Game Informer surprises me

rickonker

rickonker

CAGiversary!
I was at a GS the other day and looked through an issue of Game Informer. I was surprised because the layout was kind of clean. I think all the reviews had a white background on the page. I get EGM so I guess I've gotten used to the messy backgrounds and pages. I didn't really have time to read through it, but just comparing the look, it made EGM look bad.

Are there any other gaming mags that aren't a mess? How is the writing in Game Informer?
 
It makes for a good read on the throne after I've eaten a lot of Taco Bell...but I do pick up on a pro-bias towards the Xbox in the mag.
 
Game Informer is what you'd expect from a magazine published by EB and Gamestop. Their average score is like a 7.5. The only games they pan are the ones that'll sell regardless of reviews or that wouldn't sell anyways. It's really one of the worst magazines for reviews I've ever read.
 
I'd say Game Informer is the best gaming mag out there right now. They usually have a hot cover story, but what really impresses me are things like the monthly editorals, interview with a developer, and pro/con debate. I also like the layout more than the cornea-searing look of mags like EGM. Toned downed colors, big pictures, and readable text counts for more than just a flashy look.
 
It definately is a very good looking magazine, and I'm constantly surprised by the cover stories. They've come a long way - anyone remember years ago when GI was basically a shit rag with some stories on it?
 
[quote name='Mr. Anderson']I'd say Game Informer is the best gaming mag out there right now. They usually have a hot cover story, but what really impresses me are things like the monthly editorals, interview with a developer, and pro/con debate. I also like the layout more than the cornea-searing look of mags like EGM. Toned downed colors, big pictures, and readable text counts for more than just a flashy look.[/QUOTE]
EGM just changed their layout like 2 issues ago. Its easier on the eyes now.
 
You can find a worse gaming mag than GI (like GamePro for example), but it seems like every other review starts out with a metaphor. Guess they aren't too bright when it comes to writing.
 
[quote name='6669']EGM just changed their layout like 2 issues ago. Its easier on the eyes now.[/QUOTE]
I think it still looks pretty bad, going by the December issue.
 
[quote name='whoknows']You can find a worse gaming mag than GI (like GamePro for example), but it seems like every other review starts out with a metaphor. Guess they aren't too bright when it comes to writing.[/QUOTE]

True. Gamepro is moronic. It's not even worth mentioning anymore it's been so bad for so long.
 
It's really a sell rag for EB/GameStop, you can never forget that when reading their reviews.. They do write pretty well, and they have good layouts. I generally prefer EGM, and online sites, however.

Game Informer also seems to have a bug up their butt about admiting anything nintendo makes is worthwhile too. (EGM has been getting into this too)
 
[quote name='jer7583']Not directly published, but you know they've got their fingers pretty deep in Game Informer's pie. Unintentional innuendo there.[/quote]
They have an agreement to give away subscriptions with their savings cards. What does that have to do with how the magazine operates?
 
I haven't subscribed to GI in a few years since getting involved in the free magazine biz, but from what I recall they were decent.

By now, of course, the staff is probably so changed it would be completely different.
 
[quote name='FriskyTanuki']They have an agreement to give away subscriptions with their savings cards. What does that have to do with how the magazine operates?[/QUOTE]
GameStop owns Game Informer
 
It's really improved over the years, however the grading is still pretty biased. Games that are expected to sell well typically receive higher than average scores even in the game is mediocre, while most of the low scoring games are typically released in low numbers.

That being said GI panned the New Pokemon game which really surprised me.
 
[quote name='FriskyTanuki']It's not published by EB and Gamestop.

http://www.gameinformer.com/OtherPages/BottomNav/CorporateInformation.htm[/QUOTE]

Taken from Gamestop's company profile: http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=130125&p=irol-homeProfile&t=&id=&

"GameStop is the world's largest video game retailer. The company operates 4,633 retail stores throughout the United States, Austria, Australia, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Italy, Ireland, New Zealand, Norway, Puerto Rico, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. The company also owns commerce-enabled Web properties, GameStop.com and ebgames.com, and Game Informer(R) magazine, a leading video and computer game publication."
 
[quote name='6669']EGM just changed their layout like 2 issues ago. Its easier on the eyes now.[/QUOTE]

Their new look is even worse, IMO. The whole damn mag just hurts my fucking eyes.
 
