Can anyone pinpoint the height of the apathy? I wanna hear what it sounds like.
As A GB Fan, I Gotta Say That The Last 2 Years Haven't Been Great
(Yes, I am looking at this site in the personality aspect, because that is what the site is for me, less news, and more entertainment.)
- Patrick seems like he means no wrong, but kind of reads into things too closely, or just takes the popular opinion at the time and swears by it with no input.
- Brad is arrogant and dismissive. Also, this is just a pet peeve of mine with him, but it seems like he uses flowery language just to do so, comes off as incredibly pretentious. But whatever.
- Ryan is usually the same as Brad, only more agressive and all around seems like he really "likes himself" sort of thing.
- Vinny is awesome, but isn't as active (obviously) because of his young child.
- Jeff is more and more jaded, but still puts out good content, and personally think he's the funniest and most consistent.
- Dave is merely all around good when he is rarely in videos.
So, in short, I agree with OP, it feels like they are majorly slacking and have lost interest. This stuff comes in cycles though. Once a new console is out, I predict they will pick up the pace again.
@BestUsernameEver said:
- Patrick seems like he means no wrong, but kind of reads into things too closely
And that's a bad thing? Hell, I want more of that. Come on, everyone! I want to see your insane theories on the 9/11 allegory in Final Fantasy IV, or the racial themes in Alone in the Dark.
@GoranP said:
- The general jadedness about games and the industry has been steadily increasing. I think this point is nearly inarguable, and that comparing coverage from say 2009/10 to 2011/12 will demonstrate it. I get it, this console cycle has really gone on for too long. There are too many sequels. There is too much gross DLC. There have been six hundred Call of Duty games. The list goes on! But if the point of this site is to be humorously entertaining as well as informative, it would be unprofessional to not be entertaining. I argue that part of the staff's job is to entertain us regardless of their opinions on a specific game. To be a little more specific, a Battlefield 3 quick look full of sighs and disinterest tells me that Jeff is not stoked about that game like he was for Battlefield 2. He can also write that on Twitter. How do you make such a video with such feelings entertaining? Well, I really don't have an answer to that, that's for the staff to figure out (like they have in the 2008-2010 period). At the end of the day it's their job to do this. I know that this might sound cold hearted or that I'm an entitled prick, but that's just how it is, and I'm sure the staff would agree based on how they present themselves at least.
- The discussions and opinions presented through video, audio, and text are starting to not match the scores given to games. The most recent example of this is Halo 4. On one of the recent (if not the most recent) Bombcasts, they spend quite a big chunk of time talking about the negative aspects of the game, only to conclude that it's pretty good. This isn't the first time this has happened, and I find it baffling. Yeah, it's always easier to talk about the cons, but there should be a balance. That or give the game a lower score to reflect your opinions. What's even weirder is when the podcast discussions don't match the review text.
I totally agree with these two points, and I think they are related. If last week's bombcast was the only opinion you had heard about Halo 4 then you would assume the game would have reviewed as a 2/5 instead of 4/5. It's just really weird to hear them bash a game for a solid 30 minutes, then turn around at the end and say "but the game is still great."
Edit: but the last two years have still been pretty awesome.
@Video_Game_King said:
@BestUsernameEver said:
- Patrick seems like he means no wrong, but kind of reads into things too closely
And that's a bad thing? Hell, I want more of that. Come on, everyone! I want to see your insane theories on the 9/11 allegory in Final Fantasy IV, or the racial themes in Alone in the Dark.
yeah more of scoops .. he has the balls to say stupid stuff that the older guys would think twice about .... this is completely unrelated to gb , but go way back to the 1up interview of uwe boll after the release of Postal , you thought scoops's hair is crazy now ? holy shit that hippie bastard has the worlds floppiest jewfro going back then .. and is almost badgering uwe boll about the poor reaction to his movies and use of tax loopholes etc .. but you can see the birth of a journalist there , learning that insulting ppl isnt gonna get him everywhere he seems alot more eager to please ppl now , its weird even hating on him now when hes so much less polarizing than he was
@GoranP said:
- The general jadedness about games and the industry has been steadily increasing. I think this point is nearly inarguable, and that comparing coverage from say 2009/10 to 2011/12 will demonstrate it. I get it, this console cycle has really gone on for too long. There are too many sequels. There is too much gross DLC. There have been six hundred Call of Duty games. The list goes on! But if the point of this site is to be humorously entertaining as well as informative, it would be unprofessional to not be entertaining. I argue that part of the staff's job is to entertain us regardless of their opinions on a specific game. To be a little more specific, a Battlefield 3 quick look full of sighs and disinterest tells me that Jeff is not stoked about that game like he was for Battlefield 2. He can also write that on Twitter. How do you make such a video with such feelings entertaining? Well, I really don't have an answer to that, that's for the staff to figure out (like they have in the 2008-2010 period). At the end of the day it's their job to do this. I know that this might sound cold hearted or that I'm an entitled prick, but that's just how it is, and I'm sure the staff would agree based on how they present themselves at least.
