Wither CGOnline? [Archive] - Quarter To Three Forums

milo

07-02-2002, 02:49 PM

Is it just me or has Computer Games Online just about gone tits up? They haven't changed the front page news in weeks, and it took them several days just to paste the table of contents from the paper mag onto the please-oh-please-subscribe page. I'd hate to see it go, it's always been one of my favorite online game sites...

Mark Asher

07-02-2002, 03:02 PM

I suspect it's transitioning from an editorial site into an advertisement for the magazine.

The parent company, theglobe.com, is in dire straights. As of their March 31, 2002 financial statement, they had about $2.4 million in ready assets but were losing money each quarter -- I think that quarter they lost about $0.7 mil.

However, they had an impending hit of $625,000 to pay to their outgoing CEO. That would drop them to about $1.8 mil, and if they are still losing money, they may very well be under $1 mil in ready assets right now. My guess is they're cost-cutting, and they may have cut the website as part of that process. (In fact, theglobe.com's online ad revenue for the 1st quarter 2001 was $1.3 mil, but the online ad revenue for 1st quarter 2002 was...$0.00! Yeah, Internet advertising's healthy alright.)

The mag's up for sale, but this is not a good time to sell a magazine with the current ad slump.

Of course, there's probably no better time to buy a magazine if you want to get one cheap.

Sean Tudor

07-02-2002, 06:51 PM

I suspect it's transitioning from an editorial site into an advertisement for the magazine.

Wasn't there someone from CGonline still posting in QT3 ? Or have they been sacked too ?

Jason Cross

07-02-2002, 09:32 PM

There is nobody "from CGOnline." There is only the magazine, and CGOnline is just the website for the magazine.

It only contains content that ran in the magazine in previous months.

And yes, the idea is that we're transitioning away from that into a sell-sheet for the magazine, essentially. There's just no justification for giving away what we intend to sell, even if it is off the shelves by the time it goes up. It's certainly not generating enough sales to pay for the bandwidth the site uses, so why do it?

And we need to kill the perception that CGOnline is an editorial entity in its own right and not just a magazine archive, which this move will certainly accomplish.

I'm sorry if you like the site and are sorry to see it go, but the solution is to buy the magazine and get all the SAME EXACT STUFF a month or more earlier (plug plug).

(oh, and it hasn't all been finalized yet, so don't freak out if none of this happens just yet. And the current thinking is that the forums would remain.)

Sean Tudor

07-02-2002, 09:55 PM

I haven't seen a Computer Games magazine on the shelves here for over 12 months. The same goes for Computer Gaming World.

But there is a never ending supply of PC Gamer.

Murph

07-02-2002, 11:36 PM

CGM is really hard to find in this area, too. In fact, it may be next to impossible to get one if you don't have a subscription.

copeknight

07-03-2002, 01:13 AM

I can find CGM, oddly, a little easier than CGW, but neither has the proliferation on the newsstands here that PCG does.

Sadly, though, I think most of us that do care about journalistic integrity do subscribe to CGM. PCG, though, caters to, er, the lowest common denominator. I find enough I like in it each month to keep me reading, but a lot of it makes me cringe.

I'm sure they've been brought up before, but this piqued my curiosity, so I looked up (last year's) average circulation figures, and I admit they surprised me.

PC Gamer:
Mail: 259,870; Newsstand: 104,742; Total (incl. non-paid): 366,103

CGW:
Mail: 274,620; Newsstand: 59.733; Total: 340,568

CGM:
Mail: 360,857; Newsstand: 30,198; Total: 393.461

So are CGM's numbers inflated with subscriptions given with Chips & Bits orders?

Mark Asher

07-03-2002, 07:01 AM

PCG has always been the leader in newstand sales from what I've been told. They make a lot of money from those sales, which in this advertising climate helps. Advertisers like newstand sales too.

CGM's numbers have seemed a bit odd to some since they've risen incredibly fast over the last few years, but they're audited, so there's an independant body confirming them.

In the end what's most important is the advertising. From what I've heard, and this is just hearsay stuff, CGM has the more trouble competing for ads and getting the kind of prices the other magazines get, but no one's doing great with advertising right now.

According to their most recent SEC filing, here's theglobe.com's advertising revenue from the first quarter this year -- $667,843. That has to be almost entirely CGM ad sales, I'd guess. That's $220,000 per month, basically. (In fact in the last issue it appeard they have about 22 pages of paid advertising, which if they're getting $10,000 per page, would be $220,000.)

If CGM is printing 393,000 copies of the magazine each month according to those circulation figures, you have to wonder if they're even profitable at this point? They do have newstand and subscription revenue, but that's a lot of copies to print and deliver, and they have other expenses such as salaries and office space, etc.

07-03-2002, 07:03 AM

Does CGM really get $10,000 a page?

Mark Asher

07-03-2002, 07:08 AM

I don't know. I've heard that's the price that the other mags ask. I'd assume that's what CGM goes for, but my guess is they have to be a bit more flexible in their pricing.

