Support NeoGAF

[Snidely Whiplash]

Dude, check the screenshot, it is scrolled all the way down. Looks like it is there when you include the "/2008/02/11" but it isn't there at just www.penny-arcade.com

Two quick things
Mon, February 11 2008 - 11:32 AM
by: Gabe

 

[TreIII]

Sorry, but I quite like the look of EGM these days. I mean, I'd personally do a number of things differently, but overall I like their current direction. Nice, big images, clearly defined text areas, and page tags so you know what section you are currently in. I'm also a sucker for pixel-type fonts.

Pretty much. It's good enough to serve the purpose, and that's all that really matters.

 

[DrBo42]

Dude, check the screenshot, it is scrolled all the way down. Looks like it is there when you include the "/2008/02/11" but it isn't there at just www.penny-arcade.com

Holy shit! We must have a time-traveling device. None of this makes sense! The OP is referencing a news story from Feb 11th. Today is the 13th. Of course it's not going to be on the main page. Oh by the way, check out TeamXbox's home page for that awesome Halo 2 reveal. I'm sure it's still there.

 

[Flynn]

I know it's annoying to have to thumb through a million ads, but give these guys a break. They have to make money somehow.

I know I used to hate it back in the dot-com days when Wired was 3/4 ads. But that was because the other 1/4 was profiles of venture capitalists and CEOs -- shit I gave fuck-all about.

I genuinely like reading EGM. It's the closest thing gaming has to Entertainment Weekly. It's breezy, opinionated and well written. I'm fine with ads. Even ugly shit slapped over the cover. At the rate magazines are dropping we're lucky to even have a handful to read, let alone two or three that are readable.

 

[Flavius]

Heh, if anything, that proves that we don't work together on that stuff, because an advertiser would have to be bat-s*** insane to want to advertise next to a 2/10 review.

Technically, and I think we're better about this now than we were, say 10 years ago, the production/sales/ops people who place ads aren't supposed to put them next to relevant/similar content. I think that's one of the ASME rules...to make sure we don't have that appearance of conflict of interest.

Been fun guys...gotta get out of here. Later!

Thank you for taking the time to respond here, Shoe (and you as well, Shawn).

I really appreciate it, even if it is obvious from the quote under your avatar that you hate all of us, equally.

j/k

 

[J-Rzez]

Everyone in GAF is part of the EGM defense force...

People are more of a "1up show" and "1up yours" defender than anything. Usually there's some decent discussion in there besides x, y, or z camp in there complaining they didn't get any coverage. Why is there a better discussion? Oh yeah, there's no review scores in those.

 

[mollipen]

We never said the three reviewers don't read each other's text. I think you're getting mixed up a bit, no offense. Since I took over EGM in 2001, our policy has always been exactly this: The reviewers play the game independently (except when they're together in multiplayer), they do not share their thoughts with each other during the reviews process (not even a hint), they cannot share any opinions with each other UNTIL they have decided on and locked in a review score. Only then, can they discuss with each other. At that point, the primary reviewer writes his text, and reviewers #2 and #3 can read his text and respond to it...again, ONLY if they have already decided their scores, no sooner.

This was one of the fun parts about doing the Viewpoints section of GameFan - having somebody come before you, and then calling them an idiot for their score in your box text. *heh*

 

[Flavius]

I genuinely like reading EGM. It's the closest thing gaming has to Entertainment Weekly. It's breezy, opinionated and well written. I'm fine with ads. Even ugly shit slapped over the cover. At the rate magazines are dropping we're lucky to even have a handful to read, let alone two or three that are readable.

I think of EGM in much the same way that I think of Brett Favre. I might not watch every game that he's in, but it's somehow comforting knowing that he's still around. Sometimes he's spectacular, sometimes not so much. But even when he's not at his best, you can forgive him...because he's Brett Fucking Favre.

I hope the dude never retires (a man can dream, can't he?), and I hope EGM sticks around for a long, long time.

 

[Nardonicus]

seriously, who gives a flying fuck if there is an ad in front of the cover.

just peel it off. it takes about a second.

 

[Flavius]

seriously, who gives a flying fuck if there is an ad in front of the cover.

just peel it off. it takes about a second.

Damnit, Nardonicus...if only you'd posted sooner!

Expect a call from President Bush very, very soon...don't keep him waiting!!!

 

[beelzebozo]

peel it off!

why didn't we think of that?

 

[chaff.g]

remind me again how to distinguish ad from content in a gaming mag

 

[Nardonicus]

just been one of those days i guess.

I just don't really understand why there is even a discussion about this.

 

[border]

For the guy who used this opportunity to point out his preference for PC Gamer: Great. Really, that's fine. But you picked the wrong thread. PCG's current subscriber issue has a false cover as well. Only theirs has fake cover lines pointing to additional advertorial inside the book. In addition, these misleading cover lines use PCG's very own font. Further complicating things is the fact that the advertorial connected to the mock cover is actually the magazine' former editor in chief interviewing himself about the wonders of some hardware he's now shilling. This advertorial draws on PCG readers' familiarity with former EIC, Greg Vederman who explains that he liked the hardware so much that he decided he would rather sell that product than continue his editorial career. This, in other words, is all sorts of confusing.

If you don't stop with this intrajournalism muckracking, you're going to end up on that guy's blog again!

 

[AstroLad]

My only complaint about EGM and GFW is that they're <100 pages now (including ads). Is that really viable? Are they going to continue to decrease in size? Why is the size continually decreasing?

I love the format and pay for subscriptions ($15 for GFW, $70 for Edge, ok EGM is free) but I get the sense I'm one of the only ones.