What is your definition of entertainment in videogame websites ? - Seems to me you are looking for non critical clowns, instead of an interesting voice in videogames.
I like Giantbomb because they manage to have a good mix of humorous content and levity, but with actually good critical thinking. They don't cherish industry bullshit just to please out fanboys. In regards its personality I still think Giantbomb delivers, thou it would be foolish not to realise this industry in't going throughout its best times...
A zillion generic military shooters, disgusting dlc, AAA studios shooting down.. its clearly not the best time for AAA development, however Giantbomb have switch their focus into the indie/downloadable scene which seems as lively as it ever being.
I would say that they do have missed some key reviews.. they either are being sloppy, or they need more staff handling the non editorial work so they can actually.. write again.
Sorry about grammatical issues I might have, English is my 2nd language.
Please go to other sites, so the forums and comments aren't filled with hate for the staff members and are instead filled with discussion about games.
The site might be changing, but you've probably changed as well. It's natural for any place to have people both coming and going at all times. You're going to lose fans eventually while picking up new ones. The same stuff that entertained you 2 years ago might not now. Or you might be perceiving it differently.
I never really understand the point of these threads though. If you don't like the site as much as you used to, don't visit it as much. That's the only reasonable course of action. I don't keep playing games I don't like, i don't keep watching TV shows that i don't enjoy (even if i'm a few seasons in), etc.
So much effort is put into this site, 3 hour + podcasts are becoming the norm, 1 hour quick looks, TNT every thursday, Vinny, Dave and Drew doing old PC games, Patrick doing a live spooking with scoops from home, Jeff doing the Jar Time and Retro QL's from home. This site has been getting really good since they have settled in to CBSi, I was sceptical for a bit but now the content is great. All that is missing is a Endurance Run....
@Anwar: Who the hell said don't visit GiantBomb? Again another non-paying customer. Thanks for proving my point.
Put this in perspective, regarding Patrick. The previous news guy was a muscle-bound Geddy Lee-looking goofball who wrote terrible headlines and stole junk from Kotaku all the time. While Patrick may not be cut from the same cloth as everybody else on GB, he is a valuable asset and a drastic improvement.
@Bourbon_Warrior said:
So much effort is put into this site, 3 hour + podcasts are becoming the norm, 1 hour quick looks, TNT every thursday, Vinny, Dave and Drew doing old PC games, Patrick doing a live spooking with scoops from home, Jeff doing the Jar Time and Retro QL's from home. This site has been getting really good since they have settled in to CBSi, I was sceptical for a bit but now the content is great. All that is missing is a Endurance Run....
Yeah I hate to be the guy that comes into a topic and just quotes someone else ... but I agree with this.
I want more Vinny, Dave and Drew and Jeff is sounded more jaded lately, but all of the guys give me so much entertainment every week I can't complain. I pay the subscription just to fund this madness, not really to get anything. A three-hour Bombcast is worth the price alone.
People have a right to criticise, but at some point you have to say your peace, let go and move on.
@Wrighteous86 said:
@yabbikokeThe best thing about their reviews Is that you know their tastes and where they're coming from.I don't disagree with most of what the OP said, but I still find GB to be entertaining. The one thing that has really annoyed me lately is Jeff's CONSTANT bashing of Zombie mode in Treyarch's CoD games. At first all he did was say he didn't get it and just sort of ignored it, and that really was fine given that it was just one very simple map. Now I just feel that it's a little ridiculous to ignore this game mode, seeing how complicated and beloved it has become. I don't care that Jeff doesn't like it (Jeff doesn't like a lot of things) but I just hate that he seems to always dedicate one paragraph to Zombies, but instead of explaining what's new this time he just reiterates that he does not get Zombies, that it should have it's own game, etc etc. For every Treyarch CoD game I inevitably have to go read other reviews because they have actual information about the mode and critique it for what it is. And this all just fits into the way Jeff seems to always dismiss co-op play for ANYTHING. I understand that co-op isn't for everyone, but playing Zombies without a few close friends is pointless, so it's really no wonder Jeff doesn't "get" Zombie mode. It's just a little frustrating to see Jeff pick apart something that relies so heavily on having buddies to play with, and even more frustrating to see him constantly dismiss the mode as nonsense. And again, this all started out as Jeff just being baffled about why this "throw away" game mode has gotten so popular, but it seems to have evolved into all out hatred. I understand completely that Jeff doesn't like Zombies and doesn't want to play it. What I cannot understand, however, is why Jeff now seems utterly disgusted that the mode is included on the disk, even though it's an optional mode that has no impact whatsoever on any other part of the game. And why he needs to put a mini-rant about it in every review for a Treyarch CoD is just beyond me.