Tyjenks

07-03-2002, 07:18 AM

For what it is worth, CGM is the one magazine I have consistently subscribed to since I began my PC gaming. CGOnline was once a wonderful site, but I totally understand the problems in keeping it going and the actual need (or lack there of) for it since internet ad revenues have bottomed out.

OOooohhh! I have a terrific idea. I am hereby starting a rally cry for a secret society, members-only CGOnline Complete Plus so we can pay $9.95/mo. to read the forums and the content I can gain at one thousand other sites. :wink:

Ben Sones

07-03-2002, 08:13 AM

So are CGM's numbers inflated with subscriptions given with Chips & Bits orders?

No, those can't be included in audit figures. Or rather, they can, but they can't be included with "paid circulation." CGM has no problems when it comes to subscription circulation; the problem is newsstand sales. Advertisers give more weight to newsstand sales (for some reason--I've never really understood that), and PCG beats both of the other mags in that category by a very wide margin. Circulation does not equal profits, because newsstand and subscription prices are designed to cover production and not much more. Ads equal profits, and ideally more circulation gets more ads, but in reality it's a lot more complicated than that.

DennyA

07-03-2002, 09:03 AM

Ben's right about it being more complicated than that. Newsstand circulation is costly to obtain, for instance. In this industry, an average magazine sells about 3 per 10 copies put on the newsstand. (Nobody tell Greenpeace!) The rest are pulped. A 50% sellthrough on an issue is considered an amazing success.

I don't know if this is still true, since I'm now just a lowly freelancer on the computer gaming side of the magazine biz, but when I was more directly involved, one reason PCG had higher newsstand sales was that they distributed a much higher number of magazines, into more outlets. (Which seems borne out by the comments here about which magazine is easiest to find.)

So when you're figuring out how many copies of each issue each magazine is printing, you should multiply the newsstand number by at least two, more likely three.

rdarnese

07-03-2002, 10:48 AM

As far as the earlier statements go, yes they did layoff Bob Mayer the long time online editor for CGO.

copeknight

07-03-2002, 04:45 PM

No, those can't be included in audit figures. Or rather, they can, but they can't be included with "paid circulation." CGM has no problems when it comes to subscription circulation; the problem is newsstand sales. Advertisers give more weight to newsstand sales (for some reason--I've never really understood that),

I don't understand that either; I was always under the impression that advertisers wanted subscribers because they could count on a core base of readers and could research more stable demographics from subscribers than causal newsstand buyers.

But about the Chips & Bits, in the fine print at the bottom of C&B ads, it says $10 is allocated for a subscription to CGM. Wouldn't that be considered paid? I don't know; it just seems odd to me.

Carl

Anonymous

07-03-2002, 04:52 PM

As far as the earlier statements go, yes they did layoff Bob Mayer the long time online editor for CGO.

According to Jason Cross, there is no CGO. So Bob Mayer has been fired from Computer Games Magazine?

Mark Asher

07-03-2002, 05:04 PM

As I understand it, Bob's position was cut. I'm sure it was for financial reasons.

It's too bad. Bob's a good guy.

Desslock

07-03-2002, 06:34 PM

>But about the Chips & Bits, in the fine print at the bottom of C&B ads, it says $10 is allocated for a subscription to CGM. Wouldn't that be considered paid?

Yes, which is why CGM's number have risen so substantially over the past three years. Great mag though, and I hope it pulls through, at least to keep the other characters honest.

Anonymous

07-03-2002, 10:17 PM

CGM also turned out to be a comp. subscription source for those who subscribed to various magazines that died in various ways (OGR/C&NP, The General, and a few others).

--- Alan

Anonymous

07-04-2002, 03:52 PM

Yes, which is why CGM's number have risen so substantially over the past three years. Great mag though, and I hope it pulls through, at least to keep the other characters honest.
You vastly overestimate the number of sales and size of Chips & Bits to think that's that reason the circulation has gone up. Most of their customers are repeats, some ridiculously high percentage, and you don't get an infinite number of simultaneous subscriptions.

Aside from the obvious ways (marketing, word of mouth, increased newsstand distribution, whatever), the main way magazines build circulation quickly is to buy it from agents. Sometimes you end up with good readers, some of the time you end up with people saying, "What the hell is this?"

There were other things too: We get subs we get from various school programs, we were in Publisher's Clearing House for a couple of years, we bought Incite's PC magazine list when it went belly-up, we have cards in various game boxes, we used to sell calendars and buyer's guides with subs, we were selling versions localized in Italian and Greek (which was truly weird), blah blah blah.

Jason Cross

07-05-2002, 10:18 PM

According to Jason Cross, there is no CGO. So Bob Mayer has been fired from Computer Games Magazine?

Correct. For the last year or so, Bob's title was "Managing Editor," and the website had virtually no exclusive content at all. It was only articles that also appeared in the print magazine - delayed a month so that the print issue would be off the newsstands by the time it went online where people could get it free.

As Mark said, Bob wasn't "fired" (which implies it was his fault). We were all sorry to see him go, but we had to reduce a certain number of staff positions. Bob IS a good guy, and letting him go was in no way related to the quality of his work.

This is heresay on my part, but it's my understanding this has happened in several other mags/publishers as well. I've heard that Vederman is pulling double duty as the CD editor for PC Gamer and Maximum PC now. Again, that's just scuttlebutt.

