The Duel Between Gaming Magazines and Websites

The New York Times has up a piece looking at the ongoing battle between websites and magazines in the world of games journalism. With magazine subscriptions falling every year and a non-stop churn of news online, the article examines the ways that mags try to stay competitive, and the views of the gamers that read them. "The circulation for PC Gamer, a leading magazine from Future US, shrank to 210,369 this year from 300,271 in 2003, according to the Audit Bureau of Circulations. Magazine publishers say that readers want longer features and in-depth articles as a counterpoint to the short, bloglike pieces they find online. But Kyle Orland, a freelance journalist who writes a media coverage column for Gamedaily.com, wondered if that strategy was working, saying that when a large feature is published, it doesn't get read. 'Attention spans are just getting so small that readers don't know what they want,' Mr. Orland said."

Delay

[dunezone]

Its all about delay. I have a game informer subscription that came with the purchase of my 360. At the end of the magazine they have what will be featured in the next magazine. Unfortunately, whatever is usually featured next month is already online with write-ups and also videos to go along with it at sites like gamespot or IGN.

Either way though, Its good reading material on the pooper.

Re:Nonsense

[DocSavage64109]

You actually trust magazine reviews to tell the honest truth in a review? I remember buying Outpost [wikipedia.org] based on reviews, and it was quite disappointing when it came to actual gameplay.

Quote from wikipedia:

Initial reviews of Outpost were enthusiastic about the game. Most notoriously, the American version of PC Gamer rated the game at 93%, one of its highest ratings ever for the time. It was later made known that the reviewers had in fact played beta versions of the game, and had been promised certain features would be implemented, but never were.
Indeed, many of the features described in the game's own documentation simply did not exist in the game at all. These included the ability to enter diplomatic relations with the rebel colony and the ability to build roads, among other things. Many of these gameplay aspects were later patched in, though in appearance only, as many of them failed to have any meaningful effect on gameplay.
Following the release of the game, the game's general bugginess and perceived mediocre gameplay, along with the lack of features described in most of the game's reviews and the game's own documentation led to a minor backlash against the computer game magazines of the time by consumers who bought the game based on their reviews.

Re:Nonsense

[brunascle]

because of that incident (it might have been a different game but same situation) , PC Gamer now only reviews the final copies of games, and not pre-release versions. the pre-release may make it into the "Previews" section though, which doesnt have ratings.

Demo Disks!

[FataL187]

The only reason I have bougt a game mag in the last several years is for the occasional demo disk. If the mags included playable demos with each issue I would subscribe to them all. I like to be able to try the game before I drop $60.00 on it and find out I don't like it despite it getting good reviews on the web or in print.

If game companies were smart they would give playable demos to the mags like crazy. Too bad I have yet to see one demo disk for the Wii, it might have prevented me from buying NBA 07, Rapala Fishing and that horrible piece of trash chicken shoot (I thought my 5 & 7 year olds would like it, I was horribly wrong)

-FataL