• 126 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by sungahymn (986 posts) -


#2 Edited by sungahymn (986 posts) -

Simple question: what do you think of the new video player?

I think it's great.

EDIT: Except when it times out on me.

#3 Posted by UnrealDP (1221 posts) -

Eh, it's fine. Not much of a problem or really all that different.

#4 Posted by yoshimitz707 (2450 posts) -

The bar is way too big and ugly! So I switched to the HTML5 since GB just uses your browser's own thing for that.

#5 Posted by Hizang (8534 posts) -

It's fine, I don't get why everybody gets mad at video players. I mean once you've clicked play it all goes away anyway.

#6 Posted by SlightConfuse (3963 posts) -

i ahve been using HTML 5 but i dont like the look

#7 Posted by President_Barackbar (3434 posts) -

I think its totally fine, I don't really notice it all that much.

Online
#8 Posted by two_socks (223 posts) -

It's been fine so far.

#9 Posted by NapTimeSleeper (329 posts) -

It works just fine for me.

#10 Posted by Monkeyman04 (1009 posts) -

It's fine. I just don't like the fact that every time I want to watch a video I have to change the quality settings even though I have HD selected before I press play.

#11 Posted by emem (1961 posts) -

Do you guys not see the difference in video quality? Maybe my monitor is broken, hmm.

#12 Posted by holybins (155 posts) -

@Monkeyman04 said:

It's fine. I just don't like the fact that every time I want to watch a video I have to change the quality settings even though I have HD selected before I press play.

Same here. Hopefully this is a bug they fix eventually (soon?).

#13 Posted by mak_wikus (503 posts) -

@emem said:

Do you guys not see the difference in video quality? Maybe my monitor is broken, hmm.
#14 Posted by g6065 (271 posts) -

All good here.

#15 Posted by Canteu (2821 posts) -

The quality is poor and it is broken in several ways, but Dave is working to fix the issues.

#16 Posted by HandsomeMuffin (109 posts) -

HTML5 is the only real player.

#17 Posted by Szlifier (479 posts) -
@emem: Yes. There is no resampling or filtering when in fullscreen wihich suggests unfinished code. This shouldn't work this way. I don't understand how any website engineer could allow this to be like that. Abomination.
#18 Posted by Sanj (2353 posts) -

It's good, but I do wish it allowed for changing quality settings without resetting the video. Also, I wish there was an option to switch to streaming rather than progressive.

#19 Posted by ZeForgotten (10397 posts) -
@Szlifier said:
@emem: Yes. There is no resampling or filtering when in fullscreen wihich suggests unfinished code. This shouldn't work this way. I don't understand how any website engineer could allow this to be like that. Abomination.
Dave is working on it
Online
#20 Posted by NoobSauceG7 (1233 posts) -

It's fine but I don't like not being able to skip ahead.

#21 Posted by Szlifier (479 posts) -
@ZeForgotten said:
@Szlifier said:
@emem: Yes. There is no resampling or filtering when in fullscreen wihich suggests unfinished code. This shouldn't work this way. I don't understand how any website engineer could allow this to be like that. Abomination.
Dave is working on it
Fantastic. I didn't see it on his list and was afraid it isn't considered as a real issue.
#22 Posted by ZeForgotten (10397 posts) -
@Szlifier said:
@ZeForgotten said:
@Szlifier said:
@emem: Yes. There is no resampling or filtering when in fullscreen wihich suggests unfinished code. This shouldn't work this way. I don't understand how any website engineer could allow this to be like that. Abomination.
Dave is working on it
Fantastic. I didn't see it on his list and was afraid it isn't considered as a real issue.
Just send him a message with the bugs you find, even if he's heard it before he needs to hear them again and again.  
Also, it makes it seem like he has friends when people see that his inbox is filled with messages :P 
Online
#23 Posted by LAMP (160 posts) -

Bummer that I can't skip ahead and that changing video quality causes the file to restart, but I couldn't change the video quality mid-video at all before, so that's a step up. Also, haven't had any issues with buffering yet, so that's a marked improvement. So it's fine, because great to me implies being wowed and my reaction was more "oh, okay, neat."

#24 Posted by Vexxan (4615 posts) -

Major improvement compared to the old one for streaming/progressive which were very slow or not working at all for some videos for me.

#25 Edited by emem (1961 posts) -
@ZeForgotten said:

@Szlifier said:

@ZeForgotten said:
@Szlifier said:
@emem: Yes. There is no resampling or filtering when in fullscreen wihich suggests unfinished code. This shouldn't work this way. I don't understand how any website engineer could allow this to be like that. Abomination.
Dave is working on it
Fantastic. I didn't see it on his list and was afraid it isn't considered as a real issue.
Just send him a message with the bugs you find, even if he's heard it before he needs to hear them again and again.  Also, it makes it seem like he has friends when people see that his inbox is filled with messages :P 
If that's the case, why hasn't Gamespot changed/fixed it after what feels like years? They had a different player not too long ago (I think), but there has been that terrible video quality for a very long time and it's actually one of the main reasons why I don't watch videos on Gamespot.
#26 Posted by ZeForgotten (10397 posts) -
@emem said:
@ZeForgotten said:
@Szlifier said:
@ZeForgotten said:
@Szlifier said:
@emem: Yes. There is no resampling or filtering when in fullscreen wihich suggests unfinished code. This shouldn't work this way. I don't understand how any website engineer could allow this to be like that. Abomination.
Dave is working on it
Fantastic. I didn't see it on his list and was afraid it isn't considered as a real issue.
Just send him a message with the bugs you find, even if he's heard it before he needs to hear them again and again.  Also, it makes it seem like he has friends when people see that his inbox is filled with messages :P 
If that's the case, why hasn't Gamespot changed/fixed it after what feels like years? They had a different player not too long ago (I think), but there has been that terrible video quality for a very long time and it's one of the main reasons why I don't watch videos on Gamespot.
I will ask around the office and see why we at Gamespot haven't changed it yet... Wait a minute, I don't work a Gamespot. 
Maybe it's because they don't have their own Dave? (face it, nobody does) and now that he's in the same building that one will get fixed too? 
Online
#27 Posted by emem (1961 posts) -
@ZeForgotten: Well, I would assume that it either has to be a bigger problem which takes more time to fix (I'm having a hard time believing that) or people don't see a difference in video quality and no one has complained about it before. It's not about the site GS, but about the fact that videos have been offered to people with that same quality for a long time and it hasn't changed... I was just wondering why?
#28 Posted by Humanity (8814 posts) -

