• 62 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by BisonHero (6507 posts) -

At least, it's crazy compared to how things are prioritized at present day Giant Bomb. Also, I guess I keep forgetting that there was a time when Wii games were actively coming out and GB both Quick Looked them and reviewed them. Barring Skyward Sword, it has been a long time since that era.

I can't tell if I miss video reviews or not. On the one hand, they were neat, but they also tied up a lot of editing and video production time that could be spent doing more Quick Looks and other features.

#2 Posted by Akeldama (4246 posts) -

I am unsure as to whether this is a discussion or an oversized tweet.

#3 Posted by august (3845 posts) -

Two words: Kevin Sorbo.

#4 Posted by Sbaitso (534 posts) -

At least The Conduit 2 didn't.

#5 Posted by Turambar (6780 posts) -

@Sbaitso: It did get a QL at least.

#6 Posted by Sbaitso (534 posts) -

@Turambar: Yeah, but that QL was worth it.

#7 Posted by SomeDeliCook (2341 posts) -

I think I read on here that Jeff thinks reviews are becoming obsolete and things like Quicklooks are basically the future?

If so, I've agreed with that ever since I first came to this site. You can tell a lot about a game by seeing someone play it for just a few minutes than a clear and detailed review could ever do.

#8 Posted by Genkkaku (735 posts) -

@august said:

Two words: Kevin Sorbo.

#9 Posted by StarvingGamer (8227 posts) -

Video reviews were always them basically reading their reviews verbatim in front of a green screen, then Drew and Vinny wasting tons of time editing them. Good riddance I say

#10 Edited by Pr1mus (3904 posts) -

Kinect has basically replaced the Wii as far as half-assed games with shitty motion controls that needs a quicklook for our enjoyment goes.

I do miss gems like this one.

As for Video Reviews i do wish they'd make more of them but only as long as they make them as they used to and not just some video footage with them simply reading the written review like too many sites do.

#11 Posted by TheHT (11237 posts) -

I enjoyed them, but like others have said, they weren't particularly useful. Quick Looks and reviews suffice.

#12 Edited by BisonHero (6507 posts) -

@SomeDeliCook said:

I think I read on here that Jeff thinks reviews are becoming obsolete and things like Quicklooks are basically the future?

If so, I've agreed with that ever since I first came to this site. You can tell a lot about a game by seeing someone play it for just a few minutes than a clear and detailed review could ever do.

To be fair, the Resident Evil 6 Quick Look is quite the opposite; Brad pointed out during the Quick Look (or maybe the associated Bombcast) that there's no guarantee of the RE6 Quick Look containing a stupid QTE, or bosses that don't make it clear you're damaging them, or melee attacks that inexplicably don't connect with enemies or AI partners that refuse to come to the co-op door, but that those things pile up bit by bit to the point that the game is aggravating. Sometimes a game lucks out and none of its glaring faults show up in the Quick Look for whatever reason (or a game has bad luck and makes for a terrible Quick Look despite being good), so I think a review is still a useful resource alongside a Quick Look.

#13 Posted by Hailinel (24708 posts) -

Once upon a time, The Conduit was supposed to be one of the Wii's big exclusives.

Also, it had Kevin Sorbo whereas Conduit 2 has John St. John and no "The" in the title.

Online
#14 Posted by ManMadeGod (1561 posts) -

@Hailinel said:

Once upon a time, The Conduit was supposed to be one of the Wii's big exclusives.

Also, it had Kevin Sorbo whereas Conduit 2 has John St. John and no "The" in the title.

I remember people hyping it to be the first game that would get first person shooting "right" on the Wii. Crazy folks.

#15 Posted by thedj93 (1237 posts) -

@ManMadeGod said:

@Hailinel said:

Once upon a time, The Conduit was supposed to be one of the Wii's big exclusives.

Also, it had Kevin Sorbo whereas Conduit 2 has John St. John and no "The" in the title.

I remember people hyping it to be the first game that would get first person shooting "right" on the Wii. Crazy folks.

yeah this is the reason why it was a big deal at the time. needless to say it didn't exactly deliver.

