Print is dead?

[Hendo]

I haven't been an active forumite round these parts for a while but it's not due to falling out with anyone here or not reading the mag anymore (more down to laziness to be honest), in fact I've bought every issue now since the second one. The problem is more down to what's happening all across the print industry in that I'm buying the issue every month but due to having spent the weeks before having read about all the games inside on t'internet, I just haven't got desire to read about them all over again.

It's not the staff's fault, obviously, and I still like the mag unlike seemingly everyone else on the internet, but the magazine's role has changed for me and it's only the features left that are new. I don't know if you want me to try and be more constructive or anything, but it'd only be the same stuff you've heard time and time again (hint: gamesTM is not an entity).

If there's another topic that's the same, then apologies for not searching properly.

[djsmiley2k]

I know that feeling, but I get alotta infomation from the mag which I dont get online, and most of the time I know I can trust it also.

Hell, I might even say I see the mag as some kind of subscription for these forums.... if it comes to that

I dont know exactly what I wanted to say.... Meh - I dont think print will die, the same way CD sales dont die - People like phsyical products - and some people hate reading infomation online, I like most of the exploritive content the mag does, there has been some real nice features lately... However I do worry that after awhile they will end up recycling topics like everywhere else does... Hopefully can keep pushing in new directions.

[Rain]

It seems that I am one of the few remaining souls who prefer both their gaming news and their reviews in print. Features vary depending on what they are and how interested I am but I will always read the news and the majority of the reviews etc along with most other content (again, depending on how appealing I find it).

There are so many games sites out there that it is hard to know if the news being fed and reported is in fact accurate and not tainted by considerable bias or speculation...the same goes for reviews...how many have been bought by exclusives or advertising, how many are fanboy write ups, etc etc. (Plus I hate reading vast swathes of text on screen, especially if it's white on black which makes my eyes float after a while).

Aside from the fact that I have always had a 'thing' for gaming mags, (since the days of Your Sinclair and Crash through Amiga Power, C&VG, Super Play, etc), I enjoy reading my gaming bits and bobs in print and will never give up buying gaming mags. (unless every console goes down the route of devout motion sensor gameplay, in which case, this generation as it stands will be my last) I like having a tactile product that I can page through or take on the train, whose cover I can slag or admire, the ink I can breathe in etc...I know this makes me part of a dying breed perhaps, but hey, I feel the same about physical media as opposed to digital downloads

[djsmiley2k]

It seems that I am one of the few remaining souls who prefer both their gaming news and their reviews in print. Features vary depending on what they are and how interested I am but I will always read the news and the majority of the reviews etc along with most other content (again, depending on how appealing I find it) .... I know this makes me part of a dying breed perhaps, but hey, I feel the same about physical media as opposed to digital downloads

Shortened for ease of reading - but thanks for putting my thoughts in print! - Can't agree with phsyical vs digital atm .... I'm still on the fence depending on how it all plays out.

[djsmiley2k]

Wahahahahahaha!!!!!

First MJ, then Farrah now Print, this is a sad weekend indeed

And now this thread? OH THE PAIN!.

[ScotsWahey]

I would say that 98.675% of the articles I read online are written by D- English students that couldn't get jobs as proper journalists. You get what you pay for with GamesTM. Plus you don't have to put up with the worst page layouts the internet has to offer IM LOOKING AT YOU IGN!

[Kar]

It's an interesting topic I think. What can print do that online can't? Not much. But what I think you get 'offline' is the ability to go deeper than you tend to get online. Depth takes effort and effort costs money. There aren't too many websites making all that much money, and those that do, that money almost certainly doesn't filter down to the hacks.

So what you get is pretty light weight stuff online. It's up to the second, that the benefit, but it lacks the detail, depth you get in print.

Sadly barring two gaming mags (the ones that I buy) even print is going that way. Going superficial to cut costs. GamesTM and Edge, each have their own quirks, but what they both feature is meaty prose and some thought.

Occasionally you'll get an online piece that approaches what you get in print. But it's the exception, not the rule.

And maybe I'm old, but I like curling up with paper, not with my macbook. There's something vastly less taxing on the eyes reading good ole-fashioned print versus a LCD.

As devices like the Kindle and no doubt competing devices, some of the media limitations of online (like what you hold to read content) will start to go away. But I dunno, for me I hope there remains a market for magazines, quality ones at least.

[merman]

But then you start to hear about DRM problems on e-book readers like the Kindle and wonder if it can replace the ease of use of a magazine/book...

[Matthew]

It's way too early to call the death of print, but the status quo needs to change.

The biggest challenge posed by the net to the gaming press is the way magazines build themselves around previews and reviews. There are so many magazines that are just these and nothing else, but the conditions that once made that tempting for the reader no longer exist. We pride ourselves on offering some of the best criticism around, but games™ wouldn't be as strong without the features, retro and Discuss content.

