• 196 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
#101 Posted by CaLe (4056 posts) -

@Brendan said:

and I bet that most of you read them whether you "care" or not.

I really don't get why you would think this. Even if it's a game I'm interested in I don't read the review...

#102 Posted by bkbroiler (1642 posts) -

Yes, I would care a lot. I think reviews are what they're best at. I enjoy reading the opinion of someone who has completed a game and given thought into putting it into text. I can't watch every single quick look, but I certainly read every review. I would like more reviews, actually. Especially since they come from people I feel I know, and I can gauge my own reaction to the game.

#103 Posted by LordXavierBritish (6320 posts) -

@Bocam said:

Do you want Alex to lose his job?

I'm not required to answer that.

#104 Posted by Tylea002 (2295 posts) -

Not one bit.

#105 Posted by MightyMayorMike (423 posts) -

Throwing my name in the hat of people who would care. I followed Jeff and company after Gamespot because of the reviews they write. I'll say that I'm looking for game criticism in a review and not purchasing advice, and I think the Giant Bomb crew does a good job with that.

#106 Posted by DoctorWelch (2765 posts) -

GB reviews are pointless because they use the same structure as all reviews in that they are purchasing advice. When, realistically, a QL is better purchasing advice than any written review ever could be.

#107 Posted by MeierTheRed (4941 posts) -

Don't care about the reviews or the score they put on them.

#108 Posted by chilibean_3 (1698 posts) -

I would like them to keep putting out written reviews. I find them to be pretty helpful and another thing to use in helping me with my purchasing decision as well as a good way to come across games I hadn't expected to care about. Video reviews? Meh.

#109 Posted by doobie (605 posts) -

you can simple pretend that GB don't do reviews by just no paying any fucking attention to them

#110 Posted by Benny (1955 posts) -

There was a reddit post today about the stupid Dead Island thing and someone asked what an example of a reliable video games review site was and the top voted comment is Giant Bomb. I think review integrity and credibility is a big part of the appeal of the site. There are plenty of people who want that level of critique when it comes to games but are completely disgusted by the way IGN and Machinima go about their business.

#111 Posted by PenguinDust (12641 posts) -

I like Quick Looks and the stuff they talk about on the podcast. I don't read the reviews on this site too often or I should say, I don't read the staff's reviews. I like the stuff from the community.

#112 Posted by gamefreak9 (2419 posts) -

Yes. While quick looks are good for peaking interest, I don't have the go ahead until I see that they liked all their time with it. Also its much easier to go back to that stuff.

#113 Edited by Grixxel (773 posts) -

Nope. I come here for quick looks, bombcasts and the ocassional article. Could care less about the actual reviews.

#114 Posted by JZ (2120 posts) -

@Brendan you'd be amazed how easy it is to not read something.

#115 Posted by Hailinel (25205 posts) -

@Mesoian said:

I wouldn't mind...but I like seeing them.

I would almost prefer if it they just ditched their points system and did something similar to (shock) what Kotaku was doing a few years ago before they went back to their numbered review system, and just gave the pluses and minuses about each game after a detailed write up. Numbers obscure things in such a dumb way.

The reason Kotaku moved away from that system is because people kept misinterpreting the number of pluses/minuses as a scoring metric.

#116 Posted by BillyTheKid (486 posts) -

I would care because it is one more voice in the plethora of reviews I read for games, and gives me a good understanding of what I am getting. Though it is a good point that I think more is said in the Podcast and the Quick Looks then is usually said in a review.

#117 Edited by AlexW00d (6449 posts) -

I don't ever read the reviews tbh. I only come here for entertainment, not writing.

#118 Posted by Mesoian (1574 posts) -

@Hailinel said:

@Mesoian said:

I wouldn't mind...but I like seeing them.

I would almost prefer if it they just ditched their points system and did something similar to (shock) what Kotaku was doing a few years ago before they went back to their numbered review system, and just gave the pluses and minuses about each game after a detailed write up. Numbers obscure things in such a dumb way.

