Nintendo Magazines

[Killer Kirby]

ok I don't bye game magazines but i do look at them, but where I live there are no Australian Nintendo Magazines and it's kinda sad, especialy when the DS is beating the PSP and I can see about 3 PSP magazines and no Nintendo magazines. It just pisses me off to see a whole section of magazines that talk about games and there is no sight of a nintendo magazine I hope when the Wii is released there can be a new magazine that only talks about Nintendo. cause then there might be something intelligent to read about in a mag.
What are your thoughts?

[imaROBOT]

I used to read Nintendo Gamer, but it's gone. It does suck, but I just get any info off the net anyway.

[Jebus]

I used to get a mag called CUBE, see if your newsagent can get it in for you like mine did. Wasn't too bad, the only problem was that it was a few months late, since it was from the UK.

So, the Wii controller got revealed here, and I hurried out to buy the mag to see what they had to say about it. Then I realised I had to wait a couple of months... Yeah. Not a bad mag, though.

[REV_pioneer]

Yeah i used to get those UK cube mags but then realised how much money I've wasted on magazines wen it could be spent on games.

[Fado]

None of those PSP mags are Australian though. Aussie conent is absolutely the most important thing to me, thats why I buy hyper. Nintendo Gamer was good, but it kind of fell apart til eventually, there was nothing left to cancel. Ah well.

[Jebus]

Ew, I've tried Hyper a few times when I wanted all the opinions I could find on certain things, but apart from that I found it terrible.

[Reno]

Nintendo Magazine System used to be the best Aussie Ninty magazine. Unfortunately they went bust.

Hyper seems to be the best multi gaming magazine out, being unbiased towards all the consoles.

=D>

[President Klinton]

I reccomend Hyper very highly ... they review games s they are.. i realli liked how they reviewed Halo 2 .... everyone at the time was going 10/10 , 98/100 , BEST GAME EVER MADE. But Hyper gave in what i thought was a pretty honest review of 94/100. Same month Metroid Prime 2 got 95/100 which was pleasing to see.

[Gus the Crocodile]

I reccomend Hyper very highly ... they review games s they are.. i realli liked how they reviewed Halo 2 .... everyone at the time was going 10/10 , 98/100 , BEST GAME EVER MADE. But Hyper gave in what i thought was a pretty honest review of 94/100. Same month Metroid Prime 2 got 95/100 which was pleasing to see.

One of the main things I hate about videogame magazines is that they bred a massive community of people who think there's a significant difference between 94 and 98. There's no reason to rate out of 100; at such a level, the differences between reader and reviewer make a much bigger impact than whether the magazine gave something 89 or 90. Even marking out of twenty as I've done on AN is overkill I think.

Anyway. I used to buy NMS regularly, and still have most of the issues sitting around in a box here somewhere. I loved reading them when I was younger, but to look at them now, it seems such a waste of money :) Awful design, bad reviewing, ridiculous bias...ahh, the good old days.

[SDagger]

I used to get cube but that disappeared. I got gamepro a couple of times, that was a good multiplatform mag but I can't see that anymore. I might get hyper to see what it's like.

[President Klinton]

i disagree gus i reckon there is differences between a game tht gets 9.9 and 9.1 .. as a game that gets 9.9 is technically sound in every department but goes that extra way to outdo itself while a 9.1 would be something that is tecnically sound in every department but doesnt do tht extra bit which makes u hooked to it.

[Gus the Crocodile]

Eh, to me, that's the kind of thinking that warps the whole system into one where 7/10 is a game not worth having, which is pointless.

But think what you like, I'm not up to arguing at the moment :P

[TSPhoenix]

Waaay back I used to read NMS (Nintendo Magazine System, the official one) then after that ended I read CUBE, but now I just use the net as its cheaper and faster news.

I do miss features though, as well as reading in bed.

[Killer Kirby]

I used to get the CUBE as well and i belive they had an Aussie version of it, however it only went for 9 isssues and once that ended i had to get the UK version but i thought whats the use so thats when i stoped byeing CUBE and i also belive that the UK CUBE has stoped as well.
Hyper is all right but I just don't like it for some reason, there was once also when there was GBA world but then it changed it's name to total gamers and there newer version was crap i belive cause it's really crouded not like GBA world where they could put some details in.
All i want to see is a Australian Nintendo magazine that just talks about nintendo

[Bill&ben]

Yeah i used to get NMS every month... ah remember the good old days of Skull vs Les (with nursey). Why an officail nintendo magazine wanted to give so many kids stunted childhoods, we will never know.