But yeah, that is honestly the most important issue with GB I have right now (which is to say, I really don't have any important issue).
Four stars. San Francisco.
@IceColdGamer said:
@Anwar: Who the hell said don't visit GiantBomb? Again another non-paying customer. Thanks for proving my point.
Which point is that? That only paying members can express their likes and dislikes with this web site? You do realize that this web site makes money from none paying members too.
The OP's one mention of premium content was that he feels that it's not compelling enough for him to support it. All of his other criticism is towards content that they make available to everyone so I don't know why you are getting so hung up on the premium issue. If he as a none paying member and he outright complained about the premium content then that's a different discussion. Obviously he likes this site and he aired his grievances in a very respectful manner. It's actually a nice change from the usual "this website sucks" or "The GB guys suck" thread that we usually get.
Unless you can give that member the same level of respect then don't say anything at all. Go read his initial post and formulate a respectful reply that doesn't make you look like just another jerk who says "Don't like then don't come here".
@dennisthemennis said:
@Sooty said:
@McGrittles said:
Blame Klepek
+1
I don't even know why the premium membership exists anymore. I definitely won't be renewing.
Thanks for sharing.
Thanks for sharing that you're thankful for my sharing.
Premium membership really is laughable, you're essentially just paying for Let's Plays at this point, the "supporting the guys" is a moot point now that they are part of CBSi.
It doesn't sit well with me paying for Quick Looks (Random PC game and Flight Club are basically just that) and a man talking with a jar.
I have to say that I feel Patrick Kleppik puts a TON of work into this site. That man does Spookin with Scoops, the Worth Reading, the podcasts AND still participates in all of the video aspects. I don't really think you can knock him for slacking. His journalism skills are extraordinary.
The only complaint I have is that we no longer get regular doses of Will Smith and Matthew Rorie. Literally, that's the only negative I can come up with. Otherwise, I am still entertained and I am still happy to fork over money for the premium content we get (er, provided I can afford it; my budget will be the only thing that could potentially stop me from doing so). I'm sorry that some people aren't satisfied, but the only reasonable response I can give to those people is, "To each, their own."
Okay, okay, wait: Maybe cut back on the Brad/Patrick Quick Looks. Those are usually pretty bad. More Vinny and Jeff, please.
But, other than that, satisfied.
@mlarrabee said:
I mostly agree.
I'm finding myself skipping more and more Quick Looks without even giving them a glance.
Maybe it's the "intimate, indie" feeling that's vanished. I used to be big fans of the Rooster Teeth guys, back when they were six man-boys recording audio in a closet. Now that they have an office building and forty employees all charm has been lost. Back when I first showed up here it was four guys who had been in the game long enough to know games inside and out, and it was like I was discussing video games at Denny's over the worst breakfast in the world, and having the best time. I loved the interns. I love Patrick. But we had to pull a few extra tables together when it happened. CBSi has worked out fine. But the coffee isn't refilled as often now.
I still trust their integrity and opinions, but that charm has been fading.
It's like South Park
Maybe it's me. Maybe I'm getting older. Maybe everybody has to get over things in four- to six-year rounds. Maybe I'm expecting too much. Maybe they're tired. Maybe their hearts aren't in it anymore.
Maybe a lot of things.
This sums up my feels pretty perfectly.
Pretty much exactly how I feel. GB used to be a site where it was the first page I opened every time I sat down at my computer. I used to watch every new video, read every post, pretty much go over all the content. Now I check the site when I remember to. I watch 5 min of a quick look and get bored. Even listening to the podcast they drag so much now and go on tangents that sometimes I forget that I'm even listening and don't even recall what their talking about. I don't think it started 2 years ago but def this last year and very much these last 6 months this site has been nonexistent to me.
@DystopiaX said:
@Ghostiet said:
@planetary said:
The boys need to kick Klepek out of the inner circle, and get their groove back.
And if they do that, your dream fan fiction will get so much closer to being true! Your tiny little circle jerk with other drones dense enough to sincerely believe that Klepek is the malicious tumor that brings the site down (because obviously Patrick got into the staff to usurp power from a pack of grown men past 30) will get so much more wind after that happens. Boy, it's going to be glorious. Your mancrushes will get the whole deal.
Or, you know, some people may not like the way he acts on video.
But that's ok, your "sheeple drones hurr durr" argument was so much better than the people who actually come up with reasons for liking/disliking things.
Spouting bullshit how the site will immediately get better after Jeff, Ryan, Brad and Vinny kick out Patrick from their circle of friends is the encyclopedic definition for having a turd instead of a brain.
I get it, people may not like Patrick, cool. But begging in the comments to fire him and bringing down every conversation about the decline in quality at Giant Bomb to him is fucking pathetic. For morons like planetary or Vinchenzo it's a simple case of hero worship for the rest of the crew, they are living in an imaginary world where Patrick Klepek is the fucking Yoko Ono who will break up the Beatles and then go make his own site with Ryan, while the rest dies of cocaine overdoses.
Sure, people might not like the way he acts on video. But I don't see Ryan getting the same ton of shit after he spends the first 15 minutes of a Quick Look in the same menu talking or when he overlooks a painfully obvious quest indicator.
Patrick's probably not going anywhere. Get over it. This community has a tendency to run every meme, complain and problem to the fucking ground. <> I'm a wizard and China don't care, so fuck Leigh Alexander.
Dislike Patrick, just stop bringing these discussions to this one single point of "PATRICK SUCKS IT'S HIS FAULT I LOVE VINNY". Yeah, I bet that the reason for Jeff's growing jadedness is the fact that they hired a younger dude who puts out a shitload of content weekly on the site and is very enthusiastic about the medium.
Am I in the minority if I agree? because I agree. Quick looks on the majority just aren't as much fun as they used to be. It feels like they do them out of obligation now when it used to be out of genuine interest to show off to the people. I blame it a lot on console cycle fatigue, because I'm pretty bored with this generation right now as well.
Patrick's general cynicism really hurts the energy of the site as well. Even when he likes something he'll point out something negative about it and focus on that.
I followed GB sense the beginning. i joined the site when i became a member because i like the guys and want to support them. i had no problem with Patrick at the start, but after a while i started to dislike him. he just take up to much space, have an opinion about everything and want to share it. so i did what i do with everything i don´t like, i avoid it. the problem is now that Patrick i basically in 90% of all the quick looks. so i pay for maybe 1-2 quick looks and 1 subscriber video a week(unless its spooking) sometimes its not even that. i just want less Patrick in QL, why not bring in some guy/girl/hobo from Gamespot? they had Will Smith and other guys in the videos at Whiskey. Also Patrick spoiled the ending for Catherine 3 days after the release here in Sweden so fuck him for that.
I think i would grow tired of most GB members if they were in 90% of the stuff. that why i want them to mix it up more.
@GoranP: Since you're getting little in the form of discussion (either people are just telling you to fuck off or they agree for the stupidest reasons ("Hurr durr Patrick needs to go!")), I figured I'd match you shot for shot and give my side on why I think you're wrong.
My "History" With The Staff (so that you see where I'm coming from)
- I visited Gamespot on a daily basis from 2000-2008.
- When the the firing happened, I "migrated" to GB and have been visiting every day (usually multiple times a day) since. I visit other gaming sites, but GB is easily my favorite.
- I used to be the type that watched just about any video on here due to my general interest in gaming and for the entertainment value. I got pretty involved with the community as well, helping run the short-lived community magazine.
I don't remember exactly when I started going to Gamespot, but it was around the same time (perhaps a bit earlier?) and I left exactly when Jeff got tossed. I kept up on what Jeff was doing (Arrow Pointing Down and the like) until the formation of GB, and since then it's basically the only place I go to for gaming news/content with any regularly. I'm still the type that watches more or less everything they put out, but I've only really bothered with the forums since WM broke up (I was big into Tested before that, which is where I did the majority of my community interaction).
What is the Purpose of Giant Bomb?
- I'm operating under the assumption the purpose of GB is to be informational and humorously entertaining in regards to video games. That Too Human video set the tone pretty well, but obviously a dude like Jeff has a vast knowledge of games.
- To serve as consumer guides, to some extent. Aren't reviews just buyer guides at the end of the day? The staff are telling you if, in their opinion, you should buy certain games or not.
- Another purpose for GB is to serve as a premiere wiki for gaming (though I will not be focusing on that in this post).
I'm a firm believer that this is a personality driven website, and that the video game portion of that is a facilitator of the entertainment that those personalities provide and not the genesis of that entertainment itself (i.e. they would be just as entertaining without talking about video games). The proof is in the pudding, really; the Quick Looks that drag are the ones that focus on the mechanics and proper demonstration of the game, and the ones that people remember involve Vinny hitting innocent civilians in the head with telephone receivers or Jeff yelling "Imm'a make sweet love to him from the back!" over a crappy wrestling intro. The same goes for TNT: I've literally fallen asleep to some of the (competently played but otherwise unremarkable) FPS TNTs, but who can forget Red vs Blue Truck or "Fuck you, pay me! FUCK YOU, PAY ME!" from the Fortune Street TNT? In those two cases, they really didn't understand how the games worked (or if they did, they discarded what they knew for the sake of the comedy), but it really didn't matter, did it?
Reviews are something that Jeff isn't sure what to do with, and I agree they need a change; at this point, I feel they serve no purpose. Between the Bombcast and the Quick Looks, reviews just feel like a bit of a rehash of what they've already said (in the case of QLs) or are filled with thoughts that are better clarified or scrutinized in a discussion (on the Bombcast). In fact, killing reviews could answer one of your later complaints: perhaps they could put more emphasis on informative video content if they mated reviews and Quick Looks together? Regardless of how crazy or unfeasible my above idea is, I disagree that reviews are just pure buying guides; after all, unless there are technical reasons for them to say "Don't buy this, it's busted", a review is just one person's opinion on how well crafted a game is in comparison to the standards of the time, and not a clear cut yes or no on a purchase. At the very least, it's rare for them to say "Run out and buy this!" and much more common for them to say "This game has some interesting ideas, but X Y and Z hold it back" without a clear yes or no.
I think they review games because they always have reviewed games, and that might change. As for the wiki, I've edited one page in total and never use it, so I cannot weigh in on it at all.
My Beef (moooo)
- The 2011-2012 period has seen a significant drop in the informational and entertaining aspect of the site, and a general lack of effort.
Bullshit. Bullshit. Or, to put it in less vulgar terms: motherfucking no. I have no idea how people can even form this opinion. On the lack of effort:
- We're now nearing four hour long Bombcasts.
- There are now two staff members that are streaming features from their homes, way off hours. Jeff now is doing two of these, and Patrick is building a computer more or less for the purpose of doing his feature better.
- The site is currently getting a massive redesign, during which both Dave and Alexis have taken time out to do different features (especially Dave with both Flight Club and Random PC game).
- Patrick has put out some great long form editorial content (The Walking Dead interviews, talking to the creator of JSJ and Tokyo Jungle) and a great aggregate in Worth Reading.
- Both BLLSL's have been stellar and even better then the first. Especially the latest one, with the advent of Team Brad.
What you consider to be entertaining is all subjective, but I think there have been some amazing TNTs and QLs in the past two years. Something tells me you are missing the forest for the trees, as I've found the general catalog to be more hilarious recently then in the early days. A few poor quick looks has not spoiled the magic for me.
- Quick looks are more misinformed/unprepared than ever. Don't get me wrong, it's hilarious when the guys don't know something "obvious," and I understand that the crew don't always have time to brush up on all aspects of all games. However, I feel that the last 2 years have gone from "funny unprepared" to legitimately misinforming the public (whether through incorrect statements or omission). I'm not usually the type that goes "HHRRRRRRR, YOU'RE NOT PLAYING IT RIIIIIGHT!!!," but I do get frustrated when games get misrepresented.
This is the one point I will give you; when they have zero idea about what is happening on screen, it can be less then entertaining to watch them fumble around on something simple. I just don't think it has become the endemic that people claim it is. If it was every quick look, then sure. But it isn't half of them, or 30% of them, and even if it was the good ones are so hilarious to me that wouldn't matter that they have a few misses. Not every joke hits, and not every video is a winner. More then any other website, I think GB has the best hit to miss ratio and I don't think that ratio has dropped over the years.
- The general jadedness about games and the industry has been steadily increasing. I think this point is nearly inarguable, and that comparing coverage from say 2009/10 to 2011/12 will demonstrate it. I get it, this console cycle has really gone on for too long. There are too many sequels. There is too much gross DLC. There have been six hundred Call of Duty games. The list goes on! But if the point of this site is to be humorously entertaining as well as informative, it would be unprofessional to not be entertaining. I argue that part of the staff's job is to entertain us regardless of their opinions on a specific game. To be a little more specific, a Battlefield 3 quick look full of sighs and disinterest tells me that Jeff is not stoked about that game like he was for Battlefield 2. He can also write that on Twitter. How do you make such a video with such feelings entertaining? Well, I really don't have an answer to that, that's for the staff to figure out (like they have in the 2008-2010 period). At the end of the day it's their job to do this. I know that this might sound cold hearted or that I'm an entitled prick, but that's just how it is, and I'm sure the staff would agree based on how they present themselves at least.