Jason Cross

07-05-2002, 10:22 PM

Yes, which is why CGM's number have risen so substantially over the past three years. Great mag though, and I hope it pulls through, at least to keep the other characters honest.

Last I checked, this amounts to like 10,000 out of the entire paid circulation. I don't have the audit in front of me, but it's on there in the fine print on the last page.

It's responsible for maybe 2-3% of the total "paid circulation" at best.

And for what it's worth, the Chips thing has been going on since long before the spike in circulation, so it can hardly be responsible for it.

wumpus

07-05-2002, 10:31 PM

As Mark said, Bob wasn't "fired" (which implies it was his fault). We were all sorry to see him go, but we had to reduce a certain number of staff positions. Bob IS a good guy, and letting him go was in no way related to the quality of his work.
That sucks. Bob's the man. Figuratively speaking.

Desslock

07-05-2002, 11:09 PM

>Last I checked, this amounts to like 10,000 out of the entire paid circulation. I don't have the audit in front of me, but it's on there in the fine print on the last page

Sorry, I was just referring to it as an example of one of the many things CGM (which by no means is the only one) has done over the past several years to drastically alter its subscription base (buying old lists, etc., as Steve detailed).

The goal, of course, was to try to convince advertisers of the increased value in advertising, but if anything, it's had the opposite effect by devaluing advertising and causing potential advertisers to question the numbers. That's why newstand sales are so much more valued, since they're perceived to be "cleaner", and less easy to manipulate -- not really fair to mags like CGM and CGW that have sizable, long-term subscriber bases. But I think the Globe's circulation manipulation hurt the industry.

Anonymous

07-06-2002, 01:33 PM

But I think the Globe's circulation manipulation hurt the industry.
It hurt the industry? Ah c'mon, we have almost zero impact on the industry. No one pays attention to us at all... well, I was almost on CNN the other night, but anyway, how did we screw anything up for anyone else?

All the magazines got into a pissing contest for circulation to combat the rise of websites. We were all afraid that's where all the ad money would go. In retrospect, that was a mistake, but it's one everyone made on their own independent of anyone else.

Desslock

07-06-2002, 02:34 PM

>All the magazines got into a pissing contest for circulation to combat the rise of websites. We were all afraid that's where all the ad money would go.

That's all I'm saying. It was a short-sighted movie, but one that everyone essentially had to opt into to avoid having a circulation totally out of whack with direct competitors.

>In retrospect, that was a mistake, but it's one everyone made on their own independent of anyone else.

Whether they were just being reactive to their competitors or independently thought it was a good idea, it hurt the industry. You're closer to this stuff, so I'll defer to you on whether or not someone led the charge, but the Globe's 'bubble' IPO put it under additional scrutiny that may make its mistakes seem more prominent.

Mark Asher

07-06-2002, 02:50 PM

"All the magazines got into a pissing contest for circulation to combat the rise of websites. We were all afraid that's where all the ad money would go. In retrospect, that was a mistake, but it's one everyone made on their own independent of anyone else."

No kidding that fear turned out to be wrong. I'm surprised any game companies advertise with the websites. Why pay for exposure when you can get developer diaries online, get screenshots posted, get your game previewed multiple times, etc. -- and have it all be available as long as the website is up?

Maybe Gamespot will be able to get more ads now that their old content will be locked? Maybe that was one of their considerations when they went to their new scheme?

Anonymous

07-06-2002, 03:11 PM

>That's all I'm saying. It was a short-sighted movie, but one that everyone essentially had to opt into to avoid having a circulation totally out of whack with direct competitors.
Yeah, but it's hardly something we spearheaded. Blame PC Gamer for having the highest circ, because everyone was playing catchup to them.

it hurt the industry.
I just don't get that. What industry? The game industry? No, can't be that. The magazine industry? Regardless of the circ numbers, it'd be hurting today due to the slump.

You're closer to this stuff, so I'll defer to you on whether or not someone led the charge, but the Globe's 'bubble' IPO put it under additional scrutiny that may make its mistakes seem more prominent.
Well, by the time The Globe bought us, the bubble was already deflating. And our circ numbers had already grown well before they acquired us. We just publicized the numbers because we actually had someone in PR. And others actually paid attention at that point.

Anonymous

07-06-2002, 03:17 PM

No kidding that fear turned out to be wrong. I'm surprised any game companies advertise with the websites. Why pay for exposure when you can get developer diaries online, get screenshots posted, get your game previewed multiple times, etc. -- and have it all be available as long as the website is up?
Yeah, I think I was saying that years ago during the height of the madness and everyone was making fun of me. Wish I had some of those conversations archived, heh... actually, they're probably on Usenet.

I'd never even think about spending a penny marketing online today. The whole "daily content model" was a mistake. When you have such high demands for content, you better hope you're attracting non-endemic advertising otherwise the companies don't need to advertise to get the word out about their title. They just give you some "exclusive" shots and boom, it's up, and it's better than any ad.

