#1 Posted by hermes (1414 posts) -

Yeah, because online petitions always work.

Still; it has come to my attention that recently the need for such a show has increased. Game of the year discussions always need it, but between Mass Effect 3 and Walking Dead a few weeks ago, and Halo 4 this week, I think they should consider having this discussions on separate files. I get it... I also want a place to discuss some stuff about games I just finished with friends, and I think those sections are really good (some of them are good food for thought and some of the best parts in recent podcasts come from those discussions) but I also think its annoying when it happens in a general discussion podcast, specially because there is no description or any way to know up to which point to skip it. So, at that point I either have to get it or skip much of the podcast.

Even when they can call the Statute of Limitations, the time can vary. In cases like Mass Effect 2 or Bioshock, that got released in some platforms long after others, I got spoiled several important plot points before I even got the chance to play the game. Even on new games, I rarely play them on release day...

This is not unprecedented. Short after Metal Gear Solid 4 and Modern Warfare 2, they had short podcasts where they discussed plot points at length but, since they were on different files, you could chose to keep them on hold until you completed them yourself. I am not even asking for regular updates... it would be a nice surprise once in a while, but I don't want them to feel they need to have a minimum amount of people to complete a game so they can make a feature; but there are games that most of them played and finish outside their assignments (like Skyrim, Walking Dead, Diablo 3 or Mass Effect 3, for example) and I would love to hear their unhindered opinions, but only after I know it doesn't get in the way of my personal enjoyment of the games.

So, what do you think? Its the spoilercast idea good enough to make a return?

#2 Posted by Bulby33 (589 posts) -

I usually play the games they spoil on the regular bombcast so it doesn't bother me personally, but I could see how it would annoy other people.

#3 Posted by Canteu (2821 posts) -

Or, Ryan could just do some work and put timestamps in the description.

But that's too hard.

#4 Edited by Kerned (1170 posts) -

Providing some timestamp information for the podcast would also solve this problem. I know it's more work, but it would be SO nice of them to do. It's rare that spoliery discussions happen, but there has been more than one instance where I was spolied on something I had no idea I was at risk of being spoiled on. It's not the end of the world, but it would be nice to be able to avoid that stuff.

#5 Posted by Christoffer (1796 posts) -

But they clearly said when you could start listening again, weren't you listening?

Yeah, they need to do something about that. I'm not that bothered by spoilers usually. But the few time I am, it's a chore trying to find the spot where they've stopped talking about it. You skip around hoping to not land smack dab on "... and when everybody died I thought..."

Timestamps would be great.

#6 Posted by Canteu (2821 posts) -

@Kerned: It was nice when Patrick casually spoiled the end of 999 this week. Not that I care because that "game" is shit, it was just very...odd, that he would do this with a game he knows is literally only about the story, and which he also holds in high regard.

There was no avoiding it, due to it coming from nowhere.

#7 Edited by hermes (1414 posts) -

@Canteu: @Kerned: Yeah, timestamps at the beginning and end of those discussions could be nice too, but too much work. To relegate those discussion for another, less than an hour recording sounds more feasible.

Based on the introduction to the Halo 4 and Mass Effect 3 ones, I can guess they knew those were coming...

#8 Posted by Neurotic (632 posts) -

Or just stop caring about spoilers?

#9 Posted by hermes (1414 posts) -

@Christoffer: Most of the times, they don't. Its easier to know if you read the comments on the page, but I don't remember them saying anything about where to skip it to in this week episode.

#10 Posted by ThePaleKing (613 posts) -

@Canteu said:

@Kerned: It was nice when Patrick casually spoiled the end of 999 this week. Not that I care because that "game" is shit, it was just very...odd, that he would do this with a game he knows is literally only about the story, and which he also holds in high regard.

There was no avoiding it, due to it coming from nowhere.

The game came out 3 years ago. This spoiler fear is getting ridiculous.

