For all the people worrying about the hurting of magazine sales... I wouldn't worry too much. The bulk of money that publications get comes from their ads. That's why the ads are there.
Jeff seems like a nice guy and all, but I personally don't like CGW much, because of how much they editorialize. PC Gamer seems to offer a much less biased veiw of games in their reveiws, since theirs seem to mirror what i've actually seen in games.
I guess the straw that broke the camel's back was the Tribes 2 review. It was:
1.) two months after release (and I don't take that "production schedule" crap. Ten other publications were able to have an article on the game out a month earlier)
2.) consisted of only 25% of the article talking about the actual gameplay. The ohter 75% was bitching about problems installing the game. Not to mention that the reviewer went on to blame the problems on the dev team, when it was already news that Sierra decided to release it against the team's warnings that it was unfit for release.
(Although I'd like to commend them on getting alot of articles that PC Gamer doesn't do, like the Arcanum preview.)
But enough about my CGW ranting. The entire problem is, EA is trying to push a DEMO as some sort of a retail product. Considering EA's current financial problems (which has led to mass-axing of games that have gone all the way to final beta stage), it sure as hell seems like they're trying to make a quick buck by ripping us off on a demo we can get free in a week, or by buying a magazine. I wouldn't blame ANYONE for being skeptical about EA's intentions.This comment was edited on Jan 3, 15:07.
Xombie x0mbie x0mb|e Xombie