Would You Like More Reviews?

Yes, actually. A review theoretically keeps them on pace to have something worth discussing in the first week.

I think Alex is a fantastic writer so I'm always glad when he writes something up. Jeff and Brad, too.

I don't go to GB for the writing, so I don't really mind the lack of reviews. Alex is the only one on staff whose stuff I really enjoy reading.

The quality of the talk about games on the Bombcast has gone dramatically down since Vinny left, though, and last week's podcast with him and Alex really showed what it should be vs what it is now.

The only reason I like reviews anymore is to watch fanboys lose their shit in the comments when a game in their beloved genre or franchise gets a score lower than they thought it deserved.

I kind of go both ways. On one hand, I agree with you that spending a couple hours with a game is not enough to thoroughly critique a game. A lot of baseless assumptions and simply wrong information occasionally can cause them to dismiss games which can be frustrating. On the other hand, I don't necessarily think rushing through the critical path of every game in order to finish it in time to write a review is a great thing either. Especially when more and more games today come out with day one patches that "complete" the game

I've never really put much stock in review scores anyway. I know what I like and I don't need a score to validate my purchases. I think it would be nice to see some write-ups of games without scores, though. If one of the crew felt passionate enough about a game to write about it, I think it would be an interesting read. Not really a critical review, but just their thoughts about it.

@ejc93: I'm with you on that. Too frequently it ends up being Jeff and Brad going back and forth, and they generally have the same taste so the discussion can become stale and repetitive. Dan sort of fades into the background halfway through every bombcast. Needs more Jason. And/or a GBeast podcast.

Truth be told, I generally get a good enough impression of their opinions on a game on the Bombcast and in Quicklooks, but I enjoy a more in depth review on stuff.

No, but I'd like a portal on the front page showing new reviews from users. To be honest the GB crew's time is probably better spent.

While I would appreciate more writing from the crew, particularly from guys like Brad and Alex who are quite good at it, I don't really come to this site for reviews. I get what I need about a game via QLs and podcasts.

@geraltitude: This is a really good idea. The user review feature is something I've never really explored and it would be really cool if it was made more prominent on the site. I would like to read some duders opinions on current games.

I've read enough Jeff Gerstmann, Brad Shoemaker, and Alex Navarro reviews in my life that when a game comes out I can sort of predict what they're going to think about it. There will always be exceptions for sure (the most contemporary one being Jeff and Bloodborne), but when there are I get to hear those opinions on the BombCast, UPF, or in the Quick Look for the game. I do really like the formalized review and I think it still has it's place, maybe just not as a major thing on Giant Bomb considering the type of content to produce.

I enjoy learning about a perspective on a game that is informed, especially from one of the guys here. Seeing a video of a slice of a game being played for the first time doesn't give me perspective on a game like a review does. I also agree with the above comment that reviews by the staff help guide Bombcasts a bit, and strengthen discussion of them. I would like more reviews.

Not in the way reviews are typically written. I don't need an essay about the game, I just want the short answer. Did you like the game? "Yeah, it was good. Great gameplay and atmosphere. Fun story, albeit hokey at times. No game crashes. 4/5." That, and a video showing the game in action, is literally all I need.

So, I picked "No" for the poll.

Never cared for reviews.

The only thing I like about them, is when people lose their shit, when their beloved franchise gets a lower score than they think it deserves. BEFORE they've even played it!!
It's like watching those few 'fail army' videos where you get to see someone really, really stupid people get hurt. Similar joy.

If they can do a quick look, and sum up their opinion there, then I don't really care. I wouldn't mind though if one of them said what they'd give it in stars though. I like scores and stuff, just because I'm used to it. Their opinions are great to hear, though I don't always agree, so the score or opinion in detail hardly matter to me in the sense that it'll sway me to get something or not, it's just stuff I like to hear because it brings discussion out on a game. So no, if they did quick looks that were in place of reviews, that'd be fine by me. Maybe a score to go along with it. Their writing integrity or what have you can go to the articles they write; you can't really lose that part of the job I feel. I didn't choose any, because while I think, at least on Giant Bomb they're not really needed in the form they currently are, I'd still like to see reviews of some sort.

No, I listen to the Bombcast weekly, watch a lot of the Quick Looks, and tune in UPF weekly where they sometimes talk about current games. Honestly, if I am going to allocate time for reading, it won't be a video game review. I'm good with there being very few written reviews.

I wouldn't my a few more reviews but it would be cool if games just had a spiel from a few duders on the site just in case someone connects more with one guy than another

No, not really. It's a personality site. That never shines through in their reviews. Wouldn't mind more writing, though.