#11 Edited by Canteu (2821 posts) -

@ThePaleKing: Timing is kinda irrelevant. A lot of people aren't going to know what that thing was until Patrick praised it, and people went and played it or are playing through it, since he brought it up fairly recently.

It's just the way he does it. Like I said, I didn't really care.

It's less of a spoiler fear and more of the way they handle it. Other podcasts manage to talk about games in detail without spoiling every little thing for no reason.

#12 Posted by TobbRobb (4600 posts) -

@Canteu: He spoils 999? Fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck. That is basically the one thing they talk about that I would be even remotely bothered by. SOMEONE TIMESTAMP!

Well, I guess Ni No Kuni too, but i doubt Brad will or can spoil that.

#13 Posted by Neurotic (632 posts) -

@Canteu: I don't remember having 999 spoiled. He said that most of the endings result in death but I would've thought that was fairly obvious. He also said there was a sequel stinger. So? Who cares? That's hardly a spoiler.

#14 Posted by Hunter5024 (5614 posts) -

@Canteu said:

@Kerned: It was nice when Patrick casually spoiled the end of 999 this week. Not that I care because that "game" is shit, it was just very...odd, that he would do this with a game he knows is literally only about the story, and which he also holds in high regard.

There was no avoiding it, due to it coming from nowhere.

Which part was a spoiler? I haven't played the game, and it didn't sound like he was voicing any mind blowing story revelations or anything.

@ThePaleKing: With all of the glowing praise he's given the game recently, what a niche title it is, and the slow post holiday release schedule it's perfectly logical to assume that some Giantbomb users might have picked it up recently for the first time. So if something he says was a spoiler, that's pretty messed up even if the game is 3 years old.

#15 Posted by hermes (1414 posts) -

@Neurotic: That goes back to the reason why you play games, and some can be more damaging than others.

I didn't mind to know the end boss of Skyrim; but I wasn't thrilled to know the meaning of "Would you kindly?" before the game was even out.

#16 Edited by Canteu (2821 posts) -

@Hunter5024: @Neurotic: @TobbRobb:

"when the villains hand comes out of the pile of bodies"

Sounds a lot like a spoiler to me. Even if it's not a spoiler, why did he even have to say it? He could have left it at "theres a sequel stinger" and not say exactly what it is. Vagueties are easy enough to use. If you're talking to someone about a story beat, and somebody else doesn't want to know just say "you know the part with guy that does the thing to the other guy, after the big thing happens?", you'll know what they're talking about and the other person won't. It's just that easy.

#17 Posted by Neurotic (632 posts) -

@Canteu: Wasn't that just an example of a sequel stinger, not something that actually happens?

#18 Posted by Kerned (1170 posts) -

@Canteu: that doesn't actually happen. He was using that as a metaphor for a big "OMG" cliffhanger moment.

#19 Edited by ThePaleKing (613 posts) -

@Hunter5024 said:

@Canteu said:

@Kerned: It was nice when Patrick casually spoiled the end of 999 this week. Not that I care because that "game" is shit, it was just very...odd, that he would do this with a game he knows is literally only about the story, and which he also holds in high regard.

There was no avoiding it, due to it coming from nowhere.

Which part was a spoiler? I haven't played the game, and it didn't sound like he was voicing any mind blowing story revelations or anything.

@ThePaleKing: With all of the glowing praise he's given the game recently, what a niche title it is, and the slow post holiday release schedule it's perfectly logical to assume that some Giantbomb users might have picked it up recently for the first time. So if something he says was a spoiler, that's pretty messed up even if the game is 3 years old.

It doesn't matter if someone might have picked the game because he mentioned it; if they had to assume that someone somewhere is possibly playing any game at any moment then they would never be able to discuss anything at all. If you are THAT worried about spoilers then when the team starts talking about said game you should immediately skip forward - if your fear is so extreme then you should be willing to make extreme concessions to deal with it, not expect the other person to.