#16 Posted by avidwriter (667 posts) -

Quicklooks are more interesting then reviews, at least written reviews. I still like video reviews.

#17 Posted by Vinny_Says (5706 posts) -

I'll play devil's advocate here and say get rid of written reviews and only have Video Reviews + QLs.

Thoughts? Comments? Gimme what ya got!

#18 Posted by Heartagram (1182 posts) -

@Vinny_Says said:

I'll play devil's advocate here and say get rid of written reviews and only have Video Reviews + QLs.

Thoughts? Comments? Gimme what ya got!

I agree. I rarely read the reviews of a game because you hear them talk about them so much on the bombcast and on streams/Quick Looks that I can't imagine the things they say in the text are really all that different from what is said on the podcast.

#19 Posted by dudeglove (7832 posts) -

Shit, Kevin Sorbo's in this game? Sold.

#20 Posted by egg (1467 posts) -

@SomeDeliCook said:

I think I read on here that Jeff thinks reviews are becoming obsolete and things like Quicklooks are basically the future?

Does Jeff really think this? I wasn't watching any content on GB but maybe I will give quick looks another try if this is true.

#21 Posted by MHumphreys89 (714 posts) -

@Akeldama said:

I am unsure as to whether this is a discussion or an oversized tweet.

Aren't all threads 'over-sized' tweets? He's just missing a; "What do you think?!".

#22 Posted by RazielCuts (2953 posts) -

@Vinny_Says said:

I'll play devil's advocate here and say get rid of written reviews and only have Video Reviews + QLs.

Thoughts? Comments? Gimme what ya got!

Devil's Advocate? I think that's the common consensus with the sites ethos and user base as a whole, I'd like to see the analytics but I bet not even a third of the users here actually read the written reviews.

#23 Edited by ProfessorEss (7361 posts) -

@SomeDeliCook said:

I think I read on here that Jeff thinks reviews are becoming obsolete and things like Quicklooks are basically the future?

If so, I've agreed with that ever since I first came to this site. You can tell a lot about a game by seeing someone play it for just a few minutes than a clear and detailed review could ever do.

I would agree with this if the staff did a little preparation beforehand. Maybe it's just me but 30-45 minutes of them skipping instructions and stumbling through a game they don't understand doesn't give me much to go on.

Don't get me wrong I enjoy quicklooks and there are a number of them that are quite informative, but I'd say at least 50% of them are too uninformed to be used for anything but entertainment.

#24 Posted by Blimble (302 posts) -
#25 Posted by GS_Dan (1403 posts) -

@egg said:

@SomeDeliCook said:

I think I read on here that Jeff thinks reviews are becoming obsolete and things like Quicklooks are basically the future?

Does Jeff really think this? I wasn't watching any content on GB but maybe I will give quick looks another try if this is true.

Honest question- not trying to be a dick. What do you actually use this site for? Just the forums and the occasional written review?

#26 Posted by SomeJerk (3245 posts) -

Conduit 2 needs and deserves at least a video of the staff reactions to the ending scene.

#27 Posted by AndrewB (7611 posts) -

Written reviews are still important to me. Video reviews are a waste of regurgitating the same information with some flashy but ultimately useless video footage in the background. I'd rather a Quick Look/ formal review to help me decide on buying a game I was not intending to buy anyway.

Also, The Conduit was supposed to be the make/break for the Wii as a console which could provide decent FPS games, so it's not as surprising that so much attention was paid to it.

#28 Posted by BionicRadd (617 posts) -

quick looks are the only video content i watch on GB. I watched one video review and it felt so stale that I will probably watch another. Now if video reviews were 10 minutes of at least 2 of the bombers sitting around bitching about and/or praising the game, I'd be more interested. That would be the Bombcast, though, so it's a little redundant.

I hate scores, though. It's a pointless system for lazy people that aren't willing or able to read a review and form their opinion based on what's written.

#29 Posted by TeflonBilly (4713 posts) -

@Sbaitso said:

At least The Conduit 2 didn't.

