Video games B‑class Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game

B

This article has been rated as B-class on the project's quality scale.

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by the Wikiproject VG Reference library.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Conflict with publishers

Should this be added to the controversy section here? EGM is not going to cover Mortal Kombat, ubisoft games, or sony's sports division. Dan Hsu, the head of EGM, states that it is due to bad previews and reviews(coming from EGM) for the games made by those companies. This can be found in his editorial in the February 2008 issue of EGM.168.102.16.177 (talk) 13:05, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Issue history

I moved it to a seperate article since it was becoming very large and taking up most of the article --Kyle G 16:20, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it was probably a good idea to do so. Thunderbrand 21:48, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sushi-X, Quartermann, etc.

According to former long-time News Editor and Review Crew editor Chris Johnson (http://homepage.mac.com/chris_johnston/index.html), both Sushi-X and the Quartermann are indeed pseudonyms, or at least have been for years. In his semi-recent EGM blogging(see: http://homepage.mac.com/chris_johnston/C1662594604/index.html), Mr. Johnson reveals that Sushi-X was originally former editor Ken Williams. After Williams left EGM, the magazine continued to use the character as a pseudonym with various editors filling in content for his character. As for Quartermann, Johnson also reveals a similar case for Sushi. He was originally apart of the EGM team, but after he left, EGM team members continued using his character with random editors doing his articles.

If there arn't any good objections to adding this information, I would like to include it.

                        --anon (1-8-06)

Just FYI, I started a Sushi-X article. If anyone's willing to clean it up and bit and scrounge through old EGMs for choice quotes or interesting information (particularly stuff that we could use to define each "voice" of Sushi-X since his tastes are signifigantly different depending on the time period) please do so. --Senseiireland 23:41, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Platinum Awards

Hey does anyone know all of the perfect 10 platinum awards that EGM has given out? It would be great to have them as well as games that came very close (10,10,9.5). Here's some I know of:

The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time
Halo
Halo2
Metroid Prime
Gran Turismo 3

--JayMatsby 1-16-2006

Halo didn't recieve platinum
Halo 2 didn't recieve platinum
Metroid Prime didn't recieve platinum

I know these for a fact --Trick man01 05:11, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your facts are unfortunately incorrect. I have all the EGM issues where Metal Gear Solid for PS1 got EGM's first straight 10 platinum award (Chrono Trigger for SNES technically got the first platinum before EGM changed their requirements for a platinum score. Here is a list of pure platinum from what I can remember:

1. Metal Gear Solid (PS1) 2. Grand Turismo 2 (PS1) 2. LOZ: Ocarana of Time (N64) 3. LOZ: Majora's Mask (N64) 4. Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 2 (various) 5. Soul Calibur (DC) 6. Gran Turismo 3 (PS2) 7. Halo (xbox) 8. Metroid Prime (GC) 9. Halo 2 (xbox)

Publishing history

Someone should add some info about the magazine pre-Ziff Davis. IIRC, it was originally published by Sendai. I don't have enough info (such as what years or why they were sold or whatever) so I will not add it, but someone with that info should.

That's an idea I've had for a bit -- I'll start working on that in a few days. You're correct that it was originally published by Sendai, a company started by the magazine's founder Steven Harris (who needs more than just a brief mention in this article).--Senseiireland 14:43, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Overseas" expansion

Hi. I'm not a regular editor of this page (in fact, I've never edited it before), but I've looked at it a few times. I just now renamed your Overseas expansion section to "International expansion." Neither Brazil nor Mexico are exactly overseas. Only the Phillipines are. Ryu Kaze 20:35, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bias?

Is it me, or does EGM have some kind of bias against Nintendo when they launched the Wii and DS (eg. saying that the ps3 had better launch titles, when other reviewers such as X-play would dissagree)

Wrong they said the PS3 had about one game worth playing while the Wii had 2 they said but they had more love for the 360 that issue Gears got a 10,9.5,9 while Fall of Man had 9,s but Zelda had 10

The Platinum awards...

I'm pretty EGM-savvy but I don't have EVERY issue so could someone help me out and try to put the Platinum games in order that they appeared in EGM and list the issue number where the award was given next to each. I could probably help quite a bit but I don't know some of them (like Soul Calibur). Right now I just have them grouped by series and wrote them down as I remembered them without any semblance of order in mind. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SuperSonicTH (talk • contribs) 13:56, 12 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Contents of the article

The vast majority of the content of this article is listings of games they rated/gave awards to, and their April Fools' Day jokes. I think that we really shouldn't just include the list of the 200 best games without comment. If it's important enough to list, we should be able to say something about it other than just what it contains. See Person of the Year which does include the list, but also a fair amount of commentary. We should probably have something similar for the top 200 list, if it is indeed worth including. --Sopoforic 02:15, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Does it have any controversy?

I know EGM has alot of swear words in their mag, but why doesn't the article mention anything about it? I see only one swear in the article and it's only for the name of the magazine's section. --The Tornado 12:27, 26 January 2007 (UTC)12:23, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

April Fools, 2004

I'm pretty curious as to why the statement describing April Fools 2004 keeps getting erased. I also noticed that it is usually erased by someone anonymous. Whoever it is, state why you keep doing this. There was nothing wrong with the statement at all. --Farm Zombie 16:36 Monday, January 29, 2007

Fair use rationale for Image:EGM cover.jpg

Image:EGM cover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:09, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lair 5.5 thing?

I forgot what web site it was, but people were making it kind of a meme to post 5.5 over and over because "EGM gave Lair for the PS3 a score of 5.5" or something like that. I haven't heard it mentioned anywhere else though. So is this true? 65.54.154.114 05:48, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Lair received three scores in the "Average" region. This was due to the controls being shaky and the plot being flaky. The graphics are nice, though...

Cleanup & references

Article should be looked at concerning subjective wording like "Notable writers for the magazine...", "Memorable personalities include..." "Perhaps the most infamous name is...", "although rumor has it..." and especially the 'Controversy' section. They should be verified by relevant sources or re-written. Nreive 15:37, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. There is far too many subjective statements in this article. This isn't a fan page. This is supposed to be an objective encyclopedia entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.211.116.125 (talk) 16:40, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article revision is in order...

In the very least, EGM has dropped its 0-10 rating scale in favor of a letter-based scale. This should be taken into account.SuperSonicTH (talk) 03:31, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Founded Mistake?

Maybe I am wrong, but if EGM was founded in the Summer of 1989, How is it that issue 1 was published in May 1989, You can check out the first issues cover here http://www.retromags.com/wiki/index.php?title=EGM_001_-_may_1989_%28USA%29 , Also previous to that issue EGM also released out the 1989 Buyers Guide (in March or April I believe)

Changing a sentence

"The November 2007 firing of Jeff Gerstmann from Gamespot which is rumored to be because of a poor review for the game Kane & Lynch: Dead Men, that advertised heavily on the site has resulted in many people looking at Hsu's editorial and noting that Gamespot is not one of the sites mentioned at the bottom as not taking money for reviews."

What? There's a double negative in here, and it's also three lines long. I'd cut it down, but it's not even relevant to anything. This also sounds like original research. So, yeah, it's gone.