Customer Reviews:
Showing reviews 6-10 of 83
 Mainstream fluffers July 26, 2005
Stargazer
10 out of 14 found this review helpful
I grew up with this magazine, and it was definitely one of the first out there covering the 8-bit hobby that was gaming--it was also the best. I've read this magazine on and off since 1990, and up until around 2000-2001 it was all great. The magazine did a great job in its coverage of our fair video gaming, so I decided to finally take a subscription in the Fall of 2001. I have come to realize it was a big mistake.More and more, I noticed that the magazine was being stuffed with too many bad things. Large spreads on already hyped games, like Halo 2, being hyped games, like as Lord of the Rings: The Third Age, and kids playing old games seemed to fill the pages. Along with what to let your girlfriend play, because, you know, there is no such thing as the female gamer. How about articles on lesser hyped games? Or how about more about the industry, developers etc.? Not to say they didn't have good, but short (one page), articles once in a while, such as where our $50 goes to every time we buy a game, how to get bargains at game shops, and "Afterthoughts" with some developers; however, those were few and far between. As were non-irritating reviews. If you like 2-D graphics, colorful games, or Nintendo beware: Your mind will be likened to a child for doing so. "Kiddie" and "Baby Game(r)" seem to be their biased, preferred choice of insult. One reviewer said he could do without the animals in Star Fox: Assault. Hello?! Animals have been in Star Fox since...'93--the beginning. And the title is, um, Star FOX! Another called Mario Party 6 a "kid's game." They also put Kirby in the Baby Gamer section one issue.I have no problems with preference, but why the insults? Why must every game be expected to be so called "mature"--have blood splattering? They don't knock those games for being so. I guess some need to feel macho about their gaming choices. Sad, and pathetic, really. And what is up with calling certain games rehashes, such as the Mega Man X series, then praising Madden every year? The reviewers also tend to share their reviews with each other, which means you'll likely get "Don't listen to him/her!" from one reviewer in reference to another. The reasons vary from being a flat-out fanboy, to not knowing what the other reviewer is talking about. Sound professional? I can get that kind of crap on message boards...or here. And because they share reviews, one reviewer can be the sole focus of something like controls. Meaning, the other two will glide over the subject if another merely mentions it. Where are my 3 seperate opinions?! Add to all this: horrible letters from stupid people (How many pieces of pale, spotted flesh with video game characters tattoed on it do we need to see?), selected "previews" that are minimal, and poor coverage of the industry itself (see EGM's 2005 E3 coverage compared to Play magazine's 2005 E3 coverage--wow, just...pathetic) were the final straws in me wanting out. The only thing I will miss will be Seanbaby's hilarious slamming of all things awful, but I can still find that online.Thanks to others I did check out Play magazine, and what a difference it is. Play is upbeat and critical without sounding jaded and juvenile all the time. If your looking for a change, or want to see better coverage and not have your intelligence insulted, check out Play. Especially if you were once a fan of GameFan, and Next Generation magazine; Play feels like their spiritual successor. Sad, but this is how I feel for the current EGM. I am hoping with new blood, and, hopefully, in a number of years the mag will change for the better (as in having more depth and being fair to all games). For now, 2 stars is enough for the mag I once enjoyed so much--in this, its worst period so far.
 Why do they give it away? February 7, 2002
John (Castro Valley)
9 out of 21 found this review helpful
If EGM was really as good as they would have you think it is, why do they give it away to boost their circulation? They claim to be a multiplatform magazine, but don't be fooled by their claims, because they don't even have any PC game coverage. Their reviews are not very good and they only give you one screenshot per review. The one really big flaw I see with their ratings is that they only give one number rating for the game. True gamers know that there are many elements that make up a good game. Another thing is that they have way too much international game coverage. Most games never even make it to the United States. What good is that to me. Finally, it seems that their editoral content has moved away from hardcore gaming stories to more fluff, "lifestyle" stories. Overall it's not that great of a magazine. But what do you expect from a magazine that's given away for free?
Absolute Trash March 28, 2005
Eon (Rhode Island)
9 out of 13 found this review helpful
When I first began recieving EGM (I got it for free for three years, because they're incapable of selling this crap), it was an okay magazine.
It's done nothing but go downhill from there. First of all, the ONLY time there is an article longer than a single page (if you could call two paragraphs with a couple of screenshots a page) is if the game is Halo, Half-Life, Doom, or something similiar. Any game that doesn't have a lot of guns and a lot of mainstream hype is apparently not worthy of EGM's mention. There are plenty of ads, but hardly any content on games. And what content there is on games is never on the unique stuff gamers really want to hear about. It isn't difficult to get Halo information...give us something else, please!!!
Second, they're irresponsible. Last year they began a contest that required readers to send in a video tape and two reviews they had written. These were rules that could be found on their website, IF you could navigate the poorly designed thing. Midway, they changed these rules, negating the video tape rule. For about a week these rules were changed on the website, then went back to the old rules. However, nothing was ever mentioned anywhere on whether or not this was correct. Many people were confused. And only people who had sent in video tapes were considered for the contest, meaning EGM refused to take responsibilty for a mess on their poorly maintained website. Maybe if they'd used their MAGAZINE to keep people updated...but no, they did not.
Third, you would think that a magazine with a woman on the staff wouldn't be so sexist. Not so of EGM. Their comments in the vein of "Even your girlfriend will like (insert title of cute, family friendly game here)" drove me mad! What, girls can't play games with guns? Pfft! That sexist attitude reached such disgusting heights that I throw away my copy of EGM whenever I recieve it and eagerly await the end of my subscription.
Don't pay money for this trash. Don't even accept it if they offer it for free, it isn't worth it. Try Game Informer, a far superior magazine, instead.
OK, but there are better magazines in the genre October 26, 2001
Owen D. Hay (Seattle, WA United States)
8 out of 17 found this review helpful
Electronic Gaming Monthly (EGM) has never really found it's niche. There are console magazines, and PC magazines, but EGM tries to do both. I can't really say that they do a great job of it; their content is loosely scattered and their editors write like they are employed by Electronic Arts. It's not a bad magazine, but there are simply better ones out there. Instead, try Next Gen, which has done a great job of covering the scope of all systems, without losing focus.
 Good, but have been treating subscribers like cattle July 31, 2006
Sean Malowney (Seattle, WA)
8 out of 9 found this review helpful
Yes, the magazine is great... but up to 1/3 of the pages are ads. They will shamelessly load you up with renewal letters. And occasionally, you get a big stinky AOL disk in with your issue. Kinda like someone dooking in your cheerios. Welcome to the mainstream media.
|
