Not impressed with UGC

General Category > General Discussion

<< < (5/10) > >>

mojoeskateco:
I'd have to say I agree with most of the replies in that, currently the UGC is the best alternative out there from a features to cost ratio.

The only other alternative I've found is Black double wide DVD cases, however I prefer the look of the UGC for NES games.

- They are way cheaper than trying to find complete in box games

- They are way easier to replace than an original box if they do get damaged (just get another case and reprint the case art)

- They are way easier to take care of compared to cardboard boxes of the NES, SNES, and N64

My main concern is that with most things the quality will go down as the manufacturer looks to cut costs.

I'm through my first 200 and couldn't be happier with the results so far and will be ordering another 100-200 very shortly

Maben:
I hope my first post wasn't too negative, I was just voicing my own concerns in line with the thread. Overall, I am extremely happy with the UGCs that I have. They line up great on my shelf, they hold my N64 games great, and they display the great art on this site.

Being able to hold many different cartridges is great for other collectors too since your collection can look more uniform. And it's ideal that we have the UGCs as a standard to make covers for and to plan around.

And like mojoe said, they are great from a monetary standpoint. I can purposely seek out out-of-box games and know that they will still look great. And the UGCs are "indestructible" in comparison to cheap cardboard boxes.

So, basically I hold an opposite view of the OP. My "complaints" are really just me nitpicking any fault I can find.

Harp00nX:
Ive just took delivery of 200 and I have to say compared to the first 100 I bought these are worse. For a start the plastic sleeve is a lot clearer so cover imperfections show up more where as before they were slightly more... textured if that's the right word. Biggest gripe is they are definitely the same size but the insert part for the cover is most definitely smaller. I've had to shave off an extra 2 to 3mm horizontally to fit covers in properly now.

Overall i'm happy, out of 200 only 13 were damaged which is a miracle considering the box had burst open at both sides, I'm amazed they hadn't spilled out somewhere along the delivery chain from the US to the UK (yes postage was insane).

wiggy:
I think I've only ever owned the "new" cases as I've had to re-size covers from the get-go. Now my templates are just a tad smaller to compensate. I wondered if it was just me or not. Now I know.

Maben:

--- Quote from: wiggy on April 11, 2012, 05:10:09 PM ---I think I've only ever owned the "new" cases as I've had to re-size covers from the get-go. Now my templates are just a tad smaller to compensate. I wondered if it was just me or not. Now I know.

--- End quote ---

As I said before, I recently got mine second-hand. However, I've noticed that a lot of the covers I end up shaving about 2mm off of the back simply because otherwise the cover tends to bunch as it is too big. Not a large problem by any means but I thought perhaps I was doing something wrong ???

I guess the UGCs have varied a bit since their inception.

Navigation

 Message Index

Go to full version