 

[beelzebozo]

I just don't really understand why there is even a discussion about this.

i actually sort of agree with your sentiment, and it's essentially what shoe said a page back. it's not that huge a deal. to present the notion of magazine advertising as if we've all been overlooking it, and as if it's something we should be shaking our fists about, is ludicrous.

 

[Proven]

yeah, it's 11 pages, the 4 page cover-ad, the front cover, then 6 pages of ads before the first non-ad content

.

 

[Nardonicus]

I suppose if you start to see a pattern, with a magazine giving 9+ scores to games it is advertising on its cover over and over again, then there may be an issue.

But if you take egm for their word, then who cares.

 

[jetpacks was yes]

My only complaint about EGM and GFW is that they're <100 pages now (including ads). Is that really viable? Are they going to continue to decrease in size? Why is the size continually decreasing?

The more ads they get, the more pages of editorial content they can have.

 

[DubloSeven]

:lol :lol

EGM is a pretty bad magazine IMO, but it's free.
Same thing with GFW but it's free as well.

For PC's, PC Gamer gets a tons of exclusives. In fact they have one for next month.
For Consoles, Game Informer gets a ton of exclusives.

GFW is a great magazine. You don't know what you're talking about.

Also, yeah, I've noticed EGM has had a shitload of advertisements in it lately. It's almost overwhelming. I don't know if the writers can do anything about that though. That's probably more of a marketing issue.

 

[AstroLad]

The more ads they get, the more pages of editorial content they can have.

Or the more they get paid for each ad, and the more paid subscribers they have to defray costs, the more content they can have. This isn't exactly an earth-shattering revelation, but it seems that none of this has been working out very well for print media. Of course then you have something like Edge which has insane production quality and lots of content, so maybe things aren't completely hopeless although stateside it seems that they're getting there.

 

[jetpacks was yes]

I have EGMs from a decade ago that are as thin as any recent ones.

 

[No Means Nomad]

Does anyone have that really awkward picture of Gabe complaining about how they never advertise games they don't personally play and enjoy next to the advertisement for World Of Warcraft killing "Fury"?

Also: think about the benefits of a second cover. Like that sweet stretching glue it comes with that you can flick people's eyes with.

 

[AstroLad]

I have EGMs from a decade ago that are as thin as any recent ones.

That's a bit vague, but maybe, I don't know; I'm not exactly an EGM collector but I've gotten the distinct impression that the physical quality of the magazines and the amount of content have decreased materially. If you need an even more blatant example, look at PC Gamer now vs. Whitta Era (regularly 350+ pages). I do think that the actual writing quality has improved markedly, fwiw. What there is of it at least.

 

[Otheradam]

The more ads they get, the more pages of editorial content they can have.

That's not usually how it works. The mag has a set amount of pages for each issue. (GFW seems to be 98 quickly looking at the last 2 issues) Depending on how much ads are sold, either content is added to fill extra pages or content is taken away so the ads can be put in. That's why you sometimes see ads in the back for 1up network related sites. Those are ad spaces that haven't been sold for that particular issue. I'm saying all this as a designer for a magazine and doing page layouts.

Magazines in general have been shrinking because of the internet. If you go back 5-10 years ago and look at EGM, PC Gamer, Maxim etc, you will notice they are like almost double the size of what they are now.

 

[AstroLad]

Magazines in general have been shrinking because of the internet. If you go back 5-10 years ago and look at EGM, PC Gamer, Maxim etc, you will notice they are like almost double the size of what they are now.

Right, it's kind of a vicious circle isn't it?

 

[beelzebozo]

yes. like a disk that rolls, but the disk also has blades. vicious.

 

[Mr.City]

My only complaint about EGM and GFW is that they're <100 pages now (including ads). Is that really viable? Are they going to continue to decrease in size? Why is the size continually decreasing?

I love the format and pay for subscriptions ($15 for GFW, $70 for Edge, ok EGM is free) but I get the sense I'm one of the only ones.

I agree with the size issue. Both GFW and EGM's page count have been kind of disappointing.

 

[SapientWolf]

I'll never forgive EGM for making fun of Endless Ocean.

They were just pointing out how much fun it is to fondle the flounder.

EGM's 3 review system is what really needs to go. I don't need to hear the same thing repeated 3 times. How about using all that space for something with more depth than a dimple?

 

[Flavius]

i actually sort of agree with your sentiment, and it's essentially what shoe said a page back. it's not that huge a deal. to present the notion of magazine advertising as if we've all been overlooking it, and as if it's something we should be shaking our fists about, is ludicrous.

As the OP, I have to say: while I had a definite destination in mind, I may have done a poor job navigating.

My question more or less revolved around whether or not there is really a huge difference between selling your cover under the guise of legitimate editorial coverage, and selling a blatant advertisement and tacking it on to the front cover of your magazine.

Fortunately, I think at least a few posters knew what I was looking for, including Shoe and Shawn, so I'm not complaining.

 

[jetpacks was yes]

That's not usually how it works. The mag has a set amount of pages for each issue. (GFW seems to be 98 quickly looking at the last 2 issues) Depending on how much ads are sold, either content is added to fill extra pages or content is taken away so the ads can be put in. That's why you sometimes see ads in the back for 1up network related sites. Those are ad spaces that haven't been sold for that particular issue. I'm saying all this as a designer for a magazine and doing page layouts.

Magazines in general have been shrinking because of the internet. If you go back 5-10 years ago and look at EGM, PC Gamer, Maxim etc, you will notice they are like almost double the size of what they are now.

I see. I was just repeating what Shoe told me a number of years ago.

Though you're not totally correct about the size compared to 5-10 years ago. Holiday issues used to be much bigger but I have issues from 1997 that are only around a dozen pages longer than recent issues. So it's not that great of a difference.

And that's the end of my lame defending of EGM.