Games Mags: Past and Present

I read somewhere on the internet that the Holocoust didn't happen! God isn't Spielberg going to be red in the face when he finds out!

Which leads me, quite nicely, to a burning issue.

Why do publisher so revere print publications?

In case you don't know, publishers offer print mags preferential access to previews, high res WiP screens, game info, interviews and exclusive news for up-and-coming releases. In return, they get a great rate on ad space and believe their product (via ads and editorial) get massive exposure.

They are so clearly wrong.

Just look at these recent ABC sales figures for top ranking games mags.

172,593 OPS2
88,136 OXB (UK)
70,077 Playstation World
68,963 Play
62,159 Games Master
57,023 PC Gamer
54,442 PSM 2
44,195 Nintendo Official Magazine
28,790 Edge
20,117 Games TM

Look at 'em! Some of them don't even compare to the unique visitor stats for a fan site.

Okay, so these are sales figures, so let's imagine for a moment that for each copy sold, three people read it. It still doesn't alter the fact that your average news site is a far better place to put your advertising money. "More bang for your buck", to put it into tedious buzz-jargon.

Just look at Edge for fsck's sake! It gets bugger all readership and yet the publisher fawn over it, giving "access all areas" to the latest consoles and games - a site that gets fewer readers than one single story on a well read games website!

Now, I guess the marketing boys might come back and say some guff like "oh, banners and skyscrapers just doesn't convey the quality of our product like a glossy full page ad"

B******s.

In the days of animated GIFs, sure, they'd be right on the money; grainy, crummy anims were your lot. But now, with streaming Flash ads and the wondrous (if a little annoying) Eyeblaster ads, you can delivery high quality video to the readership. Try doing that on a glossy magazine page.

The fact is, video games marketing is stuck in the stone age. Print is dying on its ass, yet they insist on (mis)placing their latest "content for coverage" deal in magazines.

Do they think it's not possible to broker the same sort of deal with web sites? Is this Internet thing all black magic and voodoo chanting? Clearly not, because it does happen. However, it's blindingly clear that print gets the lion's share of goodies.

So long as the marketing boys and girls have this twisted view off on- vs. off-line publishing, on-line publications will seek out juicy info through the back door. Some SPOnG classics that come to mind are the GTA:SA two player story - Rockstar had a RIGHT hissy fit over that, with one GTA site reporting that R* had told them is was a fabrication. EA's NfS:Most Wanted and its Xbox360 release date was another little backdoor beauty. For Outrun2, in the face of SPOnG being "scratched" by Sega PR for previous Sammy/Sega offenses, we still got hold of bonus track details. When this happens, it's the publisher that loses out. Yeah the product gets coverage by the hundreds of thousands (though you wouldn't think so given the strop that some individuals have had), but they lose out because the stories aren't adorned with the latest exclusive screen shots, and there's no discount ad space in return.

I can only guess the reluctance comes down to this;

1. print exposure is intangible. ABCs give a measure of a mags readership, but not for a specific article. Not so with on-line publication, which can give you unassailable figures on readership. Maybe I shouldn't have copped off early to go to the pub - for the last month.

2. You can cut out and keep print coverage for that all important folder of "stuff what we've done good". After all, the boss would think you were making it up if you printed a web page!

To the marketing people; Work with us. On-line publications can give you much better exposure than print.

GamesMaster sells more than PC Gamer? What the f**k....


And a genuine response to your post, I swear blind that IGN and Gamespot get the same, we give you money, you give us good reviews treatment. If not then they're just consumer whores of the lowest kind. Especially IGN.

Edit: sorry double post.

You shouldn't be surprised by this, Gamesmaster is a multiformat mag after all. With few multiformat mags about these days when one like CVG folds more people will then buy Edge, Games or Gamesmaster.

PC mags are really the kind of rag hardcore PC people and business types buy. I have a PC and mine is so crap I have not purchased one mag in ages. The nearest I get to this sometimes is Micromart just so I can see what's new in the PC market. That usually does enough to satisfy my curiosity.

Hey there
Are these mags worth anythin? I've got issue 1 of gamesmaster from Jan 1993..
Are they collectable? What you reckon i could get for this?
Neil..

am i the first person to post on Spong in the new year?its 3:59 in the morning and me and my mum have been driving around belfast looking for my 17 y/o brother,who danders in at 3:30 blaming us for his lateness.
anyway back to the topic at hand.i was always a N64 NGC kinda guy,ever since my dad bought me issue 10 with my first N64 game.i loved it,and would always know wen the nxt issue was coming out.but when i discovered u could get gaming news on the internet i got bored of reading and paying for NGC.

config,didnt read ur whole post cuz im tired,(got the general idea) but i think the reason magazines still get "exclusives" etc is because they are a tangable form of media,therefore viewed as better quality or something.

"any hick can make a website with gaming news,but the hick in question could not publish and distribute a magazine"
.me.