From: ross@kaos.b11.ingr.com (Ross Erickson)
Subject: GAME BYTES Writer's Guidelines
Keywords: game bytes magazine
Reply-To: ross@kaos.b11.ingr.com
Organization: Intergraph Corporation
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 18:36:34 GMT

--
We're very pleased with the initial response to Game Bytes, "the
definitive electronic guide to gaming".  We welcome submissions of
reviews, gaming-related articles, walkthrus, previews, or any other
type of information that is related to this hobby (?) we love to
participate in.  If you have an idea for an article, please send an
email to me at:

ross@kaos.b11.ingr.com

to confirm what you'll be able to do.  This will help to avoid
duplication.  Once we've agreed upon what you can submit, please
follow the following guidelines for writing:

1.  SET YOUR MARGINS TO 0 and 73!!  This makes the article fit nicely
into the Game Bytes viewer.  Make sure that you use (or convert to)
straight ASCII format.  There should be no embedded word processing
characters.  Line feeds and carriage returns should be at the end of
every line.  Don't use the TAB character either, if you are arranging
columns of information.  Don't use justification either.  It adds ugly
spaces between words that looks very bad on screen.

2.  Please indent all titles, headers, and paragraphs with a couple of
spaces only.

3.  Follow standard punctuation rules; ie. one space after commas, two
spaces after periods, question marks, exclamation points, etc.

4.  The title line should read like the following:

WHAMMA WHAMMA ZOOM AND THE BALL BUSTERS by Hunky Dory Game Co.
(P)Reviewed by Ima Twit

5.  Be sure to break the article into intelligent paragraphs.  It
makes for much easier reading.

6.  Use _underlines_ for emphasis instead of all caps or other
characters.

7.  When referring to the game title use ALL CAPS for the reference to
the title.

8.  Take it easy on the exclamation points, smileys, parentheses, etc.
It only clutters up your writing.

9.  PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE proof-read and spellcheck your article once
you are complete.

10. Include your copyright notice at the bottom of the review.

11. Write in the first person.  "_I_ enjoyed this game because of..."

12. Include the hardware/system requirements of the game as they are
listed on the packaging of the game.

13. The purpose of a review is to describe in detail the premise of
the game and to give an opinion.  Therefore, it's important to state
clearly in the review what the game purports to be, how it operates
(controls), what type of graphics, sound, copy protection are
employed, and a general overview of how the game operates.  Then,
probably most important, we want you to state your opinion.  Tell us
why the game is good or bad, but make sure to state WHY, in your
opinion.  Ultimately, you're recommending to others to spend money or
not.  If this isn't clear, please let me know.  Reviews are generally
in the 5-10K in length (ASCII).  This is less important, however,
than being comprehensive and thorough.  If the game has bugs, say so;
if the game is boring, say so (and why); if the game is a 'must-have',
say so (and why).  

14. Enjoy the magazine.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Here's a sample of a well-written review.  

The Perfect General by QQP
Reviewed by Thom Vaught

It always nice to see another computer wargame on the market.  Particularly
one developed by Mark Baldwin, author of Empire.  Now he is working with
Quantum Quality Productions Inc. (QQP).  The quality of their products thus
far is obvious.  Mr. Baldwin's latest effort is The Perfect General (TPG)
which deals with relatively small scale armored conflicts.  Lately new
wargames on the computer have become almost an endangered species.  This
reviewer like many others has become disgusted with the lack of
connectivity, sloppy presentation, and poor computer opponents exhibited in
most computer wargames.  The Perfect General (TPG), which is not perfect,
rectifies this situation in two important areas, presentation and
connectivity.

The presentation of TPG is not stunning, but it is very functional and
surpasses many of its contemporaries.  The graphics in TPG are above
average for a computer wargame and it does include sound effects.  Most
computer wargame players are not looking for stunning visuals and sounds as
seen in most graphic adventures.  However most wargamers expect a solid
game design with decent graphics and a good user interface.  In terms of
the user interface, TPG deserves a pat on the back.  The interface is very
intuitive.  Commands may be given through the use of hotkeys or choosing
options from popup menus.

Another area in which TPG shines is connectivity.  TPG allows two human
generals to compete with one another by using the same computer or through
modem connection.  It must be noted that this reviewer has not been able to
test the modem portion of the product because his modem has been fried for
some time now.  Bug reports for the modem connection within the first
version have been made, and a fix is available to registered users of TPG
from QQP.  Mr. Baldwin deserves many thanks for providing gamers with the
option for human competition.  A lingering question is why more computer
wargames do not provide the option of connectivity.

One failing of TPG, and most other computer wargames, is the computer
opponent.  While the computer opponent may challenge a novice player, most
experienced players will find themselves handing the computer opponent an
humiliating defeat in most scenarios.  This reviewer must admit that there
are a few scenarios which still present a challenge because of the time
constraints or the number of opponents.  There are handicaps which allow
the gamer to make a scenario more difficult, but using this just has the
effect of reducing the gamers number of starting units.  The computer
intelligence could really use some work.

