PlanetCrap 6.0!
Front Page (ATOM) • Submission Bin (2) • ArchivesUsersLoginCreate Account
You are currently not logged in.
T O P I C
Game Over Gamecenter
February 7th 2001, 04:11 CET by Morn

Just to give you something to talk about until PC5 launches: Good old <a href="http://www.gamecenter.com">GameCenter</a> is closing down. The rumour has been circulating for a while, but <a href="http://www.gamecenter.com/News/Item/0,3,0-5223,00.html">this news item titled 'Game Over'</a> verifies it; CNET's GameCenter will be no more at the end of this week.
C O M M E N T S
Home » Topic: Game Over Gamecenter

|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»|
#1 by "Morn"
2001-02-07 04:13:07
morn@planetcrap.com http://www.planetcrap.com
BTW, if one of you wants a story published on Crapola <i>before</i> PC5 goes live, please email <a href="mailto:news@planetcrap.com">news@planetcrap.com</a> instead of submitting it via the web interface. Thanks!

- Morn
<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#2 by "Apache"
2001-02-07 04:20:00
apache@stomped.com
That came out of nowhere. I thought they would have merged Gamecenter with gamespot, sort of like ZD merged videogames.com with gamespot.com. WHO IS NEXT?
#3 by "Barneyque"
2001-02-07 04:28:33
barneyque@hotmail.com
Darn, I never went there much since it turned into a portal type site (I hate those), but they were usually good to look up a cheat or two in a moment of need.<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#4 by "Russ"
2001-02-07 04:28:35
rthcowboy@mindspring.com
I was kinda wondering if there would be another topic before PC5. Okay, call crash right now and ask him to be an admin. His presence is missed.

Even though the gaming websites are dropping out pretty fast, I am still having no trouble whatsoever finding free news and information. I guess maybe the sky isn't really falling. It will be a long while, if ever, before the anticipated subscription model can take hold. That is, unless a subscription site can offer something really unique.<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#5 by "zarathustrian"
2001-02-07 04:29:53
tarbour@canada.com
In a way, they are merging.  It's basically the one and the same now.  They wouldn't change it to something lame like "Game Center and/or Spot".
#6 by "BloodKnight"
2001-02-07 04:35:48
bloodknight@somethingawful.com
No wonder GamerXXX hasn't updated in two months
<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#7 by "Apache"
2001-02-07 04:37:16
apache@stomped.com
In a way, they are merging. It's basically the one and the same now.


when I mean merging, I mean like not laying everyone off, etc.
#8 by "Morn"
2001-02-07 04:49:52
morn@planetcrap.com http://www.planetcrap.com
Cool! If you think the End Of The World (tm) is stopping at gaming websites, <a href="http://europe.cnn.com/2001/HEALTH/02/06/ebola.canada/index.html">think again</a>.

- Morn
<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#9 by "SteveBauman"
2001-02-07 04:55:05
steve@manic-pop-thrills.com
I'd say it's more of a consolidation, that there's little reason for one company to produce competing websites that compete for the same ad dollars. They probably have a problem selling all of the impressions on one site; no reason to have two, with their own staffs, own downloads, etc.

Regardless of what it's called, Cnet is reducing their workforce by 10%, which you can read about at this URL which doesn't want to work for some reason.

http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010206/wr/cearns_dc_2.html
 
I don't know whether or not that includes any Gamecenter people.
#10 by "Barneyque"
2001-02-07 05:03:14
barneyque@hotmail.com
<b>#9</b> "SteveBauman" wrote...
<quote>I'd say it's more of a consolidation, that there's little reason for one company to produce competing websites that compete for the same ad dollars.</quote>


Come on, that's management speak speak that us well worn little guys see through.

It's a shitcanning, a layoff, getting the big boot, all that stuff.

Of course, we could call it a consolidation, or a right-sizing, if we want, but that's just dropping sugar in an open wound, and does not really help at all.

How far up the old ladder are you now Steve, have you added some of those magic little CEO/COO/CFO/CAO letters to your business card lately?