Considering how that game ended, a better sequel would almost merit an endurance run. LINCOLN FORCE'D

#30 Posted by TheVideoHustler (406 posts) -

People really hate to read. Don' they?

#31 Posted by TeflonBilly (4713 posts) -

@TheVideoHustler said:

People really hate to read. Don' they?

Did you see that depressing poll here a few weeks ago about how many lowlifes on this board who cut out books before any other form of entertainment? It's a sad, sad development.

#32 Posted by Dagbiker (6976 posts) -

Reviews are good for games with embargo's. It helps with search engines, where a video will not. But videos, at least to me, are way more fun to watch.

#33 Posted by crazyleaves (645 posts) -

@TeflonBilly said:

@Sbaitso said:

At least The Conduit 2 didn't.

Considering how that game ended, a better sequel would almost merit an endurance run. LINCOLN FORCE'D

#34 Posted by BisonHero (6507 posts) -

@Blimble said:

Not as weird as this getting a quick look

http://www.giantbomb.com/quick-look-dragonball-evolution/17-411/

It's pretty clear that Vinny has a soft spot for Dragon Ball, as he always sits in on any Dragon Ball Quick Looks, and is seemingly the only one advocating their coverage. I think Vinny is the only reason that ANY Dragon Ball games have gotten Quick Looks, compared to there being zero Naruto Quick Looks, for example.

#35 Posted by Forderz (247 posts) -

I think video reviews are pretty redundant, given that the written review is all the same content and quicklooks, given a bit of preparation, generally show off a game in a truer light.

Say what you will of Ryan's poor tactics in the X-COM QL, but that was a pretty honest portrayal of it's (pussy ass) normal mode.

Plus, the bombcast usually gives a weekly update for those longer games, and that can include evolving views.

#36 Posted by Blimble (302 posts) -

@BisonHero: I don't think they other psp dragonball fighting games got QL though. It's more just weird that they cared to cover a psp game for a movie no one saw (or tried to forget it afterwards)

#37 Posted by gelatinabomination (184 posts) -

@crazyleaves: God damn, that ending makes me crack up every time. If only playing the game was as memorable as that ending.

#38 Posted by Mesoian (1574 posts) -

@BisonHero said:

At least, it's crazy compared to how things are prioritized at present day Giant Bomb. Also, I guess I keep forgetting that there was a time when Wii games were actively coming out and GB both Quick Looked them and reviewed them. Barring Skyward Sword, it has been a long time since that era.

I can't tell if I miss video reviews or not. On the one hand, they were neat, but they also tied up a lot of editing and video production time that could be spent doing more Quick Looks and other features.

Not really, for a long time before it's release, the Conduit was supposed to be the great white hope for the Wii, the proof that it could have new big excellent original shooters just like the other systems. On paper, it was going to be an incredible title.

Then it came out...

#39 Posted by ArbitraryWater (11720 posts) -

I've never thought Video Reviews were anything other than mostly redundant, but I don't think that quick looks are any substitute for a real review (most of the time). It's interesting, yes, but it represents the shift in priorities that Giant Bomb has gone through over the past few years to focus on easy to produce video content (at the cost of Ryan never finishing TANG) and staff personalities.

As for The Conduit, I remember that game getting a large amount of buzz followed immediately by no one caring. Sure, now it's a hilarious punchline that represents how willing hardcore Wii Defenders were to latch onto something, anything that looked like it had effort put into it, but there were parts of it that genuinely looked cool.

#40 Posted by Corvak (1068 posts) -

Based on site telemetry, I can see how this could be true. I would imagine QLs get more pageviews than reviews right now, because many of us read/watch GB for the personality of the staff and features, as opposed to purely coming here for reviews. Which, I think, is why they dont review everything that comes out choosing instead to spend the time on video content.

#41 Posted by Example1013 (4834 posts) -

@BisonHero said:

@Blimble said:

Not as weird as this getting a quick look

http://www.giantbomb.com/quick-look-dragonball-evolution/17-411/

It's pretty clear that Vinny has a soft spot for Dragon Ball, as he always sits in on any Dragon Ball Quick Looks, and is seemingly the only one advocating their coverage. I think Vinny is the only reason that ANY Dragon Ball games have gotten Quick Looks, compared to there being zero Naruto Quick Looks, for example.

fuck Naruto

#42 Posted by jozzy (2042 posts) -

@Heartagram said:

@Vinny_Says said:

I'll play devil's advocate here and say get rid of written reviews and only have Video Reviews + QLs.