If more websites went to bi-monthly or weekly updating, and because of this were able to exercise more control about what's posted or not, they'd be more attractive to game advertisers--well, at least if those advertisers were me, which they're not--as there may be times when that ad is the only mention of some particular game on the site that update.

Er, that was an awful sentence. Editor!

Mark Asher

07-06-2002, 06:39 PM

No kidding that fear turned out to be wrong. I'm surprised any game companies advertise with the websites. Why pay for exposure when you can get developer diaries online, get screenshots posted, get your game previewed multiple times, etc. -- and have it all be available as long as the website is up?
Yeah, I think I was saying that years ago during the height of the madness and everyone was making fun of me. Wish I had some of those conversations archived, heh... actually, they're probably on Usenet.

What the websites need to do, and what the magazines haven't been all that successful at either, is attract other advertisers besides game companies. Movies, tv shows, comic books, sci-fi books, fast food, snacks, consumer electronics, autos, etc. -- all the things that males 15-35 are interested in. I've seen some of them advertising in the mags and on the websites, but it seems sporadic. I guess a lot of them opt for mass market advertising like TV ads.

Anonymous

07-06-2002, 08:05 PM

What the websites need to do, and what the magazines haven't been all that successful at either, is attract other advertisers besides game companies.
It's certainly not like everyone doesn't try. But you have to weigh the pursuit of those ads against the resources you have to get the ones from the game and game hardware companies. It's not just as easy as calling up Pepsi and offering them a good deal. They can get the demographic wherever they want it, and without the stigma of "geeky" gaming.

Mark Asher

07-06-2002, 08:14 PM

What's scary is that I looked at the most recent CGW and they only had about four game companies advertising -- I may be off on that number, but it wasn't many.

Toddy

07-07-2002, 01:31 PM

What the websites need to do, and what the magazines haven't been all that successful at either, is attract other advertisers besides game companies. Movies, tv shows, comic books, sci-fi books, fast food, snacks, consumer electronics, autos, etc. -- all the things that males 15-35 are interested in. I've seen some of them advertising in the mags and on the websites, but it seems sporadic.

I think that game publishers are the top advertisers in comics right now. I've been back into comics for about three years now, and I've noticed the number of game ads steadily going up over that entire period of time. These ads are appearing in both mainstream DC and Marvel superhero books, as well as adult-oriented fare like DC's Vertigo line and Marvel Max. To give a recent example, the first issue of Grant Morrison's THe Filth (DC Vertigo, meaning lots of four-letter words and tits) is filled with game ads. The back cover is Eternal Darkness, the back inside cover is Magic Online, the front inside cover is Legion: The Legend of Excalibur, and inside are ads for Way of the Samurai, Barbarian, and Headhunter. And this is in a book that's going to be a minor sales success, at best. You see the same sort of thing in the major long underwear titles like Amazing Spider-Man, though I think that the ad rate is considerably higher there, and that there's more competition for prime spots. The latest issue of the aforementioned ASM, for example, has a Got Milk? ad on the inside cover and pages for stuff like Tang (though there's a BMX game attached to that) and Corn Nuts on the inside pages. Some gaming ads, but for higher profile titles like the new Crash Bandicoot game.

Man, I think I just came up with a column topic...

Mark Asher

07-07-2002, 02:19 PM

So the comics are attracting the kinds of advertisers that would be naturals for the game mags? I wonder what their rates are compared to the game mags?

I just get the feeling a lot of game companies feel like they've already reached the game mag readers and they'd rather put the bulk of their ad dollars elsewhere.

Sean Tudor

07-07-2002, 03:20 PM

This brings up an interesting question ...

If games companies stop advertising in gaming mags and game websites go pay-only then where will we get our game information from ? How will we know when a new game is released ?

DennyA

07-07-2002, 03:25 PM

Desslock,

Nah, it didn't do a thing to the industry.

Circulation manipulation didn't start with a few bucks from Chips & Bits subscriptions going to pay for a CGM subscription. Buying lists, bringing in subscribers from magazine resellers, etc. to get your numbers to match a target or surpass a competitor is common practice. I'm certain every game magazine has done it to some extent.

For instance, you know Publisher's Clearing House and the similar "contest" resellers? Did you know that most magazines don't see a PENNY of those subscriptions? As I understand it, PCH gets to keep every cent of the subscription sale. The magazines simply get higher circulation numbers out of the deal. Same goes for mags you can get with airline frequent flyer miles and most other deals that don't come directly from the publisher. Look at all the well-known magazines you see coming from these resellers.

That's one reason that some advertisers consider newsstand sales more important that total circulation numbers. Because they're a bit more difficult to manipulate. (Although it can be done -- PC Gamer, for instance, was printing many more copies for newsstand distribution than the other game mags last time I checked, and simply getting into more outlets will obviously increase your sales.)

Anonymous

07-08-2002, 09:11 PM

Btw,what the heck happened to CGOnline's website?I just went there,and it seems to have a lot more content,but where did their forum's go to?Or am I missing something?

Mark Asher

07-08-2002, 09:44 PM

"That's one reason that some advertisers consider newsstand sales more important that total circulation numbers. Because they're a bit more difficult to manipulate. (Although it can be done -- PC Gamer, for instance, was printing many more copies for newsstand distribution than the other game mags last time I checked, and simply getting into more outlets will obviously increase your sales.)"

