#1 Edited by drakattack (166 posts) -

I saw a video review for Super Mario Galaxy 2 posted by Ryan and I have to admit that as a video game enthusiast and journalist myself, I was VERY disappointed in the Route Ryan chose to take on the video review. I am sorry Ryan, but rehashing your written review and adding one new sentence per paragraph that adds absolutely NOTHING to the substance is not acceptable. You honestly might as well not even attempt to add anything to the sentence structure of the review and just read it verbatim. You aren't fooling anyone.
 
The point of a video review is to add something for the end-user that they otherwise wouldn't get simply from reading a written piece. Standing in front of a green screen and slapping a few minutes worth of Mario footage stolen from other videos while you read your review is lazy, sir. Perhaps use the video as a platform for some engaging commentary on level design or control. I don't mean to flame against Ryan, I do love the man, but I also expect better from these guys. Do not let your standards slip simply to push out a video review without taking the time to make the review worthy of existing. I wouldn't be so hard on Ryan if every video review on this site was written in this manner, but that simply isn't the case. Take Brad's video review on Alan Wake for example. He uses the video in conjunction with his words to elevate the value of the video beyond the sum of it's parts. Notice how the video and his review work in harmony together to create something new and unique that previously wasn't existent in the written review.
       

Loading Video...
 
Here is a link to the sloppiness, for all those too lazy to use the search field at the top of the page:
Super Mario Galaxy 2 Review  
 
Loading Video...
 
Here is a link to good journalism:
Alan Wake Review

****UPDATE****
OP is up right now working on a piece about local water poisoning in a neighboring town. I write some free lance and high school sports articles for the Springfield News Leader. It is the third largest newspaper in Missouri and you can check it out here. I don't know if that is more prestigious or less than Giantbomb.com but I would reckon that it's close enough to give me some credibility when it comes to critiquing language arts, even though I am not critiquing his writing, only his effort and creativity.
 
I have NO problem with the content of his review. I think it was a fantastic and well written review that really covers all the bases. Like I said in the OP, which it seems many of you didn't read, I do not think Ryan is a bad reviewer or that Brad is a better reviewer. I was simply critiquing the format and effort put into the video review, NOT the content. I LOVE all the member of the team equally. 
 
I do, however, have a serious problem with posting a video review that is the EXACT same thing as the written review. Let me explain why again more clearly, since the internet is even more dense than I previously assumed. 
 
The reason why I am disappointed in Ryan is not because I don't like him or think he is bad at his job, It's actually because I like him very much and think he is a great journalist. It is of my humble opinion that simply standing in front of the camera and reading your written review shows piss-poor effort and a total lack of creativity. Why waste time posting a written review at all? You might as well just write your review and immediately hop up on the capture set and recite your review verbatim (like Ryan did), and then have Vinny edit in some game-play videos that do nothing to add or enhance the review itself (like Ryan did). What is the point of a video review if the video has nothing to do with enhancing the content being spewed from the reviewer. If that is the level of quality you expect  then just put up two links on the page instead, and skip the written review. Make one of the links a video of random game-play, the other link an audio file that plays Ryan's voice reading the review. However, if you actually want to engage the end-user and give them a quality experience, then make what's playing behind you on the video something new and refreshing for the viewer, even if they have already read your written review.
 
Once again, I am not saying Brad is a better reviewer than Ryan, but I am using his video review of Alan Wake as a wonderful example of how to engage the viewer and add something fresh and informative. Notice how when Brad is talking about something, the video being shown directly correlates to the information he is giving AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, I haven't already heard what he is saying in his written review. That is exactly how you use a video review to add something new to the experience rather than just make it a lazy way for people who don't read to learn about a particular game. Basically, the proper term for this particular media conduit is a "video review", so make the video meaningful. Use the words and video together to create something greater than just an audio review with some meaningless video lazily slapped on at the end. 
 
Ryan, if you ever read this, remember that you are a five star chef and while most of your restaurant is filled with palate-absent fools who are more than happy to eat any crap you cook up for them, there is always someone sitting alone in the back who knows your true skill and expects your finest dish every time. 
#2 Posted by warxsnake (2720 posts) -

cant we get along

#3 Posted by Swaboo (456 posts) -

The video reviews are for people too lazy to read.

