• Join Us |
  • |
  • Sign in with:

PCAccelerator Shutdown

by Steve Gibson, Apr 19, 2000 8:21pm PDT
Related Topics – Games: PC

Some pretty bad news for the evening. Several different sources have sent in word that PCAccelerator Magazine is closing up shop just after about a year and a half of operation. The final issue will go out the middle of next month. You can check out their website featuring the oh-so-popular babe-o-rama and other features. Real bummer to see them go, I have a feeling those guys shared a pretty similar audience as this page here.


Read all the News


Comments

« Previous 1 2 3 Next »
111 Threads | 216 Comments
  • #204
    Refresh Thread
    By: Postal x
    Reply
    How is UT shallow? Fer goodness' sake, you get 50+ maps out of the box, most of which are something other than deathmatch maps... then we get two official map packs (the DE and Epic ones), which are likewise dominated with non-deathmatch maps. Assuming you downloaded only official maps for each game, a UT user would probably have about double what a Q3 user would (over 60 vs. about 34). That isn't a small feat to finish.

    I certainly wouldn't declare UT's gameplay proper to be shallow, either - any serious player could tell you that a lot of skill is involved, especially in CTF.

    That's not to say that I'm totally pro-UT. I still prefer Q3 for straight deathmatch; it's visually better in most ways; and it's pretty clear that Q3 is better-suited for tournaments (just look at the CPL) out of the starting gates than UT is.

    I find it pretty disgusting that people feel that it's SO important to their health that they insult one game or another to make their favourite look better. UT isn't a bad game! How can you say it's horrible when it's really just a matter of preference? Play both... love both.
    Apr 20, 2000 10:15am PDT
  • #159
    Refresh Thread
    By: kickboxer x
    Reply
    back ON the subject, this whole PCXL issue is really a loss. I have read every issue and subscribed for the last 8 months (and pc gamer for the last 4 years) I can't say they go into detail on stuff like Ars Technica, nor are they as up to date as the shack (heh) but the reviews are what get me. Especially in PCXL. And the way they poke at the industry.. I like that :) I am really gonna miss those guys.. And yes, I like the fact that they tried to cross a few lines. Every issue busted me out laughing. Rest in peace, PCXL may you come back from your ashes in a firey new form, preferentially one that tastes like nacho cheese.

    -|<iC|<BoXeR
    Apr 20, 2000 12:03am PDT
  • #112
    Refresh Thread
    By: Postal x
    Reply
    I don't really mind PCXL shutting down much at all. While I respect the work that must have gone into it, the magazine wasn't exactly the pinnacle of publishing history either.

    PCXL just felt... vapid. They were honest with reviews, and did have the occasional article that was really worth reading, but to me it felt like I was killing brain cells just by holding the magazine. There wasn't much in the way of anything serious; yes, it's gaming, but when the *whole magazine* rarely goes five words without a joke... well, you get the idea.

    It didn't help that the whole magazine was basically a temple to sleaze. Really, I don't care about that picture of Sarah Michelle Gellar you're putting in the review - I just want to see what you think of the game! I also don't need excessive "look, Ma, I can use Photoshop!" graphic design.

    PCXL's fundamental failure is that it targeted the wrong people: 14-20 year old hardcore gamers. With all due respect, they're not really the group that should be deciding what the whole focus of a magazine will be. The average gamer's (or at least, PC gamer's) age is actually somewhere around 28 years, and probably falls within a few years of that. They're past the point where they obsess over girls who probably wouldn't even want to be seen in the same room with them; they're not likely to be convinced that outlandish graphics mean higher production values. They most likely want a magazine with an emphasis on real content, ease of reading, and professional style.

    If you want evidence of how a magazine should probably be done, see if you can find Car magazine (it's a UK import, so you'll have to go to a large bookstore, like Chapters). First, this magazine is thick; there's over 200 pages, and most of that is *not* advertising. Second, the style is simple but attractive. There are no overdone borders, no urge to cram in as many graphics as possible into a page. Finally, while the writing certainly uses humour, it's tasteful and used sparingly; Car doesn't think you have to laugh (or in PCXL's case sometimes, force a laugh) every other second to have a good magazine.

    If I sound like some elitist, I'm sorry. But in my opinion, it's obvious that PCXL was operating more on a gimmick (photos of girls) than on actually being worth reading. They have to learn: a magazine with interesting articles will always get business, frills or not; they didn't have enough of those articles.

    PS Car magazine also beats out the majority of North American car magazines, too. They realize that there are cars that exist outside of the US while still keeping the US in mind. They include many reviews that give a real consensus on a car (US reviews seem to almost always avoid saying "buy this car" or "run away from this" anywhere). They're also not obsessed with SUVs, NASCAR, or other really pointless exercises - Car is Gran Turismo country, so they love high-performance cars more than anything. One of their latest issues actually had a short article on the social impact of Gran Turismo... like how suddenly everyone wanted to import Nissan Skylines and Subaru Imprezas in the UK. Expensive magazine, but it feels so much less like fluff than Road & Track (which is still decent, mind you).

    Apr 19, 2000 11:21pm PDT

    Thread Truncated. Click to see all 6 replies.

  • #141
    Refresh Thread
    By: ]aratex[ x
    Reply
    *Sigh* OK, so the TV comparison was perhaps a poor choice.

    I still feel that framerates >30-40 are only there to look pretty and impress people. Sure, it sounds good, but I don't personally find it necessary. If it's solid and playable, I'm happy. Then again, I'm not real picky. It was only about a year ago that I had no 3D card at all, so it doesn't take a lot to make me happy in that department.

    On the other hand, I've never liked 3Dfx. I suppose that I admired their initial work with the original Voodoos. Those things rocked when they were first released. Since nVidia's gotten into the game, though, 3Dfx has just always seemed one step behind. They *still* haven't released a card capable of 32 bit color in 3D acceleration. That's just sad. I'm not a true nVidia zealot, I just feel that they seem to be leading the market right now. It's true that 3Dfx has some truly new features slated for the V5's and V6's, but I've yet to see why I would want full screen motion blur. The screen shots of that make me want to puke. I will also admit, though, that the FSAA looks nice. I honestly have no company loyalties (unlike most people who've sold out to one company or another), I just support what I feel deserves my support regardless of who made it.
    Apr 19, 2000 11:38pm PDT