That sort of analytical writing is still very difficult to find online. Websites are far more interested in being first than being careful, so you rarely get long, considered pieces that feature multiple interviews or an article that has let a story breathe and develop.

[Rain]

games™ wouldn't be as strong without the features, retro and Discuss content.

That sort of analytical writing is still very difficult to find online. Websites are far more interested in being first than being careful, so you rarely get long, considered pieces that feature multiple interviews or an article that has let a story breathe and develop.

Agreed. So many sites offer diluted and regurgitated news bytes or 'exclusive' or rushed reviews. So many are concerned with churning out content and fighting for a place on the cutting edge and the attention of fickle readers that the deeper, worthwhile, and more considered pieces get left in the shadows. Not that this is common to our field...for example, the rolling news channels with their constant rechurning and blunderbuss approach to news stories where everything is fast and tiny as opposed to being of genuine merit.

Some of the best parts of mags like GamesTM are the features, for example the piece on review scores a few issues back - great stuff. Sooner or later, hopefully the bubble will burst and attention will slowly swing back round to more fleshed out, meaty articles...providing enough mags and writers have hung on in there to see things through to such calmer waters.

[Kar]

That sort of analytical writing is still very difficult to find online. Websites are far more interested in being first than being careful, so you rarely get long, considered pieces that feature multiple interviews or an article that has let a story breathe and develop.

That's it in a nutshell really. The question though is whether online will ever try and move in on that territory? And even if it does, will the technology give it the same freedom of expression (in terms of artwork and page design) as you find in print.

I buy magazines to read, but I do think the artwork is a big draw too when reading a magazine. Indeed the layout, design and philosophy is quite different between online and print. Print, they design everything around the article, to encourage and support your understanding of the discussion. Online, owing to the commercial orientation, everything is around generating traffic and generating / realising ad / sponsor revenue. Basically on a gaming site, the writing is of secondary purpose.

You need to consider as well, the honesty and integrity of what you read online. As online gaming sites undergo consolidation with big companies driving their attitude (and if we look at the Gerstmann debacle, arguably the content and editorial too) it becomes hard to truly believe what you're reading.

Maybe this will change in the future, as different economic models develop. Maybe gaming sites will find a way to monetise their content without having to sell out to advertisers and publishers. I think it will be very difficult though. If the NyTimes cannot make paid for content work, what hope the gaming industry?

Anyway interesting subject, and one that will no doubt affect us all, writers and readers alike, in the future.

[Matthew]

That's a key point, because general aesthetic appeal is a major plus for magazines, but it also reinforces the idea that the dominance of previews and reviews is on shaky ground. After all, they're uniformly the most templated and visually repetitive sections of any magazine, often taking up half of the entire page count.

My guess is that we'll eventually see more focussed versions of these sections, where the games covered are more reflective of the magazine's personality than the industry release list, and the same game won't receive four separate previews in the run up to release.

Taking all the various ways of buying games into account, there's simply too many to fit into a monthly magazine, yet it's the same crop of games that are covered by everybody. An enterprising magazine could use this glut of product to define itself as unique among its competitors.

[Rain]

I'd agree that aesthetics are key, since the look and feel of a magazine are part of the overall experience which can't really be obtained online. Well crafted design and eyecatching (but not print-drowning) layout, colour, and images all help to present the pieces in a more pleasing manner, making them more enjoyable to read. Good design will always compliment and accent the pieces, adding to the overall quality and it makes me feel that I have got my money's worth as much as the quality of the writing. I suppose it is the difference between a greasy spoon dumping mushy food on a plate or formulaic airplane meal in a tray and an imaginative and creatively presented meal in a fine restaurant.

I suppose when it comes to the sections such as reviews or previews which follow a formula, this could be arguably a necessary evil - routine and familiarity are comforting to most people and help them to determine which 'cluster' or 'section' this or that piece belongs in. Perhaps a middle way is the best option with, as Matthew has suggested, the design of the sections reflecting the games being covered but retaining a sense of conformity to a looser template? Certainly a tough one. I feel that too many games get repeated hype in preview sections before release and can suffer from the law of diminishing returns - it is a problem. There is a risk that people will simply skip these or become annoyed at the constant repetition of the same cluster of titles and it is unecessary. With more and more games being produced for an expanding variety of mediums, perhaps a few tweaks and an opening up of the previews to let a little fresh air in once in a while would be a good idea?

[Bilge Rat]

I get sent away to foreign countries a lot. I need something to read on the plane and in the hotel since I have no internet access.

[Ash]

I get sent away to foreign countries a lot. I need something to read on the plane and in the hotel since I have no internet access.

In the early days of the net, when I had no money, I would print off several pages of reviews from my favourite sites and save them for moments without net access. Wonder if anyone does that any more...