Thoughts? Comments? Gimme what ya got!

I agree. I rarely read the reviews of a game because you hear them talk about them so much on the bombcast and on streams/Quick Looks that I can't imagine the things they say in the text are really all that different from what is said on the podcast.

Oh yeah, like the Dishonered thing where Patrick mentions that anecdote about sending those guys into the mines without tongues on the Quick Look, the Bombcast and in the review. I realize that I consume way too much GB stuff but it gets redundant. It's not uncommon that they discuss something on the bombcast that they already talked about in the QL, without really adding much.

#43 Posted by BraveToaster (12590 posts) -

I prefer Quick Looks over reviews. I can't remember the last time I read/saw a review/video review.

#44 Posted by JP_Russell (1171 posts) -

My take on it is that if I'm going to read something, it needs to feel like it's worth the time and psychological energy (keeping in mind that reading threads on a forum is appealing for the prospect of finding and perhaps participating in a discussion, not just literary value).  To me, reviews rarely are.  Video reviews are a simpler and more entertaining way to consume that content.
 
So while I understand why they don't do them very often anymore and don't really have a problem with it, I don't think it's fair to suggest video reviews don't have any value of their own.  They do serve a purpose to a particular demographic.

#45 Posted by JZ (2125 posts) -

It's crazy that you people are so butthurt over video reviews.

#46 Posted by NinjaBerd (221 posts) -

I totally agree with Jeff, Quick Looks are soooo much better than reviews.

If I am on the fence about a game GB gives me a way to sit and watch a couple of dudes play and talk about a game for basically an hour; that's the best thing in the world.

#47 Posted by BisonHero (6507 posts) -
@jozzy

@Heartagram said:

@Vinny_Says said:

I'll play devil's advocate here and say get rid of written reviews and only have Video Reviews + QLs.

Thoughts? Comments? Gimme what ya got!

I agree. I rarely read the reviews of a game because you hear them talk about them so much on the bombcast and on streams/Quick Looks that I can't imagine the things they say in the text are really all that different from what is said on the podcast.

Oh yeah, like the Dishonered thing where Patrick mentions that anecdote about sending those guys into the mines without tongues on the Quick Look, the Bombcast and in the review. I realize that I consume way too much GB stuff but it gets redundant. It's not uncommon that they discuss something on the bombcast that they already talked about in the QL, without really adding much.

I noticed that particularly with Jeff and Brad, they decide on a particular phrasing to describe a certain aspect of the game, and that exact phrasing tends to show up in review, QL, and Bombcast.
#48 Posted by JP_Russell (1171 posts) -
@JZ said:
It's crazy that you people are so butthurt over video reviews.
Err...  Nobody in the thread has even made a complaint regarding video reviews.  Even my post was only providing a counterpoint to the suggestion that there is no point to them.
#49 Edited by deerokus (542 posts) -

I like written reviews - Ryan in particular is a really good writer, and there are occasions where a game has had a quick look where it looked poor but was in fact a really good game. Something like Alpha Protocol falls into that category - the moment to moment mechanics are visually unappealing, while the cool things that game does don't come across in the quick look format. I'm surprised so few people read them.

I feel like Video Reviews evolved into quick looks, though.

#50 Edited by evanbower (1211 posts) -

It's not as uncommon as you might think. Just off the top of my head, Donkey Kong Country Returns was QL'd and reviewed, and Metroid: Other M was given all three. I think it is more a matter of Wii game releases drastically slowing down in the last year. The only two games to come out for Wii last year that really mattered were Skyward Sword and Rhythm Heaven Fever, and both of those were heavily covered.

EDIT: That is other than Xenoblade and the Last Story, of course, but the lack of coverage there probably has nothing to do with them being Wii games.