Sorry for the late post, but I was too busy watching last night's U.S. presidential debates to write about videogames. I hope you were similarly occupied.
On Wednesday, I had the privilege of attending a panel discussion hosted by the American Society of Business Publisher's and Editors through my job at NPR (don't ask how this relates directly to my work. I'm not sure either.) The subject of the panel was crafting good covers, which was interesting in its own right.
For most of the panel, though, I was glued to The July/August issue of "Editor's Notes", the ASBPE newsletter, which announced the organization's Magazine of the Year awards. The winners in both the over-80,000 and under-80,000 circulation categories (ComputerWorld and CSO) are published by International Data Group. IDG also publishes what was once the most popular videogame magazine in the country, GamePro.
In a sidebar to the awards article, "Editor's Note" lists "7 Ways CSO is Reader Friendly." I decided to pick up the latest issue of GamePro (Issue 194/Nov. 2004), to see how it stacks up against what the ASBPE says is one of IDG's best publications in 'reader friendliness.'
1. Page numbers on the cover provide quick, easy access to stories.
Nope, no page numbers on the cover, but I only have to flip through eight pages of ads and masthead to get to the table of contents, (compare this to magazines like Rolling Stone to see how it could be worse.). The ToC does have large numbers and headlines, and an alphabetical "Game Finder" on the second page of the contents is also useful.
2. People cover tell readers the magazine is about them.
If you think the main characters of Halo 2, Metroid Prime 2 and Killzone are like you then, yeah, I guess this applies. Otherwise it follows the lead of most videogame magazines in going with a character-based cover instead of person-based cover. The only significant exception I can think of to this rule is Next Generation, which would occasionally put an industry luminary on the front. But I digress.
GamePro's cover is a crowded mess, to put it mildly, squeezing 11 game names and other assorted text in between five character pictures and two thumbnail screenshots. On the one hand, putting everything you think is mildly interesting might get a few more readers to take a second look at your cover. On the other hand, the lack of a singular focus makes it hard for casual glancers to process the cover quickly, which might mean they'll pass it by. In general, I'd suggest they simplify a bit.
3. "Story" boxes on features quickly tell the reader exactly what they'll get from the story.
No "story boxes," but the cover feature on first-person shooters does feature a sidebar list of "All-time best selling FPS games for each system." That informative t's right below a pretty tasteless "guest review" of Halo 2 by an inexplicably Scottish-accented Samus Aran, so the sidebars are a wash.
4. Document number listed at the bottom of feature articles, provides easy access to the article and related information on the CSO website.
No document numbers, but they do feature a "Get More Online" graphic at the bottom of some features encouraging you to visit the website. Once you get there, though, you're on your own to find the information.
5. Bios at the ends of articles solicit feedback
Nope. Not even a real name at the end of the article to let you know who wrote it. But they do encourage feedback through a well done letters section and some unique letter-response feature like "Buyers Beware" (investigating glitches and rip-offs) and GeekSpeak (technical issues explained in English).
6. "Tear-out" features provide concise information in a format that can be passed around.
Nothing like this. The articles are pretty concise, though.
7. Experienced staff in knowledgeable about the market.
They seem to know what they're talking about for the most part, and they convey this knowledge to the readers.
So, after all this, the final verdict is pretyt mixed. Do you readers think GamePro and other game magazines are "reader friendly?" Let us know using the comments link below.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
GamePro is reader friendly for sure. It's not as if the magazine full of math equations. The problem with the magazine is that I would never trust the reviews as they are always overhyped.
ReplyDeleteGamePro looks to me like a jumbled mess. Honestly, the only reason I even bothered to read an issue was after getting a free unrequested and unadvertised subscription after buying a game at Babbages. ("Do you want a used game card and subscription to Game Informer?" followed by GamePro starting to arrive by mail)
ReplyDeleteEven then, it took three issues arriving and my own being rather bored to actually read more than half a page. (I had flipped through the first issue and assumed it was garbage based on the look and skimming some of the review text.)
It actually turned out to not be that bad a magazine, but I'd question "reader friendly" when the appearance alone had that degree of effect on me. (Kind of like 1up.com, except actually having worthwhile content once you get past the mess.)
I never really paid attention to how "reader friendly" the magazines are. To me, a friendly magazine is one with knowledgeable writers, relevant content, and a sense of responsibility to its readers. Cover pics and layout I don't think should be much of a concern.
ReplyDeleteI was reading a story in "GMR" (Ziff Davis) a while back about ways to sell games you don't want. The writer mentioned trading for credit at retail stores, and the editor actually dropped in an editor's note: "[like Electronics Boutique - ed.]".
I get enough advertising reading through the magazine to have to filter out more from the actual body of an article. Not only does this kind of editorial abuse reinforce the doubt many people already have about game magazines' credibitly, it also makes a magazine "reader unfriendly".
