Finally, a decent article at Hudson's website... and TurboList gossip...

[Keranu]

Yes that's what pisses me off the most about those Hudson Entertainment n00bs, they don't like Canadian slang! Please, I advise you all to check out the Gate of Thunder article I submitted to Hudson Entertainment here and compare it to what I originally wrote and later posted here. Those knobs totally horked my article, eh!

[akamichi]

Keranu, I read both articles.  All I can say is... wtf!?   The tone of the Hudson version is totally different than the one on your site.  They also added in a bunch of stuff that you didn't even say or even imply in the original.   They definitely got a little _too_ creative.

[Keranu]

Keranu, I read both articles.  All I can say is... wtf!?   The tone of the Hudson version is totally different than the one on your site.  They also added in a bunch of stuff that you didn't even say or even imply in the original.   They definitely got a little _too_ creative.

I don't really mind what they changed for the most part, I just like to act like I do . However I did find adding lines like this to make the article sound silly and cliche:

"Okay, so the storyline's pretty generic - it's a shooter - at least it had one!"

I remember when I first wrote that article I clearly wanted to avoid using a line like that because it's used in basically every shooter review, espeically on GameFAQs! So I took a little different route in what I originally wrote by saying "So basically the typical shooter story line, ..." in the paragraph after I describe the story so I could get right on into describing the action of the game.

And then of course there are lines like this they added which are just plain humerous: "Trust me, the designers of game weren't lazy!".

[esteban]

Keranu, I read both articles.  All I can say is... wtf!?   The tone of the Hudson version is totally different than the one on your site.  They also added in a bunch of stuff that you didn't even say or even imply in the original.   They definitely got a little _too_ creative.

I don't really mind what they changed for the most part, I just like to act like I do . However I did find adding lines like this to make the article sound silly and cliche:

"Okay, so the storyline's pretty generic - it's a shooter - at least it had one!"

I remember when I first wrote that article I clearly wanted to avoid using a line like that because it's used in basically every shooter review, espeically on GameFAQs! So I took a little different route in what I originally wrote by saying "So basically the typical shooter story line, ..." in the paragraph after I describe the story so I could get right on into describing the action of the game.

And then of course there are lines like this they added which are just plain humerous: "Trust me, the designers of game weren't lazy!".

I read the Hudson version but I was too lazy to read your original. After reading these comments, though, I know I should read your original version, because I wasn't expecting them to actually add content. I thought they would make it shorter... perhaps re-arrange some stuff...

If it makes you feel better, a friend of mine writes for some well-known magazines (and his first book was published recently). He told me that a lot of editors for these magazines take a great liberties -- to the point of telling him what he must say. When he strays from these instructions, they simply insert what they wanted into his articles. His best experiences have been with very small, niche magazines and a handful of big magazines that take their journalism seriously.

[Keranu]

Jeez that sucks for your friend. I thought America was free!

[Black Tiger]

I didn't realize that "Hudson" actually inserted new text into your article. Thats incredibly lame. A professional mag editing one of its employee's work is one thing. But a game publisher adding dialogue to articles that are supposed to be written by real fans is misleading at the very least.

If they put in something like (Note: the "PC Engine" is not a home computer but actually the japanese equivalent of the "Turbo=Graphics 16") thats one thing. But inserting fake "natural sounding" dialogue, like "its the bestest, for reals ya'll!" boarderlines on the kinda b.s. like Sony did with the fake PSP blog or professional forum posters.

Its not nearly as bad, but it has the same idea behind it: to pass off company lines as coming from regular gamers.

Hudson Entertainment's editing might explain George P.'s weird Arcade Card article. Overall it seems well written by someone who knows their stuff. But the theme is supposed to be how the Arcade Card saved/made the PC Engine and was the technology that allowed it to compete with the real 16-bitters.

When in reality it was a last minute upgrade in the console's lifespan that only supported a handful of games. I could see if someone wanted to argue that it was the Super CD/3.0 Card or just the CD-ROM in general that carried the PC Engine.

[Keranu]

Hudson Entertainment's editing might explain George P.'s weird Arcade Card article. Overall it seems well written by someone who knows their stuff. But the theme is supposed to be how the Arcade Card saved/made the PC Engine and was the technology that allowed it to compete with the real 16-bitters.

When in reality it was a last minute upgrade in the console's lifespan that only supported a handful of games. I could see if someone wanted to argue that it was the Super CD/3.0 Card or just the CD-ROM in general that carried the PC Engine.

Yes I thought the same exact thing. Why on Earth would the Arcade Card be " One of the most vital accessories in the PC Engine's lifespan was the Arcade Card."? If that's what the article's aim was, then yes an article about the Super CD-ROM2 card would've been a much better choice, as you said.

[esteban]

First, I agree with you, B_T, about the loss of credibility that occurred with Hudson's actions. Lame!

Hudson Entertainment's editing might explain George P.'s weird Arcade Card article. Overall it seems well written by someone who knows their stuff. But the theme is supposed to be how the Arcade Card saved/made the PC Engine and was the technology that allowed it to compete with the real 16-bitters.

When in reality it was a last minute upgrade in the console's lifespan that only supported a handful of games. I could see if someone wanted to argue that it was the Super CD/3.0 Card or just the CD-ROM in general that carried the PC Engine.

Yes I thought the same exact thing. Why on Earth would the Arcade Card be " One of the most vital accessories in the PC Engine's lifespan was the Arcade Card."? If that's what the article's aim was, then yes an article about the Super CD-ROM2 card would've been a much better choice, as you said.

Thank you, Black Tiger! That was the first thing that I thought when I was reading George P's article as well. Overstating the koolness of the Arcade Card is one thing (i.e. if you really like the ACD games, you're entitled to praise it), but overstating the importance of the Arcade Card with respect to the history of the PCE is lame.

Notice that I didn't link to the article in question!

Ahhhhh, Hudson sucks. It would take so little effort to fact-check the content of their website. 

[Black Tiger]

First, I agree with you, B_T, about the loss of credibility that occurred with Hudson's actions. Lame!

Hudson Entertainment's editing might explain George P.'s weird Arcade Card article. Overall it seems well written by someone who knows their stuff. But the theme is supposed to be how the Arcade Card saved/made the PC Engine and was the technology that allowed it to compete with the real 16-bitters.

When in reality it was a last minute upgrade in the console's lifespan that only supported a handful of games. I could see if someone wanted to argue that it was the Super CD/3.0 Card or just the CD-ROM in general that carried the PC Engine.

Yes I thought the same exact thing. Why on Earth would the Arcade Card be " One of the most vital accessories in the PC Engine's lifespan was the Arcade Card."? If that's what the article's aim was, then yes an article about the Super CD-ROM2 card would've been a much better choice, as you said.

Thank you, Black Tiger! That was the first thing that I thought when I was reading George P's article as well. Overstating the koolness of the Arcade Card is one thing (i.e. if you really like the ACD games, you're entitled to praise it), but overstating the importance of the Arcade Card with respect to the history of the PCE is lame.

Notice that I didn't link to the article in question!

Ahhhhh, Hudson sucks. It would take so little effort to fact-check the content of their website. 

I can't wait for Hudson Entertainment's next fan article about how Hudson dominated the 16-bit generation with their amazing Genesis system.