Games Master, like Edge, is a multi-format magazine Essays

Games Master, like Edge, is a multi-format magazine Essays Games Master, like Edge, is a multi-format magazine Paper Games Master, like Edge, is a multi-format magazine Paper Games Master, like Edge, is a multi-format magazine. Despite this similarity, the two magazines are significantly different in many terms of the language framework. The combination of a similarity and a variety of key differences makes the two magazines especially appropriate for comparison and analysis. The magazine appears to appeal to a younger generation of readers than Edge, which is particularly evident from the framework features of lexis and graphology contained within the text. Lexis The complexity of language found in Games Master is somewhat inferior to that in Edge. Propulsion and innovative are examples of lexis which are not comparable to the lexical elevation of Edge. There are also items which suggest Games Masters intended audience, like emotive language often used to modify verbs and nouns. Examples of this are dribs, drabs, zipping, whizzing, toxicity and thwack among many others. The words present a sense of comparative informality which would appeal to a younger audience, rather than older one. The amount of specialist lexis is relatively reasonable (see Pie Chart Analyses) but also lacks the elevation of that in Edge. Gameplay is the most complex of these words in Games Master which strongly suggests the magazines audience as the casual gamer. By this I mean a person who has no interest in the technical aspect of games reviewing and only the games more interesting aspects. Grammar The most noticeable difference between Games Master and Edge is the sentence length and structure. Games Master never uses any short sentences, but instead longer ones to suit the method of review. While Edge based its review on the history of the game and its main advantages and flaws, Games Master produces a more in-game and storytelling review. : Because of this, the text flows avoiding constant interruption by the full stop. An example of the sentence length is in When Mario is wrongly convicted of vandalism on his arrival, hes forced to use Flood to clean up the mess as part of his community service: and so begins a long chase to find the real culprit in each of the games worlds. I initially believed Edge would contain the longest sentences due to its formal nature, but instead uses complex phonological and lexical techniques such as cohesion. Games Master is the opposite and contains long sentences with no hidden framework techniques and a less direct approach. Whereas Edge is direct in its points, Games Master uses metaphorical and imaginative terms to describe things. The following is two extracts from Edge and Games Master, reviewing the game in comparison to imitators, reinforcing this theory: (See overleaf for quote comparison). Games Master: Nintendo developers somehow manage to pour buckets of curdled shame on their competitors. Edge: Everyone was waiting for Nintendos guiding light, and it arrives, and its far above its imitators, but someway below its inspiration. Apart from biased implications, the differences are obvious. Games Masters metaphoric language suits its audience well by producing a more reader friendly image. The relative formality of Edge can also be seen in this example. Graphology The graphological features of Games Master are important in distinguishing its intended audience. The amount of images (information extracted from Pie Chart Analyses Section) is particularly useful. Their number causes them to dominate the page, patronising the text, but their placements are also important. Instead of the harmonic order found in Edge, Games Masters screenshots are littered about on tilted angles with a relative lack of structure. Of course, this makes the page more appealing, especially to the younger eye. Another important feature lacked by both Edge and FHM is the appearance of the games character, twice on the first two pages. The character, Mario, dominates the first page in the form of a blown up screenshot extract. This signifies the intended audience and lays the foundation of the reviews style (basic with a low specialised lexis count). However, the most important feature is the award that is given to the game, situated on the first page Gaming Masterpiece. In my opinion, this is an indicator of the magazines relatively informal format as it is an encouragement for the audience to read the review, and which particularly draws younger readers into it something which formal articles, broadsheet newspapers as an example, do not use. In reinforcement, this award system is also used by FHM who use Game of the Month. In relation to these two, Edge expectantly does not use such a system, and the games review score even takes a subsidiary role. In relation to this feature, the use of fact boxes suggests similar things. An example of this in Games Master can be found on the second page in the top right. The contents are not even particularly relevant and even quite abstract, but it is this kind of item which attracts a young audience. The review is completed with a review box situated at the bottom right of the final page. It is divided into the three key parts of games review, which is a feature confirming tabloid similarity in terms of subtitles. They are used for easy reference which suggests the audience of Games Master is of lower education than Edge, which strictly structures all of its points within the main review, and lacks a review box. The subtitle structure is also used in the main review, and gives very general ideas upon what the following section is about, exactly like a tabloid newspaper. Phonology Onomatopoeia is the key phonological feature of the Games Master review. This is directly linked to the lexical use of a magazine with a young audience. The following are examples of onomatopoeia in Games Master. Zipping, gloop, thwack, zip and swoosh. All of these words are informal and resultantly make phonology another feature which suggests the youth or education of the audience. The Games Master whole text also appears to portray a much more spoken tone than that of Edge which contributes to its high readability. An example of this is the instructive, but humorous sentence, Dont get Yoshi wet! Use his regurgitastic spit. But dont even think of chucking on a constable, like us. Helpfully, this sentence also contains further implications which would fall into sections of lexis and grammar, but have been mentioned here due to their relevance to the section of phonology. Firstly, the type and level of humour is that which would amuse readers of an early age (8 -14 years). The humour is based around one of the games characters spitting ability and the magazine focuses upon using this upon a policeman, which is something a young person might feel rebellious doing, thus producing an element of humour. Secondly, the non-dictionary lexical item of regurgitastic is used. The word itself shares the suffix of the adverb fantastic and thus exaggerates the dictionary word, regurgitate. The suffix tastic replaces the previous one of tate. The word now appears much more interesting and appealing to the younger audience. Thirdly, the use of the exclamation mark, ! , adds a degree of humorous instruction to the sentence and contributes to its spoken tone. A final point on this sentence is its ending, like us, which serves the purpose of encouraging the reader to do what has previously been said. Although they jokingly warn against it, the rebellious implications of the sentence will make the reader do it (spitting on the policeman) and the like us ending will simply cause the reader to want to follow the magazines example. Discourse The audience of Games Master is significantly confirmed by the magazines lexical use and phonological features. The tone is generally spoken in order to involve the audience more and particularly to appeal to their youth. Elements such as pronouns, exclamation marks and humour echo this theory. Games Masters purpose is to inform in a humorous way. However, it differs from Edge because it strongly bases its informing upon the games storyline rather than Edges tendency to cover how good the game is which is the point of a review.