IMO, pretty much most any mag isn't worth it's weight in shit.

That's why I'm glad I get them for free. Getting EGM, Games for Windows (Still CGW in my heart), Game Informer, Stuff and Maxim for free is better than paying for them.

I still say the early 90s issues of PC Gamer (which is when I first started reading it) were the best. Easy on the eyes and they magazines were HUGE. 200-300 pages of goodness. It would take me a week to read everything.
 
[quote name='furyk']Game Informer is what you'd expect from a magazine published by EB and Gamestop. Their average score is like a 7.5. The only games they pan are the ones that'll sell regardless of reviews or that wouldn't sell anyways. It's really one of the worst magazines for reviews I've ever read.[/QUOTE]

I would disagree with that whole statement. I like it, I recommend a sub to it. Its not reading that will make you a better human being. But having gaming mags around the home is nice. Also you got to read when you drop a deuce. For reading on the toilet is the only thing that separates us from the animals.
 
i get game informer and egm. i like GI much more, the layout and features are just better, i think that the reviews are just as good for both and really, i dont put too much faith in reviews be it in a magazine, online, etc etc
 
[quote name='Kuros']IMO, pretty much most any mag isn't worth it's weight in shit.

That's why I'm glad I get them for free. Getting EGM, Games for Windows (Still CGW in my heart), Game Informer, Stuff and Maxim for free is better than paying for them.

I still say the early 90s issues of PC Gamer (which is when I first started reading it) were the best. Easy on the eyes and they magazines were HUGE. 200-300 pages of goodness. It would take me a week to read everything.[/QUOTE]
How did you get Game Informer for free?
 
[quote name='rickonker']How did you get Game Informer for free?[/QUOTE]

I work at a GS. When someone wants the card but doesn't want the mag and has no one to give it to, I'll ask if it's ok if I put in my info instead.
 
[quote name='furyk']Taken from Gamestop's company profile: http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=130125&p=irol-homeProfile&t=&id=&

"GameStop is the world's largest video game retailer. The company operates 4,633 retail stores throughout the United States, Austria, Australia, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Italy, Ireland, New Zealand, Norway, Puerto Rico, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. The company also owns commerce-enabled Web properties, GameStop.com and ebgames.com, and Game Informer(R) magazine, a leading video and computer game publication."[/quote]
[quote name='furyk']Game Informer is what you'd expect from a magazine published by EB and Gamestop. Their average score is like a 7.5. The only games they pan are the ones that'll sell regardless of reviews or that wouldn't sell anyways. It's really one of the worst magazines for reviews I've ever read.[/quote]

You didn't say they owned them, you said published.
 
[quote name='Kuros']I work at a GS. When someone wants the card but doesn't want the mag and has no one to give it to, I'll ask if it's ok if I put in my info instead.[/QUOTE]
Oh, sweet deal.
 
[quote name='seanr1221']It makes for a good read on the throne after I've eaten a lot of Taco Bell...but I do pick up on a pro-bias towards the Xbox in the mag.[/QUOTE]
Doesn't take long for some people to board the bias bus. Just because a magazine says unflattering things about whatever company you're ga-ga over doesn't make them biased. Everyone's entitled to opinions; reviewers do their best to give objective editorials on the subjects at hand. Yet they give their opinions -- that's the point. Calling editors biased is one of the biggest misconceptions in internet ignorance -- and that's saying a lot.

I'll get off my soapbox now and go to bed. That's just a big pet peeve for me.
 
[quote name='ViolentLee']Doesn't take long for some people to board the bias bus. Just because a magazine says unflattering things about whatever company you're ga-ga over doesn't make them biased. Everyone's entitled to opinions; reviewers do their best to give objective editorials on the subjects at hand. Yet they give their opinions -- that's the point. Calling editors biased is one of the biggest misconceptions in internet ignorance -- and that's saying a lot.

I'll get off my soapbox now and go to bed. That's just a big pet peeve for me.[/QUOTE]
All reviewers are biased against bad games, except maybe Seanbaby.
 
[quote name='FriskyTanuki']You didn't say they owned them, you said published.[/QUOTE]

Owned, published, whatever. I thought one implied the other with magazines. In this case, it does. Taken from wiki:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_Informer

"It is owned and published by GameStop Corp., the parent company of the video game retailer of the same name. Due to this, it is promoted in large part in-store, which has contributed heavily to its' large subscription base."

