. It's a great game for those who have become jaded by simple tricks that developers try to pull on many gamers today.
Re:Gaming's taken a dive.... (Score:2)
Gaming's taken a dive.... (Score:3)
Rewind three or four years back. Most content is written by die-hard fans. People who are monogamous to a game and devoted to a community of people like them churn out good sites with strong content and relatively heavy traffic.
Unfortunately, the last few years turned into a sort of online gold rush when everybody simultaneously got the idea that they could cash in big on something fun.
But instead of hardcore gamers writing content, you often ended up with designer imposters funded by big names who know nothing about the subject matter at hand. And now these folks are running out of gas.
And the games themselves... well... theyre to blame also. Now that computers are to the point where they can make a ray-traced dinosaur holding a multi-colored chainsaw with a flame texture and a 3D drink holder, selling computer games is all about dazzle rather than gameplay. Smoke and mirrors! Most game developers are too busy making goofy effects to worry about gameplay these days.
The amazing thing is that gaming sites fail to realize this or dare criticize it, for fear of upsetting the publishers and developers they like to be in bed with to succeed. I think Black & White is a great example of this. Here's a beautiful game with some big issues (redundant gameplay, sluggish controls, etc.), and gaming sites just go off the deep end about how great the trees look. Personally, I dont respect any gaming site that ships a game to some cheap freelancer who writes little more than a beefed-up version of what I could have read on the back of the box and slaps a high score on it. Oh why not toss in some pictures of models to save face! Invent some new buzzwords, that'll work!
Perhaps I'm just a relic because I was around for gaming's glory days.
PXCL (Score:5)
We had a standing bet.
Tens of thousands of people emailed us after we closed PCXL. They told us that if we brought it back in any form, they'd pay for it -- pay even more for it than before.
We knew it wasn't true. So, just to prove the point, we brought it back.
You didn't pay for it. Now cram it.
Love,
The staff of PCXL
Re:Not really the last (Score:2)
gamepower [gamepower.com] puts up a new review once a day. It's a pretty decent site all around, with all its reviews archived in a database, links to demos and patches, etc. -- the only thing it's missing is a regular feature.
Daily Who? (Score:2)
Everyone, and I mean EVERYONE who looked at the dot com boom knew that more than 90% of dot coms were going to fail. 90% of ALL new businesses fail. In a brand new market where no one is an expert you have to expect that 99% of all new businesses are going to fail. We all knew that. So why do we care when one more me too dot com with a bogus business plan bites the big one?
It is not a bad thing that poorly run companies with no revenue and no viable business plan go out of business. It is a good thing.
Most of the really sucessful dot coms haven't even been established yet. The GMs, Fords, AT&Ts, and IBMs of the Internet will be spawned over the next 10 years. And they'll be spawned by people who learned their lesson in the great dot com bust.
StoneWolf
Micropayment please! (Score:3)
It is time like this that I wish we have a good micropayment system. There are many sites on the net that I enjoy and visit often (eg /., GameCenter), and I can honestly say that I have contributed exactly Zer0 to their income.
I don't click on ads for various reasons: poor exchange rate, high S&H when you don't live in US, etc. So yeah I like to give a little to you guys, say $1/day? For me, it is very cheap and reasonable when compare to other daily spendings like bus fare, snacks, price for a newspaper, etc. For a site operator this is pretty good. How many "click-through" do you need to get $1?
For a large site lik /., asking for $1 donation every week or month can add up to good incomes; even if only a small percentage of people are willing to pay. It certainly wouldn't hurt as long as there is a easy and cheap way to collect these small payments.
====
Don't forget... (Score:3)
_______________________________________
Re:Reminder about the Advertising (Score:4)
I've been back only twice, both times through an anonymizing proxy to see if they'd taken down the ads. They hadn't.
I even submitted a story to F***ed Company, but was turned down. I said that the pop-ups were a sign of impending doom. Guess who was right?
Interstitials, anyone? (Score:3)
33% of my daily read gone (Score:3)
I read these sites every day without fail:
1. DailyRadar
2. Slashdot
3. Fuckedcompany
Now there are only 2
Re:Other Gaming Sites (Score:2)
Loser Posts (Score:4)
Re:Don't forget... (Score:2)
Well IGN is the other competitor besides gamespot. I see a bright future for them, as they have a pay program (which I joined). Hopefully that will give them the revenue they need.
Re:Awww (Score:2)
Awww (Score:5)
I will say that I'm surprised they could be short on money when even I accidentally click one of the 100 ads on their front page when I go looking for rediculously stupid articles. Forgive me for my cynicism, I just think that sites like OMM will do fine (despite the tragic loss of Daily Radar), simply because OMM doesn't suck.
Re:Don't forget... (Score:2)
Yeah, and Snowball is about dead as well, at least that's the last I heard on FC [f---edcompany.com].
This is really disappointing news though. I used to read Gamecenter. When it died I moved to DailyRadar because I felt their articles were well-written and intellegent. Now, they're gone. The only two major sites left are IGN and GameSpot. Problem with those two is IGN seems to be written by a bunch of 13-year-olds, and GameSpot is entirely too corporate. So now what? What is a gamer supposed to do when he/she wants to find out about the newest games?
Rolling your own. (Score:5)
Is this just me, or does the whole rise and fall of the dot.com scene feel like the BBS scene? Many sysops saw potential in their BBS's (myself included) and went mainstream (well, as mainstream as a closed audience could provide) and they nearly all went by the way of the dinosaur. It was the original content and customer supported sites that remained. My only semi-supported site that worked was designed to cater for the hearing impared, allowing them access to a large wealth of public information - basically a better version of existing TTY services all in one place.
Suppose the more things change, the more they stay the same. A few lessons from those days should be tinkered with and applied. Before we had to worry about dialing OUT costs (mumble international calls) and today it's bandwidth OUT costs.
Just my $0.07 cents (price adjusted for tax).
--
McCarrum!
Other sites (Score:3)
the man who pulled the lever (Score:5)
all of the imagine properties were run on a linux farm concieved of an built by myself and jeremy wohl. quick stats: 2 million dynamic pages per day from a 3 tier linux farm. lvs / apache / resin / oracle / java / xml and a myriad of other tools. the power of open-source here was truly awesome.