Still, those newstand circ figures are impressive regardless of how they are achieved. They're not freebies. They're not comps. They're not subscription switches. They're not piggybacked onto the sale of something else, etc. Advertisers are surely delighted if they think PC Gamer is flooding the newstands -- how could advertisers not like that? I'd love to think the ad I place is going to be in more newstands. That's gotta be a strong selling point.

It's only a weakness in that all those newstand copies are an expense Imagine has to bear.

Mark Asher

07-08-2002, 09:45 PM

Btw,what the heck happened to CGOnline's website?I just went there,and it seems to have a lot more content,but where did their forum's go to?Or am I missing something?

The forums are still there, but there's no link anymore. You have to look at a back issue to find a link.

Ben Sones

07-09-2002, 06:33 AM

Still, those newstand circ figures are impressive regardless of how they are achieved. They're not freebies. They're not comps. They're not subscription switches. They're not piggybacked onto the sale of something else, etc. Advertisers are surely delighted if they think PC Gamer is flooding the newstands -- how could advertisers not like that?

True enough. The fact that it's horribly expensive for Gamer to do it makes little difference to advertisers (it's not their money). They only care about the results. And the results are good newsstand sales.

Anonymous

07-09-2002, 08:02 AM

Still, those newstand circ figures are impressive regardless of how they are achieved. They're not freebies. They're not comps. They're not subscription switches. They're not piggybacked onto the sale of something else, etc.
Don't think they can't be manipulated. You know how you determine newsstand sales? Retailers report back how many they've sold. That's how the record industry used to track CD sales, and why "Thriller" was #1 for 50+ weeks. Now with Soundscan, records debut at #1 and immediately move down the chart, which is a more accurate reflection of how sales actually work.

I'm not saying anyone does this, but it's pretty easy to see how you could pay retailers to basically destroy issues and report them as sold. You pay them to be on shelves, so what's an extra few thousand to boost sales?

Robert Sharp

07-09-2002, 08:32 AM

Hey guys. I just registered here in the case of a shutdown to the CGO forum. I've been a regular there for a while now, and while I hope it remains in some form, I am just not sure at this point. Anyway, while I did register here after hearing of this very topic, I am not posting here by default :). I recognize some names here and I like the level of posting I have read so far.

For those interested, you can still get to the CGO forums, just not through the main page anymore. It has been converted to an ad for the magazine (which hopefully will survive the current financial woes of the theGlobe). It's good to see so much concern over both the website and the magazine. I think we all know that they have given us some of the most mature writing/editorials/reviews/previews of any of the gaming sites and mags out there. Hopefully they can continue and those who were part of it and no longer are will find a place somewhere.

Jason Cross

07-09-2002, 10:11 AM

It's good to see so much concern over both the website and the magazine.

Yeah - I like to see so much concern about ALL the magazines and websites, actually. I wish more gamers/readers were concerned about both the quality and financial health of game publications, online or off. Sadly, it seems like all to many of them are just looking for the next juicy rumor (which ultimately proves only partially true at best) and some more pretty screenshots.

Aszurom

07-09-2002, 02:57 PM

What the websites need to do, and what the magazines haven't been all that successful at either, is attract other advertisers besides game companies.

http://www.courttv.com/graphics/photos/topnews/mscleo/cleo_topnews_011602.jpg

Rob de los Reyes

07-09-2002, 05:07 PM

That's worth an "lol." By the way, isn't that psychic lady getting sued right now? I can't remember what she calls herself so I can't look it up.

Kool Moe Dee

07-09-2002, 08:17 PM

That's worth an "lol." By the way, isn't that psychic lady getting sued right now? I can't remember what she calls herself so I can't look it up.

That would be Miss Cleo. And yeah, I remember reading that she was getting sued...not sure what happened with that, though...

At the least, I don't see her commercials on late night TV anymore... :D

Anonymous

07-09-2002, 09:22 PM

That would be Miss-TRESS Cleo to you, mon. An while my commercials may not be on the television right now, Ahm still keepin' it real with all my true believers over the telephone. Why worry about a few dollahs in the phone bills when Ah can see your future in tha cahds?

mtkafka

07-10-2002, 12:31 AM

Is it true that CG might be closed? I read at the forums that they are looking for a buyer since theglobe is dying. And that the forums might be closed in two weeks, and that Bob Mayer was released? hmmm, CG has the best writers for a game mag... I would hate to see it go.

Miss Cleo what do you in the cards? :(

etc

Murph

07-10-2002, 12:33 AM

Hmmm...That could be why Bob hasn't been returning my e-mails...I thought it was just an editor thing. :-)

Gordon Cameron

07-10-2002, 07:17 AM

It only contains content that ran in the magazine in previous months.

I've had a subscription to CG for the last year and I don't recall ever seeing a Jeff Vogel "Grumpy Gamer" column in the print magazine. Was that an online-only feature, or was it just tucked away somewhere hard to find?

Bernie_Dy

07-10-2002, 11:36 AM

Ah can see your future in tha cahds?

