Magazines tend to have their own websites, where readers can leave their comments. Of course, it might seem like leaving comments about an article in a forum dedicated to a magazine isn't quite as easy to do, but it's hardly difficult either.AC10 said:
Well, if I read something in a magazine I'm going to have to be seriously motivated to find a PC to reply to it, that is even if I don't forget about it by time I get to a PC.Telperion said:
Which only further supports the OP's point about online being the future of magazines if readers are being encouraged to go online in order to chat about the articles within the magazine.Telperion said:
Just outta curiosity, what was your reaction when Microsoft bought-out CGW and made it into their own personal ad magazine? Frankly, that's when my subscription ended, with much remorse. Much as I loved those guys, I just couldn't support what Microsoft did to them. :/Andy Chalk said:
The magazine I have supported for the better part of 10 years started out pretty much all PC, but these days it's about just about every conceivable gaming media out there. And, although I only own a PC and an XBox, I really enjoy reading reviews about games on other platforms.WhiteTigerShiro said:
The thing that strikes me about the Escapist is that the website doesn't cover nearly everything. I don't spend several hours every week looking for stuff that might interest me, which is what I would realistically need to do to get the kind of news coverage I'm used to. It's why I pay for a subscription.WhiteTigerShiro said:
It's likely you guys have AdBlocker or some other such thing running. I had the same problem a day or so back and when I turned it off I was able to get back to seeing things properly. However, once I figured out what it was I just resigned myself to highlighting the text.Sartan0 said:
I gave up on CGW probably less than a year after George Jones took over as Editor-in-Chief, long before the Microsoft thing. There was a very obvious change in direction that I just didn't care for and I ended up leaving. Subscribed to PCG for three or four years but near the end I was only really buying it for the demo discs anyway, so when broadband showed up in my little town, that was that.WhiteTigerShiro said:
Ah yes, I loved Tom. Back when they got rid of his section I was tempted to be done with them, he was always so hilariously insightful, truly a case of "saving the best for last". The guy who replaced him was just... no. I tried reading his articles, but he was trying too hard to be a bad-ass, only without the cynical sense of humor that makes things like Zero Punctuation so great. :/Andy Chalk said:
They also had a ton of Alpha Protocol ads and gave AP a rather negative review.Hurr Durr Derp said:
Maybe that's what happens here (competent moderators FTW), but comments have the disadvantage that in many parts of the internet, you get ridiculous amounts of stupid; just look at YouTube. In print, you don't have page after page of "stfu noob this articel suxx0rz" and "lolol +1". In print, the closest you get is letters, of which only a select few intelligent ones are actually published.AC10 said:
That's part of the problem facing @Gamer. Objectivity can be incredibly hard to pin down. The Gerstmann case had all the appearances of a hatchet job because of the K&L review, but what was going on behind the scenes that we're not aware of? Now slap that situation on top of a magazine being put out by someone with obvious issues of self-interest and everything is magnified. It's quite possible that @Gamer will be a 100% straight-shooting mag from start to finish, but any little bump in the road will end up looking (possibly) worse than it is because the assumption will be that they've made pimping their shit the priority.Assclown_King said: