A-Head 01 Mag Review
From C64 Diskmag Wiki
---------------------------------------- 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