The game itself is a generic armored conflict wargame divided into
scenarios.  To play a scenario, the player must give his name.  TPG keeps
an overall combat history and scenario combat history for each scenario the
gamer who has played.  This is a nice touch because the gamer can see a
record of their performance over a long periods of time.  Each scenario has
a number of optional rules which may be adjusted.  These options include:
play attacker/defender or once as each, hits may cause full kill or partial
kill, shots may be always hit or random hit, sight may be full view or
limited to line of sight, game length may be standard game or long game,
and handicap.  With these optional rules, the gamer has the ability to
greatly affect the way the game behaves.

A scenario is won or lost based on victory points.  Objectives for a
scenario have victory points assigned to them.  If a player occupies the
objective at the end of a turn without an enemy also occupying a portion of
the objective, the player gains the number of victory points assigned to
that objective.  The victory points are cumulative and a unit must occupy
the objective at the end of each turn for to gain victory points for the
objective for that turn.

Units available for the player depend upon the scenario and whether the
player is the attacker or defender.  Following is complete list of the
units available: infantry, engineer, armored car, light tank, medium tank,
heavy tank, mobile artillery, light artillery, heavy artillery, and mines.
The player is given a predetermined amount of Buy Points with which to buy
units.  Once units are purchased, the player places the units in areas
which are available for initial placement in the scenario.  In some
scenarios, reinforcement points are available if certain circumstances are
met such as occupying a specified objective during a given turn.

Each turn in TPG is divided into eight phases.  The first phase is the unit
purchase and placement phase.  Second is the mobile artillery plot phase
where mobile artillery units plot their fire.  Third is the indirect fire
in which both stationary and mobile artillery units execute their firing
orders.  Stationary artillery may plot their fire in the fourth phase.  The
fifth phase is a direct fire phase in which units may execute direct fire
at opposing units.  Sixth is the movement phase where mobile units may plot
their movement.  If the unit moves within the line of sight of an opposing
unit, it may come under passing fire.  Passing fire is nice, but could use
some improvement.  In order to give orders for passing fire, the defender
must be present to give the order while the attacker is moving.  Also, the
only indication that passing fire orders may be given is the letter 'F' in
one portion of the screen turns green.  How about a tonal signal or
something.  Passing fire orders must be given in real time.  A delay value
may be set to indicate the amount of time the player has to respond with
passing fire, but an optional pop-up menu instead of the time delay would
be a nice enhancement.  The seventh phase is another direct fire phase.
Finally there is the scoring phase in which victory points are tallied.

The scenarios that come with the game are well designed.  They cover a wide
range of difficulty levels.  Most of them present the gamer with a variety
of different strategic, tactical, and logistical problems for.  Some
scenarios demand careful initial placement of units.  Others require taking
advantage of chances for ambush.  Still others require the gamer to deal
with the problem of moving units effectively to a destination which is just
within reach given the allotted time.  Of course, whether the player is
playing attacker or defender will have great bearing upon the decisions
made.  Some factors affecting the decisions of generals are the terrain,
time, weather, and neutral countries.  Terrain, including water, bridges,
desert, forests, hills, roads, etc., presents presents both opportunities
and challenges.  For example, hills and forests limit the sight of units
and offer the player the chance to set up an ambush.  Bridges, if
destroyed, must be rebuilt by engineers for units to be able to cross.  In
all of the scenarios, the attacker is not only fighting the defender but
also time.  Several scenarios have varying weather which may affect both
the movement of units and the ability of units to see other units.  Neutral
countries sometimes border the attacker and defender and often present a
temptation to cross for a flanking maneuver.  Be warned, neutral countries
will immediately join the other country and all their buy points will go to
him.

The two larger scenarios, Patton Kicks Butt and Alamein, packaged with the
game present a wide range of opportunities to the attacker and defender.
Most gamers asked why more scenarios of that magnitude had not been
included.  Enter the World War II Scenario Disk.  It is a must buy for
anyone who enjoys TPG.  The scenario disk consists of 15 new scenarios from
the WWII period.  Not all of the battles occurred, most are based on real
battles.  The scenarios are Pegasus Bridge, Sicily, Guadalcanal, Kasserine
Pass, Gafsa, Anzio, Utah Beach, Omaha Beach, Okinawa, Saipan, Gazala-Bir
Hacheim, Iwo Jima, Arnheim, Oahu, and Kharkov.  All of the scenarios are
very good and it is very nice to see QQP support TPG with the additional
scenarios.  It shows they have a genuine commitment to their products and
customers.

Copy protection for TPG is in the form of documentation look-up.  The usual
enter the word on page x line y word z.  They make it a little easier by
prompting with the first letter of the word, but many still find
documentation look-ups very annoying.

All things considered, TPG would be a great addition to any strategist's
computer wargame library if a challenging computer opponent is not a
requirement.  However, if there are wargaming friends handy try putting
away the counters and dice for an evening and giving this game a try.  It
should prove to be a enjoyable gaming experience.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


-- 
|------------------------------------------------------------------|
|  Ross Erickson             |                                     |
|  ross@kaos.b11.ingr.com    | "No individual raindrop considers   |
|  205-730-4019 - voice      |  itself responsible for the flood." |
|  205-730-6445 - fax        |                                     |
|  Internet: 129.135.252.87  |                                     |
|------------------------------------------------------------------|