> Let me start by saying that what you are attempting to do with this
> CD-Magazine is a very cool alternative to stopping at the bookstore. I
> was going to say much needed, but maybe it is much needed only to
> computer geeks like myself.

Actually, IE seems to appeal to lots of people who would never in a
thousand years pick up a gaming magazine. Go figure.

> So, I really like the idea, but now for the things that bugged me about
> (Episode 3)
>
> 1. Why don't you just show the game being played full-screen? Instead,
> you film a computer screen running the game and play that . . . just
> show DOOM being played like it usually is, or like any other DEMO would
> do.
>
> 2. Show more animation and movement . . . I don't want to see a thousand
> still frames!! I really wanted to see how BioForge would run on my
> computer, but you guys just showed still frames! My apologies if you
> couldn't get any animated sequences because the games weren't that far
> done yet. But I think for most games you should be able to get your hands
> on some actual games being played and not just do screen captures fellas!
> (and ladies).

Heh. These two are related, so I'll tackle them together. Full-screen
gameplay? We'd LOVE to! The problem is, the technology just isn't there
yet. Until all games run out of Windows, and companies become willing to
share their playing engines with us, and we have time to rewrite the code
for IE from the ground up every month (translation: NEVER), we're stuck
with running digital video clips. As you well know, digital video is
very much in its infancy. As the technology gets better, you can rest
assured, IE will get better. Once we can afford to buy tens of thousands
of dollars' worth of video equipment, we'll be able to do better captures
(and more of them; right now, we really rely a lot on the developers to
supply us with motion, and most of them don't have the time to produce
stuff for us). And once every video card in the country has an MPEG chip
on it, you'll actually be able to SEE it full screen at your end.

> 3. One thing that really got on my nerves was when I would click on the
> game title on the left, the screen would not change until the little
> picture in the window got done filling up the window. You wouldn't even
> hear the click of the little button until that picture got done filling
> up the screen . . . annoying.

Steve, our Director, who handles the technical aspects of the mag,
tells me that this is a Windows thing. While Windows is performing a major
task (like copying a big file, or a bunch of files, for example) it stops
checking for input. The button click and jump to another article occurs
in response to mouse input; while IE is pulling a screenshot off your
CD drive, uncompressing it and displaying it, it's not looking for that
mouse input.

>
> Well, now for the praises of your product . . .
>
> 1. I loved the Siskel and Ebert type reviews! Those made the reviews and
> previews more enjoyable and I only wish you did that more . . .
>
> 2. I liked the idea of clicking on the picture window to get to the games
> as well as the buttons . . .
>
> 3. I like the Hi-Color support cause I have a Diamond Stealth for my
> color hand scanner and it was nice to see a program that handled that.
> Although, the video sequences were very choppy and the voices did not
> match the lips at all. (Not to relapse into the "What Sucks" section, but
> just thought I would throw that in . . . )
>
> Overall, for a new company, or attempt, or whatever the heck you guys
> and gals are doing, you are doing a very nice job indeed! I really
> enjoyed it. Just get more animated sequences!!
>
> M.S.
> Beaver Falls, PA