Whether people like reading them or not is irrelevant the point is that they allow the reviewer to put his thoughts down in a structured manner. Which will have knock on effects in their future discussions too. I personally don't always have time to listen to the bombcast so I appreciate the reviews. Honestly with 3-5 quick looks a week I don't think I can keep up and judge everything comparatively.

That said, i'm usually a year or two behind in actually playing games so I use the GOTY lists as guidelines. Though I can't keep up in playing top 20 games of the year nowadays I can probably still play top 5-6 games every year(with the two year lag).

Yes - with a caveat. Video reviews, or really any well produced and fancy looking content would be nice. I like seeing the crew put on their professional/scripted-video hats.

I feel like years ago when I tended to be less informed about gaming, I was more into the "skim a review, make my mind up about a game, buy it." These days I typically tend to hear about games on the bombcast, they tend to be games that I'd already know I'd like, and if I'm unsure I'm satisfied with the QL.

There's probably a somewhat younger audience that still goes to the internet for a review, but I figure they're probably going to check gamespot, or IGN, or some better-known site, rather than GB.

I voted no - my actual opinion is complete ambivalence. I enjoy them, but they have so many opportunities to express their opinion on games across this site, that It's always fairly clear where they stand.

I still enjoy reading a review - especially as I think all the guys here are great writers who I enjoy reading text pieces from.

But honestly I don't think I actually benefit in the intended way from a review. Theoretically, they're purchasing advice - but we live in a world where you never have to rely on a review for purchasing advice because there are so many ways to see a game in action for yourself prior to and after release. Throw in their bombcast discussions (and other podcasts I listen to) and I pretty much know where I stand on anything. I can't think of any time in the past few years where I was unsure whether or not I wanted to buy a game by the time it released, or if I was interested but wanted to wait for a sale on it even.

So I guess if anything I'd prefer a different type of written content. Jeff has done a few of those "opinion pieces", and Alex ran his column for a while, so I'd certainly be interested in reading more if the guys still want to write stuff. But if they don't, then I'm okay without it. I feel like you also get a lot less value out versus the effort put in (a piece can take hours to write and edit but five minutes to read, whereas a video segment will be as long as you spend recording it).

Less reviews, more guns of navarro.

That's how I generally feel as well, the reviews are fine enough, I don't really read them, one every now and then if I'm really interested to learn about it or a staffs feelings on it, but that's about it.
More writing though would be cool, whatever form that may take, I wouldn't mind reading their thoughts/opinions about stuff going on.

They usually write reviews when they feel like they have something to write. Outside of that they use the quick look to view opinions.

I don't need to force them to write an article they dont want to write

I said no, but think about this.....when was the last time a game was actually complete in order for an actual review to be posted? Sure its good i guess for day one suckers but in all honesty if you are that gullible i guess you deserve a review.

@me3639: i'm hoping you're being sarcastic...

I generally like the GB reviews and I hope they stick around. I'm perfectly fine with the sporadic reviews coming out (like 2-3 a month at most), these guys don't have a ton of time to complete games and review them near release dates and that's totally fine. But I still enjoy seeing a written perspective on games from the crew, some insight/analysis is much easier to communicate in a written form rather than verbally. I'd rather see more written reviews than quick looks of random games on Steam but that's just me. If the site went full video/podcast I'd still come back to it, but it would feel a bit strange to me.

I couldn't care less about reviews at this point. Quick Looks/Unfinisheds/Unprofessional Fridays/Bombcasts are infinitely more helpful.

A review in the traditional sense was a product of times when the best you had was a few postage stamp sized screenshots(in color if you are lucky) and some deceptive box art. I dont care if we get more or none at all. I will just continue to not be interested either way.

I will say that I do want "new age" journalism style reviews to die in a fire. Save your life story and experiences for your LiveJournal hippy.

I just... what is a review in 2015?

Some users here seem to be under the belief that the staff members that are involved in the quick look have only played the game during the quick look. They progress through the games a bit before quick looking them and then typically bring in a staff member that hasn't played it, which spurs natural conversation. They don't typically just go in blind, even for some of those random GBeast quick looks.

yeah

I mean, sort of? It's less that I want a steady stream of reviews and more that I'd like to see the crew consistently finish games more often, which was what reviews were good for doing, as well as encouraging the others to do so, if nothing else. It feels like every year they manage to play less and less. I suppose it's a separate issue, though.

Kind of. What I've always hoped for was more produced content. Live "off-the-cuff" stuff is cool and all, but I enjoy Drew and Vinny's work, and now we got Jason too.

It's kind of why I always wait with anticipation for E3 day recaps and GOTY stuff.

I prefer group-based banter and lengthy discussion about their personal experiences. The final scores seem like nothing more than a vestigial appendage to criticism of critics of yesteryear. I would truly prefer a point-counterpoint discussion. Ideally this would hash out the key moments, mechanics and concepts at length. But not structured so formally rather a natural discussion. This method would push the GB crew's personality to the forefront and help everyone come to understand why a game is loved, loathed or whatever in between.