And yeah so it was majorly biased, I still enjoyed reading it!

It was a great mag and i do miss it

I did also read n64/ nintendo gamer until it fell though also

itz been a while since that mag died as well....

We can only hope that the Wii succeeds and a new magazine is born (so that we can complain about it!! :D )

[Jader7777]

The Internet has basically ruined any reason for me to buy a magazine. I used to buy CUBE but it was very inaccurate, badly edited and had crummy screen shots and constant advertisements.

[Danon]

I bought a couple of GBA world- that was decent, so was CUBE but i rarely ever buy games mags nowadays coz of this place called Aussie Nintendo- you might have heard of it. :|

[JleeLink]

I use to buy cube but after a couple of issues i stopped as it took so long to getto Australia the news wasnt worth reading and the discs that came with it didnt work on my cube for some reason. But i could buy Nintendo Power as they sell that at macquarie centre boarders.

[TSPhoenix]

I used to get the CUBE as well and i belive they had an Aussie version of it, however it only went for 9 isssues and once that ended i had to get the UK version but i thought whats the use so thats when i stoped byeing CUBE and i also belive that the UK CUBE has stoped as well.

There was an Aus version, but it was rather short lived.

Yeah i used to get NMS every month... ah remember the good old days of Skull vs Les (with nursey). Why an officail nintendo magazine wanted to give so many kids stunted childhoods, we will never know.

For an official mag, the content in the mailbags was atrocious, definately not something I probably should have been reading at that age.

For those that don't remeber it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo_Magazine_System:_Australia

[Killer Kirby]

the discs that came with it didnt work on my cube for some reason..

ah which ones were you talking about cause the ones that have game footage are ment for the DVD player not the Game Cube and the ones that had code junkies with cheats for certian games were ment for the Gamecube

[stubbietubbie]

Yeah i used to get NMS every month... ah remember the good old days of Skull vs Les (with nursey). Why an officail nintendo magazine wanted to give so many kids stunted childhoods, we will never know.

It really is interesting though, back then, Nintendo were doing great, and let this kind of thing go on in their official mags. Maybe thats the reason they don't make them anymore, the content was just a bit too much for kids to be reading, and the continuous flow of Mario killing Sonic images in various forms and some got quite (quite!) gory.

But still, a great memory of my gaming youth, and look how well I turned out. *twitch*

[F-Zone360]

There used to be an Aussie edition of CUBE magazine. until it stopped for some reason. Just recently I bought Hyper, which is the most available mag with Nintendo content in there. BRING BACK NINTENDO GAMER!! I still have their old magazines you know. XD

[Seanus]

I reccomend Hyper very highly ... they review games s they are.. i realli liked how they reviewed Halo 2 .... everyone at the time was going 10/10 , 98/100 , BEST GAME EVER MADE. But Hyper gave in what i thought was a pretty honest review of 94/100. Same month Metroid Prime 2 got 95/100 which was pleasing to see.

One of the main things I hate about videogame magazines is that they bred a massive community of people who think there's a significant difference between 94 and 98. There's no reason to rate out of 100; at such a level, the differences between reader and reviewer make a much bigger impact than whether the magazine gave something 89 or 90. Even marking out of twenty as I've done on AN is overkill I think.

Anyway. I used to buy NMS regularly, and still have most of the issues sitting around in a box here somewhere. I loved reading them when I was younger, but to look at them now, it seems such a waste of money :) Awful design, bad reviewing, ridiculous bias...ahh, the good old days.

Which is why you, most of the time, disregard the score and read the review. Many times people have written in mentioned what you have said, and they have replied saying that they would like to get rid of the number score and let the review show it, but of course, in this day and age people are to impatient and want to know something quick.

Anyho, taking the number review system out of the equation, I find Hyper one of the best game reviewers, in magazines and on the internet.

[Cobretti]

since the internet magazines have been dieing out slowly so you can probably see why a aussie nintnedo mag wouldn't be very benificial

[Nexus]

Anyway. I used to buy NMS regularly, and still have most of the issues sitting around in a box here somewhere. I loved reading them when I was younger, but to look at them now, it seems such a waste of money :) Awful design, bad reviewing, ridiculous bias...ahh, the good old days.
I have a whole draw in my bedroom set aside for my old NMS mags. They were so awesome at the time. I loved the design of the magazine especially for reviews. While each review didn't follow a templated style each one was unique with its own tailored design. I probably would buy something more professional now like EDGE.

I also bought into some of the Aussie Cubed mags which were rather good for news and rumours but apparently they dug up a lot of rumours from very unreliable sources. I found thier reviews to be rather solid, pity they stopped them.

I didn't like Nintendo Gamer. The magazine was run by a bunch of rookies stealing some of the Hyper fame. They seemed to be very unprofessional but thier scoring system was rather accurate.

The magazine at this time created a minor controversey when it awarded the N64 game Turok 2: Seeds of Evil a perfect score of 10 in Issue 68
I remember this issue. Rather bias. OoT and SM64 only got 99%.

[TSPhoenix]

Yeah i used to get NMS every month... ah remember the good old days of Skull vs Les (with nursey). Why an official nintendo magazine wanted to give so many kids stunted childhoods, we will never know.

It really is interesting though, back then, Nintendo were doing great, and let this kind of thing go on in their official mags. Maybe thats the reason they don't make them anymore, the content was just a bit too much for kids to be reading, and the continuous flow of Mario killing Sonic images in various forms and some got quite (quite!) gory.

But still, a great memory of my gaming youth, and look how well I turned out. *twitch*

It wasn't so much the gore as the blatant nudity and various other obscenties. That said I'd kill for some bigger copies of the pics by Natalia Silvia and Mark W.

The magazine at this time created a minor controversey when it awarded the N64 game Turok 2: Seeds of Evil a perfect score of 10 in Issue 68
I remember this issue. Rather bias. OoT and SM64 only got 99%.

They gave those games 99% to leave space for something better, then they gave Turok 2 100%, breaking their own rule. I don't know how that is biased though, the official Nintendo mag gave the top score to a 3rd party game, not an in-house game.

[Gus the Crocodile]

Which is why you, most of the time, disregard the score and read the review. Many times people have written in mentioned what you have said, and they have replied saying that they would like to get rid of the number score and let the review show it, but of course, in this day and age people are to impatient and want to know something quick.

Well, personally I do tend to ignore scores most of the time, but that's not the issue I was raising. I don't think scoring systems should be disregarded, I just think they need to take into account the fact that reviews are subjective. Scores have a place, and that place is that you need to know the reviewer for them to be useful. Even then, however, you're going to be a different enough person for increments of one in a hundred to be completely meaningless.

[imaROBOT]

featured Lara Croft on the cover.

but why? just to be smart ar$es?

[TSPhoenix]

featured Lara Croft on the cover.

but why? just to be smart ar$es?

Tomb Raider on GBC I believe.

Which is why you, most of the time, disregard the score and read the review. Many times people have written in mentioned what you have said, and they have replied saying that they would like to get rid of the number score and let the review show it, but of course, in this day and age people are to impatient and want to know something quick.

Well, personally I do tend to ignore scores most of the time, but that's not the issue I was raising. I don't think scoring systems should be disregarded, I just think they need to take into account the fact that reviews are subjective. Scores have a place, and that place is that you need to know the reviewer for them to be useful. Even then, however, you're going to be a different enough person for increments of one in a hundred to be completely meaningless.

Scores should be semi-reliable though. I understand that reviews are subjective as some people have different tastes, but my gripe is them marking down a game they like because it was like what came before it. Basically they are lowering the score for something that does not detract from that game, and often something that is hard to avoid.

Even NSMB got some bad reviews because it was the same thing as Super Mario Bros 3 - that was the point, did it make the game bad? No it didn't so why reduce the score?

[ajp]

[quote=killer kirby]For those that don't remeber it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo_Magazine_System:_Australia

LOL thanks for that, completely forgot about that mag, I remember being about 12 saving up money for that first issue!

[Gus the Crocodile]

Scores should be semi-reliable though. I understand that reviews are subjective as some people have different tastes, but my gripe is them marking down a game they like because it was like what came before it. Basically they are lowering the score for something that does not detract from that game, and often something that is hard to avoid.

Even NSMB got some bad reviews because it was the same thing as Super Mario Bros 3 - that was the point, did it make the game bad? No it didn't so why reduce the score?

Why mark down games for rehashing old ideas? Because to the writer it did detract from the game, that's why. If you don't agree with that opinion, then just look elsewhere for your reviews, because it's not wrong, it's just written in the context of having played the games before it. Not marking it down for that would be just as misleading to all the people who then complain of boredom from playing the same thing again.

When I watch movie reviews on ABC, for instance, I know to take into account that Margaret Pomeranz is more tolerant of comedy/action movies than me. There is no general good/bad indicator, you simply need a certain level of understanding of the context of the piece. Does this mean that some people are unintentionally mislead by reviews? Sure; plenty, I imagine. But some people are unintentionally mislead by road signs or washing instructions too, it's just a matter of education and practice until they figure out how to understand the text.

