• 139 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
#51 Posted by Cincaid (2956 posts) -

I wrote a pretty long comment regarding this, but in the end I'll just settle for: "I think you're all silly".

#52 Posted by Jimbo (9810 posts) -

I stopped watching when they became primarily about showing themselves off, usually at the expense of less well known games.  Big games were being taken seriously and small games were being used as nothing but chuckle fodder.  I found it (the disparity in treatment) kinda gross tbh.  'Watch me be bad at this <anything which isn't CoD or Gears> and then blame the game!' isn't very entertaining.
 
Game coverage delivered by personalities > Personality coverage delivered by games, imo.

#53 Posted by MrKlorox (11209 posts) -

The Mount and Blade and STALKER quicklooks. I really like Dave, but he's exceptionally bad at demoing games.

#54 Posted by VelourMustache (54 posts) -

I usually just watch them for a bit of entertainment. Occasionally I end up buying a game I hadn't planned on because of quick looks, but I can't think of a time I've been put off something because of how it was portrayed.

Not to say that they haven't sometimes made a game look worse than it is. The TERA quick look, for example, did not do a great job of conveying what makes that game stand out among other MMOs.

#55 Posted by JustKamToo (684 posts) -

The simple lack of enthusiasm.

Ok so a lot of the games they play can’t always be the type of games they want to play, but even when I play a demo I take a small amount of time to get used to the controls and oddly enough I even play the tutorial.

Just because it’s a quick look it doesn’t mean they have to forget any type of gaming etiquette before you bitch and moan about what the game can and can’t do.

I sometimes feel they simply shouldn’t do a quick look no one is even slightly interested in the game.

#56 Posted by Zleunamme (666 posts) -

It's already been mention but Silent Hill: Downpour. It's unfair that a judgement call was made before the game got started. Another one is Metal Gear Solid HD Collection, especially Peace Walker. In that quick look, Jeff and Patrick wanted to get to the nearest exit as fast possible. They wanted to get it over with in the least amount of effort.

They skipped the tutorials. Most of the time was spent bring up common complaints of Hideo Kojima games. In MGS 2, instead of hiding. They get spotted and killed in first level. Then they spent 15 minutes stuck on the roof of the beginning strut. Ignoring the codec call and the group of seagulls near the hole in the fence where they are suppose to go.

In Peace Walker, they did not even scratch the surface on what that games has to offer. Recruiting soldiers to build an impressive army. Using R&D to build better weapons and technology. Coordinating attacks to large targets with other players. They treated the game as if it was another third person shooter.

I really appreciate that Giant Bomb makes quick looks. For the most part I find them to be informative and entertaining. The staff is not perfect and they will drop the ball once in while.

#57 Edited by MrKlorox (11209 posts) -
@JustKamToo said:

I sometimes feel they simply shouldn’t do a quick look no one is even slightly interested in the game.

That reminds me. When the community asks for a quicklook of a game that they have no interest in, they always make a remark about how they're just doing it to pacify "all three users who wanted it". As if to pass the blame when they fail at it or as an excuse for them not giving a shit about actually showing features. Sniper Elite V2 is the most recent to come to mind.
#58 Posted by Humanity (9251 posts) -

Actually I have a bigger problem with Quick Looks where the guys sound pretty positive and enthusiastic about a game only to completely shit on it a week later. For instance, recently they played Prototype 2 and both Vinny and Jeff sounded like they were enjoying it. Jeff, being the one that had been playing the game thus far said it was simple but fun - and Vinny actually went as far as to say he was going to pick it up because it looked like fun. Fast forward a week ahead and they have literally nothing good to say about it on the Bombcast.

I almost caught myself buying a few games based on these initial positive Quick Looks, which would have been pretty shitty if I actually did buy them.

#59 Posted by Emperor_Jimmu (249 posts) -

Any time Brad forgets the controls, Ryan gets lost or Vinny has a flight stick.

#60 Posted by ajamafalous (11994 posts) -

R.U.S.E. 
E.Y.E.: Divine Cybermancy 
 
 
First two that popped into my head but I feel like I could have an RNG pick a random Quick Look and it would have a pretty good chance of being a misrepresentative one.

#61 Posted by Benny (1953 posts) -

There's often something to be said about the game if people who play games for a living don't pick up on one of its basic mechanics. Personally I'd put that down to a design issue 9 times out of 10. And tutorials are pretty much one of the worst things in games. There's always a better way

#62 Posted by AlexanderSheen (5007 posts) -

They usually not paying attention to the tutorials because "It's not compelling television". But in reality, the thing that is not compelling, is watching guys running around not knowing what to do and blaming the game for it. Sure, there are bad games, but grouping bad games and some good games together because of that, is misrepresentative.

