• 196 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
#51 Posted by BaconGames (3129 posts) -

@KaneRobot said:

Yes I would care. Quite a bit.

Quick Looks are fun and at least most of the time informative, but they are not always representative of what the game actually is (see: Fez). Reviews are pretty much the only reason I still take this site seriously - without them, it's just a bunch of goofy videos. I know there have been some attempts to try to bring "serious journalism" in here and there but that has been really hit and miss with me. I value reviews here more than pretty much every other site because I have some familiarity with the reviewers themselves, which makes reviews much more worthwhile to me when it comes to interpreting their score & what they have to say about the game. I know other sites review everything, but I don't get a damn about what Joe Nobody at IGN or Gamespot or whoever has to say about a game. I may as well ask a total stranger at a Gamestop what they think of something, since I don't know anything about their tendencies and likes/dislikes either.

Nothing wrong with goofy videos, but it's easy to forget most of these guys have been covering games for over a decade now, it would be a total waste to not have reviews.

I also miss the occasional video reviews, but I guess that ship has sailed.

tl;dr summary: If you want reviews to go away, FUCK YOU, FACIST

Pretty much my feelings on the matter. I think the one way GB gets to get away with all the goofiness is precisely because they've got the experience and editorial clout to back it up. Bombcasts are an important supplement to reviews but I would rather have more, not less, with respect to discussion about video games.

#52 Edited by Fredchuckdave (4479 posts) -

Not in particular, it's not like that's going to happen though. What does Alex do with his time without reviews?

#53 Posted by SharkEthic (945 posts) -

@Video_Game_King: Oh, well, that's fair. As you were.

#54 Posted by MonkeyKing1969 (2265 posts) -

I like the reviews because they ARE NOT the typical unthinking schlock you find online. They rarely use freelancers, so they avoid the uncomfortable situation of having some outsider just providing a score "just because" there was and empty spot to fill. They don't review everything and they don't regurgitate the news on everything, and it it that selectivity that adds value. Their stance of reviewing or discussing what interest them, not what is expected from a site. Everything that appears here is HERE for a reason, even if they reason is "We choose to look at this and not that this week."

This week I really go a kick out of them talking about CoD BLOPs 2, that games has been out for months, only was mentioned once for GOTY...but because that was on their minds this week because someone was playing it they talked about it for 20 minutes.

#55 Edited by Chop (1963 posts) -

Nope, in fact it seems like a waste of their time at this point. When you consider what the bombcast does, it seems to me like reviews have become completely inferior and unnecessary.

#56 Posted by SomeJerk (2968 posts) -

Reviews have to stay, because when the government loses power and it's time to round up people to use as slaves and blood and organ resources we need 1000+ reply review posts.

#57 Posted by phantomzxro (1532 posts) -

I would not care because i really don't follow their reviews anyway. They often don't review all games and they have a narrow scope of what they cover and like. I feel the Bombcast and quick looks do a good job of saying if they like it and if its a good game.

I know it would be hard on a purely conceptual level to have a gaming website without reviews. So i don't know if i would actively push for it. I'm sure the guys have flirted with the idea but I'm sure business and bottom lines can get in the way with all that stuff.

#58 Posted by GrantHeaslip (1357 posts) -

I can’t remember if Jeff has commented on this before, but I would assume that reviews drive a bunch of traffic. Especially now that they’re owned by CBSi, they may not be in a position to just stop publishing reviews. You or I might not mind, but we’re (meaning those who actively participate) a pretty small minority of their audience.

#59 Posted by TheHT (10274 posts) -

Yeah. I like reading someone's thoughts when they've finished the game.

#60 Edited by mikeeegeee (1534 posts) -

As I'm sure others have probably said, a review is a lot like an essay. It takes time, and it forces the author to reflect and organize coherent thoughts and arguments. I respect the opinions expressed in reviews as fully formed, well thought-out arguments for or against a game. I take the opinions voiced in quicklooks with a grain of salt as they are frequently off-the-cuff, and sometimes half-baked.

Both are great, and I'd argue that there is a need for both.

#61 Posted by TheSouthernDandy (3627 posts) -

I wouldn't really care if they did, but I don't think they should stop. I'm still interested in what the dudes have to say about particular games and I'm sure they bring in traffic. Even the mess that the DmC review turned into provides a certain type of entertainment.

#62 Posted by Chemin (630 posts) -

No. Not really.

#63 Posted by dungbootle (2454 posts) -

I wouldn't want them to go away.

#64 Posted by Funkydupe (3293 posts) -

I enjoy the discussion, the arguments back and forth over a game that they do here more than the score that is tagged on at the end.

#65 Edited by Canteu (2814 posts) -

Nope. I don't read reviews in the first place.

These guys have different tastes to me, and a review has never influenced any purchasing decision of mine, and one probably never will.

#66 Posted by rentfn (1267 posts) -

I would. I've enjoy their writing for a long time and I'm afraid there wouldn't be any if reviews were gone. We get previews every now and then but I could see this turning into a mostly video site. So please keep doing reviews!!!

