|
They don't care about the customer. This company is not dependable. I received 2 issues of my 12-month subscription, and have talked to the magazine twice and Amazon three times in the last month about a missing issue. Despite assurances to the contrary, the missing issue has never arrived and now the current issue is also missing. I recommend you consider another magazine.
I can't play them. What do I care about Japanese imports. While it is still understandable sometimes, it shows a lack of professional conduct. Sometimes it is as serious as pages not matching up or an aritcle being cut off in the middle.They generally only review mostly Xbox360 games, a few PS3 games, and almost no PC or Wii games. There, their, and they're are often misused, which drives me insane.
Play magazine is great if:1) You have no grasp of the English language2) You own a next gen console that is not a Wii.3) You have access to Japanese imports and a console on which you can play them.Every issue of Play has several serious breaches of grammar and editing. If I owned a PS3 and a Xbox360 I would probably rate this magazine at a 3 star level, but since I don't it only gets a one-star rating. As someone who mostly games on the PC or Wii this is a little disappointing.There is an entire section of ~20 pages in every issue dedicated to Japanese imports. Why are they in the magazine.Overall, I would not recommend Play magazine unless all the above conditions apply.
Best unbiased game magazine around. Great reviews of games and previews of new games. With a hint of Jap Anime, its a brilliantly vibrant magazine. I prefer this over EGM, PCG, all the big name magazines.
Getting this magazine made me realize a few things.1) It's nice to look at. and that's about it.2) I wish I had my $20 back.
He claims that the errors in it that make it so frusterating and difficult to play give it a "charm", and that the media gave it bad reviews because no one likes difficult games anymore. The problem with the magazine is that the reviewers are unable to objectively review the quality of a game. That's the problem with throwing out 10s all over the place; there is no where higher to go. He brags that he is more in tune with the general public than the other media outlets who reviewed the game, citing the positive player reviews. if this is true, I think it is testament to the fact that developers do not consider PLAY to be a serious gaming publication.
The actual content, however, is another matter entirely. The PS3 and the Wii launch were rapidly approaching. Similarly, Gamespy gave the game a 1.5 out of 5. Gamespot, on the other hand (who I consider to be a very reliable reviewer of games) gave Sonic a 4.4 out of 10 ("poor") and even describes the game as "broken". There was no serious discussion about the pros and cons of the system, just plain gush gush gush. Reviewers should not give a game a 10 solely because it quenches their fanboy thirst, but because it truly stands out among all other games as one of quality that will appeal to not just fanboys.
I will return to the cover status in a bit, but first the scoring must be examined. Games like Zelda Twighlight Princess, which is being called one of the best games of all time, and Gears of War end up scoring the same as these mediocre games. The print was all blurred together. I recommend looking elsewhere for you gaming news. I got sucked into subscribing to it based on the sheer prettiness of it. Gears of War, arguably the biggest game so far for the 360, was released.
The part I could read read like a Sony ad. When games like Sonic are given 9.5s based on the reviewers love of the franchise and of playing in that particular universe rather than on the game's independent merit, it prevents truly exceptional games from being recognized as such. The Wii saw absolutely no coverage. The reviews are, to put it bluntly, the worst representation of a game's merit that I have ever seen.
Viva pinata hit store shelves. The review gushed about how wonderful the game was. He likes the game. They throw out perfect 10s so often and on such mediocre games that it is impossible to give any credence to any of the reviews.
The glossy pages are covered in color drenched screen shots and concept art. The last issue I got had Sonic the Hedgehog on the cover. The problem with this is he ignores the fact that with a game like Sonic (that is, a large franchise game that has proven to have serious flaws) the vast majority of people who buy it are buying KNOWING about the flaws because they love the franchise so much that the same flaws that would ruin the game for anyone else are not an issue. The editor gave some lame excuse that the developers would not give them copies of the game. PLAY gave Sonice for the 360 a 9.5 out of 10. They overrate so many games (indeed, i think i would have trouble finding one that wasn't) and to such extreme degrees it is laughable.
As for Sonic being on the cover, one needs to consider the other games and events ocurring in the month covered by the magazine. Oh, I could go on, but i think you get the idea. I highly recommend Game Informer, whnich is both beautiful and skillfully and professional written.UPDATE: I just recieved my latest issue of PLAY, in which the editor defends his review of Sonic as a 9.5 game. Yet they had SONIC on the freakin cover. Yes, this magazine is pretty. The PS3 did get a launch section, but get this: One of the pages was UNREADABLE.
Other magazines, after all, do not seem to have this chronic problem of not being able to cover the biggest games. Fine, I have no problem with people loving different games, or even people loving fatally flawed games.
|
