Now, I know the GB guys are running at full steam these days and pumping out a hell of a lot of content, so really there is no reason to complain. Giant Bomb is chugging along fantastically. Lots of articles, a regular podcast and heaps of videos. One thing I must admit I am missing are Video Reviews.
Now I appreciate that their time is limited and they don't have the resources to put together video reviews for every game released, but surely, surely they could put together video reviews for the big AAA titles.
Notable omissions of late would surely include:
- Starcraft 2 (be patient perhaps?)
- God of War 3
- Splinter Cell: Conviction
- Final Fantasy XIII
- Just Cause 2
- Battlefield: Bad Company 2 (hell, the original got a video review!)
The last video review was back in May!
So what do you guys think? Would you like to see the video reviews back? Or do you think, "shut the hell up there's already lots of stuff going on, Quick Looks, Bombcast, Event Coverage (like E3), TNT, Wonderful Universe of TANG and you get heaps of written reviews anyway - stop complaining!!"
Can it hurt to ask for at least a few video reviews return? Even just the AAA's or the 4+ star games would suffice...
***** UPDATE *****
Brad has kindly put together a video review of Starcraft 2. Now we can stop complaining for a little while...
No More Video Reviews?
Now, I know the GB guys are running at full steam these days and pumping out a hell of a lot of content, so really there is no reason to complain. Giant Bomb is chugging along fantastically. Lots of articles, a regular podcast and heaps of videos. One thing I must admit I am missing are Video Reviews.
Now I appreciate that their time is limited and they don't have the resources to put together video reviews for every game released, but surely, surely they could put together video reviews for the big AAA titles.
Notable omissions of late would surely include:
- Starcraft 2 (be patient perhaps?)
- God of War 3
- Splinter Cell: Conviction
- Final Fantasy XIII
- Just Cause 2
- Battlefield: Bad Company 2 (hell, the original got a video review!)
The last video review was back in May!
So what do you guys think? Would you like to see the video reviews back? Or do you think, "shut the hell up there's already lots of stuff going on, Quick Looks, Bombcast, Event Coverage (like E3), TNT, Wonderful Universe of TANG and you get heaps of written reviews anyway - stop complaining!!"
Can it hurt to ask for at least a few video reviews return? Even just the AAA's or the 4+ star games would suffice...
***** UPDATE *****
Brad has kindly put together a video review of Starcraft 2. Now we can stop complaining for a little while...
Starcraft II seems very likely. I always have to remember that the other sites use the same camera room.
I agree that more video reviews would be nice. Although ultimately the work that goes into them probably isn't worth it. Think about all the footage of the games they have to capture and edit together to sync up perfect with the "script" that they have written for the review. There's tons of video editing work that just seems unnecessary when there's a more detailed written review one click away. At least that's how I see it.
Could someone please elaborate to me what the fuck is the point of a video review besides telling people WHO SEEM TO BE UNABLE TO READ A TEXT WHICH IS RIGHT THERE about a game?
Sure, you get footage from the game as well, but you get that everywhere else as well, without getting cuts to look at someone's face reading the text WHICH HAS BEEN RIGHT THERE THE WHOLE TIME
No video reviews seems like a good thing. Leaves more time for Quick Looks.
Video review aren't really that important now, what with all the Quick Looks. You can see what the game plays like before the game is out so there's no need to show what the game is like with a video review.
I think I prefer the quick looks over the video review. They're longer, funnier cause of the random dialogue, and let me get to know a game the same as if I went over to a friends house to watch them play. The video reviews just make me too lazy to read the written review.
Just thinking: If video reviews were just bite size to make me want to read the full review...
To me, video reviews define the video game website. If the website doesn't have video reviews...it's like CNN or BBC not broadcasting their news on TV. How realistic is that? I personally love video reviews because it's a way of expressing your thoughts that a written review can't convey (also because I'm not a reading type of guy).
If Jeff and the gang can't commit their time making video reviews, they should consider hiring/ appointing someone to do it, just like GameTrailers who have a group of gamers playing the games and let GT co-founder and Creative Director Brandon Jones do all the talking. GiantBomb should do the same.
P/S: best video reviewer: Greg Kasavin!
" Could someone please elaborate to me what the fuck is the point of a video review besides telling people WHO SEEM TO BE UNABLE TO READ A TEXT WHICH IS RIGHT THERE about a game? Sure, you get footage from the game as well, but you get that everywhere else as well, without getting cuts to look at someone's face reading the text WHICH HAS BEEN RIGHT THERE THE WHOLE TIME No video reviews seems like a good thing. Leaves more time for Quick Looks. "For me, video reviews give a better sense of what the reviewer is talking about in his review. When bad voice acting is mentioned, usually the video cuts to an example of the bad voice acting. If they mention a notable ability in the game, they can show you exactly what they're talking about. The video review brings the review alive. Someone can tell me that a game has atrocious voice acting and I'll believe them. However, if they show it to me I'll know exactly how much it would bother me and can help make my purchasing decision better.
Sure, some of that can be accomplished in a Quick Look. But a Quick Look is just a slice of the game, is 20-40 minutes long and generally shows off less important stuff than a 5 minute video review that condenses it all. They didn't even get to time manipulation stuff in the Singularity Quick Look, which is a important part of that game.
