Way to go, Atari!

[Arnelos]

I grew up playing computer games on my Atari 800 (bought in 1981) and later on my Atari ST (bought in 1986).

So yeah, it was on the work of the original Atari that I was raised.

[DrSpike]

But the atari ST sucked. :stir:

[pg]

http://web.archive.org/web/20030604043617/www.babelmedia.com/template.php?c=online_marketing

http://www.babelmedia.com/template.php?c=online_marketing

supposedly atari used that company to market the game some. look at the changes in it's website recently...

[Alex]

i used to buy games based on recommendations from game sites/magazines, but now i only trust in what the forums have to say about a game. if lots of players say that the game is rubbish, then i don't care if gamespot or ign says that it is the best thing since sliced bread.

[Dis]

forums can be misleading.

Civ3 forums here used to all say civ3 was crap. But we all know it wasn't crap. It was a damn good game. Maybe not as good as civ3 was in its heyday, but still playable. There was a ton of civ3 bashing back then. I think even I may have started a civ3 bashing thread, but I was only trolling

game demos are your best bet. Or just getting an illegal copy . But I still recommend buying the game if you like it.

People don't believe me. But this piracy is hurting computer games now. There's a reason why there aren't that many good computer games anymore.

[Alex]

Originally posted by Dissident
forums can be misleading.

Civ3 forums here used to all say civ3 was crap.

oh, but civ is in an entirely different category of games: those that i buy no matter what people say about them.

[Grumbold]

Originally posted by Dissident


civ3 was a damn good game

And thus we have the eternal paradox. For some people the reviews are spot on. For others they miss by a mile. A reviewer need only nod to the people that share their opinion.

[pg]

as negative as the civ 3 forums here were after launch i'd still say they were more useful than any review. you have to acknowledge the fanboy effect where most games will either be hated/loved by very vocal people. the civ 3 forums had so much info about the game i think it would be very easy to make up your mind even with all the noise you have to wade through.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Alex
i used to buy games based on recommendations from game sites/magazines, but now i only trust in what the forums have to say about a game. if lots of players say that the game is rubbish, then i don't care if gamespot or ign says that it is the best thing since sliced bread.

The advantage of asking in a forum, is that i can follow up - i can ask how a game compares to specific other games, I can ask about specific things that concern me, if someone doesnt like a game becuase of factor X, and i suspect Factor X wont matter much to me, I can ask others what they think of factor X. etc,

The disadvantage is that to get the full benefit of the forums, you have to wait till the game has been out for a while, and a lot of folks have gotten a chance to play the game in depth. Thats not really a problem for me - ive still got my dinosaur puter, and when i get a new one I'll be buying the backlog of games i want, not cutting edge new releases. But for folks who like to get new releases early, I can see that would be a problem, and mags would still serve a purpose.