#4 Posted by Godlyawesomeguy (6420 posts) -

Isnt the video review supposed to be the the written review in video form? I dont see the problem here, it was an intuitive review.

#5 Posted by triple07 (1239 posts) -
@Swaboo said:
" The video reviews are for people too lazy to read. "
I hate reading! Fuck books!
#6 Posted by natetodamax (19421 posts) -

He's been doing it that way for awhile. I don't really like it either, but that's the way it goes.

#7 Posted by Sanryd (1441 posts) -
@Swaboo said:
" The video reviews are for people too lazy to read. "
#8 Posted by Dalai (7775 posts) -

So it's a Ryan review rehash. Not cool, Mr. Davis.

#9 Posted by Claude (16629 posts) -

He added a couple more Faceships. I thought that was cool, plus he acted it out.

#10 Posted by Trilogy (2705 posts) -

TRUST ME... I'M A DOCTOR!  
 
I MEAN A JOURNALIST!

#11 Posted by m2thek (43 posts) -

Why would he change anything if he's already done the review?
#12 Posted by Sarumarine (2494 posts) -

That's how they always do video reviews isn't it? It's just their written review with some visual aide.

#13 Posted by SirOptimusPrime (2037 posts) -
@triple07 said:
" @Swaboo said:
" The video reviews are for people too lazy to read. "
I hate reading! Fuck books! "
Books are for bitches.
#14 Posted by Ragdrazi (2258 posts) -

Yeah. I really don't see your point OP. I mean, the Giant Bomb crew could always be doing better, because skills can always be honed, but this just seems like nitpicking.

#15 Posted by drakattack (166 posts) -
@Sarumarine said:
" That's how they always do video reviews isn't it? It's just their written review with some visual aide. "
It's not what they always do. It's what Ryan always does, and it's shitty. Look at Jeff's or Brad's reviews. They don't rehash, they enhance.
#16 Edited by Karmum (11515 posts) -

Video reviews just backup the written text. I can't say that any of IGN's video reviews are helpful either, and they're even shorter. Is that a bad thing? No, because you're supposed to be getting your content in the written review, not the video review.
 
They pretty much reiterate all of the biggest points in their written review, whether they be positive or negative.

#17 Posted by august (3911 posts) -

Allow me to ask the rhetorical question: "Who cares?"

#18 Posted by Atomasist (2793 posts) -

So another thread complaining about the site that they pay for, right?

#19 Posted by ThePhantomnaut (6272 posts) -
@tdk08 said:
" @Swaboo said:
" The video reviews are for people too lazy to read. "
"
#20 Edited by bonbolapti (1704 posts) -

This community needs to stop complaining about things.
 
For fuck's sake.
 
Jesus Christ.
 
gahhhh

#21 Posted by lukeissxc (248 posts) -

So Ryan has a different review structure than Brad, big deal. Its only natural that they would have unique ways of doing video reviews and I enjoy both of them. But to call Ryan's review sloppy is going a little too far. I understand if you didn't like it but calling him out on it just because you're a journalist is dumb. If you don't like his reviews then start up your own video game website and make your own reviews instead of criticizing someone else's.  

#22 Posted by Sarumarine (2494 posts) -
@drakattack said:
" @Sarumarine said:
" That's how they always do video reviews isn't it? It's just their written review with some visual aide. "
It's not what they always do. It's what Ryan always does, and it's shitty. Look at Jeff's or Brad's reviews. They don't rehash, they enhance. "
Oh. Maybe it's just the few familiar lines they use for emphasis I picked up on.
#23 Posted by Blair (2550 posts) -
@august said:
" Allow me to ask the rhetorical question: "Who cares?" "
This.
#24 Posted by DystopiaX (5378 posts) -

if you haven't realized, they've always done this.