And a little fact checking before dismissing something or in general, would be great.

Don't get me wrong, I love Quick Looks, but... :/

#63 Posted by CookieMonster (2417 posts) -

I'm not really bothered which ones they misrepresent or whatever to be honest. I just enjoy the quick looks for what they are. They're only a very short portion of the game shown so, in most cases, they are going to misrepresent the game in some way or another. I'll have probably already read up/played a game I am interested in that they going to quick look anyway and formed my own opinions on it.

#64 Posted by TheUnsavedHero (1255 posts) -

I always watch Quick Looks with a grain of salt. I know they try to show everything a game has to offer and the gameplay mechanics, but I know there will always be something that they'll mess up or miss. I have no issue with it.

#65 Posted by cutyoface (544 posts) -

Most recently probably the Minecraft Quick Look.

#66 Posted by PulledaBrad (612 posts) -

MGS HD quicklook was fucking painful.

#67 Posted by dropabombonit (1490 posts) -

I have to SOTC HD in the Ico/SOTC HD collection. Brad made that game look way more frustrating that it is. But I play it once a year so I know where all the weak spots are at

#68 Posted by aspaceinvader (257 posts) -

Guys quick looks are not reviews, but as the title of quick looks goes it's just that a quick look a sort of mini preview of said game. The guys tend to post the review a few days later. I like the quick look format it gives me insite into the game and how it plays, better than a written review any day.

#69 Posted by ShadowSkill11 (1783 posts) -

The videos are called quicklooks not reviewlooks. I think the tc missed the point.

#70 Posted by warxsnake (2650 posts) -

At least when Drew gets into a new game on a quicklook, he enjoys trying to find out how things work, whereas the others just dismiss game mechanics they don't understand from the start, most of the time because they are busy talking over the tutorial bits. Like complaining about a game's mechanics while the game is desperately trying to explain how those work.   
 
God forbid an FPS game doesn't function like COD, they wont like it. 

#71 Posted by Ventilaator (1501 posts) -

A million times Nier. Other than choosing a terrible part to show, they cut off right at the second when the game starts getting going.

#72 Posted by Quarters (1703 posts) -

For the vast majority, I'm totally fine with QLs. Two of the only one's that severely stuck out to me was MGS HD and SH: Downpour. Just overwhelmingly negative, mainly due to personal opinion and not actual game quality. The negativity was so severe that it just totally drown the whole QL in an attitude of, "I don't care about this, you shouldn't care about this, this shouldn't even exist".

#73 Posted by Guided_By_Tigers (8061 posts) -

Metal Gear Solid HD

#74 Posted by Dauragon (554 posts) -

@Grimluck343 said:

@Hailinel said:

Any Quick Look in which the guys blatantly ignore tutorials that explain basic gameplay concepts and then go on to complain about how the game doesn't do the thing that the tutorial told them about.

Muramasa, for example.

So most of the quick looks?

I have definitely watched dozens of quick looks where I've screamed CAN YOU READ? IT SAYS HIT A RIGHT THERE IN HUGE LETTERS! at the screen a ton of times.

I kinda like it that way though tbh.

#75 Posted by deathstriker666 (1337 posts) -

Just Cause 2. Holy shit Ryan, you are a fucking idiot

#76 Posted by Gargantuan (1882 posts) -

The crew is regularly pretty damn stupid and it's annoying.

#77 Posted by Dagbiker (6976 posts) -

@Quarters said:

For the vast majority, I'm totally fine with QLs. Two of the only one's that severely stuck out to me was MGS HD and SH: Downpour. Just overwhelmingly negative, mainly due to personal opinion and not actual game quality. The negativity was so severe that it just totally drown the whole QL in an attitude of, "I don't care about this, you shouldn't care about this, this shouldn't even exist".

Yah, some times not reading the tutorials can get annoying, and sometimes missing glaring gameplay elements can get annoying. But when they just fucken hate everything about a game from the start, with out having even giving it a chance. Then that is just poison.

another example is the Hydrophobia quicklook.

#78 Posted by NicksCorner (416 posts) -

Please do just a little research on a game before doing a Quick Look.

In my book the worst QL are usually the ones that are just loaded up from the beginning of the game.

Online
#79 Posted by JoeyRavn (4974 posts) -

@wewantsthering said:

I watch GB quicklooks simply for entertainment value personally.

This. I really don't care about how well they play a game, I just want them to do stupid, funny things. If I wanted more factual information, I'd read a review.

#80 Posted by buft (3317 posts) -

I really enjoy the quick looks because it gives you a flavor of what the game will be like if you just pick it up and start playing which is what i usually do, they are fairly representative of the game in the hands of the end user and not PR walkthroughs which can get boring, with some exceptions like skulls of the shogun.

the main complaint i have and its not a complaint at all is that sometimes the guys can make shit games look great because they are so funny playing off each other and it makes me want to play that game even though my experience would be a much more somber affair.

#81 Posted by Shookems (474 posts) -

I watch them because they're funny.

You guys need to chill out

#82 Posted by Dany (7887 posts) -

We know that quick looks are not reviews. The entire premise of a quick look doesn't make them perfect. They should strive to make them better.

#83 Posted by RWBladewing (118 posts) -

I enjoy most quick looks, and even if they're misrepresentative they can still be enjoyable because of witty commentary. But there was one in particular that was outright painful for me to watch: Dynasty Warriors Gundam 3. I still don't understand why they even did that one. Spent the entire time talking about how they don't like Dynasty Warriors and don't know Gundam, while acting like they were being literally tortured playing it. And repeating that all you have to do is mash x to win while getting repeatedly killed attempting to do just that. It's not really a useful look at a game when they're so heavily biased against it before even going in and refuse to change their preconceptions even in the face of them being proven wrong.

#84 Posted by EXTomar (4732 posts) -

@BeachThunder: How is "This is how I feel about playing this game so far..." misrepresenting anything? If nothing else, it is even more honest than a prepared review.

#85 Posted by Dagbiker (6976 posts) -

I enjoy most quicklooks, in fact i have over 200 of them downloaded.

#86 Posted by Binman88 (3687 posts) -

I enjoy most of them, even the terrible ones where they don't know what they're doing but still keep upbeat and funny about it. The Sniper Elite V2 one was horrendous though, and it's with quicklooks like that where the "DURR CHILL OUT GUYS DEM GUYS ARE FUNNY LOL VIDEO GAAAAMES YAAAAAAY CHOCOLATE MILK" argument dies. Not even remotely entertaining and completely unrepresentative of the game they're trying to show. Why bother?

I guess why most people find these poor quicklooks so frustrating, is because the crew certainly put a decent amount of effort into some games, and do the complete opposite with others. I guess it doesn't come across as being fair and open-minded.

#87 Posted by Excast (935 posts) -

I enjoy the vast majority of Quick Looks.  On occasion you run into one like like the Shadows of the Colossus debacle where they just don't pay attention to what is going on around them in terms of gameplay or tutorial bits.  Those can be a little painful to watch.

#88 Posted by Nux (2360 posts) -

@Animasta said:

Nier fo sho

they played through the worst part of it. Even starting the game from the beginning would have been preferable.

I completely agree. That quick look did not do Nier justice. They should of started after the time skip, that would of been better.

#89 Posted by Paindamnation (805 posts) -

The sheer purpose of a quick look. Is a bloody Quick Look It's there to show a part of the game. Sometimes it's funny sometimes it's not. All it does is show gameplay and give commentary to see if you want to play it or buy it. I personally am going to watch the Max Payne 3 Quick Look and see if I like the gameplay. I could care less if they play it to the specifications, or if their an expert or not. I use it as a judgement call on some games to buy. Syndicate was a good game, and Jeff loved it but It was a mediocre shooter, I bought it because of the Quick Look and it didn't hit my high cords. Not because of the way they played it, just the way I enjoyed it. I still think Quick Looks are one of the best things on the site, because it's un-scripted and gives a view of a game usually before it comes out, which other sites do, but it is a completely scripted adventure. Either watch them or don't. Plenty of people enjoy them vs the complainers that want THEIR GAME they enjoy to be represented "properly" that's crap, no game is presented properly. Enjoy the video for what it is, entertainment and a quick view of a game, to see if you want to buy it or pass it up.

#90 Posted by WinterSnowblind (7617 posts) -

There's only a couple I haven't liked. The Pokemon Black & White one for example, felt like they didn't really care about playing the game and there was nothing funny to even make it worth while.

I know a lot of people dislike the Monster Hunter ones, when they "don't play the game right", but that's exactly how those games come across for those new to the series and it helps demonstrates the flaws in the game.

#91 Posted by Totori (559 posts) -

Way to be timely

#92 Posted by Recall (103 posts) -

Yakuza 4 Quick Look totally makes the game look boring as sin, when its possibly the most immersive and dramatic story in a game I have played in like 6 years.

Also Quick Looks where they generally don't understand its basic aspects until the very end, ruins quicklooks for I as it means those first 20 minutes were pointless as they didn't bother to pay attention to the screen prompts making their issues there own and not the games fault.

