View source for A-Head 01 Mag Review

<pre>
----------------------------------------
 review of genetic dreams #16 from tnc  
----------------------------------------
                                        
yes.this time the trinomic mag 'genetic 
dreams' issue 16 which was released in  
january '93 is going to be reviewed.    
                                        
the first chapter is as usual the       
editorial. here we find an excuse for   
the non-possible-loadingoperation when  
the 'genetic' logo is not on the scrren,
information about the new crunching     
system that they will use next issue,   
credits and a list of people who        
supported the mag in some way.          
the editors have also put the reactions 
in here. in one reaction the staff      
is tought that there were double        
entries in the charts last issue like   
moz(ic)art/geir tjelta. furthermore     
there is some text about alpha flight   
who had a comeback in their view.       
                                        
the second chapter is the newschapter   
which is normally the most interesting  
chapter but in this mag it is not.      
the reader is informed that somebody    
in acrise had birthday some days ago.   
in the following we read that the       
story about the comeback of alpha flight
is a fake. i just wonder why they did   
not erase the text about afl in the     
editorial if they knew the truth        
afterwards. reading on i get bored by   
either old news or lamer news. only     
about 5 more or less hot elite news     
are placed in this chapter.             
i could not stop laughing when i read   
the following news:clique claimed that  
their last issue of script had 2000     
blocks of text but trinomic checked it  
out and found out that clique lied      
because there were only 1800 blocks of  
text. congratulation to the editors     
for printing such a 'news'. do you      
think anybody cares about that?         
in order to make the news longer the    
editors printed numbers of success      
boards in this chapter. what do you have
the boards chapter for?                 
                                        
next chapter are the charts. here we get
the prove that the 'editors' did not    
learn from the reactions. again a double
entry:we find geir tjelta on place 14   
and moz(ic)art on place 17. in the      
news chapter we got the old information 
that'gamers guide' is back. now in the  
mag-charts they write the following:    
"...... gamers guide(dead?). very       
strange. nothing more to say about this.
                                        
the megacharts is the next chapter.     
but the editors did not even name the   
mags they got the votes from.           
i quote:"they were taken from several   
magazines(?) which i don't remember at  
the moment." and again doubleentries    
like in the previous charts.            
                                        
now let's load the inter3iews. they got 
an interview with anarchy/rsi/5d and    
tell the readers that "he left the      
scene" which is of course wrong.        
i got disapointed when i read exactly   
the same dull questions as usual in     
this chapter of genetic dreams. and i   
died laughing because the staff has     
probably never heard of grammer in      
english. i quote:"how do you entered    
the scene...and how do you come to your 
current group?" that's what we call     
germanism. another nice exemple is:     
"if you could take a person into your   
group,which would you let join?"        
i'm sorry for the two who had to read   
and answer these questions.             
                                        
after this i checked out the crack      
reviews. i flipped through it and saw   
that there was often only one cracker   
listed per game which made the          
2 chapters totally unobjective.         
i feel very pitty for the editors       
because they also listed a cracker      
called 2dd/alpha flight although they   
wrote in the news-chapter that afl      
was just a fake. the staff seemed to be 
totally confused.                       
                                        
now i loaded the demoreviews-chapter.   
the first demo review was 'hental       
mangover' from faces. we get to know    
from gaylen:"i was a little bit angry,  
coz i expected a little bit more from   
a faces-demo..." i'm sure that faces    
is sorry for gaylen and will next time  
release a better demo which also        
plaeses him.                            
the review of the demo "goatland" from  
noice was very incomplete.              
about the intro the editor did not      
mention the zooming and turning goatland
logo before the bitmap scroller appears.
to the fractal-part i read the following
statemant:"nice plotting exemples,but   
also shown ages ago by other dudes."    
the typical statement of a lamer who    
can't code himslef but slags on         
everything. furthermore he forgot to    
say that the fractals got animated after
some time and turned around all axis.   
another incomplete description is the   
one about the vector part. the vectors  
were hidden line!                       
about the elastic line part he wrote:   
"looks nice,but i think i have seen     
something like this before."            
he has seen such a routine before!!!!   
quite amazing to know that.             
by the way i want to mention that       
the wrong punctuations in the last      
quotations are not my fault.            
just another quotation about the part   
with the goat sprite and the swedish    
flag:"have a closer look at the raster- 
lines above the logo.theres a bug!!!!!  
it's a simple part,so such kinds of bugs
mustn't be in such parts!!!"            
(the amount of exclamation-marks is not 
changed!) in all the reviews the editor 
never mentioned the coder,gfx-artist or 
musician who created the demo. luckily  
another editor is taking over this      
chapter in the next issue.              
                                        
in the film-corner i awaited reviews of 
new movies but just read two reviews    
of movies that were already quite old.  
                                        
the next chapter was named "groningen"  
and contained a report taken from a crap
note(!) which was written at the meeting
.                                       
"a. party" was a report about gaylen's  
new years eve party. this chapter had   
the highest amont of text. we get to    
know that gaylen wanted to cut someones 
dick and play ping pong with his eggs   
and other shit. gaylen really deservres 
his name. reading this chapter is a     
total waste of time.                    
                                        
4 addy chapters give the mag more text. 
nothing special to say about them.      
                                        
the following chapter was named         
"coderippers". it contained a text about
ozzy coderippers taken from a note(!)   
which was written by an australian guy. 
nothing of interest.                    
                                        
"boards" gave us some information about 
2 boards and some news. very short      
chapter.                                
                                        
happy because i read nearly the hole    
mag without taking any harm i chose the 
last chapter called "racism". here i    
read some nice articles about growing   
racism in germany. most of the text was 
again(!) taken from notes.              
                                        
summary,conclusion and rating of        
'genetic dreams #16":                   
the amount of text is ok. but most of   
the text (reports,...) is crap and too  
much text is not selfmade (taken from   
notes). the reviews lack any objectivity
and are incomplete. the news are mostly 
old or cannot be called 'news'. the     
questions of the interviews make you    
bawl.                                   
                                        
points:1 out of 10                      
                                        
                                 diabolo
                                        
                                        
                                        
                                        
                                        </pre>