#25 Posted by drakattack (166 posts) -
@bonbolapti said:
" This community needs to stop complaining about things. "
People need to stop protecting paid journalist's when they do a piss poor job too. The site may be free for me, but they are paid for their work, and I do expect a baseline level of quality, regardless.
#26 Posted by Coombs (3507 posts) -

Fuck the reviews,   Give me more quicklooks.

#27 Posted by LiquidPrince (16488 posts) -
@bonbolapti said:
" This community needs to stop complaining about things.  For fuck's sake.  Jesus Christ.  gahhhh "
No, I disagree with one thing. Voicing your complaints about legitimate things might be acceptable. I think this is more of a case of people need to stop complaining about stupid ass things.
#28 Posted by HitmanAgent47 (8553 posts) -

Well ign also rereads their reviews for the video review, I don't read reviews, I watch them most of the time.

#29 Posted by DanielJW (4929 posts) -
@drakattack said:
" @bonbolapti said:
" This community needs to stop complaining about things. "
People need to stop protecting paid journalist's when they do a piss poor job too. The site may be free for me, but they are paid for their work, and I do expect a baseline level of quality, regardless. "
Hey look, false entitlement. 
#30 Posted by DrPockets000 (2875 posts) -

That's the point of video reviews.  Every site does it.  Especially IGN.   
 
And seriously, stop complaining.  I come home from work and all I see are the forums flooded by all these assholes fucking complaining about every damn thing.  

#31 Posted by Frostler (276 posts) -

I agree that video reviews are just written review but fast and interesting without all that...*gulp* reading. This seems like a pointless argument to make.

#32 Posted by vinsanity09 (220 posts) -

*yawn*

#33 Posted by TheHendenpeter (49 posts) -

How about everyone on giantbomb already knows if they like Mario's Galaxy 2 or not. The vocal majority on giantbomb does not care about Mario's Galaxy 2, they do however trip shit about Alan Wake. God forbid they spend a little less time with Mario and focusing on E3 and all the stuff everyone wants to hear about. Channel 2 anchor mutha trying to catch someone on shit and feign concern.

#34 Posted by bonbolapti (1704 posts) -
@drakattack said:
" @bonbolapti said:
" This community needs to stop complaining about things. "
People need to stop protecting paid journalist's when they do a piss poor job too. The site may be free for me, but they are paid for their work, and I do expect a baseline level of quality, regardless. "
Give me evidence that you're not completely useless and we'll talk.
#35 Posted by agentboolen (1932 posts) -
@drakattack:  No sir I don't agree, the video review is really just there for people that don't want to read the review.  If they chose to add something extra thats nice but in all truth I think video reviews are for those who don't want to read.  I think you have to lower your standards here.
#36 Posted by yakov456 (1966 posts) -

What is with the sudden rash of review complaints, who are you his fucking boss?

#37 Posted by Jeffsekai (7154 posts) -
@drakattack: You know what, I agree with you. Well said. 
 
People should stop bitching at you I mean really, unlike when most people have something negative to say its written poorly and is hurtful. Not here, very well written post.
#38 Posted by MAN_FLANNEL (2472 posts) -
@ThePhantomnaut said:
" @tdk08 said:
" @Swaboo said:
" The video reviews are for people too lazy to read. "
"
"

#39 Edited by drakattack (166 posts) -
@DanielJW said:

" @drakattack said:

" @bonbolapti said:

" This community needs to stop complaining about things. "
People need to stop protecting paid journalist's when they do a piss poor job too. The site may be free for me, but they are paid for their work, and I do expect a baseline level of quality, regardless. "
Hey look, false entitlement.  "
I guess expecting someone who is paid to do even a mediocre job at something is false entitlement. If rereading a written review from a teleprompter while standing in front of random game footage makes for an adequate video review then mission accomplished. What is so unfortunate isn't the review but the fact that Ryan is so much better than that. He is a great journalist, which is what makes it that much more disappointing when his work doesn't live up to his abilities.
#40 Posted by mazik765 (2334 posts) -
@drakattack:  So you'd prefer he write the article of his opinion and then make a video review of his opinion just in different words? All video reviews are just rehashes of the written article when you boil it down to basics. You're just mad that you were able to pretend it was different up until now? Sure not all reviews are verbatim like this one, but ultimately they are just using different words to convey the exact same thing you will find in your article. No matter what way you look at it, the video reviews are for people too lazy to read.
#41 Posted by ArchScabby (5877 posts) -
@triple07 said:
" @Swaboo said:
" The video reviews are for people too lazy to read. "
I hate reading! Fuck books! "
They are for me then.  Except I like books, just not reading a review about a video game, man that's boring.
#42 Posted by Ryax (4580 posts) -
@drakattack: go write your own review jack ass
#43 Posted by Camurai (272 posts) -
@drakattack said:
" @bonbolapti said:
" This community needs to stop complaining about things. "
People need to stop protecting paid journalist's when they do a piss poor job too. The site may be free for me, but they are paid for their work, and I do expect a baseline level of quality, regardless. "
Regardless of if the video review is word for word the same as the text review, it's still a good, quality review. It doesn't lose quality because it's the same. If you are saying the text review is low quality (it's not) and the video suffers because of it (it doesn't) that's a completely different complaint.
#44 Posted by buzz_clik (7273 posts) -

Your problem is that Ryan didn't say the same thing all over again in a different way? What purpose would that serve? I mean, I enjoy when the video content is different to the written review, but it doesn't really make me fume when they're the same. You're still getting the reviewer's same (subscription fee free) viewpoint. If anything, you should be angry if the video is offering up a wildly different opinion.
 
At any rate, it's been happening long before the Galaxy 2 review, and that kind of proves that for the most part it doesn't matter - you've obviously either been watching the videos without reading the text, or vice versa.

Moderator
#45 Posted by FluxWaveZ (19818 posts) -

Fuck it, video reviews > written reviews.  I'll honestly say that I prefer seeing something in motion, observing something, and hearing things instead of reading those damn words.  It's also faster, which I appreciate.
 
Now, I've not seen any video review on this website and I've only ever read one review here, but if what the OP says is true, improvement should be made through those reviews, those suggestions shouldn't just be ignored because "Oh, video reviews are for those who are too lazy to read".  That's bull.

#46 Posted by Gaff (2113 posts) -

I define video review in different terms than you, therefor your idea of a video review is bad. 
 
News at 11. 
 
This just in: Universe imploding because random forumite praises a Brad review.

#47 Posted by yakov456 (1966 posts) -
@drakattack said:
" @DanielJW said:

" @drakattack said:

" @bonbolapti said:

" This community needs to stop complaining about things. "
People need to stop protecting paid journalist's when they do a piss poor job too. The site may be free for me, but they are paid for their work, and I do expect a baseline level of quality, regardless. "
Hey look, false entitlement.  "
I guess expecting someone who is paid to do even a mediocre job at something is false entitlement. If rereading a written review from a teleprompter while standing in front of random game footage makes for an adequate video review then mission accomplished. What is so unfortunate isn't the review but the fact that Ryan is so much better than that. He is a great journalist, which is what makes it that much more disappointing when his work doesn't live up to his abilities. "
And again I wonder, who the fuck are you? Go apply for an exec. job with Whiskey Media, then you can do his yearly review.
#48 Posted by august (3911 posts) -
@drakattack said:
" @bonbolapti said:
" This community needs to stop complaining about things. "
People need to stop protecting paid journalist's when they do a piss poor job too. The site may be free for me, but they are paid for their work, and I do expect a baseline level of quality, regardless. "
Your idea that Ryan has some sort of journalistic obligation to craft totally separate written and video reviews is bizarre and asinine. Your apparent personal quest to call him on your imaginary standards is frankly embarrassing. 
 
Find something else to do with your energy. Seriously.
#49 Posted by ThePhantomnaut (6272 posts) -

This thread sucks.

#50 Posted by StillVictor (153 posts) -

Constructive criticism is good. Letting the crew know what you think about the site features can be helpful. 
 
What I don't understand is how people write their opinions as if they know everything about what makes a review/video review good, while certain staff member - who has been doing this for a few years, maybe? - apparently has no clue about his job.
 
Not liking something is fine. But assuming that it's poorly done just because it's different from what you want...