#67 Posted by believer258 (11043 posts) -

No, not really. I don't read them. I get all I need to know from their podcasts and Quick Looks, among other things.

However, if they want to keep publishing them then it won't bother me at all. Seems like reviews themselves are an exercise in putting down your thoughts of a game, something that their job pretty much requires (or seems to) anyway, so why not publish them as content?

#68 Posted by laserbolts (5309 posts) -

I wouldnt miss reviews.

#69 Posted by 49th (2543 posts) -

Nope I never read them. I look at the score and I used to sometimes watch the video reviews, now I just care more about word of mouth though.

#70 Posted by Kerned (1168 posts) -

Reviews aren't very valuable when compared to quick looks and podcast discussions. Quick looks give you a much better idea of how the game actually plays, and hearing a game discussed on the podcast gives you a range of viewpoints on a game's relative strengths and weaknesses.

On the other hand, the text of a review is just one person's narrow opinion and scores are essentially meaningless, not just on GB but everywhere. The only thing they are good for is starting arguments (see: anything, ever). Of course they are good for generating traffic too, which is good for the site (and therefore good for the readers), so I understand why scores and reviews aren't going anywhere soon.

#71 Posted by Khadyn (228 posts) -

I'd be fine with no reviews and stick to maybe longer quicklooks. The 5 Star rating system proves nothing except the person who decides on what that specific game deserves and honestly seems to ALWAYS cause some sort of hate or trolls. Doing maybe a write up giving information on the game through the game experience of one of the GB guys would be better with their pros/cons about that specific game. Then take that information and maybe do longer Quicklooks giving the community what they need to see based off gameplay, graphics or whatever else. Hell, I'd be fine with just opinions being brought up during podcasts as a review. Just PLEASE remove the 5 star rating..it just asks for worthless spam topics in the forums...

#72 Posted by Kear (109 posts) -

I wouldn't want them to stop doing reviews. I love all the other stuff GB can do to cover a game, it can be more entertaining and give me a broader view of a game. In the end I still want one of the staff members who has devoted their time to playing the game with the intent of reviewing it to sit down and give me their thoughts on how good the game is. Then I want them to give it 1 to 5 stars for the fanboys to argue about.

#73 Posted by jonnyboy (2920 posts) -

No. It's not why I come here.

#74 Posted by MetalGearGeorge (218 posts) -

Since GB is one of the few sites whose reviews i trust i think i would be a bit disappointed if the guys stopped writing them. However as many have pointed out before me Quicklooks prove to be way more useful than reviews.

#75 Posted by JZ (2125 posts) -

No, in fact if they stopped they could do waay more content. Also they would enjoy games more because they'd play what they actually want to.

#76 Posted by Cold_Wolven (2167 posts) -

Reviews definitely feel like they are apart of an old business model of reeling in users to the site that still look for reviews. The emphasis of Giant Bomb feels more towards video/audio content than anything else and is why I stick around for the Quick Looks as well as the Bombcast.

#77 Posted by notdavid (757 posts) -

I'm only here for quick looks and shenanigans. News and reviews are cool I guess, but I can get that stuff at other sites. No one else outside of the dark pits of YouTube is posting an hour of unedited Neverdead gameplay with insightful and humorous commentary.

#78 Posted by C0V3RT (1188 posts) -

I wouldn't care at all. Quick Looks and gameplay impressions from the Bombcast are way more valuable. The only thing reviews do for me now is give me something to point to when someone asks me about a game I'm not terribly familiar with.

#79 Posted by Turambar (6484 posts) -

A Quick Look gives you a good idea of what a game is like, but a review gives you a solid idea of what a member of the staff thinks of the entirety of the game, particularly for those that do not listen to Bombcasts. I personally would not care, but written reviews still serve a major purpose.

Video reviews went away because they served the same function of written reviews, but with a lot more time spent on editing. It didn't go away because reviews were no longer necessary.

#80 Posted by billyhoush (1187 posts) -

I enjoying reading. I'm not always in the mood to watch a video or listen to a podcast. Most of the crew has been writing reviews for ages so they are really good at it and I really like reading their thought out opinions.

#81 Posted by JZ (2125 posts) -

Also patrick can stop posting articles. I've never read a article on giantbomb in like five years. Now if it were a video of patrick just telling me the news I'd watch all of those.

#82 Posted by kishinfoulux (2077 posts) -

@Ravenlight said:

I get way more out of Quick Looks than I do out of reviews. It seems like the Bomb Crew keeps doing reviews because "everybody" knows that's what game sites do.

This. If they stopped I'd be all for it, especially if that time and effort went elsewhere.

Online
#83 Posted by Razorlution (180 posts) -

Meh, wouldn't care that much. I come to this site for the quick looks and quirky videos they do on games.

#84 Posted by Turtlebird95 (2143 posts) -

I'd be happy if they stayed but GB isn't my first stop for reviews.

#85 Posted by Snail (8469 posts) -

I like reading their stuff. So yes, I would mind. In fact, I want them to write more stuff for the site. Not necessarily just reviews though.

#86 Posted by Bocam (3551 posts) -

Do you want Alex to lose his job?

#87 Posted by Unequivocable (197 posts) -

The feeling I get is that for us folks in the GB community, reviews aren't as important because chances are through QLs and the Bombcast we're getting all that info anyway. But I think it's important to understand their value for people outside of the community. Reviews are a great 'gateway drug' that can bring people to the site who might then find lots of other neat reasons to stay.

Reviews are like poetry -- something i'm really not that interested in, but I'm glad it exists for others who care.

#88 Posted by Gaff (1492 posts) -

@LordXavierBritish: Picking out the last 4 reviews as an indication of "how random and infrequent they are" (DmC, Family Guy, FarCry 3 and Adventure Time) seems a bit unfair since nothing interesting was released between now and Thanksgiving 2012. Which happens every year, oddly enough. And that would explain why most sites, heck publishers and developers too, take a break for the holidays.

And I should probably clarify "interesting" as "noteworthy, not a port of an existing game, nor catering towards some incredibly niche audience.

And I wouldn't be surprised if the metrics (page hits, comments) show that GB reviews are still the main reason most people come to the site. Maybe not for you specifically, but still.

#89 Posted by Winternet (7936 posts) -

Not really, I already know if a game is good or not from osmosis.

#90 Posted by 2HeadedNinja (1447 posts) -

I would be fine with no more reviews ... I know what kind of games I like and overall quicklooks to more than any written piece to show me if a specific game is for me or not. To make a decision I need good footage of a game. I bought more than one game based on a quicklook, I never bought a game based on a review. Usually reviews are only there for the bigger games anyways. And lets be honest: I don't need a review to know if I like Assassins Creed 3 or Black Ops 2 ... reviews are only there to start flamewars (points to the DmC review).

If not doing reviews gave them more time to do videos on games or overall dumb stuff ... get rid of them.

We get plenty of opinion from the crew out of the Bombcast and the Quicklooks.

#91 Edited by 2HeadedNinja (1447 posts) -

@kalibr said:

Keeping reviews and getting rid of scores would be cool for me. Video reviews are nice too but it doesnt look like there are gonna be any more of those.

... also that: Get rid of the damn score ... It has no purpose.

#92 Posted by coakroach (2478 posts) -

Nope.

#93 Posted by Abendlaender (2597 posts) -

Even though I pretty much get every information I need from the Bombcast or Quicklooks I still enjoy reading reaviews (especially Brad's). If this is a question of "If we don't do reviews any more, we would do more video stuff instead" I'd say "Okay". But if it's just "We wont do reviews any more but nothing else changes" I'd be disapointed. A bit.

#94 Posted by Ben_H (3200 posts) -

Go for it. I never read them anyway. I get far more out of a quick look than a review. You can tell by how interested they are if it is a good game. If they seem bored I probably will be too.

#95 Posted by HeyImPhoenix (169 posts) -

Quick looks are better but it's always nice to have both.

#96 Posted by frankfartmouth (1016 posts) -

I wouldn't care. I don't really give much of a shit about reviews anymore. That used to be the primary reason I went to gaming sites, but I hardly pay attention anymore.

I guess I wouldn't mind if they kept them up. I do glance at them from time to time. But if they axed them, it wouldn't change my view of the site at all.

#97 Posted by jimmyfenix (3680 posts) -

for me quick looks do better justice for a game then a review

#98 Edited by Willtron (238 posts) -

The way reviews are approached, in games journalism, in general, needs to change. But they're still relevant. I can see an argument for scores being a thing of the past. However, a lot of people honestly just look at review scores and move on without ever looking at the bulk of a review--the text. Though reviews are not Giant Bomb's bread and butter, so to speak, everyone on the crew still ought to do them. They're still relevant to consumers, and act as a supplement to a quick look--opinions can change from the quick look, too. I also think reviews are a good way to hold someone to of their opinion on a game. If someone's going to champion a game as game of the year, or call it complete shit, I wanna know why, and a review will give me that context.

Also, I think the staff are among some of the best games journalists in the field, and I generally, really enjoy their writing styles. They've all got a distinct voice, and their reviews are just enjoyable to read. Even if I don't give a fuck about a game and have no intention of buying it, I'll still read reviews from the guys, simply to see their writing style. And speaking of style, I wanna see more articles from Jeff like the BlazBlue on the beta site. That was a fun read.

#99 Posted by Brendan (7512 posts) -

Everyone says that they don't care about reviews, but reviews get the highest traffic on gaming sites, including Giantbomb (as said by Jeff) and I bet that most of you read them whether you "care" or not.

#100 Posted by rabbithearted (66 posts) -

I personally find the reviews helpful if I'm on the fence about a game, and they provide a certain type of reflection that QuickLooks lack--I tend to view QuickLooks for amusement, because the guys are funny and have good personalities, and reviews for whether or not I REALLY want a game. There are time swhen this isn't true, of course, but a lot of the times it is. It probably helps that I don't really favor one type of game over another.

I enjoy most of the articles, actually. Except Patrick's "Worth Reading". I don't get the Patrick hate, but, man, those read like someone's bored tumblr posts.