It's inarguable, but what the hell do you want? Them to fake how they're feeling? It would be unprofessional for them to act like everything is sunshine and roses when they just don't feel it. Hate to break it to you, but BF3 (especially the 360 version) just didn't do it for a lot of people (like myself), it didn't do it for Jeff, and I'd rather have them say as much than fake their way through a piece of content. (For the record, I even went back and re-watched that quick look just to see where you are coming from, and I honestly don't. They enjoyed themselves during the multiplayer portion, they were less then enthusiastic about the single player (What do you know? It's terrible and trying to be Call of Duty and they point that out.) and less then enthusiastic about the 360 version overall (once again; less players then the PC, smaller maps then the PC, looks worse then the PC, what else do you want them to say?)) But here's the thing; in an industry that is making your favorite personalities more jaded, Vinny will still slam demon heads with car doors, Dave will still get Drew to eject upside down, Jeff will keep making questionable purchase decisions for our enjoyment, and Patrick will keep spilling his drink on his couch at some jump scares. They are more then capable of enjoying themselves if whatever they're doing isn't total bullshit; I guess you need to ask yourself if you'd rather have them not put up any cynical content at all, because you sure as hell aren't going to catch them talking about something that's garbage (or wrong with the industry, for that matter) in a positive light.
In fact, Jeff calling out some of the shit that companies or individual games get away with is one of my favorite parts of this site, and there's nothing saying that you can't have a critical or cynical piece of content that isn't entertaining or humorous.
- The discussions and opinions presented through video, audio, and text are starting to not match the scores given to games. The most recent example of this is Halo 4. On one of the recent (if not the most recent) Bombcasts, they spend quite a big chunk of time talking about the negative aspects of the game, only to conclude that it's pretty good. This isn't the first time this has happened, and I find it baffling. Yeah, it's always easier to talk about the cons, but there should be a balance. That or give the game a lower score to reflect your opinions. What's even weirder is when the podcast discussions don't match the review text.
First off, I wish scores would be done away with entirely. If you are so pressed for time that you cannot read a review and have to rely on a number and an excerpt (which is a common argument for why scores exist, not saying you do it), then you aren't really making an informed decision about your purchase at all. The reasons for what some game got a X is in the body of the review, and if those reasons aren't as important to you vs the reviewer, you might assign a totally different value to a game for completely different if still valid reasons. With that mini-rant out of the way, I don't get what you are saying here. On the podcast, you have different people who can have very different opinions about a certain game, while a review is just one person's take on it. Jeff may have scored AC 3 harsher because he feels the Desmond stuff is the best part of that series (and by all accounts that aspect isn't done all that well), but he didn't review it, so of course his negativity isn't going to be reflected as part of the review.
For Halo 4, the consensus is that 343 decided to play it safe with the story/enemy/new weapon beats, and they spend a fair amount of time criticizing that because it really could have been a positive, radical shift and they wasted that opportunity. The positives are glossed over because, for lack of a better phrase, it's Halo. It feels like a Halo game, looks like a Halo game, and smells like a Halo game. I've seen some people throw their hands up and say "That's the lazy way out!", but it's not; the original Halo defined how FPSes could work on a console, and as such have become a sub-genre in and of themselves. However, they haven't really deviated from the first few games, so why bother to repeat what's been said a hundred times before in a podcast that's already hitting near four hours, when the text of the review covers it in more detail for those who really need to know? Overall, despite the wasted opportunities and the sense that this is, for better or worse, more Halo, Jeff felt that the presentation along with a few tweaks to the multiplayer and overall competency of the design garnered the game a four star review. Nothing they added was a net minus, and I fail to see how anything he has said, either expressed in text or on the Bombcast, is contradictory to that.
- I feel that the staff have fallen into this hole of having an increasingly growing fan base which mostly understands their opinions (at least the die hard ones do), so the staff don't have to try as hard.
Try as hard to what? Make us understand where they are coming from with their opinions? Try as hard to create content? If you mean the former, you can't go complaining about the amount of time they spend on the negatives of Halo 4 (which is where they'd need to justify their opinions the most) and then turn around and say they don't do enough of that. If you can elaborate on this, I'd be more then happy to debate your point.
- This is more for 2012 than 11, but the amount of premium content has been rather poor. I'm a fan, on some level I want reasons to subscribe.
Have you ever been a subscriber? I don't mean that as a negative if you haven't, but I want to know where you are coming from on this. If you were one and let it lapse, are you comparing what you saw to what they are putting out now? And if you haven't, are you coming to that conclusion just by seeing how often they post the content? While I would love for there to be more premium content, I don't know if it is feasible. 3+ hours go to the Bombcast on Tuesday, TNT takes up Thursday, and they did eight Quick Looks last week (along with another Encyclopedia Bombastica), and we still got a two hour Random PC game, a Jar Time, and a Spookin' With Scoops. While you can argue that's an abnormal amount of content (premium or not) for one week, I think that represents the feasible maximum they can put out while still doing regular text reviews.
My take is that all of the premium content has been consistently amazing, and that makes up for the lack of volume. While I would love to have more of it, I wouldn't want that impact the quality of anything, and I wouldn't want them to turn any of the current regular features to premium ones to make up for it (I'm honestly surprised that the EB isn't premium, but whatever). I signed up because they were independent, not because I wanted anything, and I've re-subbed now because I still love what they do. My suggestion to you is to spend $5 on a one month sub and watch a bunch of the back content, and see if the quality outweighs the quantity. Jar Time, Sim Golf, Lantern Run, Breaking Brad, Random PC Game, Flight Club and a bunch of other one shots have been top tier stuff.
I know the main weakness of my argument is that I barely give any super specific examples, but that's only partly because I'm a lazy bastard. The other reason is that I feel this way about the site in general (over the past 2 years), and not just regarding specific pieces of content here and there.
Your general feeling has to come from specific examples, because if this malaise has settled over you about the website in total, you have to have more then a few particular instances of your general points. That's what makes me disregard your opinions so easily; without something to back up your viewpoint, I can easily just chalk it up to you burning out on GB and leave it at that. If you want to bring specifics into the mix, and I mean really dig into it, we can have ourselves a little PM debate for weeks if you like. Hoo boy, this is running LONG. Damn this mechanical keyboard making me want to type all the time!
Let me wrap this up by saying I'm happy you took the time to put some effort behind your post and didn't just try and bait people into a flame war. I hope this response isn't... disproportionate, and more along the lines of what you were hoping to get back. If you have issue with any of the specifics in this meandering mess of a retort, feel free to point `im out. If it wasn't clear, I've got a bit of time on my hands. :D
I blame Ryan, that guy always sounds like he wants to be elsewhere, especially when with Jeff. He's excited rarely.
CBS did this, so I guess we should
I don't know whether it's me become jaded, or them, but I tend to agree.
Over the last wee while, several important aspects of the site have lost some of their charm and energy.
The podcast is still entertaining, but is slowly leaning more and more into tangents that just aren't interesting. Bombcasts have always - and I mean always - gone on tangents of little to no relation to games, but they used to have the self-awareness to reign it in when it ceased to be entertaining content and became watercooler conversation. This is something that has become a larger percentage of the podcast than it used to be.
The staff's reaction to mediocrity has changed from cynicism to straight up negativity, and in quicklooks, this tends to expand into being dismissive and disinterested in whatever they are presenting and, again, going off on uninteresting tangents. And that lack of focus is just kinda boring to watch. I think a prime example of this is the recent quick look for Zone of the Enders HD, where a very large portion of the quicklook is dedicated to bitching about the Silent Hill HD Collection, and general commentary on Kojima's body of work. Commentary on the game is almost incidental.
I'm not saying that they shouldn't talk about any of that stuff in the quick look, but there is a balance that has been tipping further and further in that direction, and it's just not something that appeals to me.
THE GOOD THINGS
Flight Club, Encyclopedia Bombastica and Random PC Game: Consistently the most entertaining, interesting and straight up fresh features on the site. Staff talking enthusiastically about games. The games aren't always good (i.e. some Random PC Games) but these are why I paid these guys $50 for the last two years. The reason I signed up in the first place is because the guys talk about video games like I do: with a passion that might make a regular consumer tilt their head in a "but they're just games" kinda way. But they and I (and we) know that games are one of the most exciting mediums out there, and there is so much to be passionate about.
It's that love of the craft and the industry that drew me to the site, but it's the dismissive, negative attitude towards those same things that is pushing me away.
Oh, and yes. Absolutely true:
@YoThatLimp said:
@mlarrabee said:
I mostly agree.
I'm finding myself skipping more and more Quick Looks without even giving them a glance.
Maybe it's the "intimate, indie" feeling that's vanished. I used to be big fans of the Rooster Teeth guys, back when they were six man-boys recording audio in a closet. Now that they have an office building and forty employees all charm has been lost. Back when I first showed up here it was four guys who had been in the game long enough to know games inside and out, and it was like I was discussing video games at Denny's over the worst breakfast in the world, and having the best time. I loved the interns. I love Patrick. But we had to pull a few extra tables together when it happened. CBSi has worked out fine. But the coffee isn't refilled as often now.
I still trust their integrity and opinions, but that charm has been fading.
It's like South Park
Maybe it's me. Maybe I'm getting older. Maybe everybody has to get over things in four- to six-year rounds. Maybe I'm expecting too much. Maybe they're tired. Maybe their hearts aren't in it anymore.
Maybe a lot of things.
This sums up my feels pretty perfectly.
let me blow your minds- i've been following the site for only ONE year, i'm enjoying the hell out of it- and the kicker- KLEPTOK brought me here! i was a fan of his work on g4's feedback (back when it was legit with sessler, heppie, and patrick), and wanted to see more. and lo! what did i find? a giant bomb.
so i guess i would say- while it might not be the 'glory days,' this is still the best video game editorial i've come across. if it isn't to your liking anymore- maybe look for something else?
I just want to point out that throughout this whole thread, the people that have expressed a disappointment in recent content (or Patrick, or any member of staff) have explained their arguments articulately and reasonably, while the numerous users who have defended everything blindly using personal insults and by being completely dismissive have made themselves look desperately, desperately pathetic.
The amount of "whining" and "white knighting" or whatever you want to call those is disgusting. Both groups should just shut the fuck up.
@Winternet: I guess so, but that's not a bad thing. The staff should know how their community feels...we wouldn't be here if it weren't for them and vice versa, so it makes sense that these threads exist and hopefully if they get enough attention, the staff will take notice.
I tend to agree with the OP's overall sentiment, but not necessarily with his specific points. I feel like this site has lost a fair amount of soul, and I find myself disappointed by their content these days more often than I used to be. This could be for any number of reasons- the shift in parent companies, events in the personal lives of all the staff members, a console cycle that is lasting long enough to cause a dearth of interesting new concepts, and you could even say that the current economy is forcing companies to play it safe which ends up making games less interesting in general. The indie space is always expanding, but indie games generally focus on a single interesting mechanic as much as possible, which does not necessarily make for highly entertaining QL's.
The resulting feel of the site is one that isn't completely able to deliver to the audience it has grown to draw. I've been a frequent user for about five years now, and I miss the devil-may-care attitude that the staff used to have towards the content they put out. I think a vast majority of GB users come here for entertainment first, and video game information second, partly because one of the overall messages GB broadcasts is that video games are silly and at the end of the day you buy what you want; what matters is whether or not you find a particular game or concept attractive. Sure, innovation and original ideas are important, but I don't think the GB staff operate on an empirical "bad game to good game" scale, which is why their reviews kind of baffle me and I rarely read them. I always appreciated Quick Looks because they gave me a chance to see what a game looked like when normal people with a sense of humor and criticism were playing, as opposed to a demo or staged footage from developers. These days, with the exception of the Bombcast, I feel like GB sort of takes itself a bit too seriously. To be honest, I don't care what the staff thinks of a game, I care about how they can inform me about what I will think of a game, which is why I am very excited about the concept of the Encyclopedia Bombastica. It's a great and unique idea that would set GB apart again and give the guys a chance to just have fun and show us what the gaming world has to offer. They should stop worrying about reviews and informative feature pieces, because those are all things that can be discussed during a Bombcast, and focus more on putting out funny stuff that they are genuinely interested in.
I visit GB for the same reason I watch a sitcom (I like the characters and I like the premise), not because I want to spend hours reading articles that are trying to challenge my ethical views about video games...that stuff gets old, fast. Day-one DLC is fine because funds were specifically allocated towards creating it, ergo it should cost money; sexism is wrong; good people can make bad games. The list goes on. I get it. It's not complicated stuff. Now get drunk and film yourselves playing some video games for me.
@deathstriker666 said:
Looking back at it all, we were ridiculously spoiled with the amount of excellent content that was put out on a daily basis. Persona 4 ER, Matrix MMO dying, TANG, bunch of random ass videos Vinny would just post on the site, video reviews, news stories written by Jeff/Ryan/Brad, well-produced ILM's and as always, Quicklooks. For 5 guys in a basement, that was a ton of stuff to put out on a weekly basis. Considering that these days the staff still seem relatively busy and occupied with the content they put out today, it's safe to assume that they overworked themselves in those initial few years. Maybe they feared being shutdown if they didn't meet a monthly rising quota of viewers? Who knows.
Anyway, I'm satisfied with the quality and amount of content Giantbomb puts out. I've noticed I've visited the site a hell of a lot less these days then I used to. I used to visit Giantbomb multiple times during any hour I could get on the Internet. If there wasn't something new I'd read the forums or check out someone's blog. Giantbomb was the first site I visited and now it's something I check back every few days or so. I often miss TNT's, but I never really enjoyed them in the first place. The last good TNT was the Dead Island one, fucking amazing that. They need to play coop more often.
Quoted for truth. I do really miss TANG and other random features. Not to mention the daily ER. I only visit the site once a day now, where as back then I had it as my homepage.
I agree with all of your points. The only reason I continue to subscribe is because of Vinny and Drew, but I doubt I'll renew my subscription if things continue as is.
Frankly, they don't cover enough games and the games they do cover I have no interest in. Probably because my preferences are starkly different from Brad, Ryan, Patrick and Jeff, and these four are mostly in charge of the content that is posted on the site.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment