New Release - Game Player's Strategy Guide to Nintendo Games Vol.2 No.3 (June-July 1989)

[kitsunebi]

Retromags Presents!

Game Player's Strategy Guide to Nintendo Games Vol.2 No.3 (June-July 1989)

Database Record
Download Directly!

Scanned By: kitsunebi    Edited By: kitsunebi    Uploaded By: kitsunebi   

Follow us on...

                      

 

[Ferneu]

Thanks! But I really wish you had left the ads. At least there is an alternate version which seems to have them.

[Areala]

2 hours ago, Ferneu said:

Thanks! But I really wish you had left the ads. At least there is an alternate version which seems to have them.

The ads are completely present in Kitsunebi's download. What he's talking about is the change of one specific ad which existed in the original version of the magazine which was scanned, but was different in the version he scanned.

[kitsunebi]

7 hours ago, Ferneu said:

Thanks! But I really wish you had left the ads. At least there is an alternate version which seems to have them.

4 hours ago, Areala said:

The ads are completely present in Kitsunebi's download. What he's talking about is the change of one specific ad which existed in the original version of the magazine which was scanned, but was different in the version he scanned.

I never have figured out twitter and other social media posting.  Short and succinct just isn't my style.  So when I present blocks of text carefully explaining things, it often has the opposite effect - people's eyes glaze over and the meaning is lost.  All I can do is provide the information, I can't make people read it.  But yeah, I don't see how what I wrote could be misinterpreted as "ads are missing."  My scan is 100% complete and is technically the only one of the two that can claim that distinction, as the other was guillotine cut, meaning that part of the gutter side of each page (however inconsequential) ended up in a pile of clippings on the floor, never even making it to the scanner.  What I was pointing out was a slight variance between the two magazines which were scanned.  Although otherwise identical, there is a single advertising page which differs between the two - on page 122 of my mag, there is a Toys-R-Us advertisement for an NES, while on the other scan, page 122 is an in-house ad for subscriptions to Game Player's.

TLDR: read the download post again.

Edited November 22 by kitsunebi

[Ferneu]

I am terribly sorry if my post sounded disrespectful. That was definitely not my intention.

When I saw the skater guy in the cover I thought "hey, that is Skate Or Die! That is the second game I got when I got my NES!!!"

And then I clicked on the link to see if the post had a content summary, so I could see what was inside without having to download the magazine. I just wanted to confirm it really was Skate Or Die. And the post had a content summary (you are awesome!!!) and it really was Skate Or Die!

I kept reading the whole thing and then... you see... I think this is what might have thrown me off

https://cdn.imgchest.com/files/e4gdca5rar4.jpg

That purple guy over there, in that screenshot, that one showing the world he has at least two fingers, seems to be saying "ads are extracted"

Now, just because there is an animated image saying that the ads were extracted, it does not mean that the ads were extracted. But you must confess, that is fu..... confusing! (got it? David Chappelle reference? I bet you got it, alright :) ) 

But I forgive you. And not only because I am right and you are wrong and I am just that awesome, but because you are right too. Which is kind of impressive when you think about it. A paradox of sorts.

The problem here is that when I posted, I read only what was written on this post here. Because, well, I was talking about this post. And on this post here there is not a single mention of ads. Well except that purple guy. I think. I could be wrong. I'm often wrong. In fact, I'm not even 100% sure I am right here. I'm probably wrong again... but at this point I'm just going to keep writing, for two reasons:

1. so you do not mingle me with the 20 chars per message social media crowd.

2. it is probably really ticking you off knowing that you really weren't THAT RIGHT in the first place. Even though you kind of were. But let's keep that last part between us and don't tell that to you, so I can continue to annoy you.

 

Anyway, I really hope I haven't offended you. It was never my intention. I know you are one of the top contributors here, and have been since I first discovered this site I don't know how many years ago. Please understand that I really appreciate all the work and effort and hours you've spend giving us awesome scans for free. I really do.

And just so you know how far back my appreciation for your efforts go, I hope you are not still using CDisplay to read the mags. See? I still remember that discussion! And I remembered that because it's been a while since I'm trying to find some free time to propose a change that will save Retromags a lot of money. I was going to do it this weekend but, in respect of your efforts and general awesomeness, I'll give you and your CDisplay a couple more days.

 

PS: you are awesome and I am very thankful for everything you've ever done for this site.

 

[kitsunebi]

6 hours ago, Ferneu said:

That purple guy over there, in that screenshot, that one showing the world he has at least two fingers, seems to be saying "ads are extracted"

Now, just because there is an animated image saying that the ads were extracted, it does not mean that the ads were extracted.

OK, I see what happened.  You misunderstood what "ads extracted" means.  Ads extracted means that the advertisements in that particular mag have been added to our image gallery.  It's an indicator so that no one else has to waste their time comparing the ads in that mag to the ones in the gallery to determine if they've been uploaded yet or not.  Extracting an image from an archive is not the same as removing or deleting an image from an archive.  It essentially means "making a copy" of specific files within the archive.

That purple guy is a legacy from a time when there was no proper data field in our database entries to show that a mag's ads had been extracted.  Since then, that field has been added.  You can see it on every single magazine in our database, marked either "yes" or "no":

Again, this does not mean that the ads have been removed from the archive.  They've been extracted and added to our advertisement gallery.  (I've removed the purple guy because he's just so sassy.)

 

But even though you weren't as right as you thought you were, this is still an important conversation and I'm glad it came up.  @Phillyman: We've got at least one person confused by the "Advertisements extracted" field in our database, who thought it meant that ads had been removed/not included with the download.  There are probably others who think the same.  Perhaps the field should be changed?  "Ads have been added to gallery: yes/no" or something similar?

 

ALSO, for information regarding downloads, always look on the download page, not the database page, and CERTAINLY not the new release post.  The new release post is auto-generated by the site software when a download is posted and has zero input from the person uploading the mag.  And the database entry and any data it contains is usually input by a completely different person, often years before the download is even created/added.   So you need to click the "Download Directly!" link to go to the download page if you want to see any information written by the scanner/editor regarding that particular scan.  Granted, lots of people here never bother writing anything at all, but I always do, even if it's just some non sequitur rambling.

Edited November 23 by kitsunebi

[Ferneu]

Thanks for the detailed explanation. I wasn't aware of any of that.

I knew you were still as awesome as thought you always were. Angry. But awesome!

[kitsunebi]

1 hour ago, Ferneu said:

Angry. But awesome!

Angry but awesome is a tagline I can live with.  Not really angry, though.  Just perpetual "online-resting-bitch-face."  My words may appear angry but that's just my natural state.  Caustically sarcastic/pessimistic?  I'll cop to that.  But I'm not angry, really.  You wouldn't like me when I'm angry. 

 

The "ads extracted?" field in the database entries remains as-is, so it looks like @Phillyman isn't concerned with its meaning being further misconstrued by other members.  Or he just hasn't read these posts.  It's impossible to tell.  But at least now YOU know, I guess.

Edited November 24 by kitsunebi

[tcaud]

Woo hoo! Thanks for this.

Edited November 27 by tcaud
a

[TresHombres]

It's a confusing tag for sure -- I too first thought "ads extracted" meant the mag was without ads. It might read better as "Advertisements From This Scan Have Been Added To Our Advertising Database" but that is a bit hard to fit on a button

 As for Kit being angry the most angry I have seen them is to just get frustrated and express that frustration in many words. Certainly not hostile or angry. I think it can be off putting to some but for me the difference is, is it someone speaking from their heart without any hesitation or mitigation ... or is it someone who just enjoys being a pain in the ass and calls it "telling it like it is" haha. Kit is definitely just a straight shooter, no chaser, no fluff. 

[kitsunebi]

59 minutes ago, TresHombres said:

It's a confusing tag for sure -- I too first thought "ads extracted" meant the mag was without ads. It might read better as "Advertisements From This Scan Have Been Added To Our Advertising Database" but that is a bit hard to fit on a button

That's at least two votes for changing it to something less confusing.  "Ads added to gallery?" would probably be a better fit, but will @Phillyman come to the rescue and make the change?  Will he even see this discussion??!  Or will chaos and confusion continue to reign supreme?  Tune in next week for the exciting conclusion!

[Ferneu]

Perhaps you guys could simply add a button right beside the "ads extracted" and, when that button is clicked, it could show the longer explanation as a tooltip or pop-up or in whatever other way you non-artistic challenged people think it would look good.

As for me, now that I know what it means, I'm fine with it. Well, not really FINE FINE, but, you know, I can live with it . Probably...

[kitsunebi]

3 hours ago, Ferneu said:

Perhaps you guys could simply add a button right beside the "ads extracted" and, when that button is clicked, it could show the longer explanation as a tooltip or pop-up or in whatever other way you non-artistic challenged people think it would look good.

As for me, now that I know what it means, I'm fine with it. Well, not really FINE FINE, but, you know, I can live with it . Probably...

Actually, "ads added to gallery?" is fewer characters than the current "advertisements extracted?" even including spaces, so it's not a matter of available space.  It's just a matter of doing or not doing.  The only person capable of changing it, however, is @Phillyman, and I've tagged his name to this conversation 4 times now without any response or acknowledgement that he's even looked at this conversation.  So although a typed response of "no, it's better left as it is" would have saved us all some time 7 or 8 posts ago, at this point I think we can assume that this conversation either hasn't been read and never will be, or else that it HAS been read and the "no, it's better left as it is" response was indeed delivered forthwith via telepathy and it's our fault that our feeble human brains were too primitive to have received it .  At any rate, let's stop posting about it here, since it keeps bumping this post to the top of the new releases on the main page, which after that pinned EGM kickstarter thread, is getting to be an annoying trend.