Of course scores should be reliable, but you quite simply cannot make a score that is "reliable" for all readers; if objective reviewing were possible, there wouldn't be seven trillion review sites on the internet. Subjectivity is only problematic when people assume they're being given facts - something they simply have to learn not to do.

[TSPhoenix]

What I'm getting at is that reviewers should definately mention that a game is a bit old in the review text, but not reflect that in the score. The score is a quality guage, and thus should only account for things that actually affect the product's quality.

I'm well aware that there are things that need to be accounted for when reading reviews, but the current reviewing practices make it difficult to draw a conclusion, expecting everyone to be seasoned review readers for it to be of any use.

Sure a review can't be accurate for all readers, but it can at least try and target a group other than game reviewers. Many currently work on the assumption that anyone reading has played every game in existence, a poor assumption.

[Gus the Crocodile]

What I'm getting at is that reviewers should definately mention that a game is a bit old in the review text, but not reflect that in the score. The score is a quality guage, and thus should only account for things that actually affect the product's quality.

What? The score is a summary of the text; arbitrarily leaving things out of one but not the other sounds pretty misleading to me. What if reviewers started deciding that they were such fans of the game that a complex, ugly UI didn't matter, and didn't put that in the score? As I said, to the reviewer the product's quality was affected, that's why they would lower the score. Quality is not an absolute attribute that can be measured independently.

What you're proposing doesn't make the review more accurate, it just switches the audience: those such as yourself would find it more accurate, and those who agreed with the reviewer that this game was less interesting for its repetition of old elements will be annoyed by the change. Those people do exist, and they are no less correct than you are here. The solution isn't for the reviewer to take your opinions into account, but for you to take the reviewers opinions into account. Yes, I think it's a good idea that the writer mention a few important things that might make a difference, but it's not their job to be someone you agree with, and it's not their job to make your decisions for you. Their job is to write what they think, to be smart enough that what they write is meaningful, and to be representative of a large enough audience to make what they think worth publishing.

I also can't really agree with suggestions that reviewers need to target a different audience or make different 'assumptions' to be better understood, because I don't agree with writing to an audience to begin with. As far as I'm concerned, you write what you think, and you let your audience form from the people who like what you say. Doing the opposite is a great way to earn money, but not a good way to build a set of worthwhile reviews.

[stubbietubbie]

See, this is why I don't do game reviews for A-N.

[TSPhoenix]

Yes it does switch the audience, but to the lowest common denominator (at some stage nobody had played the game). In this way people who don't know about the series can draw lots from the review, while those that do can read the review text and decide for themselves whether they want more of the same, as being more seasoned players, they should know what to expect.

The more experienced gamer can extrapolate info from a review that isn't explicitly written (ie. if they didn't say something has changed, then it is the same, people who have not played previous titles have no such reference points), so why does the reviewer even bother to put it in?

[Gus the Crocodile]

Yes it does switch the audience, but to the lowest common denominator (at some stage nobody had played the game). In this way people who don't know about the series can draw lots from the review, while those that do can read the review text and decide for themselves whether they want more of the same, as being more seasoned players, they should know what to expect.

I'm not sure if I'm reading you right, but what you're saying here sounds pretty much what I do when I read reviews; I take the facts about the games and use those to make up my own mind, only taking heed of the writer's opinions if they sound like someone with similar views to myself (which means ignoring them most of the time).

However, the important thing is that I don't do this because I think that's how reviews should be read, I do it because I don't tend to know the reviewer well enough to know where our differences lie. I'd like to be able to take a score at face value, and I think that's possible, but until the videogame press stops treating their reviewers as faceless objects, I sadly can't do that. I want the videogame equivalent of TV movie review shows, where you can get to know the people involved, so if you think they're wankers, you can ignore them, and if you think they're intelligent people you can listen.

So yes, I do think that you're making a fair point (at least when you phrase it as you have now :)), and I think such a method does have a place, especially given the press environment I talked about above. Just as you can't force people to read in one particular way, I don't want to force people to write in one particular way - the more different sources, the better - but I personally just prefer to revel in the subjective, that's all. If I wanted 'seasoned players' to get facts about the game and make their own minds up, I'd just link to the game's official website instead of writing a review at all.

