Opinion: Print Game Media - [Still] Not Dead, [Maybe] Getting Better
January 10, 2009 4:00 PM |
['Game Mag Weaseling' is a weekly column by Kevin Gifford which documents the history of video game magazines, from their birth in the early '80s to the current day. Following his initial report on EGM's closing earlier this week, Kevin returns to discuss the state of video game print magazines in North America.]
Have you ever been around the offices of a magazine just after it closes? I highly recommend it. It can be fun sometimes, particularly if you were well aware the day was coming soon. Such was the case for PiQ.
While I'm sad the mag failed, I still heralded PiQ's closure with open arms, 'cos it meant that I didn't have to report to work at 9am and deal with irate ex-Newtype USA subscribers any longer. A definite boon, and a very practical one for my sanity as well.
The picture above is from that fateful day when ADV laid everyone off, but the mood was ebullient 'cos everyone had already made plans for their next job anyways. I imagine things were a tad more muted in San Francisco earlier this week.
As you've likely noted, the past few days have been dominated by news about the game media, mostly bad. Ziff Davis Media's game division is no more; now it's UGO's recently-downsized San Francisco office.
Game forum honks don't like it -- though there's not much they really like about professional game media, when you get down to it -- and nostalgia for 1UP podcasts is spreading like a storm across the Internet.
The final issue of EGM is being published online piece by piece, reportedly, including the massive boffo 20th-anniversary retrospective I wrote for it. (So read it, you ingrates!)
Meanwhile, Hardcore Gamer magazine is trying to sell itself on eBay. No takers yet for the $42k minimum bid, despite promises of "hav[ing] your editors invited to press junkets in Japan, the UK and all across the US". Couldn't guess why.
So, nothing but terrible news for print media worldwide in '09, huh? Ziff goes from six game mags to zero in the space of a few years; Game Informer barely manages 90 pages in its latest issue; GamePro's circulation drops to over half of what it was during the early 2000s; freelance budgets are down everywhere.
The worst part of it all: on all the blog posts about EGM's closing, the prevailing response was either "Good riddance" or "What am I going to read on the toilet now?!", which suggests to me that constipation must be epidemic among console owners.
But, hang on -- Future Publishing, now undeniably the torchbearer for print game media worldwide, had a pretty good 2008 overall, with growth particularly pointed over at Nintendo Power and PlayStation: The Official [US] Magazine. What gives?
In the MCV interview linked to above, CEO Stevie Spring sees it as a simple reflection of the burgeoning console game scene, seemingly oblivious to the fact that her company is the sole exception in a year full of bad news for print game media. (The fact that Spring calls Nintendo Power "Official Nintendo Magazine" in the interview indicates that she may be a bit hands-off with the US side of the business.)
There has to be more to it than "the strength of the console video games sector," as MCV suggests -- otherwise, EGM would have been viable, for one. But what's Future's secret? If you asked me, it's twofold: Future knows how to keep its costs deadly-low on the print business, and they're still satisfied with making a little profit instead of a ton of profit.
That, coincidentally, is likely what keeps mags like Play alive, too. Play is not a name on tips of gamers' tongues. Very few people profess to reading it at all. But they're still around -- because they have a dedicated, rock-solid, and above all predictable audience.
To me, EGM's folding doesn't prove that print magazines are dead. Instead, it proves that the era of media we've enjoyed up to now -- one where magazines sold deep-discount subs and expected to rake in the dough on advertising -- is gone, and a new one is about to take its place.
What is that new era? I talked a bit about my idea for Your Game Mag of the Future nearly two years ago, and I don't think that idea's changed much since. If advertisers cannot be relied upon as a primary revenue stream anymore, it follows that the readers have to take up the slack -- which suggests a highly polished, highly collectible, probably expensive publication is the way to go.
With some of its more recent specials (such as Guitars and Gaming), Future US has been getting pretty close to this idea. Future UK's plunged all the way in with its CVG Presents line, about the closest thing in reality to my two-year-old concept (except for that strategy guide roundup issue -- lordy).
It doesn't take a psychic to see that the print mags that survive will go more and more in this direction -- a path EGM itself was taking under EIC James Mielke, although the magazine was already in too harsh an environment to survive for long by the time he took over.
Is this future for print mags very attention-grabbing? Fabulously profitable? Is it something that the vast majority of gamers will even care about? No. But, at least, it would exist and remain exciting for the dedicated group of gamers who would follow it.
[Kevin Gifford breeds ferrets and runs Magweasel, a site for collectors and fans of old video-game and computer magazines. In his spare time he does writing and translation for lots and lots of publishers and game companies.]
Categories: Column: Game Mag Weaseling








7 Comments
"Have you ever been around the offices of a magazine just after it closes? I highly recommend it. It can be fun sometimes,"
Don't extrapolate your unusual situation and think its common. I've been around the offices of magazines that just closed, and it's been about as fun as a walk through the children's cancer ward at the local hospital. I'm sure the people that were at EGM would agree more with me than with you.
I disagree with just about everything in this post, really. Where is this audience that will be willing to pay $30+/year for a magazine when they can get the same info on the web for free? Are you just assuming it exists, or do you have some data to back it up?
Print media is dying across all genres, unfortunately. I don't see much hope for gaming print media to make a comeback.
The fact that you had to use the abhorrent Play Magazine as an example speaks volumes in itself...
Pete S | January 10, 2009 4:49 PM
Readers and bloggers who don't live in the Bay Area seem to often miss the point -- EGM closed because of its massive crippling debut, not because it stopped selling. Ziff Davis was able to sell 1UP.com to Hearst, but not EGM (even though they tried mightily).
Print media has definitely seen better days. And yeah, online is poised to completely take over (in time...hopefully a long time). But what happened to EGM is a pretty spectacular case -- accumulating over $600 million in debt will make you do desperate things.
EGM was a great mag, but couldn't survive without 1UP (or a major online presence). I think the real question is why Ziff didn't establish an EGM.com years ago to avoid this very situation.
Sigh, what a waste of a great name in gaming. At least the creative staff can be proud they put out a (usually) great product.
Sid S | January 11, 2009 10:39 AM
"And yeah, online is poised to completely take over"
I'm always interested in how this is thrown out in every discussion of the media. Online media took over nearly a decade ago. People may pay closer attention to other forms of media, but that's largely due to their smaller numbers. (I.e. it's easier to track a handful of magazines than hundreds or thousands of websites.)
I tend to agree with Kevin, that the future of print lies not in replicating online but in doing something totally different, for a smaller audience that appreciates whatever that "different" is. Small audiences will pay a premium for things they like because their niche-y tastes aren't being satisfied by those looking to reach bigger audiences.
Pete S., you may not dig Play but it has an audience and stays in business, so it's a perfect example of what Kevin is talking about. It's a niche publication with an extremely loyal audience. It doesn't work for me, but so what? It doesn't need to reach me to stay in business. And to get and keep me, it would likely have to betray its existing readers.
steve | January 13, 2009 1:13 PM
"Online media took over nearly a decade ago."
Yes and no. Sure, more people read online -- but the business model isn't as proven as print (insert laughter). It's hard to make money online, unless you're huge, something that's becoming especially true now with the cratering economy. Online will get there, but it will be a gradual process as more standards are set and agreed upon by both advertisers and publishers.
Hey, believe me, I grew up on the internets -- I know damned well how important and world-changing it is. But I still think there's a place for print while online "figures itself out."
Sid S | January 13, 2009 2:02 PM
"It's hard to make money online, unless you're huge, something that's becoming especially true now with the cratering economy."
Since print hasn't been making money either, I'd say the audience size---which is, by a factory of 10-100 times larger than print---and overall revenue to show how much larger online has been than print for a number of years. Online media spending dwarfed print media spending, at least for games, when I was last privy to that info a couple of years ago. And it wasn't close. (TV exceeded both, at least for console games.)
I'm not sure what standards you're referring to. Online advertising has been pretty standardized for a while, at least as much as print. There's no traffic standard everyone agrees with, but print auditing is pretty bullshit too.
steve | January 13, 2009 5:45 PM
It's a sweeping generalization to say "everything print does, online does better for free." I've seen a lot of stories in print magazines that are superior, in terms of writing, presentation, and depthj -- and even more online stories that are based on print stories. (See also: Kotaku, Joystiq.) As long as magazines can do things different or better, they will have a place -- and that's the real challenge. Things like high-quality content, higher entertainment value, deeper coverage, and better presentation will help print find its new footing. And there are going to be casualties along the way. There always are. EGM is a particularly surprising one because of the quality of the product, so the cause would seem to be something else. More on that in a moment.
I'd argue that the best-looking things on most games media sites are scans of magazine pages in forum discussions -- online can't currently do what print does when it comes to presentation. (That doesn't mean that those text-in-a-column online sites are doomed, mind you.) Newspapers are in more serious trouble because online can fundamentally do their jobs better; that's a case where there really was a better way to do it, not just a different way to do it. When it comes to magazines and online, they are different ways, but each has its strengths in different areas.
But good forms of communication do not die; they change. Radio is no longer the dominant form of mass media, but it once was; now its role has changed, but it figured out what it needed to be and it survived as a commercial enterprise. The internet didn't kill books or TV (don't they know you can get storytelling online?). DVD didn't kill theatrical motion pictures (why would you go to the movies if you can see everything for less by renting a DVD at home?) And newspapers did not wink out of existence the moment the internet went commercial; it took several years for online to take over. Change takes time, and if you can change with the times, you can find your place, even if it's diminished or more niche. That's where magazines are now -- not dead, just finding their place in a changed market.
As for EGM, Ziff-Davis took business risks that did not pay off, and this was the result. Circuit City is closing; does that mean nobody will go to Best Buy since the demand for consumer electronics is clearly over? It's more likely that Best Buy is running its business differently than Circuit City, just like all publishers do not operate the way Ziff-Davis operated for the last five years. This "one fell so all will die" logic is an easy battle cry, but seems fundamentally flawed.
Dan | January 17, 2009 2:33 AM
As usual, Dan says it better than anyone else.
Steve said, "I'm not sure what standards you're referring to. Online advertising has been pretty standardized for a while."
I'm referring to page views and unique visitors, two metrics that are young and crude. Online advertisers worry immensely that they spend too much for nebulous concepts like "impressions." There is more research behind print advertising, more understanding around it...which doesn't make print advertising better, just a known quantity. Online advertising has a ways to go before everyone can agree on an effective, cost-effective standard that is generally understood and respected. And "page views" ain't it -- this will mature, naturally, but we're not there yet.
Sid S | January 18, 2009 10:19 PM