@Aetheldod: "GiantBomb.com ~ Reviews, News, Videos & Forums"

It's the first thing on the site's blurb, reviews are a damn important thing for GB. I feel like if they don't feel that way they should just delegate all that stuff to GS and focus on being a VG Entertainment website, with TNT, Bombcast, QLs and all that taking the front stage.

@Ares42 said:

@murisan said:

@Ares42: So basically, they need interns. That seems simple enough, no?

Well, sorta ye.. Or rather I'd say they need more assistants at least. But then again, could you imagine any of the guys being comfortable with having a PA? :P

Absolutely. Don't you remember when they'd boss Kessler around?

@MatthewMeadows said:

Not gonna lie, it looks a bit unprofessional that he hasn't done it.

I mean fair enough, I guess GB is kinda about the informal approach to game writing ("journalism"), and I love em for it, but you still have to do your damn job. This isn't a small game, it's one of the AAA games of the year, and I know you only get so much mileage out of subscribing to the belief that AAA games deserve more coverage but I think it's important that we learn what Ryan thinks about the game.

FYI, I'm not one of these "ERMEGERD GAMEZ JOURNOS ARE PAID OFF/LAZY" people, and I love me some Ryan Davis, but I kinda have to call him out here, he needs to get this review out.

I hear you, but AC3 is a massive game. It took me 45-50 hours to do everything.

@Jazzycola: @MatthewMeadows:

Mhhh fair ... fair ..... but by this I also take into account narrationless vids , were the gameplay must speak for itself , or the return of video reviews wish I think they are far better than written word (videogames after all are a audiovisual media after all) , but lest face it most reviews (including the ones in GB) are more of a bullet point/ re reading instructions of how to play the game , not how the game is

@Aetheldod: I wouldn't say that's the case at all with GB's Reviews. It's why I care about their ACIII review.

I gotta admit, it's a bit lazy to not do the review until it's so long after the game came out so you can just use the "it's too late for a review" excuse

@Aetheldod: Again, Video reviews do not go over the goods and bads of a game in depth. As far as I'm concerned Video reviews only give you the high points and dramatize them then gloss over the bad as if its nothing (if it is what they consider a great game). Or on the flip side highlight only the bads and gloss over the good (if they considered bad).

As far as, the visual media is concerned. Movies are visual media, but movie video reviews are useless.

By reading from your comments it seems like you've never read a review. Either that or your mistaking previews and game guides for a review article. If this was IGN and you were talking about a review Audrey Drake did then you'd have a point.

@murisan said:

At this point, I'd like to see the review just because Ryan said he'd do it.

So it might sound a little desperate, knowing how the GB staff take their time to review a game, but it's been one week already, and all we've got is the DLC review (3 stars, which I don't think the game deserves, although I haven't played it yet) and a Quick Look. I'm starting to worry there will be no review. Yes, AC is a game for completionists, but I don't think it's necessary to complete the game 100% to give a review. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to criticize GB, but I'm starting to get a little desperate,

So, any whereabouts about the review?

@CptBedlam said:

@WilliamHenry said:

@jrodrz said:

all we've got is the DLC review (3 stars, which I don't think the game deserves, although I haven't played it yet)

Sums up the problem with video game fans and reviews. "I haven't played one second of a game, but I know enough to know that the person who played through the whole thing is wrong, and that it deserves more than three stars."

I was about to write the same thing. Hilarious.

But obviously he knows a lot about it. Not enough to know that Liberation is the Vita AC game and not DLC, but enough to know it deserves more than three stars.

Lol, sorry, my mistake for assuming it was DLC when it was actually a Vita game. Still you can't say I'm wrong when I complain about having the Vita release reviewed much earlier than the console version. Besides, even though I haven't played it yet, reviews and comments from other sites have pointed that the game deserved more than 3 stars. Why do I complain if there are other reviews in other sites? Because I expect to get what I was offered from this site when I joined.

@jrodrz said:

@CptBedlam said:

@WilliamHenry said:

@jrodrz said:

all we've got is the DLC review (3 stars, which I don't think the game deserves, although I haven't played it yet)

Sums up the problem with video game fans and reviews. "I haven't played one second of a game, but I know enough to know that the person who played through the whole thing is wrong, and that it deserves more than three stars."

I was about to write the same thing. Hilarious.

But obviously he knows a lot about it. Not enough to know that Liberation is the Vita AC game and not DLC, but enough to know it deserves more than three stars.

Lol, sorry, my mistake for assuming it was DLC when it was actually a Vita game. Still you can't say I'm wrong when I complain about having the Vita release reviewed much earlier than the console version. Besides, even though I haven't played it yet, reviews and comments from other sites have pointed that the game deserved more than 3 stars. Why do I complain if there are other reviews in other sites? Because I expect to get what I was offered from this site when I joined.

Alex reviewed the Vita game, Ryan reviewed AC3. Plus if you're coming here for their opinions, I don't see how you can argue that it's low "because other people said it was better". If you want their opinions, get their opinions. What's the use in getting another review that agrees with all the other reviews for the sake of being the same? That's fucking stupid.

And GB has always been about the videos and commentary. They have NEVER, NEVER reviewed all releases, even major releases. To say you expected it going in is either stupid of you or completely false.

@DystopiaX said:

Alex reviewed the Vita game, Ryan reviewed AC3. Plus if you're coming here for their opinions, I don't see how you can argue that it's low "because other people said it was better". If you want their opinions, get their opinions. What's the use in getting another review that agrees with all the other reviews for the sake of being the same? That's fucking stupid.

And GB has always been about the videos and commentary. They have NEVER, NEVER reviewed all releases, even major releases. To say you expected it going in is either stupid of you or completely false.

Like I have said before, I wanted the GB review because I like how they review the games. I wouldn't have complained if the review would have been 1 star, I don't care about the score, I want to know what they think of it, because I have found GB review's to be more honest and straightforward. If the site were only about videos and commentary, there wouldn't be any reviews at all, don't you think? Of course I know they don't review every game, yet AC III is a game a lot of people have been expecting, it would have been strange if they hadn't reviewed it.

@jrodrz said:

@CptBedlam said:

@WilliamHenry said:

@jrodrz said:

all we've got is the DLC review (3 stars, which I don't think the game deserves, although I haven't played it yet)

Sums up the problem with video game fans and reviews. "I haven't played one second of a game, but I know enough to know that the person who played through the whole thing is wrong, and that it deserves more than three stars."

I was about to write the same thing. Hilarious.

But obviously he knows a lot about it. Not enough to know that Liberation is the Vita AC game and not DLC, but enough to know it deserves more than three stars.

Lol, sorry, my mistake for assuming it was DLC when it was actually a Vita game. Still you can't say I'm wrong when I complain about having the Vita release reviewed much earlier than the console version. Besides, even though I haven't played it yet, reviews and comments from other sites have pointed that the game deserved more than 3 stars. Why do I complain if there are other reviews in other sites? Because I expect to get what I was offered from this site when I joined.

Nope, I heard lots of complaints about Liberation on numerous gaming podcasts. Weekend Confirmed and Invisible Walls, for example. GT is usually a high-scoring site but even they gave it a 6.9/10.