The reason Kotaku moved away from that system is because people kept misinterpreting the number of pluses/minuses as a scoring metric.

Ugh...people are so dumb...

#119 Posted by Oombalan (81 posts) -

Yes, a lot

#120 Posted by DeF (4979 posts) -

Nope, I wouldn't miss reviews on GB one bit. We get the same information via Quick Looks or the Bombcast and the only potentially useful thing about reviews is that you can read them or quote them easily if you need to. I don't care for scores either so ... yea.

#121 Posted by MikkaQ (10344 posts) -

I would care a lot. Giantbomb's reviews matter to me because I've spent so much time watching their videos, seeing their personalities and consuming their content, that I know what the individual editors' tastes are. This makes their reviews more meaningful to me because I can weigh it against how they'd rate similar games and I have a better idea about the quality of the game without having played it.

If they stopped reviewing games, I would have to spend years leaning about other fucking reviewers and I don't have the time or desire. I've been following some of these cats for over a decade now and I wouldn't really like to establish a new "base of trust" with other reviewers.

It's like when you were reading a gaming magazine for years on end. You knew how certain editors felt about certain kinds of games and you would balance their reviews accordingly.

#122 Posted by phrosnite (3518 posts) -

No. I have disagreed with their reviews so many times in the past that I don't care any more.

#123 Posted by AlmostSwedish (637 posts) -

@MikkaQ said:

I would care a lot. Giantbomb's reviews matter to me because I've spent so much time watching their videos, seeing their personalities and consuming their content, that I know what the individual editors' tastes are. This makes their reviews more meaningful to me because I can weigh it against how they'd rate similar games and I have a better idea about the quality of the game without having played it.

If they stopped reviewing games, I would have to spend years leaning about other fucking reviewers and I don't have the time or desire. I've been following some of these cats for over a decade now and I wouldn't really like to establish a new "base of trust" with other reviewers.

It's like when you were reading a gaming magazine for years on end. You knew how certain editors felt about certain kinds of games and you would balance their reviews accordingly.

You don't feel that the QLs and the podcast fills the same role?

#124 Posted by ShockD (2421 posts) -

Yes. I prefer reading the reviews when I consider buying a game.

#125 Posted by markini6 (452 posts) -

Nope, not at all. The guys are great at what they do, but their respective levels of writing just aren't at the level of quality I expect, in order to treat them seriously. The quick looks and podcast are much better, casual and relaxed formats for them to express their opinions.

#126 Posted by MikkaQ (10344 posts) -

@AlmostSwedish said:

@MikkaQ said:

I would care a lot. Giantbomb's reviews matter to me because I've spent so much time watching their videos, seeing their personalities and consuming their content, that I know what the individual editors' tastes are. This makes their reviews more meaningful to me because I can weigh it against how they'd rate similar games and I have a better idea about the quality of the game without having played it.

If they stopped reviewing games, I would have to spend years leaning about other fucking reviewers and I don't have the time or desire. I've been following some of these cats for over a decade now and I wouldn't really like to establish a new "base of trust" with other reviewers.

It's like when you were reading a gaming magazine for years on end. You knew how certain editors felt about certain kinds of games and you would balance their reviews accordingly.

You don't feel that the QLs and the podcast fills the same role?

No, gut reactions and discussion can only go so far. I like a written piece that formalizes their thoughts into something more coherent.

#127 Posted by triviaman09 (804 posts) -

A little bit. Long form video like the quick looks will always be the main draw, but I enjoy reading GB reviews.

#128 Posted by TobbRobb (4852 posts) -

No I never read reviews. I think they add more to the site then they detract and we should probably not make them leave. But I personally wouldn't miss them.

#129 Posted by redbliss (648 posts) -

Reviews are important for more than just business reasons. Reviews offer a quicker, easier way of finding facts and opinions on games that quick looks do not. It is much easier to find an opinion or a fact on the game in a review than it is in a quick look. For example, it might be that if there is a lot of backtracking in a game that you wont want to buy it, but something like that might not be mentioned until 20 or 30 minutes into a quick look whereas that would be something you could find in 5 minutes of skimming through a written review.

Personally, I would like to see giant bomb get back to doing video reviews. I know those take much more time to produce and maybe with the time it takes to produce video reviews it isnt worth doing them, but it was nice to have a video to watch that summarized the review.

#130 Posted by Grillbar (1914 posts) -

i really never read a review i watch quicklooks, not only do i get to see if the game is for me but its also more indepth for me listening to what they say. and if im still on the fence about the game it would most likely be mentioned on the bombcast where i get more insight if needed.

i think reviews are now more for people who dont follow games or this site and just need some insight. but at the same time i think you really need to know something about the persons taste and so on to know if you can use there review to mirror your taste

no review have made me go out and buy a game but a ton of QL. discussions have that i would not have bought otherwise e.i asura's wrath, far cry 3, crusader kings 2 and black ops 2 just to name a few

but i dont think they need to go away or anything like that its there for the people who want that. for me ill just take everything else.

allthrough i would really love more video reviews since i really like those. but not at the cost of something else

#131 Posted by DizzyMedal (400 posts) -

Reviews are an important part of why I come here, but I would still stay if they went away.

#132 Posted by GnaTSoL (836 posts) -

They're worthless (the reviews). I remember in the gamespot days, these guys would go multi-page in-depth on these games. Go over everything to the smallest detail. They go over a lot in quick looks but most of the time they go in sooo green on games that actual solid info is sometimes lacking. But they don't care cause this site focuses on natural comedy through them playing their games..... blind in some cases...

And i love it. :D

#133 Posted by DarthOrange (3909 posts) -

Reviews bring new users to the site who check out the metacritic for a game and maybe get hooked on the site.

#134 Posted by datarez (575 posts) -

I'd like to see reviews change but not go away. I'd like them to be a paragraph of this game is good, bad, ok and I think you should wait, buy it or stay away. That should all be above the fold. Then I would love for the reviews of the game to be full on spoiled. Talk about each part of a game without worrying about spoiling it. Spoilercasts are great but the GB crew doesn't seem to be that into them. I enjoy it when they talk and discuss the oh wow moments in a game and unfortunately those are all only in the game of the year podcasts right now. I'd like to see more of that discussion throughout the year.

#135 Posted by Stimpack (911 posts) -

Written reviews are a big part of this site in my opinion. They're never going to get rid of the written reviews anyway, so...

#136 Posted by MentalDisruption (1670 posts) -

I would care. Some reviews here have led me to buying games that I would have ignored otherwise. I feel like they work well together with the quick looks. Usually I watch a quick look just to pass time, and if the game looks interesting I read the review (if there is one) to get a more in depth idea on whether or not I should buy the game.

#137 Posted by s10129107 (1213 posts) -

No, as long as they finished the game before the quick-look and used that to evaluate the game.

#138 Posted by illegalnull (110 posts) -

I rarely read the reviews, spend much more time watching quick looks, reading news articles, listening to the bombcast... so no, I don't think I'd miss reviews if they vanished from GB.

#139 Posted by Little_Socrates (5718 posts) -

Reviews are meaningful because it means somebody on the Giant Bomb staff will make a legitimate effort to play a given game to completion, guaranteed, and that's extremely meaningful. People complain often that "the staff didn't play/finish ______." It's nice to have something that guarantees someone will complete a recent and important game.

It's also a waaaaay faster way to get somebody's perspective on a game than three twenty-minute conversations on three separate three hour Bombcasts and a Game of the Year podcast plus a forty-minute quick look. I have enough time for the podcasts, but I've been behind on Quick Looks for months.

Also, I'm only okay with this at all if they stop playing spoilery sections of games in Quick Looks. I still haven't watched the Assassin's Creed III QL because it's in, like Chapter 9 of the game and contains massive spoilers. Though I'm not playing that game anymore, so I guess I could go back.

#140 Posted by Godlyawesomeguy (6403 posts) -

It wouldn't be absolutely life-shattering, but I definitely prefer having them as they have the context of having a guy who has beaten the game and has formed an educated opinion on the game. Are they essential to the life of the site? No, but it's no question that they are definitely important.

#141 Posted by Sin4profit (3003 posts) -

Nnn'ope

Quick Looks and Lets Plays are the new review systems these days. You can watch someone play something and get a better idea of whether it's for you or not then listening to someone's opinion of a game. Mix that with the open discussion about the GB crew's experience with any given game on the Bombcast and reviews just seem unnecessary.

Only other thing to consider,GB's reviews tend to make their way outside of the Giant Bomb web site so having an official review out there may lead someone unfamiliar with the site here.

#142 Edited by Zomgfruitbunnies (889 posts) -

I don't come to GB for game reviews.

I come for the shenanigans.

And they do bloody good shenanigans.

But the site probably wouldn't last for very long if all they did was shenanigans.

#143 Posted by MEATBALL (3507 posts) -

I think they're an important part of the process for the site and feed into podcasts and quick looks, I don't care a whole lot about reviews, but do think it's important that Giant Bomb continue to do them. I don't know how many games they'd play to completion if they didn't have to review them, beyond the stuff that immediately appeals to them. If Giant Bomb didn't do reviews we probably wouldn't see stuff like Brad playing games he doesn't expect to like and being pleasantly surprised by them (like Asura's Wrath, or the most recent/obvious example, DmC)

#144 Posted by audioBusting (1649 posts) -

I understand that writing reviews is an important process for GB but I never read them so I wouldn't care. I get enough from the quick looks and podcasts.

#145 Posted by Darson (448 posts) -

I don't think I've ever read a single review here.

#146 Posted by MyNiceIceLife (635 posts) -

I like reviews in the sense that you might see something in a quick look that looks awesome or hear that they are really enjoying the game so far, but then end up having issues with it in the end. most of the time their reviews line up with the quick look, but sometimes they don't. It's still nice to have reviews, but if they'd magically disappear I don't think i'd be heart broken over it as long as the quick looks were around and maybe go even more into some of the games.

#147 Posted by BulletproofMonk (2733 posts) -

@Branthog said:

Of course, I would care. A Quick Look only gives you a 30-60 minute snip at the beginning of the game. I'd like to know the thoughts and context of an entire game from someone who has played it and whose style and taste I've come to know.

Exactly.

#148 Posted by RJPelonia (863 posts) -

Yes.

#149 Posted by crusader8463 (14429 posts) -

I would prefer it as it would free them up to do other stuff. I never read reviews because I see no point. I have been playing games long enough to know if I want to play the game or not from a QL, and if there's any serious problems with the game that go past a QL they would talk about it on the podcast or in other videos. TNT's tend to turn into mini bombcasts in the last half when the guys get bored with the game they are playing and just talk about stuff. Plus I just never get anything from reviews. I have never found someone that shares the same interest in games that I do, so reading someones opinion of a game doesn't do anything for me. I have gone back and read reviews many people have done after I was done with a game and I have yet to find a review that I agreed with in any kind of capacity.

#150 Posted by Christoffer (1923 posts) -

I don't find Quick Looks as useful as many others around here. They're good to loosely show off what the game is about. But the outcome is often too influenced by how much they care about the title or the genre, even their mood of the day. Not to say I still don't enjoy Quick Looks.

I still want more detailed and thoughtful opinions on the games. Meaning the whole games, not just their first impressions after spending 30 minutes with it. There are, of course, more fleshed out Quick Looks that are made after they've finished it (like DmC). Those are always great.

But don't get rid of reviews. Some people still care about them.