[Deanie]

I used to buy those CUBE magazines from the UK, but I stopped coz they had really old Nintendo News in it :roll:

[Triaspia]

maybe we should ring/write to nintendo of aus and ask them if we could get nintendo power from the us somehow, or just go to NoAm directly.


im going to emai NoAm now, ill let you know when they repply

[TSPhoenix]

Yes it does switch the audience, but to the lowest common denominator (at some stage nobody had played the game). In this way people who don't know about the series can draw lots from the review, while those that do can read the review text and decide for themselves whether they want more of the same, as being more seasoned players, they should know what to expect.

I'm not sure if I'm reading you right, but what you're saying here sounds pretty much what I do when I read reviews; I take the facts about the games and use those to make up my own mind, only taking heed of the writer's opinions if they sound like someone with similar views to myself (which means ignoring them most of the time).

However, the important thing is that I don't do this because I think that's how reviews should be read, I do it because I don't tend to know the reviewer well enough to know where our differences lie. I'd like to be able to take a score at face value, and I think that's possible, but until the videogame press stops treating their reviewers as faceless objects, I sadly can't do that. I want the videogame equivalent of TV movie review shows, where you can get to know the people involved, so if you think they're wankers, you can ignore them, and if you think they're intelligent people you can listen.

So yes, I do think that you're making a fair point (at least when you phrase it as you have now :)), and I think such a method does have a place, especially given the press environment I talked about above. Just as you can't force people to read in one particular way, I don't want to force people to write in one particular way - the more different sources, the better - but I personally just prefer to revel in the subjective, that's all. If I wanted 'seasoned players' to get facts about the game and make their own minds up, I'd just link to the game's official website instead of writing a review at all.

I totally agree with how you read reviews, my gripe is that I ~know~ that most people don't read reviews like that. They should, but they don't. The truth is that their ignorance is probably their own problem, but I don't like seeing people buy a crap game, because the better ones scored around the same.

EDIT: Typo fixes.

[Gus the Crocodile]

Yeah, that's perfectly fair. It took me a while during this argument to realise that I was promoting subjectivity by having everyone write like I want them to write, which is obviously nonsense. Better everyone just read the type of review they want to read :)

[TSPhoenix]

I used to buy those CUBE magazines from the UK, but I stopped coz they had really old Nintendo News in it :roll:

I know, once the Aus edition ended the news was so old by the time it got here yu'd be hard pressed to actually call it news.

[Killer Kirby]

^^ thats very true although i did bue an edge magazine today.... I loved the cover it had :D

[ShortCutMan]

I have a subscription to GameSpot for the HD videos and stuff only. Magazines can't provide that for me and only come out once a month, not often enough for me.

See, this is why I don't do game reviews for A-N.I stopped doing Mod of the Month reviews for Mod DB (http://www.moddb.com/) after I had raging fanboys attacking me for some (little) negative points I made regarding a mod. You are smart not to do game reviews.

[Flareod]

I absolutely loved NMS when I was young(er). I think I even subscribed to it I was that much of a fan (I've never subscribed to a magazene in my entire life). But then it died, which was sad.

Then I moved onto Nintendo Gamer which was awesome, infact it lead me to a whole bunch of online Nintendo communities (anybody remember Nintendo Cult or Nintastic?), but it too died during the game-drought. I was very sad then as well.

I like Hyper alot, but it's not exclusively Nintendo. I think Australian coverage is really important, because it's what is relevant to us. That's why I was really excited when I came to this place (thanks to the guy who handed me the piece of paper at the connection tour!).

Long Story Short: I recomend Hyper.

[Link The HL Fan]

I used to get N64/Nintendo Gamer and NMS.

Then it was Hyper.

Now I have the net. No mags needed.

[HisBrother]

We need an official Nintendo Magazine here in Australia! Playstation fans gets one! I want one too! NAL try harder please!

[El Nicko]

ha im jinxed with game mags...
i always get them cause i never had net and i liek the smell lol
i used to get NMS...then it died...
so i turned to Nintendo Gamer...then it died
Now i get Hyper every month but u have to filter out all the x box xhit
of course since the days of NMS ive adopted a whore-like gaming lifestyle and i have a ps2 so Hypers cool...but since i fpund this site its no surprise about the news it has =p

[TSPhoenix]

Recently I stumbled upon this site
http://www.luv2game.com/luv2game/index.html?fuseaction=main.download
Basically they have thieir magazine freely downloadable in PDF.

Buliding on that I think its a great idea, you could have a full multimedia experiecne which is much more like reading a magazine than a website. All you'd need then is a way to read it like a book and you'd be set. The great thing about magazines is that they're physical, you can touch them, they don't need electricity and they can have loads of pictures without having to worry about bandwidth. If some of these principals could make it accross to digital distribution I'd be very interested in reading documents in that format.