Any other holes you want to try and punch into my statement?
 
[quote name='radjago']All reviewers are biased against bad games, except maybe Seanbaby.[/QUOTE]
Very good point, and that's usually the thing I say to combat the wretched "B" word. By the way, I love Seanbaby -- one of the few must-reads in any gaming pub.
 
My friend brought home an import (European?) gaming mag... some kind retrogaming title. Super clean layout. Surprising because it deals only with older games. Whole two page spread of a Sega Genesis screenshot (and it's got huge glossy pages). I think it's $12 an issue or something like that but it's almost coffee table quality, and they do cool things like focus on Zelda for a particular issue or Sierra games.

Anyone know what I'm talking about? Bueller...?
 
I'm so sick of this constant bitching about such and such magazine is biased, because they gave a game you hate, or a game you love, a high/low score.
 
[quote name='ViolentLee']Very good point, and that's usually the thing I say to combat the wretched "B" word. By the way, I love Seanbaby -- one of the few must-reads in any gaming pub.[/QUOTE]

I think his schtick wore out years ago, but if people still like him, then I guess I'm in the minority.

As for bias, people tend to start with a conclusion (e.g., GI is biased because it's a vehicle to sell games) and search out for verification of it; this consists of both identifying those things that reaffirm the existence of bias, as well as ignoring those things that aren't biased. In the end, the poor souls are stuck with this conclusion: Game Informer is always biased, except when it isn't.

;)

Now, I've read people say it's biased b/c they want to sell you games...but that's a rather abstract accusaton of bias. If you want to convince people the magazine is biased, talk about the content of the magazine, not your theoretical judgments. Give me an example of bias - I'll set it up for you, even: what score did they give the EA release "Superman Returns?"

I honestly have no idea, but I do know that the game seems to have been universally shit on. Maybe we can also compare their PS3 Gundam review, another steaming pile.
 
When I made my comment about them being bias towards the xbox, it was because in many issues I've read they seem to always praise the xbox and shit all over anything sony.

I havn't really picked up the mag in the past couple months, so I don't know if they've changed.

And good luck trying to say people only call a mag bias when they put down a company they like, especially when the 360 is going to be my main system this gen. :roll:
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Give me an example of bias - I'll set it up for you, even: what score did they give the EA release "Superman Returns?"

I honestly have no idea, but I do know that the game seems to have been universally shit on. Maybe we can also compare their PS3 Gundam review, another steaming pile.[/quote]
Superman Returns got a 6, which goes with with the average rating for the game. Strange enough, some managed to give the game a 9.1.

They gave Gundam a 3.75, which is also in line with its average rating.
 
[quote name='furyk']Game Informer is what you'd expect from a magazine published by EB and Gamestop. Their average score is like a 7.5. The only games they pan are the ones that'll sell regardless of reviews or that wouldn't sell anyways. It's really one of the worst magazines for reviews I've ever read.[/QUOTE]

I've always liked Game Informer. Anyway, they use the "school sytem" grading scale where 7 is an average game, as opposed to EGM's where 5 is average.
 
I got a sub when I renewed my edge card. It now joins EGM, CGW, and Computer Shopper in my bathroom and reads just as well as the others. I will say this though.. their cover material feels nicer on my ass than EGM's.
 
[quote name='FriskyTanuki']Superman Returns got a 6, which goes with with the average rating for the game. Strange enough, some managed to give the game a 9.1.

They gave Gundam a 3.75, which is also in line with its average rating.[/QUOTE]

Well, that's certainly a notch in their favor, then.
 
I've got to say, I used to despise Game Informer (sorry, but any mag that gives the new Mortal Kombat game a 9.75 is just not on the same wavelength as I am, and is of no use to me as a gamer), but increasingly, I've felt their content has shot past that of EGM. I might not completely agree about some things (No, no, we shouldn't complain about copycat games and features!), but they're really backing up their reviews with solid reasons now, while I feel EGM is sort of slipping into "We liked this, we didn't like that, end of story" territory.

I also agree quite stongly about the trend to "ZOMG they R teh bias!" whenever something you like gets a crap review. I admit it: I like plenty of crap games, and dislike many good ones. But I can still tell which is which. I think more people need to distance themselves from that "I like it = it's good" misconception.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top