:)<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#11 by "Barneyque"
2001-02-07 05:04:00
barneyque@hotmail.com
Shit, that second speak should have been the word 'bullshit', I have no idea how that happened.  :)<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#12 by "Barneyque"
2001-02-07 05:06:43
barneyque@hotmail.com
Speaking of C-Net, if they can't make good, and I mean damn good money with those bigass ads they are running now, then the internet is surley(sp?) doomed.

I love the news site, but those ads make the pages scroll like an old woman dragging a bodybag down the road.<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#13 by "charred"
2001-02-07 05:10:18
jgollner@sympatico.ca
Cool! If you think the End Of The World (tm) is stopping at gaming websites, think again.


I read about this earlier... thankfully it's not an airborne virus (otherwise we'd need to bring in Dustin Hoffman), and the freezing cold up here makes in next to impossible to spread unless they try really, really hard.

To be safe though, I say just nuke Winnipeg to the ground. In fact, they can go right ahead and nuke all of Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and western Ontario as well. All the fun comes out of Montreal anyway. Toronto is just "Hey Look We're A Typical American City But Have Nothing Redeeming At All," and should be destroyed ASAP. I mean come on, the pansies there called in the ARMY when they had a foot of snow. Talk about embarrassing your country.

We'll keep BC and Alberta around because they have Banff. The Maritimes can also stick around, for great justice.
#14 by "Barneyque"
2001-02-07 05:16:48
barneyque@hotmail.com
<b>#13</b> "charred" wrote...
<quote><quote>Cool! If you think the End Of The World (tm) is stopping at gaming websites, think again.</quote>

I read about this earlier... thankfully it's not an airborne virus (otherwise we'd need to bring in Dustin Hoffman), and the freezing cold up here makes in next to impossible to spread unless they try really, really hard.

To be safe though, I say just nuke Winnipeg to the ground. In fact, they can go right ahead and nuke all of Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and western Ontario as well. All the fun comes out of Montreal anyway. Toronto is just "Hey Look We're A Typical American City But Have Nothing Redeeming At All," and should be destroyed ASAP. I mean come on, the pansies there called in the ARMY when they had a foot of snow. Talk about embarrassing your country.

We'll keep BC and Alberta around because they have Banff. The Maritimes can also stick around, for great justice.</quote>

Godammit, have you guys not left yet? What's the holdup? Crying bitches, it never quits.
<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#15 by "None1a"
2001-02-07 05:20:13
none1a@home.com
<b>charred</b> (#13):
<quote>I read about this earlier... thankfully it's not an airborne virus (otherwise we'd need to bring in Dustin Hoffman), and the freezing cold up here makes in next to impossible to spread unless they try really, really hard.</quote>

It's Ebola for crying out loud. It'll be next to impossible to spread (unless of course there are bodies laying around canadas road ways and crap flowing in the watter supply). All though you might want to avoid public pools.<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#16 by "Barneyque"
2001-02-07 05:23:49
barneyque@hotmail.com
<b>#15</b> "None1a" wrote...
<quote>crap flowing in the watter supply</quote>

Apparently this IS a bit of a problem in some areas up here.

Quite nasty, 2500 hospitalised, and 7 dead last summer from e-coli (shit) in the water supply. Cocksucker running the system was not chlorinating the water like he was supposed to be.<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#17 by "charred"
2001-02-07 05:26:54
jgollner@sympatico.ca
It's Ebola for crying out loud. It'll be next to impossible to spread (unless of course there are bodies laying around canadas road ways and crap flowing in the watter supply). All though you might want to avoid public pools.


From my understanding, it's a lot easier to transfer just by touching someone when the weather is warm. I'm probably confusing it with cholera, but I seem to remember reading that that's why the outbreaks in the Congo would kill entire villages in a few days. I could be wrong though. I probably am.
#18 by "Russ"
2001-02-07 05:29:17
rthcowboy@mindspring.com
<b>charred</b> (#17):
<quote>it's a lot easier to transfer just by touching someone when the weather is warm. I'm probably confusing it with cholera</quote>
Nah, you're thinking of <i>cooties</i>.<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#19 by "None1a"
2001-02-07 05:33:57
none1a@home.com
<b>charred</b> (#17):
<quote>From my understanding, it's a lot easier to transfer just by touching someone when the weather is warm. I'm probably confusing it with cholera, but I seem to remember reading that that's why the outbreaks in the Congo would kill entire villages in a few days. I could be wrong though. I probably am.</quote>

It's spread via body fluids and can be get really bad quickly as it does cause bleeding (thus the touching thing), and there are generaly no way to handle the number of infected bodies in many villages. I did not know the water supply that that bad up there (from Barn's post), I hope they've got that problem sorted out or this could get really bad. <i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#20 by "Apache"
2001-02-07 05:35:54
apache@stomped.com
damn, less than 20 replies and its already waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay off-topic.
#21 by "Barneyque"
2001-02-07 05:38:00
barneyque@hotmail.com
<b>#19</b> "None1a" wrote...
<quote>I did not know the water supply that that bad up there (from Barn's post), I hope they've got that problem sorted out or this could get really bad. </quote>


Hard to say, I guess it depends on where you live.  Canada is a giant country with a handfull of big citys, which I'm guessing generally have no problems with the water, but there are zillions of small well fed systems that I would call questionable at best.

Needless to say, last summers problems have put a big spotlight on the problem, and I would imagine it's all being fixed as we speak.<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#22 by "Barneyque"
2001-02-07 05:39:28
barneyque@hotmail.com
<b>#20</b> "Apache" wrote...
<quote>damn, less than 20 replies and its already waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay off-topic.</quote>

Heh heh, morn started it at #8, so blame him.

His server, his site, and his topic so I guess he can do what he wants.  :)<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#23 by "Russ"
2001-02-07 05:43:20
rthcowboy@mindspring.com
<b>Apache</b> (#20):
<quote>damn, less than 20 replies and its already waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay off-topic.</quote>
Well, Morn's the one who went off topic. Since it was his topic to begin with, this must be what he wants. He's just trying to keep us off balance. Besides, this sounds more interesting than another gaming site shutting down.<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#24 by "Apache"
2001-02-07 05:51:43
apache@stomped.com
damnit morn :)
#25 by "SteveBauman"
2001-02-07 05:55:05
steve@manic-pop-thrills.com
Of course, we could call it a consolidation, or a right-sizing, if we want, but that's just dropping sugar in an open wound, and does not really help at all.

Well, I wasn't justifying it so much as saying, from a business perspective, it probably makes sense. Just typical things (unfortunately) that happen after an acquisition. From a personal perspective I suspect it sucks mightily.

How far up the old ladder are you now Steve, have you added some of those magic little CEO/COO/CFO/CAO letters to your business card lately?

I'm a god. Not THE God, mind you, just a regular run of the mill god.
#26 by "Barneyque"
2001-02-07 05:57:35
barneyque@hotmail.com
<b>#25</b> "SteveBauman" wrote...
<quote>I'm a god. Not THE God, mind you, just a regular run of the mill god</quote>

Well, in that case, I gotta talk to you later...I said some things today in the heat of the moment that we probably need to talk about.  :)<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#27 by "Apache"
2001-02-07 05:57:39
apache@stomped.com
Nice "Groundhog Day" reference. :)
#28 by "paul"
2001-02-07 06:52:13
pbullman@webhitzone.com
It's ashame another company is going down.. but.. it will be interesting to see if they suspend practice or if they are completely selling everything(including the domain name.) I can not imagine Fixed Costs for a internet company are high at all(bare bones, domain fee, with cheap hosting with some "we will be back" sign)

- Paul
#29 by "Kayin"
2001-02-07 06:56:29
kayin@infinet.com
It's sad to hear another gaming site shutting down, but honestly, CNET applies to my "never seen, never cared" philosophy...

the shakedown continues... *cue foreboding music*<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#30 by "Quicken"
2001-02-07 08:17:26
geoffrey@access.com.au
I used to read the CNet stuff and I used to like it. Somewhere around 2 years ago I stopped having the time and stopped liking what I read when I did. Then after reading a rather poor review they wrote up of Mech4 I decided I'd give up on them. Back when Gamegirl was running things it was a pretty nice place.
#31 by "Mark_Asher"
2001-02-07 09:28:21
marka@cdmnet.com
"I'd say it's more of a consolidation, that there's little reason for one company to produce competing websites that compete for the same ad dollars. They probably have a problem selling all of the impressions on one site; no reason to have two, with their own staffs, own downloads, etc."

So how does this apply to your parent company, theglobe.com? They have three sites that overlap, Happy Puppy, CGO, and Games Domain Review. Which one will be left and which two will be closed?

As to Gamecenter and Gamespot being merged, that's not happening. The entire Gamecenter staff has been laid off.
#32 by "Mark_Asher"
2001-02-07 09:46:40
marka@cdmnet.com
Sites that depend on advertising revenue are in for some scary times. Morn's graphic for the crapper aptly depicts where ad sales are now. This isn't just a downturn, either. This is a market correction. The ad rates in the past were way overpriced.

If you want to know how dire things are now, I talked to one of the MMORPG sites tonight. This site turns 20 million pageviews every month, which is huge. To serve up those pageviews they pay $5000 every month. They run their own servers. That cost, which is $0.40 per CPM, doesn't even include salaries and overhead.

That's a cost of $0.40 per CPM. I just wanted to repeat that.

Doubleclick, one of the leading ad brokers (dclk is their symbol and they have a current market valuation of $1.768 billion, so this isn't a rinky-dink ad broker), has been selling some ads at $0.50 per CPM.

Now if your bandwidth costs are $0.40 per thousand pageviews if you're hosting your own servers, and ad rates in some cases have dropped to $0.50 per thousand pageviews, well, you're fucked.

I expect that most commerical game sites will go under before the year is out. Even CNET, the mighty content network, is going to have problems in the current ad market. There's no guarantee that the ad rates will rise all that much either. There's a lot of brave talk about this being a downturn that can be weathered, but really, what evidence do we have that ad rates will rise? None.

And good luck to the game companies that have had a free ride. You're not going to find it as easy to get the remaining sites like Gamespot to provide continual coverage of games in development. You might get your one preview and that will be about it. The days of sites posting new screenshots every day may be winding to a close. Sure, there will be fan sites, but all your doing is marketing to the choir there. The people who frequent a Duke Nukem fan site are going to buy Duke Nukem Forever anyway. How do you get your game in front of others though? Maybe buy some ads on websites? Hey, what a concept!
#33 by "Theseus"
2001-02-07 10:37:58
theseus@cpgaming.com
One less of an overcrowded blues clone genre.  Though this is sad, even sadder is that fact that those who remain will probably be both quality journalists, but also large amounts of "Andys".  The concept similar to, the Independent being a bloody superior paper to say the Sun, yet which generates greater readership?

In my opinion, soon banner ads will be replaced with "something that works", but what that will be doesn't instantly come to me.
#34 by "Morn"
2001-02-07 13:22:20
morn@planetcrap.com http://www.planetcrap.com
Back in 95/96, during my first days on the net, one of my favourite computer game related websites (and there weren't too many back then) was a Command & Conquer fansite called... called... gah, I don't even remember the name. However, it was beautifully designed, had <i>lots</i> of great content (full unit descriptions, mission walkthroughs, multiplayer strategies, a downloads section with editors/maps/hacks/etc, and more) and was updated frequently. The site was being run by one guy only who was hosting it, if I remember correctly, on good old Geocities (which was sort of new back then, too, and wasn't enforcing any annoying popups or DHTML overlays).

Of course the site wasn't carrying any banner ads, either... the guy simply made it because he loved Command & Conquer. Of course, back then making a gaming website wasn't about "high-speed news publishing" and mentioning every single new screenshot on the net.

If making [gaming] websites is going back to this, I actually welcome this (from a business perspective pretty much depressing) development. A staff of a dozen over-paid (but often essentially incompetent) kids can never make up for a true fan who loves the game/topic he's talking about.

- Morn
<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#35 by "Morn"
2001-02-07 13:24:20
morn@planetcrap.com http://www.planetcrap.com
A little correction: my last post wasn't supposed to be a comment on the story itself, but rather on the general discussion about the demise of ad-supported websites.

- Morn
<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#36 by "asspennies"
2001-02-07 13:38:11
asspennies@somethingawful.com
<b>#32</b> "Mark_Asher" wrote...
<quote>There's a lot of brave talk about this being a downturn that can be weathered, but really, what evidence do we have that ad rates will rise? None. </quote>

Seeing as how this is <b>probably</b> a cyclical economic effect, it's a pretty good guess that eventually, ad rates will rise.  Otherwise we're witness to the collapse of civilization as we know it - and I seriously doubt that's true.<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#37 by "WarrenMarshall"
2001-02-07 13:43:45
warren@epicgames.com
Morn (#8):
Cool! If you think the End Of The World (tm) is stopping at gaming websites, <A href="http://europe.cnn.com/2001/HEALTH/02/06/ebola.canada/index.html">think again</A>.

"HAMILTON, Ontario".  That's my hometown.  Where my parents and brothers live.  :(

Morn (#34):
If making [gaming] websites is going back to this, I actually welcome this (from a business perspective pretty much depressing) development. A staff of a dozen over-paid (but often essentially incompetent) kids can never make up for a true fan who loves the game/topic he's talking about.

Yeah, it would make me happy to see a return to fans running fun sites as well.  Formulaic sites are getting pretty stale (news + screenshot of the day + forums = fan site!), and it would be great to see people get back into it for the pure fun of it again.

When I ran MPQ (MultiPlayer Quake), my page was -dirt- simple.  :)  Just some basic HTML tables and a color scheme that I liked.  But I got enough hits to make it worth my while, and people enjoyed the site a lot.  I don't see why sites need to load themselves down with databases, Java, etc ... just do something simple and have fun with it.  If it's good, people will come ...

---

Warren Marshall
Level Designer/Programmer/Corporate Shill
Epic Games (www.epicgames.com)<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#38 by "palutke"
2001-02-07 13:58:26
kcpalutke@tasc.com
<b>Barneyque</b> (#14):
<quote><B>#13</B> "charred" wrote...
<quote><quote>Cool! If you think the End Of The World (tm) is stopping at gaming websites, think again.</quote>

I read about this earlier... thankfully it's not an airborne virus (otherwise we'd need to bring in Dustin Hoffman), and the freezing cold up here makes in next to impossible to spread unless they try really, really hard.

To be safe though, I say just nuke Winnipeg to the ground. In fact, they can go right ahead and nuke all of Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and western Ontario as well. All the fun comes out of Montreal anyway. Toronto is just "Hey Look We're A Typical American City But Have Nothing Redeeming At All," and should be destroyed ASAP. I mean come on, the pansies there called in the ARMY when they had a foot of snow. Talk about embarrassing your country.

We'll keep BC and Alberta around because they have Banff. The Maritimes can also stick around, for great justice.</quote>

Godammit, have you guys not left yet? What's the holdup? Crying bitches, it never quits.</quote>

Wow.  I've seen US v. UK threads, US v. Canada threads, etc. .  but never a Quebec v. the rest of Canda thread.  Good going, guys, way to keep things fresh!

I predict that by post 100 we'll have degenerated into chest-thumping and calling one another Nazis.<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#39 by "WarrenMarshall"
2001-02-07 14:13:39
warren@epicgames.com
palutke (#38):
Wow. I've seen US v. UK threads, US v. Canada threads, etc. . but never a Quebec v. the rest of Canda thread. Good going, guys, way to keep things fresh!

I predict that by post 100 we'll have degenerated into chest-thumping and calling one another Nazis.

I could get into this, but I won't.  All I have to say on the matter is that if Quebec is so unhappy with being part of Canada, LEAVE.  :)

---

Warren Marshall
Level Designer/Programmer/Corporate Shill
Epic Games (www.epicgames.com)<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#40 by "Greenbean"
2001-02-07 15:57:47
john@playerofgames.com
Coming from a small voluntary games site for Ireland I can only say it delights me that the big sites are going. Theres no way you can compete with 12 paid writers and editorial staff with steamroller heavy weight tactics involved to get their content. I mean secretaries have been employeed at games companies soley to manage web pr (yea I know thats a exaggeration). Its getting far far harder to quickly contact the correct people unless you are a big name.<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#41 by "Apache"
2001-02-07 16:34:23
apache@stomped.com
morn wrote:

Back in 95/96, during my first days on the net, one of my favourite computer game related websites (and there weren't too many back then) was a Command & Conquer fansite called... called... gah, I don't even remember the name. However, it was beautifully designed, had lots of great content (full unit descriptions, mission walkthroughs, multiplayer strategies, a downloads section with editors/maps/hacks/etc, and more) and was updated frequently. The site was being run by one guy only who was hosting it, if I remember correctly, on good old Geocities (which was sort of new back then, too, and wasn't enforcing any annoying popups or DHTML overlays).

Of course the site wasn't carrying any banner ads, either... the guy simply made it because he loved Command & Conquer. Of course, back then making a gaming website wasn't about "high-speed news publishing" and mentioning every single new screenshot on the net.

If making [gaming] websites is going back to this, I actually welcome this (from a business perspective pretty much depressing) development. A staff of a dozen over-paid (but often essentially incompetent) kids can never make up for a true fan who loves the game/topic he's talking about.


Welcome to the GameSpy Network!
#42 by "SteveBauman"
2001-02-07 16:40:28
steve@manic-pop-thrills.com
So how does this apply to your parent company, theglobe.com? They have three sites that overlap, Happy Puppy, CGO, and Games Domain Review. Which one will be left and which two will be closed?

We'll see. In theory the sites only overlap in what's being covered, not how it's covered. Yeah, it's a subtle difference, and it doesn't necessarily mean ad dollars are easier to come by, but I'd argue Gamespot and Gamecenter were more alike, in tone and readership, then CGO and Happy Puppy. Also, Happy Puppy covers consoles. And a lot of traffic for Happy Puppy and Games Domain is people looking for free downloads.

But in terms of competing for ad dollars, the days of proving this enormous aggregate of sites to deliver zillions of impressions is probably over, at least in the short-term. So as I said, we'll see what happens. (And I honestly don't know what any plans are, and probably couldn't divulge them even if I did know.)
#43 by "Mark_Asher"
2001-02-07 17:27:40
marka@cdmnet.com
"But in terms of competing for ad dollars, the days of proving this enormous aggregate of sites to deliver zillions of impressions is probably over, at least in the short-term."

Pageviews are almost a liability now. Sites are better off figuring out how to cut down pageviews while retaining the same number of sessions.

Gamecenter and Gamespot both were profitable from what I've heard, and didn't have a lot of overlap in readers. CNET's just cost-cutting and when you do that, having two similar sites is one of the first things you look at.
#44 by "Mark_Asher"
2001-02-07 17:30:42
marka@cdmnet.com
"Coming from a small voluntary games site for Ireland I can only say it delights me that the big sites are going. Theres no way you can compete with 12 paid writers and editorial staff with steamroller heavy weight tactics involved to get their content. I mean secretaries have been employeed at games companies soley to manage web pr (yea I know thats a exaggeration). Its getting far far harder to quickly contact the correct people unless you are a big name."

And as a small site, what will you do if you grow and your bandwidth costs rise? Through the Looking Glass just posted last night that they're getting stuck with a $1200 bandwidth bill. How are you going to pay for that?

As to contacting game companies, it's not the big sites that are getting in your way. It's that there are 10,000 small sites all begging for screenshots and interviews. Make most of those go away and you might have better luck.
#45 by "Kelster"
2001-02-07 17:34:56
kelster@planetstarsiege.com
[41] Apache:
morn wrote:
...
If making [gaming] websites is going back to this, I actually welcome this (from a business perspective pretty much depressing) development. A staff of a dozen over-paid (but often essentially incompetent) kids can never make up for a true fan who loves the game/topic he's talking about.

Welcome to the GameSpy Network!

Not really. As a die-hard Starsiege: Tribes fan and a volunteer working within the GS Network (PSS) I find that comment slightly offensive. Working on a "planet" doesn't remove one's fandom. It extends it!

I'm able to work with and talk to hardcore tribesplayers on a daily basis! I love the game more today than when I was doing tables on unstable geocities and xNetwork fansites (which I've had my share of). GSN takes care of the server bills, technology, etc. while we focus on community involvement and services. They provide the easel and paint and we do the rest. Not a bad thing IMHO. :)

I'd be willing to bet we could find some GameSpy folks who are more hardcore and dedicated than you Apache. ;)

-Kel doesn't appreciate being branded an essentially incompetent kid
#46 by "Mark_Asher"
2001-02-07 17:36:19
marka@cdmnet.com
"Yeah, it would make me happy to see a return to fans running fun sites as well. Formulaic sites are getting pretty stale (news + screenshot of the day + forums = fan site!), and it would be great to see people get back into it for the pure fun of it again."

Have they ever gone away? I suspect you don't see them because you don't bother to look for them. You probably spend your time at the bigger sites because they deliver more of the information you want.
#47 by "Mark_Asher"
2001-02-07 17:38:11
marka@cdmnet.com
"In my opinion, soon banner ads will be replaced with "something that works", but what that will be doesn't instantly come to me."

CNET's running giant ads on some of their pages. They are actually highly annoying -- not because of their size and placement, but because they're animated. While the animation is running it's virtually impossible to read the article. They really need to turn off the animation.
#48 by "Apache"
2001-02-07 17:43:04
apache@stomped.com
Not really. As a die-hard Starsiege: Tribes fan and a volunteer working within the GS Network (PSS) I find that comment slightly offensive. Working on a "planet" doesn't remove one's fandom. It extends it!


thanks, I worked on quite a few of those "planet" sites myself... The pay was um, in the satisfaction. ;)
#49 by "Greenbean"
2001-02-07 17:46:01
john@playerofgames.com
Mark_Asher [44]

Bandwidth costs are placated by having no costs in exchange for providing a service for the bandwidth provider.. a content service (essentially sharing reviews and content which are being done anyway).

And Yep you're probably right its the other sites like us that are getting in the way. Ideally we would leverage our connection with the bandwidth provider towards games companies to get content, but I like just getting to know people personally.<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#50 by "Kelster"
2001-02-07 18:06:53
kelster@planetstarsiege.com
[48] Apache:
thanks, I worked on quite a few of those "planet" sites myself... The pay was um, in the satisfaction. ;)

That's exactly the way I look at it as well . ;)
C O M M E N T S
Home » Topic: Game Over Gamecenter

|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»|
P O S T   A   C O M M E N T

You need to be logged in to post a comment here. If you don't have an account yet, you can create one here. Registration is free.
C R A P T A G S
Simple formatting: [b]bold[/b], [i]italic[/i], [u]underline[/u]
Web Links: [url=www.mans.de]Cool Site[/url], [url]www.mans.de[/url]
Email Links: [email=some@email.com]Email me[/email], [email]some@email.com[/email]
Simple formatting: Quoted text: [quote]Yadda yadda[/quote]
Front Page (ATOM) • Submission Bin (2) • ArchivesUsersLoginCreate Account
You are currently not logged in.
There are currently 0 people browsing this site. [Details]