All depends on what I'd be losing in exchange.

I like their reviews, but it isn't the primary , secondary or even tertiary reason I come here.

I agree with this. Don't care about actual reviews but like getting opinions from several people on each game. I think they generally do a good job with that, but I do kind of wish they had another gaming focused podcast like Scoops and the Wolf where we could get opinions from people who aren't involved in the Bombcast regularly and who didn't QL the game. For example, if Dan/Jeff/Drew/Brad QL a game, I would like to be able to get opinions from GBEast, Rorie, Jason. Mostly, I would like to get Vinny's opinion on as many games as possible as his tastes seem to most closely mirror my own...

I'm pretty sure they are trying to set up a GBEast podcast, cause everyone always wants some more Vinny

I said "no," but I agree with whoever posted above that it would be good to have more non-review written stuff.

Nope. I don't need them. Watching a game for 15 minutes on is all I need to know whether or not I'll enjoy a game.

I have gotten so much more from QLs than I ever got from reviews.

For most games I only need to see gameplay and maybe have it described at length, kinda like a QL.

Bigger titles I may seek a review but even if GB does review it it won't be the only one I read. I'll talk to friends who are playing it, see how they're liking it, what they enjoy about it and what they don't, and seek out other sites I trust. I tend to know when I hear about a game if it's something I'd be into or not.

Sure I guess, I definitely think reviews still have a place alongside stuff like quicklooks.

There are a couple of situations where I actually prefer a review to a QL, like when the game is very story heavy (so QLs will be way too spoilery for me) or if it's a long game.

I hate spoilers, so I wont go beyond a 'quick look' in terms of watching a game before playing - for some games I won't watch anything, so it'd certainly be more difficult for me to make educated purchases if reviews vanished altogether.

However I don't feel like I need the reviews coming from GB specifically... though I guess if more reviews meant the guys would have more experience with the games they quick look that'd be cool, but I imagine more reviews would equal less video content so I dunno -shrug-

Would I enjoy more reviews? Yes. I would always take more content. Would I sacrifice any of the video stuff for reviews? No.

It's basically one of those things where I do like them but they aren't really necessary so I'm fine with whatever they want to do.

I will say that I am curious how many people actually use reviews as "buying advice" or whatever anymore, sometimes it just kind of feels like people are looking for validation in what they enjoy/how they spend their money. I have had some times where I'm on the fence and I've looked at a review but then I always also look at the associated quick look as well so for me quick looks are definitely more important and I definitely get more enjoyment out of them than a text review.

Yes. I like to specifically hear the opinions of the GB staff themselves because I'm interested in the duders behind the review. I think they go into a lot more detail about certain things in the review that they may pass over pretty quickly within a quick look. "I really don't like this" in a quicklook is explained in detail in a review.

Like most of us, I don't need to read a review for any game. That's not why I like them. It also never hurts to help get their name out there. Also, Nintendo fanboys are as hilarious as they always have been in the comments. Never can get enough of them focusing on half of one sentence in an entire review and attempting to discredit the entire review based off of the subjective opinion that's probably not even 1/100th the importance of anything else in the review. It's a free comedy bonus the GB crew doesn't even have to work for!

I only care about the raw opinion. If there was a review podcast that would be perfect. I don't want anything edited and what may 'sound good' with maybe the potential in the face of criticism. I just I want opinions, sometimes they're backtracked sometimes not but this is also the reason why I super enjoy the end of the year deliberations. I know @jeff wants more podcasts, Bombast Review (I know you've been thinking about it, also @jeff didn't tag; mobile platforms ftw)

Yes - only because of the time consuming nature of Quick Looks. I have a pretty good idea of the types of games that I like and keeping up with the podcast is a good way to keep pace of how a game is coming along and is generally a good barometer of what the guys think of a game. That said, close to the release of the game, I'm caught in an odd mix of:

a) Quick Looks take way longer than a review to consume (obviously if I'm on the fence about a game I'm happy to wait it out a bit anyway)

b) Sometimes Quick Looks ironically tell me too much about a game/show too much (especially for small downloadable titles)

I agree that the way reviews are written isn't as relevant any more. I feel that the way reviews conclude on GB aren't great - they seem to tail off with no real conclusion - I get that they're avoiding the old system of "here's my wrap up and here's the score for the game", but it just doesn't read correctly to me.

So yea, either more reviews or 'written impressions' about games would be nice - as I can read an article in a few minutes but don't have an hour for some Quick Looks.

Yes. I don't know I just like reading. Quick Looks are ok but sometimes I'd prefer a read.

Reviews are dumb. Give me more Quick Looks.