Yeah. Visa card, MasterCard, Amex card...

Robert Sharp

07-10-2002, 03:01 PM

It may be online only, but I thought I read some of them in the mag too. They are good articles, IMO, even when I don't agree with him. He goes too far sometimes, and I think he is even guilty at times of doing things in his games that he claims to hate ;). Still, interesting reads. Much better than Shoot Club :twisted:

Jason Cross

07-11-2002, 01:05 PM

Grumpy Gamer was an online-only column. It's just about the only thing that was.

Tyjenks

07-11-2002, 02:09 PM

I have not received my most recent issue of CGM in the mail which usually arrives right around the first. Hopefully, there is no connection to this debate and it is simply a coincidence.

I assume it is only the fault of our much hallowed federal mail service. I will more than likely receive it in 2 weeks torn to shreds wrapped in a USPS plastic baggie.

Monkeybutt

07-11-2002, 02:32 PM

I got mine,so I bet it's just the post office.

Rob_Merritt

07-11-2002, 06:15 PM

IF CGM goes under it should help the over all market. Considering pc gaming is a shrinking hobby, I can't see it can support 3 dedicated magazines. Though it sucks that jobs will be lost.

Rob de los Reyes

07-11-2002, 07:28 PM

Taking the risk that you're not just trolling . . .

I haven't seen a set of numbers yet that indicate PC gaming is a shrinking hobby. The worst numbers point to flat levels of (non)growth. The best numbers point to a 30% growth rate this year, well in excess of the 18% growth in console gaming. Even on those numbers, console gaming has the lead in absolute value, but you said "shrinking."

I'll pass on the rest of your comments as a hedge against being completely trolled. :?

Tyjenks

07-11-2002, 07:46 PM

IF CGM goes under it should help the over all market. Considering pc gaming is a shrinking hobby, I can't see it can support 3 dedicated magazines.

You would not by any chance live in England and be celebrating Tony Blair's marijuana proposal, would you?

Rob_Merritt

07-12-2002, 05:35 AM

In the US (the largest PC gaming market) over all PC sales are down by about 40% from two years ago. (Mostly pulling this from last quarter investor statements from the major game publishers and retailers) Yes there are PC games that still sell very very well but the gulf between the top sellers and everything else has grown. Retailers are either getting rid of pc games (Such as Target, Sears, Kmart) or drastically shrinking pc game shelf space (Such as Best Buy, EB games, and virtually everyone else). Most important in this chain is publishers are funding fewer and fewer pc titles and thus are simply buying less ads. Combine that with a depressed ad market and you have situations where 3 magazines devote to pc gaming isn't over all a good thing. I myself would rather see one go now rather and thus allow the surviving two raise their ad prices a bit and become healthier than see them drag each other down for another two years only to have their parent companies say "screw it" and leave us with none.

I know that PC gaming in Europe and in Asia is growing thus stabilizing the loss made in the US but that doesn't directly affect US magazines and publishers haven't taken advantage of this yet.

Tyjenks

07-12-2002, 06:33 AM

In the US (the largest PC gaming market) over all PC sales are down by about 40% from two years ago.

Is this not because the majority of the population who would purchase a PC now owns one? So of course sales of PC's would drop and soon level off. There should still be the same amount of folks buying games. I would think in ever increasing numbers as new PC users are becoming familiar with their systems and starting to use it as a form of entertainment instead of only surfing the net and receiving eMail.

Anonymous

07-12-2002, 06:35 AM

I myself would rather see one go now rather and thus allow the surviving two raise their ad prices a bit and become healthier than see them drag each other down for another two years only to have their parent companies say "screw it" and leave us with none.

The question I have is whether either of the remaining game magazines really speaks to me. PC Gamer seems to be aiming at a much younger demographic and CGW is tilting that way as well. Maybe it's the old flight sim curse - 'when the hardcore gamers get what they ask for only the hardcore are going to buy it' - but I doubt it. All the numbers show gamers, as a population, getting older. Older folks have more disposable resources and tend to take a more analytical and personal view of their hobbies - less affected by hype and social pressure than personal experience. You'd think a more critical magazine like CGM would thrive, and subscription numbers tend to show this, in that environment.

In any case, besides CGO and here there are few other options for good, somewhat serious, gaming forums out there. I've started up an account at Gamespot, what the heck I owe them, and while the forums there are performing a good, informative, function for younger gamers the content isn't what you'd find at CGO.

The loss of CGO, and potentially, CGM isn't an acceptible loss or collateral damage of a struggling economy. It's a family tragedy for the serious gamer and his serious fun.

Brian Rucker

07-12-2002, 06:36 AM

Bugger. That was me.

Rob_Merritt

07-12-2002, 06:55 AM

Tyjenks

07-12-2002, 07:06 AM

OK...I am not sure if I buy that, but it makes more sense in your arguement.

Dave Long

07-12-2002, 07:08 AM

I don't know where you're getting that Target, K-Mart and Sears are pulling out of PC games. Target does a pretty brisk business in PC gaming. K-Mart is in the death throes due to bankruptcy so they really don't matter to anyone anymore (despite the fact they still have the smae space for PC games) and who the hell shops for games at Sears?