@NoobSauceG7 said:

It's fine but I don't like not being able to skip ahead.

MY biggest issue with it as well.

#29 Posted by Abendlaender (2764 posts) -

There is a new player?

I dunno, I hit "play" and the video starts. What's new about it?

#30 Posted by predator (349 posts) -

Indifferent because it's not Gnash compatible. Youtube HTML5 WebM player for me, and downloading for premium videos.

#31 Posted by ElixirBronze (417 posts) -

Granted top men will eventually work out the issues present right now, I think it's great. It feels way faster than the old one.

#32 Posted by web966 (87 posts) -

The progress bar is to big

#33 Posted by RockAction (376 posts) -

its great, i use safari on mac and had problems with youtube freezing the browser for videos longer than 5 or 10 minutes* so for quick looks i had to open chrome to watch

it wasn't a problem just slightly inconvenient, the new player loads perfectly in safari so i'm happy with it

*not to derail the thread, but, anyone else having this problem?

#34 Posted by alternate (2682 posts) -

Missed the option for - give it a few weeks to work out the bugs before grabbing the pitchforks.

#35 Posted by Sign (291 posts) -

I use the HTML5 version so I didn't even notice they had changed it until I saw 3-4 threads spring up. In that regard I have no problem with it, but I can certainly see why people take issue with it given the post by Dave of the problems they are looking into. I am sure it will be fine once they get those issues sorted though.

#36 Posted by BruceLeet (51 posts) -

Annoying that it wont default to 720p when I have "HD" selected before I press play. I hate having to press stuff twice!

#37 Posted by yoshisaur (2648 posts) -

Wow, didn't even realize it was there until I looked at this thread. I usually keep it on HTML5, but after seeing this I switched. The HTML5 video UI doesn't disappear unless you take your mouse completely off the page, and I don't like the full screen option it gives you. Does have some work to go, though, but I have faith in Dave!

#38 Edited by bybeach (4725 posts) -

It sucks and I feel a rage coming on.

seriously, it doesn't work for me

#39 Posted by JYoung (151 posts) -

I miss mousing over the progress bar and being able to see the time, if I'm continuing to watch a video from before.

#40 Posted by Robo (773 posts) -

HTML5 for me. I don't really care what other player they offer.

#41 Posted by Lucidquasar (22 posts) -

From the radio show discussion I had thought they might add a player that would incorporate user comments along the progress bar that highlighted specific times of the video, similar to what soundcloud does for their audio player. My only gripe with the player is not being able to jump to any time of the video without it fully downloaded, with longer videos there really needs to be that option. Other than that it seems fine.

#42 Posted by Demoskinos (14563 posts) -

Where's the "I use HTML5 so I dont give a fuck" option?

#43 Posted by Still_I_Cry (2494 posts) -

I didn't even notice.

#44 Edited by Vyper (109 posts) -

Along with other things people have said. My biggest annoyance would be the fact that the fullsize button is to the left of the quality (which is far right). On other players like youtube, the fullscreen is on the far right.

I feel like this is an internal GB joke, like how the xbox controller switched around the colors on their controllers lol, but it still annoys me.

#45 Posted by Bourbon_Warrior (4523 posts) -

the last one they had was terrible. All premium videos would take forever to buffer that i would just download the file instead

#46 Posted by Quarters (1632 posts) -

Seems fine. Same basic thing as the previous one. Haven't had any difference, really.

#47 Posted by MordeaniisChaos (5730 posts) -

@ZeForgotten said:

@Szlifier said:
@emem: Yes. There is no resampling or filtering when in fullscreen wihich suggests unfinished code. This shouldn't work this way. I don't understand how any website engineer could allow this to be like that. Abomination.
Dave is working on it

Really? Because Gamespot had it like that for evvvvvvvver. As someone who watches HD on a big monitor, fullscreen, it looks fucking awful, even in HD. Anything else is just impossible to watch in fullscreen.

There was nothing wrong with the old player. Changing quality midstream seems like a totally useless thing, but I guess it would be handy if you have really spotty internet and need to turn it down? I would just put it at progressive/download it and be patient but that's just me. I don't see why they felt the need to change.

@yoshimitz707 said:

The bar is way too big and ugly! So I switched to the HTML5 since GB just uses your browser's own thing for that.

This another issue. That bar is so fucking fat. Luckily I'm on a 1920x1200 monitor so it mostly fits in the black bar, but it's way too big. Sadly HTML5 doesn't work in my browser. Although I'm not sure why, I had no issues with Chrome before, I thought they had been going back on that whole "we hate HTML5 videos despite supporting HTML5" crap.

#48 Posted by Ketchupp (672 posts) -

I'm astonished by the results!

#49 Posted by atomic_dumpling (2458 posts) -

It plays videos. It is fine.

#50 Posted by BrockNRolla (1702 posts) -

I would say it's fine, but given that it's currently broken to only allow "progressive," I'm going to have to say the last one was better.