Edit: If the entire game was ruined because Patrick mentioned the

, then the story is shit anyway.

#20 Edited by Canteu (2821 posts) -

@Kerned: Fair enough, but of course i'm not going to know this, having not played the "game".

However, he does this a lot, he'll set up that there's a thing that happens, then he can just leave it at that. Instead he continues with an explanation of the thing that happens, when he could have just skipped it entirely as it adds nothing to the discussion. Usually the others have no idea what he's talking about so all he's doing is making it bad for the listeners.

#21 Edited by SomeJerk (3216 posts) -

Halo 4 was released November 6th 2012, podcast came out January 22nd 2013, warnings were made in the podcast itself? Spoiler fear is getting hilarious!

"Spoiler-talk of $game from around $h/m to $h/m" is the only work they need to do if any. It's no problem scribbling those times down on paper and adjusting when wrapping it up and uploading it.

The way people act in comments we're going to have a future of JESUS DIES IN THE BIBLE

#22 Posted by Pestulon (29 posts) -

I like the idea of separate spoilercasts for games that the GB crew feels need to be thoroughly analysed. The statute of limitations is way too subjective in my opinion. If there is a game/movie/book that I am planning on playing/watching/reading, I do not want it spoiled regardless of whether it came out two months or fifty years ago.

I also remember listening to some other podcasts in the past that had actual chapter markers. So they could give you a heads up and tell you to just skip to the next chapter before spoiling anything. Haven't seen anyone do that recently though, so maybe this is no longer a thing or was an iTunes only feature or something like that.

#23 Posted by Canteu (2821 posts) -

@ThePaleKing: Alright then, let me tell you all about the entire twist of the last case in the first phoenix wright game. Now let's say you're playing this visual novel right now, having never played it before. Does it matter than the game came out several years ago? Not really because it's relevant to you now.

Spoilers don't necessarily ruin the entire game, just that moment, which can lead to apathy regarding your time spent and perhaps lower your desire to continue.

#24 Posted by EarthBowl (164 posts) -

@hermes:I wish you all the best with your petition. Personally, I would love to listen to them talk about a JRPG, that would be time well spent in my books.

#25 Posted by Christoffer (1796 posts) -

@hermes said:

@Christoffer: Most of the times, they don't. Its easier to know if you read the comments on the page, but I don't remember them saying anything about where to skip it to in this week episode.

I was just joking. When they were done spoiling Halo 4 Vinny said (jokingly) that we could start listening again, which is quite useless information if you are not listening.

#26 Posted by Hunter5024 (5614 posts) -

@ThePaleKing: I don't think they need to worry about spoilers for every game that someone might be playing ever. I'm all for some spoilery discussion, but like I said, I think 999 is a specific case where he likely turned some people on to that game very recently, so spoiling it a couple weeks later for no reason without warning seems a little stupid, and inconsiderate.

#27 Posted by Captain_Felafel (1568 posts) -

Simply having some way for people to know that "Hey, at this time to this time they're going to be talking in-depth about X game's story." would serve the same purpose.

#28 Posted by Rafaelfc (1331 posts) -

people's definition of spoilers is way too broad and restricting when it comes to discussions.

everyone should just be less uptight about it.

#29 Edited by hermes (1414 posts) -

@SomeJerk said:

Halo 4 was released November 6th 2012, podcast came out January 22nd 2013, warnings were made in the podcast itself? Spoiler fear is getting hilarious!

"Spoiler-talk of $game from around $h/m to $h/m" is the only work they need to do if any. It's no problem scribbling those times down on paper and adjusting when wrapping it up and uploading it.

Its a game that is not even 3 months old. I am not talking about a PS2 game...

I am not asking them to put a timestamp in the audio or anything that requires edition or postproduction. But in this case, they knew this discussion was coming, they even said they "had this huge discussion in the office before"; the same way we all knew the Mass Effect 3 talk was coming. What I am saying is that they should get all that out of their system, go to the recording room, talk about it to their hearts content; and bum... new feature content.

#30 Posted by Nightriff (4990 posts) -

MGS4 Spoilercast is still the greatest bombcast they have ever done, so yeah, they should do it

#31 Posted by ll_Exile_ll (1584 posts) -

@SomeJerk said:

Halo 4 was released November 6th 2012, podcast came out January 22nd 2013, warnings were made in the podcast itself? Spoiler fear is getting hilarious!

"Spoiler-talk of $game from around $h/m to $h/m" is the only work they need to do if any. It's no problem scribbling those times down on paper and adjusting when wrapping it up and uploading it.

The way people act in comments we're going to have a future of JESUS DIES IN THE BIBLE

Not everybody buys every new game the day it comes out. Halo 4 is a still a new release. I think a good rule of thumb is that if a game is still $60 new, it is way too early to freely spoil things.

#32 Posted by Yillb (34 posts) -

During a Mass Effect 3 spoiler discussion on another podcast I turned my car's audio down to zero and occasionally would bring it back up to see if the topic had moved on, if it hadn't I just lowered the volume again.

During the game of the year discussions I said screw it because I was more interested in the discussion than I was about not experiencing the ending myself. And I'm in no worse off, I'll still play ME3 and enjoy it.

People doing podcasts should be free to talk about whatever they want and as in depth as they want, nothing is more annoying then vague roundabout discussions.

#33 Posted by Petiew (1345 posts) -
@Nightriff said:

MGS4 Spoilercast is still the greatest bombcast they have ever done, so yeah, they should do it

This. We need some more spoilercasts, I listened to the MGS4 one a few months ago and it was great.
#34 Edited by Rittsy (77 posts) -

They warned you about the Halo 4 spoilers in the podcast description, and during the podcast. If you're that concerned about it maybe people should ignore this weeks podcast until you finished it.

People need to chill out about spoilers. I'm tired of them being forced to talk around games that have been out for months because as soon as they mention anything about the finale, people bitch and moan that they're ruining video games.

Darth Vader is Luke's father. Tyler Durton is the Narrator. Michael Jordan and the Loony Tunes win.

...But yeah, more bombcasts can only be a good thing.

#35 Posted by Nightriff (4990 posts) -

@Petiew said:

@Nightriff said:

MGS4 Spoilercast is still the greatest bombcast they have ever done, so yeah, they should do it

This. We need some more spoilercasts, I listened to the MGS4 one a few months ago and it was great.

Yup, MGS4 and MW2 Spoilercasts are amazing as well as the hour long ME3 discussion a month ago

#36 Posted by LKPOWER (155 posts) -

@Canteu: With all due respect. I used to produce podcasts for a living and putting timestapms on them is harder than you might think, especially when a show is loosely structured and averages 3-4 hours in length. Not to mention that there is no easy way to indicate the timestamps in the file, outside of putting them in the text description that no one ever reads. I'm just tired of people saying things like Ryan should do some work. Recording a 3-4 hour show is work. Also, it's 3-4 hours they take out for their day to make a show. that's a huge chunk of time. I'm sorry but timestamps will probably never happen.

#37 Posted by Canteu (2821 posts) -

@LKPOWER: Pretty sure that's why I said "But that's too hard.", because it is.

#38 Posted by mordukai (7150 posts) -

@Canteu said:

@Kerned: It was nice when Patrick casually spoiled the end of 999 this week. Not that I care because that "game" is shit, it was just very...odd, that he would do this with a game he knows is literally only about the story, and which he also holds in high regard.

There was no avoiding it, due to it coming from nowhere.

He is just that way. He really has no filters and he loves hearing himself talk. That's bad combo.

#39 Posted by ArtisanBreads (3796 posts) -

I would like this.

I still think some of the best gaming podcasts I've heard were the Rebel FM Gameclub podcasts where they all played through a game together like a book club would read a book and they discussed everything.

I would love for Giantbomb to do something like that.