The only reason PC games shelf space could be shrinking (though I haven't witnessed this myself) is that the BOXES ARE SHRINKING! The amount of allotted shelf space doesn't need to be as much as it was just a year ago because you can fit far more product in a smaller space today.

I'm not even going to touch your CGM stuff. You're the guy that was saying on the Gone Gold boards that the whole lot of PC game magazine writers are on the take. So clearly you're not very in touch with the magazines to begin with. If I remember correctly, you were touting PC Accelerator as the best games mag. Whatever dude.

Allow me to quote you...

If game magazines aren't being bought, then game companies are sure busy trying to buy them and they have been doing it for a long time. Can't imagine companies just throwing gobs of cash away, years after year, with no return on their investment. This has been in conversation for 5 years now. I think reviews are tainted even if you can't find a trail of cheese crumbs to the mouse hole.

The internet is a wonderfully searchable place...

--Dave

mtkafka

07-12-2002, 07:24 AM

Also, there seems to be less pc games released...which obviously affects the number of sales.

And in the news! The Dow is going down, down down down. Dow is going down, down down down. I got out, one year ago, lost 2k. I'm ghey for losing 2k.

etc

Rob_Merritt

07-12-2002, 07:36 AM

I'm not even going to touch your CGM stuff. You're the guy that was saying on the Gone Gold boards that the whole lot of PC game magazine writers are on the take. So clearly you're not very in touch with the magazines to begin with.

That wasn't my argument, you quoted me out on context, I have no interests in rehashing a debate I had months ago with you especially since you didn't get get it the first time, and this has nothing to do with the economic of the pc gaming industry in the US.

If I remember correctly, you were touting PC Accelerator as the best games mag. Whatever dude.

Yes, I said it was my favorite pc gaming magazine.... dude. Actually I lied. My favorite was Compute! but since they stopped making it 17 years ago, it isn't relevant to most people.

Dave Long

07-12-2002, 07:41 AM

What part of this...

I think reviews are tainted even if you can't find a trail of cheese crumbs to the mouse hole.

...can anyone possibly take out of context?

You dig your holes, no one else does it for you. I'm just pointing out that your opinions of the magazine industry make your comments about wishing one of the mags would go away pretty worthless since you think the whole industry is corrupt anyway.

--Dave

Mark Asher

07-12-2002, 07:56 AM

"I myself would rather see one go now rather and thus allow the surviving two raise their ad prices a bit and become healthier than see them drag each other down for another two years only to have their parent companies say "screw it" and leave us with none."

They won't be able to raise their ad prices. The demand for ads just isn't there. The only way one of the mags folding will help is through possible increased newstand sales for the remaining two.

Right now it's a advertising buyer's market and the game companies know this. All magazines are trying to find new advertisers. The game companies are probably getting woo'd by non-game publications that previously never approached them.

Rob_Merritt

07-12-2002, 08:03 AM

What part of this...

"I think reviews are tainted even if you can't find a trail of cheese crumbs to the mouse hole. "

...can anyone possibly take out of context?

*sigh* :roll:
If you really want to get into it, please post the link to the thread. Really its a waste of time since its really a non-issue at the moment. Companies aren't even buying ad space like they use to. They certainly aren't forking out the dough for trips and expensive parties. So that situation doesn't exist anymore.

You dig your holes, no one else does it for you. I'm just pointing out that your opinions of the magazine industry make your comments about wishing one of the mags would go away pretty worthless since you think the whole industry is corrupt anyway.

You have issues. Please let it go. Whether a review has been bought or not is pretty low on my list of things that bother me. I don't live and die on message forums. I personally wish the industry was healthy enough to support 6+ mags devoted to the hobby.

Rob_Merritt

07-12-2002, 08:05 AM

They won't be able to raise their ad prices. The demand for ads just isn't there. The only way one of the mags folding will help is through possible increased newstand sales for the remaining two.

That would be the hope. Though I guess a case could be made that the target crowd already buys all 3. I know I do.

DennyA

07-12-2002, 08:37 AM

Actually, Rob,

1) COMPUTE! didn't fold until late 1993. I was there until about two months before it died, when I shifted down the hall to OMNI. (Ironically, given this topic, COMPUTE! was apparently making money. But Ziff-Davis was looking for a good mailing list to use to launch Computer Life, so GMI happily sold them COMPUTE!'s list for a quick buck and shut the magazine down.)

2) Stop sending subconscious negative vibes to CGM. The way the ad sales work in the game industry, CGW and PCG aren't "losing" ad sales to CGM -- show me one ad that's in CGM that wasn't in the other two mags. And CGM's not a real influence on their ad prices, either. In fact, if CGM doesn't find a buyer, it actually hurts CGW a little because they lose the the Chips & Bits ad revenue. (I let my PCG sub lapse last year, so I'm not sure if C&B is still advertising there.)

3) If you look at title-by-title sales, you'll realize that any downturn in total PC game sales is due to the simple fact that the publishers are doing fewer PC game titles. Not because the market isn't still there, but they get visions of $$$ in their eyes when they fantasize about successful console titles. As the console title glut grows and the consoles start to look more dated, PC game sales and title development will pick up again. This happens with every generation of console launches.

Murph

07-12-2002, 08:41 PM

If one of the magazines is going under (which I hope that none of them do), I certainly wouldn't want it to be CGM. It's long been my favorite of the three.

mtkafka

07-12-2002, 09:04 PM

CG is the best. No questions asked. Cate Archer in a cool winter coat lookinghot was on the last cover. How can you beat that? And Tom Chicks article on Lan Gaming made me all warm inside like mountain dew with cold fries. And Steinmeyer gets all down and dirty with an expose' on hot nude elves (with pictures!) in AoW2... what other gaming mag gets this coverage? nowhere else!

And Morrowind gets a 5 star review.

I love this magazine, but my cd this month was all scratched. Bastards deserve to die. Bauman owes me!

etc

Murph

07-12-2002, 09:14 PM

Tyjenks

07-12-2002, 09:18 PM

I could care less about the CDs. I do get a couple of them each month (I don't think I get the CD with PCGamer), but I also have broadband, so they usually just sit around my desk until they get lost or I loan them to by bandwidth-impaired buddies.

Same here.

I loved reading Steinmeyer's Sausage articles. Now that did not come out right. While he was building up to the release of Tropico and immediately after, I found it terribbly interesting. As someone outside "the biz", it was great to see how much and what all went on throughout.

Let me restate my vote from the first page of this thread for CGM as my mag of choice as well.

Sparky

07-14-2002, 04:51 AM

Anonymous

07-14-2002, 08:06 AM

So at the end of Tom Chick's LAN article in this month's CGM, on page, er, yes, ha ha very funny...69, are we to believe that the guy pictured on the bottom right labelled "until next time" is indeed Tom Chick, toting his PC back from his visit to Nerdvana? If so, WOO WOO! He's s00per KYOOT!

I'm not sure about that sweater, though.
It's not him, though he has appeared in the magazine before... anyone remember Tom's blistering coverage of some game awards show, and his interview with the gunman that took it over?

Aszurom

07-14-2002, 08:56 AM

Sparky,

Will trade REAL pics of Tom Chick for beta build of the monster game. Will trade NAKED pics of Tom Chick if you make him one of the monsters IN the game.

(Seriously, I've got some pics of him that you'd think were "awwww cute" - but no naked ones. Those are of Chet.)

wumpus

07-14-2002, 10:15 AM

I think that guy is "Neo" from the article.

Did you check out the picture of the pudgy guy with 12+ cans of mountain dew sitting next to his computer? Now that is super sexy.. YES!

Sparky

07-14-2002, 04:10 PM

I think that guy is "Neo" from the article.
Who woulda thunk it -- he's the only normal looking person depicted. Except for the sweater, of course, which I can now freely disparage since I know it's not Tom.

Did you check out the picture of the pudgy guy with 12+ cans of mountain dew sitting next to his computer?
Oh yeah...CGM is turning into Maxim for us ladies. It's about time -- I mean, CGW doesn't even use Jeff Green's photo at the top of his column anymore. Someone needs to address this shameful dearth of nerd porn.

Anonymous

07-14-2002, 05:39 PM

Someone needs to address this shameful dearth of nerd porn.
Hey, we've had naked elves and panda porn. We're trying, we're really trying.

Brian Rucker

07-14-2002, 06:22 PM

Oh yeah...CGM is turning into Maxim for us ladies. It's about time -- I mean, CGW doesn't even use Jeff Green's photo at the top of his column anymore. Someone needs to address this shameful dearth of nerd porn.

Here's one of Bruce Geryk (http://gamespot.com/gamespot/features/all/gamespotting/071202/p8_01.html) if you go for the slightly strung out type. :D

Jason McCullough

07-14-2002, 11:38 PM

Gordon Cameron

07-15-2002, 01:51 AM

My favorite was Compute! but since they stopped making it 17 years ago, it isn't relevant to most people.

IMO, ZZAP! 64 is the greatest computer mag of all time...

mtkafka

07-15-2002, 02:02 AM

Wow that picture of Geryk makes him look crazy! Like a ... a guy on an acid trip! Medical school must be crazy.

Oh yeah that article with Tom as a crazy fan. That was when I found out Tom is a bald guy... thus reinforcing my ideas of Tom as Siskle and Asher as Ebert! :lol:

etc

Tyjenks

07-15-2002, 08:29 AM

Wow that picture of Geryk makes him look crazy! Like a ... a guy on an acid trip! Medical school must be crazy.

Imagine that guy coming at you in the E.R. with a needle to stitch up a cut in your forehead. "No thanks, I'll just take a couple of aspirin and be on my way."

"I...I...I can give you a shot. I....I....like needles. They are sharp. Look at my arm. ****Grabs your head and forcibly turns it toward him**** I SAID LOOK AT MY ARM!!!

"Excuse me, too much coffee this morning. Hehe. You can barely see where I inject myself. I promise I won't hurt you......much"

"What was that, doctor?"

"Um, huh? Oh, I said 'lunch'. I said,' I promise I won't hurt you and then we'll have lunch'." :lol: