Retro Gamer magazine's terrible Metal Slug feature --reviewed!

Sam Madeupname said:

Come on sugarknees, come up with an error that isn't in your imagination.

Click to expand...

No, he hasn't posted here since I transcribed the words so he could reread it. It's pretty clear. Maybe you should go back and read it too Sam. You might not be here any more either.

Sam Madeupname said:

Oh, okay, sorry. My mistake. I had assumed you'd have noticed how every single one of Bobak's silly points had been discredited not only by the article's author, but also by the editor of the magazine. I'd have thought you'd have realised that when Bobak was making mistakes so stupid as to not even understand a (-Ed) joke, and then to further scream and shout about it after the joke was explained to him, that his credibility was a little questionable. Never mind that he completely missed the purpose of the article altogether, thus rendering 99% of his festival of stupidity completely void.

But that wasn't fair of me. You think that because your friend Bobak wrote it, it was all 100% true. And you can't have your own thoughts - as your special story explained for us, you don't have your own thoughts, you just take the ones from your friend and then shout them as fact.

And it's cruel of me to ask you to think all by yourself. I'm sorry, and I hope you can forgive me.

Click to expand...

My favorite thing about this white knight posse is their inability to trust what anyone says.

"Sam, a dog just took a dump in your yard. "

"Why don't you just go to hell ho! Don't try and fool me with your lies and deceit! I'm gonna look online and read this for myself. Leave me be as I delve into research this topic so I may master all of its' intricacies."

So, so late to the party.

What a thread, this is quite possibly the best ever. Thank you Bobak.

Stewart, I think you missed a huge point that Bobak was trying to make... it was the fact that you (whether consciously or not) omitted a lot of important background information on the Metal Slug series. He never really said that you got your facts wrong (a la Lithy), he said that there just weren't enough facts PERIOD.

You wrote that article as if you were writing to a bunch of fanboys who already knew the ins-and-outs of the series. This is a huge mistake, because this makes the article inaccessible to people that haven't played the games before, and may discourage said people from trying them.

Sure, people who have been playing this game for years might skim over the few paragraphs needed to fill in the folks who have remained ignorant of the series up to this point, but that's better than having people read your "definitive" article and finding themselves still in the dark after finishing. Remember, not everyone is 41 years old and have been playing games possibly before many others were born, as you boast... so why don't you write like it?

Bobak has rightfully called your writing ability into question, and after all your arguing and childish name calling, you've still failed to defend yourself.

And another thing... the hypocrisy in this thread is astounding. I forget if it was you, Stewart, or one of your little defenders (which amazingly show up on this site only when you do) that called Bobak's post libelous, yet have no problem with the article being an opinion piece and defending it as such. Has it crossed your mind (whoever you are) that Bobak's post was his opinion?

When the flames die, this thread needs to be moves to Best of, STAT.

EDIT: Upon reading the OP again, nevermind. Yeah, Bobak is pointing out tons of inaccuracies in your article. I've read through so many posts that I forgot what was said in the original. Your article is plain terrible, Stewart. Sorry.

Praise the Lard said:

So when there is an editor's note that looks like every other editor's note and legitimately seems like it might be a small apology from the editor for leaving such a thing in we should actually always assume that is indeed not an editor's note?

Please, Sam, give the forum a history lesson on editor's notes jokes. I'm sure these timeless pearls go back centuries. VERY common practice.

Click to expand...

Okay!

While I don't know where the joke began, I first encountered it in Your Sinclar magazine in 1987. In the copy there would be comments in parentheses allegedly written by the magazine's editor. These would often be things like, "(You're fired -Ed)" after a particularly bad joke, or little pedantic explanations like, "(Actually, they're more like 'examples' rather than 'explanations' - Pedantry Ed)".

This same theme has been common in British videogames magazines for at least twenty years, and the terrible secret is that a lot of the time they're written by the piece's author rather than the editor himself. Although it's still perfectly common for the editor, or prod ed, to throw in a -Ed comment to tease the author or include an extra joke.

Oh, wait, you weren't seriously asking for a history lesson? Oh, how embarrassing.

Anyway, the point is, even if one were completely unfamiliar with the whole concept (I don't know if has ever been a theme the more light-hearted US mags), you would assume a reader would not be so ball-thumpingly silly as to think an editor would write a correction in parentheses after a mistake, rather than simply correcting the mistake. Not only would the -Ed comment take longer, but it would of course make no reasonable sense for a mistake to be deliberately left in a magazine. It would require quite an absence of a sense of humour to not make the conclusion that it was, in fact, a joke. Even if you might not consider it a particularly amusing one.

You describe it as "a small apology from the editor for leaving such a thing in". Did you think the editor went and wrote his comment into every copy of the magazine after it was printed?

Sam Madeupname said:

Anyway, the point is, even if one were completely unfamiliar with the whole concept (I don't know if has ever been a theme the more light-hearted US mags), you would assume a reader would not be so ball-thumpingly silly as to think an editor would write a correction in parentheses after a mistake, rather than simply correcting the mistake. Not only would the -Ed comment take longer, but it would of course make no reasonable sense for a mistake to be deliberately left in a magazine. It would require quite an absence of a sense of humour to not make the conclusion that it was, in fact, a joke. Even if you might not consider it a particularly amusing one.

You describe it as "a small apology from the editor for leaving such a thing in". Did you think the editor went and wrote his comment into every copy of the magazine after it was printed?

Click to expand...

It's obvious you haven't even read the article. It appears to be a legit Ed's note. Why you'd argue this is beyond me.

I'll show you an editor's note joke:
"The scientist and Roman Catholic priest Georges Lemaître proposed what became known as the Big Bang theory of the origin of the Universe, although he called it his "hypothesis of the primeval atom". The framework (HEY I SNORTED COCAINE THIS MORNING, ALERT THE INTERNATIONAL NEWS DESK -Ed) for the model relies on Albert Einstein's general relativity and on simplifying assumptions (such as homogeneity and isotropy of space)."

Pretty good one, eh?

Sam Madeupname said:

So many people have said he cannot cope with criticism, but no one's put it to any reasonable test. Which strikes me as the height of obnoxious arrogance.

Click to expand...

I think Stu's difficulties with controlling his emotions have become quite clear on the first few pages already, and all that just because someone expressed his thoughts about a series of articles.

"Hello idiots" were his first words uttered here if I'm not mistaken, followed by a series of comments in a way more juvenile tone than I would expect from a person who is 41 years old and claims to be a pro journalist with 20 years of experience. I won't comment on his journalistic skills but I do think it's time for him to work on his ability to communicate with people outside the paragraphs of his articles.

If anything, Stu should have slept over it before jumping in here. Instead he chose to ride it out and fell flat on his face more than once in the process, at least that is what I read from many replies of people not directly involved here.

Praise the Lard said:

It's obvious you haven't even read the article. It appears to be a legit Ed's note. Why you'd argue this is beyond me.

I'll show you an editor's note joke:
"The scientist and Roman Catholic priest Georges Lemaître proposed what became known as the Big Bang theory of the origin of the Universe, although he called it his "hypothesis of the primeval atom". The framework (HEY I SNORTED COCAINE THIS MORNING, ALERT THE INTERNATIONAL NEWS DESK -Ed) for the model relies on Albert Einstein's general relativity and on simplifying assumptions (such as homogeneity and isotropy of space)."

Pretty good one, eh?

Click to expand...

Well, no.

But what you're not realising is the point of a -Ed joke is that it's supposed to look like something that was put in during the subbing of the magazine, but then not removed before print. Editors don't ever put corrections in parentheses in the middle of articles. It would be silly. Still, more common than you thought they were, aren't they!

Praise the Lard said:

It's obvious you haven't even read the article. It appears to be a legit Ed's note. Why you'd argue this is beyond me.

I'll show you an editor's note joke:
"The scientist and Roman Catholic priest Georges Lemaître proposed what became known as the Big Bang theory of the origin of the Universe, although he called it his "hypothesis of the primeval atom". The framework (HEY I SNORTED COCAINE THIS MORNING, ALERT THE INTERNATIONAL NEWS DESK -Ed) for the model relies on Albert Einstein's general relativity and on simplifying assumptions (such as homogeneity and isotropy of space)."

Pretty good one, eh?

Click to expand...

Hey, give Sam a break. Backpedaling is hard on the lower thighs.

Sam Madeupname said:

sugarknees

Click to expand...

"Sugar-knees." Hyphens, mother-fucker. Use them.

Where's Stu? Off doing another week's worth of research on a series, only to bone-head the shit out of it? Funny how he suddenly ran out of free time, since he has so much on his hands. And if he didn't want to get roasted about a 15-year-old photo, he'd update it at some point. His site could use it, too. I didn't realize Angelfire lay-outs were still in fashion.

Sam Madeupname said:

Well, no.

But what you're not realising is the point of a -Ed joke is that it's supposed to look like something that was put in during the subbing of the magazine, but then not removed before print. Editors don't ever put corrections in parentheses in the middle of articles. It would be silly. Still, more common than you thought they were, aren't they!

Click to expand...

Forgive my exaggeration. I hardly care how common they are, just that this one doesn't come off as a joke in the least.

Since you haven't read the piece I'll transcribe the note for you:
"Metal Slug 3 isn't even as good as the Black Death got. (Hey I love this game - Ed)"

Here's my joke version:
"Metal Slug 3 isn't even as good as the Black Death got. (YOU are not as good as the Black Death got you sunnofabitch, take it back!! wah wah wah we like metal slug 3 and you don't - Ed)"

Mine is much funnier. Obviously.

lithy said:

Sorry, we still haven't gotten past the mummies yet.

Click to expand...

Of all the mucking about I've done here - and I hope that everyone I've been rude to realises that I obviously mean them no personal harm or malevolence, but rather that I'm just a cheery troll who wishes people would raise their games when complaining on the internet - you're the one I was convinced would eventually pull back the hood and reveal that he was playing.

Are you playing? Or are you really, really serious about this mummy/zombie thing? If you're not, and you're playing me, obviously this is golddust for you as you can carry on and drive me even crazier. But I thought I'd ask.

Praise the Lard said:

Forgive my exaggeration. I hardly care how common they are, just that this one doesn't come off as a joke in the least.

Since you haven't read the piece I'll transcribe the note for you:
"Metal Slug 3 isn't even as good as the Black Death got. (Hey I love this game - Ed)"

Here's my joke version:
"Metal Slug 3 isn't even as good as the Black Death got. (YOU are not as good as the Black Death got you sunnofabitch, take it back!! wah wah wah we like metal slug 3 and you don't - Ed)"

Mine is much funnier. Obviously.

Click to expand...

I could be wrong, but I'm fairly certain that's not the -Ed gag Bobak was so cross about. I think he was upset about the one where Stu made a reference to MGS. That's the one I was talking about, at least. I imagine that -Ed comment you cite was genuine.

ki_atsushi said:

it was the fact that you (whether consciously or not) omitted a lot of important background information on the Metal Slug series. He never really said that you got your facts wrong (a la Lithy), he said that there just weren't enough facts PERIOD.

Click to expand...

Just as a quick clarification for why I've been ranting about zombies and mummies for 500 posts. Both Stuart and the Editor of RG asked the forum in general to point out ANY factual errors in the work. So I picked what I thought was a simple one, and 10 pages later, voila!

I've enjoyed the ride so far and I'm glad it is still going. Although I've still yet to decipher Sam's purpose here.

P.S. I've now been convinced by Sam that since walking mummies are not real they can't exist in video games. I shall now rewrite my memories to label all things that do not exist in real life as the next best thing: zombies!

lithy said:

Just as a quick clarification for why I've been ranting about zombies and mummies for 500 posts. Both Stuart and the Editor of RG asked the forum in general to point out ANY factual errors in the work. So I picked what I thought was a simple one, and 10 pages later, voila!

I've enjoyed the ride so far and I'm glad it is still going. Although I've still yet to decipher Sam's purpose here.

P.S. I've now been convinced by Sam that since walking mummies are not real they can't exist in video games. I shall now rewrite my memories to label all things that do not exist in real life as the next best thing: zombies!

Click to expand...

You're right, and after reading Bobak's OP again I can see that he himself ripped Stewart for many inaccuracies in the article.

The problem was, after reading through 15+ pages of posts, I forgot what the original was all about. I apologize, Lithy.

ki_atsushi said:

You're right, and after reading Bobak's OP again I can see that he himself ripped Stewart for many inaccuracies in the article.

The problem was, after reading through 15+ pages of posts, I forgot what the original was all about. I apologize, Lithy.

Click to expand...

Hah, nah I wasn't hacking on you about it just a small detail, I know this thread is now way too long to catch up on.

Plus if I'm every going to top Stu's post count in this thread, I'll have to spam it up in his absence.

I need to go back to page one and record all the various terms of endearment used in this thread and how many times each was used.

Love... sweetie... mate... sugarknees...

...are you looking at my butt?

AncientFlounder said:

Where's Stu? Off doing another week's worth of research on a series, only to bone-head the shit out of it? Funny how he suddenly ran out of free time, since he has so much on his hands. And if he didn't want to get roasted about a 15-year-old photo, he'd update it at some point. His site could use it, too. I didn't realize Angelfire lay-outs were still in fashion.

Click to expand...

Forgot who said it a bit earlier but Stu has DEFINITELY calmed down somewhat, and been a bit more cautious in his latest replies in this thread, indicating that he finally somehow realized his tantrum-like childish posts early on wasn't exactly the wisest thing he could have done. Of course, he knows that deep down, but would never freely admit it in this thread as apparently, he has to always be right on the first shot.

So when is Stu coming back?

Praise the Lard said:

So when is Stu coming back?

Click to expand...

I saw it already

History shall not record these events.

Lagduf said:

Guys, I kind of like Metal Slug 5.

The soundtrack is just too awesome to pass up.

The sliding feature is asinine and the the last boss doesn't make sense but the game is ok.

Metal Slug 3 is the best in the series to play 2-player.

Click to expand...

I love MS5. The thing about it that pisses me off is how blatantly unfinished it is. I'm sure Stu knows all about that, as thorough as he is.

AncientFlounder said:

"Sugar-knees." Hyphens, mother-fucker. Use them.

Where's Stu? Off doing another week's worth of research on a series, only to bone-head the shit out of it? Funny how he suddenly ran out of free time, since he has so much on his hands. And if he didn't want to get roasted about a 15-year-old photo, he'd update it at some point. His site could use it, too. I didn't realize Angelfire lay-outs were still in fashion.

Click to expand...

He's got stuff to do man. Between his professional journalism, daily professional squirrel feedings, professional care of his rats Pixie, Cho-Cho, Blondie and Tails, and professional upkeep on his patented Kid n' Play fade, time isn't on his side.

lithy said:

Although I've still yet to decipher Sam's purpose here.

Click to expand...

Honestly? To try and write some stuff that will make some people laugh. I've definitely achieved that, which has been gratifying.

And to see if it's possible to get some people to back down and rethink things. I don't know why I bother with that part, because obviously people won't. But it's still interesting to try.

And then finally, because I get swept up in it, like everyone else. Like the xkcd comic someone posted a thousand pages ago, I can't stop because someone is wrong on the internet.

Oh, and to see how many times I could get you to type the words "mummy".

Sam Madeupname said:

Honestly? To try and write some stuff that will make some people laugh. I've definitely achieved that, which has been gratifying.

And to see if it's possible to get some people to back down and rethink things. I don't know why I bother with that part, because obviously people won't. But it's still interesting to try.

And then finally, because I get swept up in it, like everyone else. Like the xkcd comic someone posted a thousand pages ago, I can't stop because someone is wrong on the internet.

Oh, and to see how many times I could get you to type the words "mummy".

Click to expand...

I know what Sam, but who, where, how, and why?

Who are you?

Where did you come from?

How did you find us?

Why are you here?

I think your problem with attempting to get people to change their minds is that you failed to present an argument and supporting evidence. You keep saying that Bobak's review was properly destroyed, but all I saw was post after post of Stu losing it and then a few posts from Darran saying he felt the point of the Definitive may have been missed. Nobody really got around to addressing any of his actual points.

I also suppose that Stuart was never on the list of people you wanted to see if they could back down and rethink some things.

I mean, it says Mummy on the damned building for fuck's sake. How much clearer can it be that they aren't zombies?!?

Sam Madeupname said:

Honestly? To try and write some stuff that will make some people laugh. I've definitely achieved that, which has been gratifying.

And to see if it's possible to get some people to back down and rethink things. I don't know why I bother with that part, because obviously people won't. But it's still interesting to try.

And then finally, because I get swept up in it, like everyone else. Like the xkcd comic someone posted a thousand pages ago, I can't stop because someone is wrong on the internet.

Oh, and to see how many times I could get you to type the words "mummy".

Click to expand...

I thought you were funny 2 days ago. Now you're just annoying, mate.