Quick Looks the new Video review?

  I've noticed lately that reviews have lately been more of a written variety and the video is just the Quick Look.  Just got me wondering how the community feels about this shift. As far as i go i don't mind it for the fact that QL's tend to give me a better sense of the game then a video review does.  The written review gives me a nice overall opinion of the game and the QL helps solidify the idea of the gameplay and combined i can get a pretty good idea of the game. The video review just seems to be more of "i don't want to read" kinda thing ya.  Thoughts?  Also if your reading this Giantbomb crew is this a shift your making or are ya just behind on video reviews?

"   I've noticed lately that reviews have lately been more of a written variety and the video is just the Quick Look.  Just got me wondering how the community feels about this shift. As far as i go i don't mind it for the fact that QL's tend to give me a better sense of the game then a video review does.  The written review gives me a nice overall opinion of the game and the QL helps solidify the idea of the gameplay and combined i can get a pretty good idea of the game. The video review just seems to be more of "i don't want to read" kinda thing ya.  Thoughts?  Also if your reading this Giantbomb crew is this a shift your making or are ya just behind on video reviews? "

Quick looks are way more fun than video reviews

I definitely see Quick Looks as being a really great way of telling you if this game is for you, but I still do like my video reviews. It's just me mainly because that was how I found out about Jeff Gerstmann and so even though it might seem a little redundant in that its just a video version for the lazy, some might say, but it is something that I'd still like to see once in a while.

I like quick looks more anyway, so I don't really care.

I used to love the Reviews, all the great editing by Vinny,  
I think that it is much easier for them to do and it gives us a much broader scope of the game,  
 
So, QL's are the future, it seems at least. 

The video reviews were usually nearly word for word the same as the written reviews anyway.

I think QL's are way more informative than a video review. It shows you the game as it is, rather than edit it in some flashy fashion. Also, I always read the text reviews first, and it seemed like they were just reading that to the camera in the video reviews.

Quick looks are better than video reviews IMO.

I like the video reviews, but they tend to be just the review read out loud + some footage. 
 
I'd take the written review plus a 15 - 30 minutes quick look over a review + a video review any day personally.

I'm with you guys. QL are more fun and watching an unedited portion of the game is also more informative.
 
Written review + quicklook = perfect

Quick Looks are generally more entertaining and i also like that it's not a direct reading of the written review but rather another piece of the reaction.  Maybe the review should be written by one member and the QL's should be done by others and that way it's like the whole staff weighed in on the game so you get multiple perspectives from all our favorite GB personalities!

" Quick Looks are generally more entertaining and i also like that it's not a direct reading of the written review but rather another piece of the reaction.  Maybe the review should be written by one member and the QL's should be done by others and that way it's like the whole staff weighed in on the game so you get multiple perspectives from all our favorite GB personalities! "

It's not like they ever did THAT many video reviews anyway.  Also: 
 
@ajamafalous said:

" The video reviews were usually nearly word for word the same as the written reviews anyway. "

" @jaymorgoth said:

" Quick Looks are generally more entertaining and i also like that it's not a direct reading of the written review but rather another piece of the reaction.  Maybe the review should be written by one member and the QL's should be done by others and that way it's like the whole staff weighed in on the game so you get multiple perspectives from all our favorite GB personalities! "

That would be a waste of time.  "

" @The_Laughing_Man said:

" @jaymorgoth said:

" Quick Looks are generally more entertaining and i also like that it's not a direct reading of the written review but rather another piece of the reaction.  Maybe the review should be written by one member and the QL's should be done by others and that way it's like the whole staff weighed in on the game so you get multiple perspectives from all our favorite GB personalities! "

That would be a waste of time.  "

How would that be a waste of time? It's what they are doing now more or less just the reviewer isn't in on the QL, he's playing the game for review.   "

" @jaymorgoth said:

" @The_Laughing_Man said:

" @jaymorgoth said:

" Quick Looks are generally more entertaining and i also like that it's not a direct reading of the written review but rather another piece of the reaction.  Maybe the review should be written by one member and the QL's should be done by others and that way it's like the whole staff weighed in on the game so you get multiple perspectives from all our favorite GB personalities! "

That would be a waste of time.  "

How would that be a waste of time? It's what they are doing now more or less just the reviewer isn't in on the QL, he's playing the game for review.   "

If they have played it enough to review it why hand if off to someone who knows nothing? They would have to take time to get to a point where they are comterbule with the game then do the quick look.   "

" @The_Laughing_Man said:

" @jaymorgoth said:

" @The_Laughing_Man said:

" @jaymorgoth said:

" Quick Looks are generally more entertaining and i also like that it's not a direct reading of the written review but rather another piece of the reaction.  Maybe the review should be written by one member and the QL's should be done by others and that way it's like the whole staff weighed in on the game so you get multiple perspectives from all our favorite GB personalities! "

That would be a waste of time.  "

How would that be a waste of time? It's what they are doing now more or less just the reviewer isn't in on the QL, he's playing the game for review.   "

If they have played it enough to review it why hand if off to someone who knows nothing? They would have to take time to get to a point where they are comterbule with the game then do the quick look.   "

But they've done that before , a few QL's they've admitted this is the first time they've played the game. "

" Quick looks are way more fun than video reviews "

" @luce said:

" Quick looks are way more fun than video reviews "

I feel like quick looks are also more informative of how the game actually plays.  "

Depends on the game.  For console games they're way better, because you will see everything there is to see in 20 - 30 minutes.  For a lot of (but not all by any means) PC games - take Warband for example - a QL is still great, but they're barely going to scratch the surface.  In these instances a traditional review (whether written or video) is still more useful I think.

It's not a shift, it's always been this way. They never liked doing too many video reviews due to the effort involved for the output given. 

I generally prefer the Quick Looks. If I had to choose one or the other, definitely Quick Look. There have been some pretty great video reviews though. The Soul Caliber 4 review is one of my favorites. A little more "off the cuff" than just reading the written review while some clips play.

I prefer QL's. They are by far more entertaining, and as stated earlier, give a better impression of a game than a video review.

"Quick looks are way more fun than video reviews "

The video reviews consist of them reading their reviews for you. 

Reviews in general do very little for me.  Things that help me decide to buy a game, quick looks of them , and discussions on the bombcast. Also I can't think off the top of my head of a game I bought soley because I read a review of it. I welcome more quick looks and less video reviews.

I thought it was really cool to read the Alan Wake review and at the bottom was the handily placed QL for my viewing pleasure. I think the 1-2 punch of a full review and then a QL really represents and explains games well. 
 
Side note: I really really want to play Alan Wake now!

Quick looks are not reviews... how can you review a game with 15 - 30 mins of gameplay? If you played the first 15 mins of FF13 you would not have a clue how good or bad the game actually is. And that is how I feel about quicklooks, they are too brief, dont reflect the game as a whole product and are not accurate. 
I personally would rather the team play a whole game through, write a review or record a review... quick looks are very sloppy.
It also takes no skill apart from being entertaining to do a quick look at least reviews demand a solid writing style, understanding of game's and mechanics and some industry knowledge...

" Depends on the game.  For console games they're way better, because you will see everything there is to see in 20 - 30 minutes.  For a lot of (but not all by any means) PC games - take Warband for example - a QL is still great, but they're barely going to scratch the surface.  In these instances a traditional review (whether written or video) is still more useful I think. "

" Quick looks are way more fun than video reviews "

I found the video reviews pointless. It was usually exactly word-for-word what was written in the written review, except now someone else is reading it for you. It didn't tell you anything new. A Quick Look is a much more worthwhile endeavor, both for them and for us.
 
If you want a review, go read it.