#93 Posted by Brodehouse (9949 posts) -

Quick Looks used to be my favorite feature on the site. I used to get excited when a new game came out to see the Quick Look. I don't even finish most QLs now because I'm done with pissy disinterested snark. It's not like games have got worse, some of the best QLs are of bad games. Now it's just pure apathy, most times they act like they're being dragged at gunpoint to show off some game. Rogue Warrior was not a good game, but that QL was a hoot because they WANTED to do it.

I think they should either go straight from the beginning or have played through a significant chunk before doing a QL. The 'played a half-hour in, don't know anything about the game, have to poorly explain first half-hour to the passenger' ones are AWFUL. I wish staff would actually read that, that's not me being a dick, that's me giving a real suggestion. Don't start Quick Looks 45 minutes into the game, because the driver can't explain what's going on and the passenger can't offer anything because they don't understand what's going on. Either go from Press Start or go from halfway through the game.

Silent Hill downpour is tough to watch. "in old silent hill games you could run from the monsters, the combat was bad and so you ran" *proceeds to fight three monsters instead of running, complains about the combat*

Then again, I'm still not sure if Patrick ever did like Silent Hill. He hates the combat, the puzzles, the controls. What's left? Graphics and narrative?

#94 Posted by Bubbly (254 posts) -

I haven't read the whole thread so sorry if I'm repeating here (which I probably am), but I believe that the crew should not play tutorials in Quick Looks and at least play a decent bit of the game. A lot of the time tutorials are not representative of the actual game so it is pointless to do them. If they felt that the tutorial was bad then they can say so, but it should not be shown. They also would avoid the too common problem of not paying attention to the tutorial section since they were too distracted from chatting with each other. And not playing the game at all before doing the Quick Look is a bad idea. They don't have to beat the game (and I don't expect them to either considering what QL's are), but they should at least play enough of it so that they can talk somewhat intelligently and accurately about the game. Totalbiscuit has the right idea with this stuff as he does what I said with most games and his videos are great because of it.

I've also seen people saying that they come here just for the entertainment, but some of us are also looking to be informed and entertained. Those two things do not need to be mutually exclusive. Compare Totalbiscuit's Sniper Elite V2 video with GB's and tell me which is better coverage of the game. He showed a level past the tutorial sections and was able to make the video both entertaining and informative. I certainly got more out of his video than I did with GB's. And no I am not a fan of that game as I haven't bought it and don't plan to (well, maybe on a big sale), it was just the most recent example I could think of. All I'm trying to say is to give each game as fair a look as possible or don't do the video at all. The guys should be above making the half-ass videos that they sometimes put out.

#95 Posted by EXTomar (4732 posts) -

But those things are part of the game. I believe anything the player can access in the game is fair game for a Quick Look style series.

#96 Edited by Yadilie (380 posts) -

@shivermetimbers said:

The Silent Hill: Downpour quick look comes to mind.

Oh, you mean an uninformed person bitching about something for the entirety of a Quick Look? Such a great thing to do. Especially when he can't even bring up examples of why the others are good and this one is bad.

#97 Posted by SASnake (338 posts) -

All quicklooks where they think they know everything, then say the game sucks because they didnt know how to do it..then blame the game some more.

#98 Posted by AngelN7 (2970 posts) -

Yeah I'll say there was a time when they were more enthusiastic about covering most games even the ones that look "bad" to them , that's why is always a treat to have Vinny in QLs he's willing to give games a chance before playing them plus he stays focused on asking stuff about the game to whoever is playing while being entertaining, you don't have to shit on a game and 'Ugh' the crap out of it to make a funny video.

#99 Posted by wjb (1662 posts) -

I enjoy QLs mostly, but do not watch a ton because I'd rather play the game myself. This thread makes me wish GB did more written reviews. QLs have their benefits, but I'd still rather one of them play the game for a while, do their research, and answer most (if not all) questions in a review or in a Bombcast discussion instead of playing a total of 45 minutes of the game and saying "Yeah, I dunno" or "I think there's this, but not totally sure" while recording a QL.

I tried five minutes of the Xenoblade QL, and it felt like Patrick and Brad had to do it instead of wanting to do it.

#100 Posted by KaneRobot (1611 posts) -

People complaining about a lot of these (expecially the Minecraft one) probably wouldn't be happy unless it was 3 hours long. That's not a quick look.

@SpunkyHePanda said:

There was that weird glitch in DJ Hero 2 that caused the game to lock up if you had 100 Xbox Live friends. Happened a couple of times in the Quick Look, if I recall. It did not look good.

That's not misrepresenting the game. That's showing a dumb oversight by the developer.