Computer Games is a favorite magazine of mine for a bit more intellectual take on things (though I'll never recover from them dropping the wonderfully dorky title "Computer Games Strategy Plus"). One of their columnists mentioned battlemail.com, which like Hasbro provides email turn-based games, but does so for free. They run adds at the bottom of the game window.
Right now they have Kung Fu and Soccer. It doesn't look as interesting as the Hasbro stuff, but they do have half a million players and since I like to keep up with this stuff, I sent a few people games.
Lemme know if you want to start a game!
ID:194565
 Oct 25 2000, 6:17 am
|
|
On 10/25/00 11:26 am Zilal wrote:
But I do declare, I have never seen so many typos, grammar errors, mispellings, and other editorial mistakes in a professional publication. Did you read my "Forward"? (Still kicking self) | |
On 10/25/00 11:39 am Tom H. wrote:
Did you read my "Forward"? A world that will go down in infamy... | |
On 10/25/00 11:26 am Zilal wrote:
I get the magazine [Computer Games] for free as part of my Simutronics account, and there is some pretty intelligent stuff in it; I love the thorough, relevant reviews. And I like the magazine's playful-yet-responsible attitude on violence in games. They ran this letter a while back, which impressed me so much I re-typed it for the Well: I liked this letter from Tom Mazzullo in Computer Games Magazine so much I had to retype it here: ---------- I look at Computer Games Online every day and subscribe to the magazine, and while I find both valuable for my hobby, part of it leaves me a little unsatisfied: The focus of both is mostly on games *yet* to be released, and very little time is spent discussing games that exist. I understand that the majority of your readership is excited about upcoming titles, but I for one would like to see more coverage of current games and even past games. For instance, is anyone playing Alpha Centauri any more? How about MechCommander, Caesar III or X-wing Alliance? Too much hoopla is given to previews and release dates, reviews and "first looks", then a game is off the radar within weeks. If a game is lucky, it will be mentioned again in March during a "best games of the past year" issue. But that's it. Bargain bin if you can find it. I know there are chat forums for current and past games, and they're OK, but there's no substitute for a knowledgeable writer discussing a game's strengths after playing it for a while. Most reviews are written within hours of a game's release, and I often wonder if a poorly reviewed game can grow on you if you play it for a while. Just look at the richness of StarCraft -- surely this can't be the only game with such depth and complexity? And if it is, there is a *big* probelm with the games industry, bigger than anyone is admitting. I assume game companies work on so many titles so often to scoop up the press surounding a game on its release and increase the company's presence. Perhaps there is too much focus on "new" and not enough focus on "good". I wonder what would happen if all the game magazines devoted 90% of their issues to strategy and discussion of existing games, and a page or two to games on the horizon. Imagine a gaming magazine with articles about and interviews with gamers, study of the great games they have played, demo discs filled with scenarios and new units and articles about how to use them by people who play the games for more than a month. Imagine if this were the main focus of the entertainment press. ----- I was even more impressed with the magazine's response: Computer Games Magazine October 2000 editorial "In the July issue of the magazine, we printed a letter from reader Tom Mazzullo called "Previews galore" in which he indicated a bit of dissatisfaction with the balance between covering future games and current or past ones. Based on the responses to that letter from readers (a selection of which can be found in this month's edition of "Rebound", many of you agreed. (Perhaps skewing the results somewhat was the letter's poor timing -- it was included in our once-a-year "Ultimate Preview Guide" issue.) But you know what? We agree with you too. We've had a lot of internal discussions of how to better satisfy our readers' interests in not only upcoming and current games, but also those that have made their way into the bargain bins or remain on hard drives years after their release. We don't have all of the details worked out yet, but as always we're interested to know what types of articles you want to see..." Who knew a letter to the editor could matter? | |
I get the magazine for free as part of my Simutronics account, and there is some pretty intelligent stuff in it; I love the thorough, relevant reviews. And I like the magazine's playful-yet-responsible attitude on violence in games. But I do declare, I have never seen so many typos, grammar errors, mispellings, and other editorial mistakes in a professional publication. And then there's the editor's habit of publishing letters just to make fun of them rather than to provide any useful content ("U should have more porn pics dude!!!!!" letters start to get boring after the 20th one you read or so). And, finally, the innocent-yet-annoyingly-pervasive hints that most of the writers have forgotten women play games (and subscribe). If I see one more instance of: "This expansion contains female medics, for those of you who absolutely can't go a day without ogling the fairer sex" I'm going to... complain some more. Or pack it in and decide that the magazine isn't exclusive of women; it's inclusive of lesbians.
Well... my ire is exaggerated. (I really do jump at any chance to complain, don't I.) The content of the magazine can be great. And at the price I pay for it, I can overlook everything else. Anyone else love reading reviews of games you'll never buy, movies you'll never watch, books you'll never read?
Z