I agree 1up.com's graph paper motif needs a makeover.
Well, I haven't read a Gamepro for a few years but it generally seems one of the more nightmarish for reader friendliness. Nintendo Power is pretty bad as well. But then I kind of feel a "professional" look is correlated to reader friendly. I have typically preferred the Ziff magazines for that though EGM's fairly recent redesign hurt more than helped. Let's just say no video game is quite Newsweek for structured layout.
ReplyDeleteI flipped through the issue you sampled. It was a mess. I remember reading GamePro when I was younger. I liked it because it had bright/cool pictures, but I do remember it being very cluttered even back then.
ReplyDeleteI don't read GMR, but the covers generally look nice. Anyway, I'm not going to buy a magazine that, in the most recent issue, challenged female gamers to prove their existence by emailing them pictures of them playing video games. I found this insulting, quite frankly. I shouldn't have to prove my existence to anyone, unless I'm involved in some kind of identity theft case.
I prefer a more professional, hype-free, and critical gaming publication, like Edge magazine. Unfortunately, subscribing to Edge from outside the UK is incredibly expensive, so I rely on gaming news and reviews from various websites and blogs.
Edge is very reader-friendly. They have a very clean and simple design aesthetic, and most articles have authors credited, with at least an email address. If not, there are email addresses for the letters section. The first thing that greets the reader when opening an issue is not an advert, but a letter from the editor which touches upon what is in the issue. They have very clear contents pages, with page numbers, and icons and pictures. The way they organise articles is also good, in my opinion. Many covers are not "people covers" but they are simple, eye-catching, and usually striking. Also, the covers are not generally cluttered by huge font words all over the place. Usually an image dominates the cover, perhaps some words, and then a small box which contains highlights of the issue.
Edge is probably the best gaming magazine I've ever read, and I'm not being a fangirl about this. Other mags are too hype-driven and uncritical of games and the industry. Many of them are also overtly immature and even misogynistic. The fact that major games development studios routinely place recruitment ads in Edge give some indication of a part of the readership.
You'd probably be interested to know that Media Play regularly stocks Edge.
ReplyDeleteAnd as long as we're listing great magazines, I gotta put my support behind Play. The anime section is a little too large for my taste, but it's my favorite gaming mag and the reviews are great.
And since I hate being anonymous but I don't want to create a Blogger username just to post comments here:
ReplyDeleteJohn @ GamingTarget.com
You're doing an apples/oranges comparison between a consumer and trade publication.
ReplyDeleteWhile some of that "Reader Friendly" advice is relevant, most is not. For example:
1. Page numbers are used, in theory, for busy CEOs to jump to pages quickly. That's not as important for a consumer publication.
2. Game magazines are product centric, not people centric. The games are the celebrities, not the people making them.
3. This is a good point, regardless of the magazine.
4. Only relevant if you have a website.
5. Bios make more sense for industry publications, or when the author has a specific body of knowledge.
I understand there are differences between business and consumer publications, but I think almost all these design elements listed can apply to either.
ReplyDelete1) Why do only business professionals want to save time? A GamePro reader who wants to go straight to a cover feature shouldn't have to troll the table of contents.
2) This gets into editorial more than design issues, but I feel game magazines should devote at least a little bit of space and publicity to the people behind the games occasionally. Besides being important to forming a more complete understanding of the industry, people-focused features can be easier to relate to, especially for a non-hardcore audience.
4) Who doesn't have a web site this day and age? To be fair, many game magazines don't put their print content on the web, so this might not apply to them.
5) I hope video game journalists have a specific body of knowledge. How can I evaluate a review if I don't know something about the reviewer's background and general game preferences. Many magazines handle this with a bio. section up front, which is fine (no need to put it at the end of every article) but GamePro does not do this.
3)
GamePro has gone through a few redesigns to try to make it appealing to the audience, but reader-friendly...I guess it's in the eye of the beholder. For years GP was accused for being that aforementioned jumbled mess--lots of bright colors, can't tell the ads from the content, etc. True--but a product of the times (when games were mostly kid stuff), and slow to change with them.
ReplyDeleteCover design deserves a topic of its own; it's somewhere between a commerce decision and a black art. Page numbers are not necessary there, but concise, compelling info is. I personally felt GP's covers were often too cluttered. I was happy with the Doom 3 cover back in April; that was fairly simple and effective for me. But the thought behind tons of cover lines cluttering a cover is "look how much stuff there is in here! Please pick me up from the newsstand!" That is the cover's primary goal at GamePro (and just about every other consumer games publication) and that's neither good nor bad--it's just a strategic decision.
Also, since you referred back to it, I explained GP's situation with real names in the comments section of your linked real name article; I'm curious to hear your thoughts on that.