The "Sony Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Just something I've noticed when reading over a lot of contributions, is that the biggest moan about the PS2 is waiting for the hyped games to be released.
I think that the main cause of this is the fault of the magazines that month after month print updates on the big games of the future. I mean, we've all marvelled at the delights of Metal Gear Solid 2 (every month in every magazine in the last 4 months, but the update we really want to know is the release date (not likely until the end of the year - at the earliest!!!!).
I understand that the hype will help sell the hardware, but this will also lead to another disgruntled PS2 owner wondering when the game that they bought the machine for will be coming out.
Another effect is that current releases get compared - unfairly - to games which may be in the shops for 9-12 months. Surely the standards reviews should follow are those already set by games already released.
As time goes on games are expected to develop, and therefore standards will be continually growing i.e. a rating of 9/10 now may only be 7/10 in a years time when developers may realise greater achievements from the PS2.
One example is Operation Winback. Nearly all reviews I have seen say it isn't a patch on what MGS2 will be. What we really want to know is how it compares to what we already have to choose from - especially when the comparitor is some 9 months off.
I am an avid magazine reader - always looking for the latest news and reviews - but I have given up buying many because the new items would take up about 5 pages. I suggest others do the same and read them in the local shop instead.
I think that the main cause of this is the fault of the magazines that month after month print updates on the big games of the future. I mean, we've all marvelled at the delights of Metal Gear Solid 2 (every month in every magazine in the last 4 months, but the update we really want to know is the release date (not likely until the end of the year - at the earliest!!!!).
I understand that the hype will help sell the hardware, but this will also lead to another disgruntled PS2 owner wondering when the game that they bought the machine for will be coming out.
Another effect is that current releases get compared - unfairly - to games which may be in the shops for 9-12 months. Surely the standards reviews should follow are those already set by games already released.
As time goes on games are expected to develop, and therefore standards will be continually growing i.e. a rating of 9/10 now may only be 7/10 in a years time when developers may realise greater achievements from the PS2.
One example is Operation Winback. Nearly all reviews I have seen say it isn't a patch on what MGS2 will be. What we really want to know is how it compares to what we already have to choose from - especially when the comparitor is some 9 months off.
I am an avid magazine reader - always looking for the latest news and reviews - but I have given up buying many because the new items would take up about 5 pages. I suggest others do the same and read them in the local shop instead.
Page:
Cheers. The middle of that post confused me but the summary really did sum it all up. Thanx Wookiee.
Yep. OPS2M is Official PlayStation 2 Magazine, by Future Publishing.
PSM2 is an unofficial magazine, also produced by Future Publishing.
The confusion has been caused by Future Publishing themselves, really. The official PlayStation magazine for PlayStation 1 *used* to abbreviated to 'PSM' by Future themselves.
In the last few months, they've changed it from 'PSM' to 'OPM' - Official PlayStation Magazine.
They also released the unofficial PS2 magazine, and called it PSM2.
And, of course, the official PS2 magazine - abbreviated to OPS2M. I suppose really, for consistency, it should be OP2M, but it's not. Not around here, anyway! :-)
So, to summarise...
OPM = Future's Official PlayStation Magazine (PS1)
PSM2 = Future's unofficial PlayStation 2 magazine
OPS2M = Future's Official PlayStation 2 Magazine
PSM2 is an unofficial magazine, also produced by Future Publishing.
The confusion has been caused by Future Publishing themselves, really. The official PlayStation magazine for PlayStation 1 *used* to abbreviated to 'PSM' by Future themselves.
In the last few months, they've changed it from 'PSM' to 'OPM' - Official PlayStation Magazine.
They also released the unofficial PS2 magazine, and called it PSM2.
And, of course, the official PS2 magazine - abbreviated to OPS2M. I suppose really, for consistency, it should be OP2M, but it's not. Not around here, anyway! :-)
So, to summarise...
OPM = Future's Official PlayStation Magazine (PS1)
PSM2 = Future's unofficial PlayStation 2 magazine
OPS2M = Future's Official PlayStation 2 Magazine
OK so your no3 is the one that says official playstation 2 yeah.
There are several regulars - myself included - who consider PSM2 to be the best mag.
The magazines I buy, in order of preference, are:
1. PSM2
2. PSW
3. OPS2M
4. Play
5. The Player
6. P2
However, IMHO, PSW has by far the best coverdisc.
The magazines I buy, in order of preference, are:
1. PSM2
2. PSW
3. OPS2M
4. Play
5. The Player
6. P2
However, IMHO, PSW has by far the best coverdisc.
Is that Official playstation 2 uk or PSM2. Tell me because they both seem to be the same.
PieroGas wrote:
> There seems to be a lot of OPSM2 bias going on - are you all working
> for them?
As much I'd like to, no.
The fact is, OPSM2 IS the best PS2 mag. That's the plain and simple reason for all the bias
> There seems to be a lot of OPSM2 bias going on - are you all working
> for them?
As much I'd like to, no.
The fact is, OPSM2 IS the best PS2 mag. That's the plain and simple reason for all the bias
Suggest you get OPSM2. None of that kind of BS in that fine publication.
Now I wait for the cheque...
Now I wait for the cheque...
Just something I've noticed when reading over a lot of contributions, is that the biggest moan about the PS2 is waiting for the hyped games to be released.
I think that the main cause of this is the fault of the magazines that month after month print updates on the big games of the future. I mean, we've all marvelled at the delights of Metal Gear Solid 2 (every month in every magazine in the last 4 months, but the update we really want to know is the release date (not likely until the end of the year - at the earliest!!!!).
I understand that the hype will help sell the hardware, but this will also lead to another disgruntled PS2 owner wondering when the game that they bought the machine for will be coming out.
Another effect is that current releases get compared - unfairly - to games which may be in the shops for 9-12 months. Surely the standards reviews should follow are those already set by games already released.
As time goes on games are expected to develop, and therefore standards will be continually growing i.e. a rating of 9/10 now may only be 7/10 in a years time when developers may realise greater achievements from the PS2.
One example is Operation Winback. Nearly all reviews I have seen say it isn't a patch on what MGS2 will be. What we really want to know is how it compares to what we already have to choose from - especially when the comparitor is some 9 months off.
I am an avid magazine reader - always looking for the latest news and reviews - but I have given up buying many because the new items would take up about 5 pages. I suggest others do the same and read them in the local shop instead.
I think that the main cause of this is the fault of the magazines that month after month print updates on the big games of the future. I mean, we've all marvelled at the delights of Metal Gear Solid 2 (every month in every magazine in the last 4 months, but the update we really want to know is the release date (not likely until the end of the year - at the earliest!!!!).
I understand that the hype will help sell the hardware, but this will also lead to another disgruntled PS2 owner wondering when the game that they bought the machine for will be coming out.
Another effect is that current releases get compared - unfairly - to games which may be in the shops for 9-12 months. Surely the standards reviews should follow are those already set by games already released.
As time goes on games are expected to develop, and therefore standards will be continually growing i.e. a rating of 9/10 now may only be 7/10 in a years time when developers may realise greater achievements from the PS2.
One example is Operation Winback. Nearly all reviews I have seen say it isn't a patch on what MGS2 will be. What we really want to know is how it compares to what we already have to choose from - especially when the comparitor is some 9 months off.
I am an avid magazine reader - always looking for the latest news and reviews - but I have given up buying many because the new items would take up about 5 pages. I suggest others do the same and read them in the local shop instead.
Page: