Official Feedback Issue 103

[Pettersson79]

Hi

Is Issue 103 Not available online for pixelmags?

.pettersson79

[samhain81]

Wow Retrogamer, I never knew Coolspot was released in 2003 for the megadrive


These typos are seriously going beyond a simple one off now. Its quite embarressing now to see how often these serious errors are made. Please guys, proof reading is actually worth it in the end.

[Antiriad2097]

Prrof reading won't pick up a typo in a date unless the proof reader knows what the date should be instead. Pretty unlikely.

[RetroMartin]

As I alluded to earlier (and feared) there wasn't much content relevant to me, however this is not a gripe as I am not the only reader of the magazine.

I did however enjoy the Double Dragon article, the kickstarter article & Iain Lee's column (that always amuses me.)

Next months contents don't sound too fascinating to me either but that's just the announced bits, the rest might be good...and I'll pick it up anyway cos sometimes it's fun to learn stuff about things I never bore witness to in my lifetime!

[samhain81]

Prrof reading won't pick up a typo in a date unless the proof reader knows what the date should be instead. Pretty unlikely.

You'd have to be pretty stupid to proof read '2003' and 'megadrive' in the same sentence and not think 'eh?'

And from a retro gamer writer/editor too?

Yeah..pretty unlikely

[NorthWay]

My issue arrived and I thumbed through it. Or not. I ended up reading the big Atari pieces. Top notch! Though I'd say the Lynx was outright bought out, not "developed with".

[Antiriad2097]

Prrof reading won't pick up a typo in a date unless the proof reader knows what the date should be instead. Pretty unlikely.

You'd have to be pretty stupid to proof read '2003' and 'megadrive' in the same sentence and not think 'eh?'

And from a retro gamer writer/editor too?

Yeah..pretty unlikely

You think Daz and Stu have time to proof read everything to that degree?

Its pretty common in publishing to have proof readers who do just that, checking for typos and grammatical errors after the editing process. They'll do anything that comes their way from any of the publications their employer knocks out, so won't necessarily have technical knowledge to catch a wrong date.

[carl_retrotext]

Well just read the issue,

Citadel piece absolute class, More like this please!

on the whole a top issue, the focus on the hardware side of consoles and computers is refreshing too.

[samhain81]

Prrof reading won't pick up a typo in a date unless the proof reader knows what the date should be instead. Pretty unlikely.

You'd have to be pretty stupid to proof read '2003' and 'megadrive' in the same sentence and not think 'eh?'

And from a retro gamer writer/editor too?

Yeah..pretty unlikely

You think Daz and Stu have time to proof read everything to that degree?

Its pretty common in publishing to have proof readers who do just that, checking for typos and grammatical errors after the editing process. They'll do anything that comes their way from any of the publications their employer knocks out, so won't necessarily have technical knowledge to catch a wrong date.

But.... its an article..about dates....Oh the irony lol

[Rev. Stuart Campbell]

Its pretty common in publishing to have proof readers who do just that, checking for typos and grammatical errors after the editing process.

Sadly, not any more it's not. The value of sub-editors ended at roughly the same time the general public's ability to spell or punctuate properly did. Even grown-up newspapers are happy to go out with typos in their headlines these days - because hardly anyone will notice and hardly any of those who do will care - so the sub-ed is an expensive and unprofitable luxury.

[Eric]

Double Dragon making of was great, the Road Avenger car cameo was a nice surprise.

The Cool Spot 2003 typo in Retro Dairy page would be very hard to spot in a page of 21 dates. Was never a fan of this page as it doesn't really offer much in content, mostly just a quick glance of the images before moving on. Shame as it probably needs a lot of research and time to create. Maybe a redesign to focus on one past game or event from the current month?

[sscott]

I enjoyed the issue. The main reason I still subscribe after 4 years is that the articles are original and not derivative copy and paste jobs from other sources. From the Archives is still my favourite bit as I feel the section has room to breath and include the kind of detail and business anecdotes I like.

[markopoloman]

Wow Retrogamer, I never knew Coolspot was released in 2003 for the megadrive


These typos are seriously going beyond a simple one off now. Its quite embarressing now to see how often these serious errors are made. Please guys, proof reading is actually worth it in the end.

What happened to just pointing out an error and getting on with life? I struggle to believe some of you guys get SO wound up by a poxy mistake in a mag. What should be picked up is your inability to spell embarrassing in a post about errors! Every bloody feedback thread seems to be STAB STAB STAB at the RG team lately. It all seems a little sad to me.

[theantmeister]

In general, I'm loving this issue, but I've just read the Preservation article and, for whatever reason, I totally hated it. The writing was just aweful. A bunch of rambling sentences, very opinionated and, frankly, insulting in places. I struggled to get through it. Digital Preservation is a very serious and very important topic, but that didn't really come across in the article. Dreadful. A bit of waffle about the PoP code and interview with some guy who runs, what, an arcade and a few screenshots of random stuff. Er, ok?

Otherwise, like I said before, I am loving this month's issue. The 2600, Double Dragon and Citidel articles were fantastic.

[markopoloman]

The Citadel article was brilliant - and I have never played it before.... It is now top of the 'acquire' list and have a bash at it on my next day off