Don't get me wrong, I love Quick Looks. I also know how much time is required to do a video review. If making one video review required missing out on 5 Quick Looks, I'll take the Quick Looks. I'm just defending the video reviews, because acting like they're an alternative to reading for stupid and lazy people is a gross oversimplification.
" Written reviews are just as good as video reviews to me. "
This, video reviews add no extra content. They just read the review in front of a green screen if you want to see gameplay watch quicklooks,TNT,or streams. Also for people who want more information listening to the bombcast the week after the game comes out is also a good way to get an idea of how good the game is.
Fair enough, but how about they put in a video clip or a voice clip at specific points in the text.
"The voice acting is painfully awful
CLICK FOR EXAMPLE
It's so bad I muted my TV"
" @Ventilaator said:Great points. That Singularity review is a good example and was probably a case where they should have done a video review just because the quick look didn't really do the game justice. I think it's something they should evaluate on a case by case basis and make the call based on how busy they are, as well as how much they feel showing the game would benefit. I think a game like Starcraft 2 though--despite it being a huge release--shouldn't get a video review on account of it's 12 year old base mechanics. Everyone already knows Starcraft. Plus they already did a 2+ hour long TNT, so there's that too." Could someone please elaborate to me what the fuck is the point of a video review besides telling people WHO SEEM TO BE UNABLE TO READ A TEXT WHICH IS RIGHT THERE about a game? Sure, you get footage from the game as well, but you get that everywhere else as well, without getting cuts to look at someone's face reading the text WHICH HAS BEEN RIGHT THERE THE WHOLE TIME No video reviews seems like a good thing. Leaves more time for Quick Looks. "For me, video reviews give a better sense of what the reviewer is talking about in his review. When bad voice acting is mentioned, usually the video cuts to an example of the bad voice acting. If they mention a notable ability in the game, they can show you exactly what they're talking about. The video review brings the review alive. Someone can tell me that a game has atrocious voice acting and I'll believe them. However, if they show it to me I'll know exactly how much it would bother me and can help make my purchasing decision better. Sure, some of that can be accomplished in a Quick Look. But a Quick Look is just a slice of the game, is 20-40 minutes long and generally shows off less important stuff than a 5 minute video review that condenses it all. They didn't even get to time manipulation stuff in the Singularity Quick Look, which is a important part of that game. Don't get me wrong, I love Quick Looks. I also know how much time is required to do a video review. If making one video review required missing out on 5 Quick Looks, I'll take the Quick Looks. I'm just defending the video reviews, because acting like they're an alternative to reading for stupid and lazy people is a gross oversimplification. "
I like both the QL and the reviews. If they are overwhelmed I can do their video reviews for them and have two girls stand behind me bouncing up and down to make it entertaining GO! Request that now!
" Written reviews are just as good as video reviews to me. "They're better. I always felt like the video reviews were stiff and awkward (though better than most sites). They are much better writers.
While I ALWAYS want more content from Giantbomb, I feel like if they are going to leave something out then video reviews are the thing to forgo. IMO, they are the most unnecessary part of the Giant Bomb Experience. I would still like to see more of them though.
No more video reviews until we start paying for GiantBomb. They're holding out on us to drive up sales.
True story.
I do miss the Video Reviews, but I think I enjoy watching the Quick Looks more. The most recent one I watched was Castlevania: Harmony of Despair, which didn't look like a Castlevania game at all to me.
If there's any Video Reviews I hope to see later this year, it would be one for Starcraft II.
I enjoy reading the reviews more than watching some video that isn't nearly as in depth as the written part.
So for me it's not really a big problem that there are no video reviews.
If it means more funny Quick Looks, Live streams, weird/funny random videos and great Bombcasts, then I'm perfectly fine with it.
Yes. They need to get back on track with the video reviews. As that one guy pointed out, video reviews can do things that simple text cannot. I also don't understand how some of you think video reviews are suddenly taxing to a point where they are unfeasible. They used to do them, along with TANG and the ER, which they no longer do. There is WUTANG (still irregular) and TNT (which is just as much fun as it is work), and on top of that they have an intern and a freelance guy. So why is so hard to do video reviews now? I don't want to come off as a "Mr. know it all" (I despise those fucking people) but I don't think video reviews for big releases is expecting too much.
Like they said on the Podcast, there is absolutely NOTHING going on right now with video games. There should have been a SC2 video review.
I like the video reviews and when I need an old game to play through I'll watch through a load and choose one.
I also think they are very important to bring new people to the site, it was a video review (cant remember which) that first brought me to Giantbomb, as well as a few other people I know.
The other video stuff is just as good when you're familiar with the crew and the in-jokes/formula but a video review is completly accessable and lets someone new see the quality of the site and staff straight away and with so many sites out there you often only get one chance.
" @louiedog: Fair enough, but how about they put in a video clip or a voice clip at specific points in the text. "The voice acting is painfully awful CLICK FOR EXAMPLE It's so bad I muted my TV" "They could be like the inline pictures with captions they have so they're not intruding in on the text horribly.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment