#1 Posted by Bourbon_Warrior (4523 posts) -


#2 Posted by Bourbon_Warrior (4523 posts) -

Their has only been 5 video reviews in the last 12 months. As a site like GB is really video focused why is their so little video reviews?

#3 Posted by FakeKisser (361 posts) -

I love the Quick Looks, and I feel like those could be better served, in many cases (not all), by having the reviewer give his thoughts while doing the Quick Look. I don't need an edited GameSpot style Video Review. I just want video of the game while someone tells me how the game is (overall). They can totally talk about other parts of the game, even if they are only playing 15-30 minutes at the beginning of the game.

#4 Edited by believer258 (12081 posts) -

I feel like this has been asked before, several times, and the answer goes thus: 30 minute Quick Looks provide far more insight than any video review ever could; add to that the opinions and commentaries expressed on podcasts and TNT's, and I find no real need for video reviews. I'd rather see their focus put elsewhere, and on better content.

If I want a summary of a written review in snipped video form, there's IGN and Gamespot to go to. For here, written reviews are great and have their place but video reviews are entirely superfluous these days.

At least, in my opinion.

#5 Edited by Bourbon_Warrior (4523 posts) -

@believer258: Not true its usually only 30 minutes of the tutorial section of a game, Deadlight for example Brad seemed really stoked from the game in the QL but in the review he was really down on it.

And yes I do want a super edited video review done by Vinny, the end of video reviews are some of the funniest things like the WREX\Shepard moment from ME2 video review, they used to do them all the time but the last video review was Zelda, seems their is just a real lack of content since CBS brought them.

#6 Posted by believer258 (12081 posts) -

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

@believer258: Not true its usually only 30 minutes of the tutorial section of a game, Deadlight for example Brad seemed really stoked from the game in the QL but in the review he was really down on it.

And yes I do want a super edited video review done by Vinny, the end of video reviews are some of the funniest things like the WREX\Shepard moment from ME2 video review, they used to do them all the time but the only video review this year was Zelda and we are more than half way through the year

Yes, that's true, and that's why written reviews still have a very solid place. If you want the final opinion on a game, then you have them there.

As for the cutesy little 5 second things at the end of some video reviews, I don't see that as enough reason to bring them back in full force. Yes, they were nice, but ultimately I'd like to see more of those (strangely elusive) crazy things that Jeff talked about during that pancake announcement video than more video reviews.

You asked for my opinion on whether video reviews should make a triumphant return or remain an obsolete thing of the past, and there is my answer.

#7 Edited by Bourbon_Warrior (4523 posts) -

@believer258 said:

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

@believer258: Not true its usually only 30 minutes of the tutorial section of a game, Deadlight for example Brad seemed really stoked from the game in the QL but in the review he was really down on it.

And yes I do want a super edited video review done by Vinny, the end of video reviews are some of the funniest things like the WREX\Shepard moment from ME2 video review, they used to do them all the time but the only video review this year was Zelda and we are more than half way through the year

Yes, that's true, and that's why written reviews still have a very solid place. If you want the final opinion on a game, then you have them there.

As for the cutesy little 5 second things at the end of some video reviews, I don't see that as enough reason to bring them back in full force. Yes, they were nice, but ultimately I'd like to see more of those (strangely elusive) crazy things that Jeff talked about during that pancake announcement video than more video reviews.

You asked for my opinion on whether video reviews should make a triumphant return or remain an obsolete thing of the past, and there is my answer.

Just saying GB used to do alot of video reviews. 70 from 2008 to 2011, 0 in 2012... The content is just going away, no subscriber content worth watching, no endurance run, this site is just turning to shit.

I'm starting to wonder if when CBS brought them they signed away their right to do video reviews, as it a big reason why people go to gamespot.

#8 Posted by believer258 (12081 posts) -

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

@believer258 said:

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

@believer258: Not true its usually only 30 minutes of the tutorial section of a game, Deadlight for example Brad seemed really stoked from the game in the QL but in the review he was really down on it.

And yes I do want a super edited video review done by Vinny, the end of video reviews are some of the funniest things like the WREX\Shepard moment from ME2 video review, they used to do them all the time but the only video review this year was Zelda and we are more than half way through the year

Yes, that's true, and that's why written reviews still have a very solid place. If you want the final opinion on a game, then you have them there.

As for the cutesy little 5 second things at the end of some video reviews, I don't see that as enough reason to bring them back in full force. Yes, they were nice, but ultimately I'd like to see more of those (strangely elusive) crazy things that Jeff talked about during that pancake announcement video than more video reviews.

You asked for my opinion on whether video reviews should make a triumphant return or remain an obsolete thing of the past, and there is my answer.

Just saying GB used to do alot of video reviews. 70 from 2008 to 2011, 0 in 2012... The content is just going away, no subscriber content worth watching, no endurance run, this site is just turning to shit.

I'm starting to wonder if when CBS brought them they signed away their right to do video reviews, as it a big reason why people go to gamespot.

I'm not going to say that you don't have a point there, but if (hopefully when) more content starts coming along, video reviews won't be a priority simply because those are not the major reason that most people stayed on this site.

#9 Posted by Bourbon_Warrior (4523 posts) -

@believer258 said:

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

@believer258 said:

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

@believer258: Not true its usually only 30 minutes of the tutorial section of a game, Deadlight for example Brad seemed really stoked from the game in the QL but in the review he was really down on it.

And yes I do want a super edited video review done by Vinny, the end of video reviews are some of the funniest things like the WREX\Shepard moment from ME2 video review, they used to do them all the time but the only video review this year was Zelda and we are more than half way through the year

Yes, that's true, and that's why written reviews still have a very solid place. If you want the final opinion on a game, then you have them there.

As for the cutesy little 5 second things at the end of some video reviews, I don't see that as enough reason to bring them back in full force. Yes, they were nice, but ultimately I'd like to see more of those (strangely elusive) crazy things that Jeff talked about during that pancake announcement video than more video reviews.

You asked for my opinion on whether video reviews should make a triumphant return or remain an obsolete thing of the past, and there is my answer.

Just saying GB used to do alot of video reviews. 70 from 2008 to 2011, 0 in 2012... The content is just going away, no subscriber content worth watching, no endurance run, this site is just turning to shit.

I'm starting to wonder if when CBS brought them they signed away their right to do video reviews, as it a big reason why people go to gamespot.

I'm not going to say that you don't have a point there, but if (hopefully when) more content starts coming along, video reviews won't be a priority simply because those are not the major reason that most people stayed on this site.

Before I started spending too much time on Videogame sites the only time I would visit them was for Video Reviews, which in the end made me check out the other things on their sites.

#10 Posted by LiquidSwords (2738 posts) -

Same thread, different title.

#11 Posted by Bourbon_Warrior (4523 posts) -

@LiquidSwords said:

Same thread, different title.

Thanks for your contribution.

#12 Posted by Bollard (5746 posts) -

Video reviews add little to nothing to a review. They are just for people with too short an attention span to actually read the damn review. Also they waste the GB crew's time in making worthwhile content.

#13 Posted by LiquidSwords (2738 posts) -

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

@LiquidSwords said:

Same thread, different title.

Thanks for your contribution.

Your welcome. Feel free to make a thread and cry about it.

#14 Posted by Bourbon_Warrior (4523 posts) -

@Chavtheworld said:

Video reviews add little to nothing to a review. They are just for people with too short an attention span to actually read the damn review. Also they waste the GB crew's time in making worthwhile content.

What worthwhile content? And yes I have a short attention span.

#15 Posted by GetEveryone (4458 posts) -

There is basically zero site content anymore, so I see absolutely no reason to subscribe.

...but yes. I would like to see more video reviews. I'd like to see a lot more than Patrick's inane editorials and the absurd number of "news" items.

Isn't that initially what Giantbomb was sort of the antithesis of? These sites that mass post publisher marketing virals and the ilk?

#16 Posted by Bourbon_Warrior (4523 posts) -

@LiquidSwords said:

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

@LiquidSwords said:

Same thread, different title.

Thanks for your contribution.

Your welcome. Feel free to make a thread and cry about it.

Yes!

#17 Posted by Cloudenvy (5891 posts) -

No, not really.

#18 Posted by Bollard (5746 posts) -

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

@Chavtheworld said:

Video reviews add little to nothing to a review. They are just for people with too short an attention span to actually read the damn review. Also they waste the GB crew's time in making worthwhile content.

What worthwhile content? And yes I have a short attention span.

All the other features they produce like Quick Looks and whatnot.

#19 Edited by Bourbon_Warrior (4523 posts) -

@Chavtheworld said:

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

@Chavtheworld said:

Video reviews add little to nothing to a review. They are just for people with too short an attention span to actually read the damn review. Also they waste the GB crew's time in making worthwhile content.

What worthwhile content? And yes I have a short attention span.

All the other features they produce like Quick Looks and whatnot.

Quick Looks involve a 2 mics and recording footage for 30 minutes. ME3 didnt even get a Video Review, im really just talking about big releases not getting them.

#20 Posted by 71Ranchero (2794 posts) -

I would like to see reviews done away with from GB. QL's provide a far better idea of if you will enjoy a game or not and thats all that matters.

#21 Edited by Bourbon_Warrior (4523 posts) -

@Atramentous said:

I would like to see reviews done away with from GB. QL's provide a far better idea of if you will enjoy a game or not and thats all that matters.

Idiotic statement. If you watched The Deadlight QL it looks like a great game, but in the review not so much.

#22 Posted by 71Ranchero (2794 posts) -

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

@Atramentous said:

I would like to see reviews done away with from GB. QL's provide a far better idea of if you will enjoy a game or not and thats all that matters.

Idiotic statement. If you watched The Deadlight QL it looks like a great game, but in the review not so much.

Nonsense. Every game is fun to somebody and anybody can have fun with every game if you let yourself. Stop being a sheep and start enjoying video games.

#23 Posted by crusader8463 (14426 posts) -

No thanks. As they have stated many times now, between QL's and their talk on the Bombcast you know if a game is worth playing or not. Would rather them not waste time making video reviews that go over the same things.

#24 Posted by Bourbon_Warrior (4523 posts) -

@Atramentous said:

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

@Atramentous said:

I would like to see reviews done away with from GB. QL's provide a far better idea of if you will enjoy a game or not and thats all that matters.

Idiotic statement. If you watched The Deadlight QL it looks like a great game, but in the review not so much.

Nonsense. Every game is fun to somebody and anybody can have fun with every game if you let yourself. Stop being a sheep and start enjoying video games.

Hahahahaha. Whats that got to do with anything. I'm saying you cant judge a game on a 30 minute quick look of the tutorial\opening of the game.

#25 Posted by Laiv162560asse (487 posts) -
@Bourbon_Warrior said:

@Atramentous said:

I would like to see reviews done away with from GB. QL's provide a far better idea of if you will enjoy a game or not and thats all that matters.

Idiotic statement. If you watched The Deadlight QL it looks like a great game, but in the review not so much.

Looked exactly like a 3/5 game to me from the Quick Look.
#26 Posted by 71Ranchero (2794 posts) -

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

@Atramentous said:

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

@Atramentous said:

I would like to see reviews done away with from GB. QL's provide a far better idea of if you will enjoy a game or not and thats all that matters.

Idiotic statement. If you watched The Deadlight QL it looks like a great game, but in the review not so much.

Nonsense. Every game is fun to somebody and anybody can have fun with every game if you let yourself. Stop being a sheep and start enjoying video games.

Hahahahaha. Whats that got to do with anything. I'm saying you cant judge a game on a 30 minute quick look of the tutorial\opening of the game.

It has everything to do with it. Does it look fun? If yes, play it. If no, then dont. You see it all the time, people will love some games that get shit reviews and hate others that get great reviews. The review is irrelevant. The best way to tell if you will have fun with a game is actually seeing a chunk of it being played.

#27 Posted by Bourbon_Warrior (4523 posts) -

@Atramentous said:

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

@Atramentous said:

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

@Atramentous said:

I would like to see reviews done away with from GB. QL's provide a far better idea of if you will enjoy a game or not and thats all that matters.

Idiotic statement. If you watched The Deadlight QL it looks like a great game, but in the review not so much.

Nonsense. Every game is fun to somebody and anybody can have fun with every game if you let yourself. Stop being a sheep and start enjoying video games.

Hahahahaha. Whats that got to do with anything. I'm saying you cant judge a game on a 30 minute quick look of the tutorial\opening of the game.

It has everything to do with it. Does it look fun? If yes, play it. If no, then dont. You see it all the time, people will love some games that get shit reviews and hate others that get great reviews. The review is irrelevant. The best way to tell if you will have fun with a game is actually seeing a chunk of it being played.

Yeah but your talking about paying 60 dollars for a game because the intro looked good?

#28 Posted by BabyChooChoo (4733 posts) -

@GetEveryone said:

There is basically zero site content anymore, so I see absolutely no reason to subscribe.

...but yes. I would like to see more video reviews. I'd like to see a lot more than Patrick's inane editorials and the absurd number of "news" items.

Isn't that initially what Giantbomb was sort of the antithesis of? These sites that mass post publisher marketing virals and the ilk?

Normally, I'd jump down your throat after reading this, but I can't really disagree. Besides the QL we get every other day, there seems to be very little content aside from the stuff Patrick puts out.

I assume stuff is coming down the pipe, but it's kinda hard to stay positive when we rarely, if ever, hear anything about anything.

#29 Edited by DjCmeP (1148 posts) -

Would you like to see even less quicklooks+premium content because they are making video reviews?

NO.

#30 Edited by KaneRobot (1783 posts) -

@Chavtheworld said:

Video reviews add little to nothing to a review. They are just for people with too short an attention span to actually read the damn review. Also they waste the GB crew's time in making worthwhile content.

Oh bullshit. Half the time the "worthwhile content" is Quick Looks that do a disservice to a game (see: Fez) as they don't put the game in any sort of proper perspective. They're fun and entertaining but I don't put much stock in them when it comes to a purchase recommendation. Video reviews are just as valid as any other form of content on this site and it's a shame they don't do them more often. Text reviews are nice but video reviews are cheese with the wine.

#31 Posted by Bourbon_Warrior (4523 posts) -

@DjCmeP said:

Would you like to see even less quicklooks+premium content because they are making video reviews?

NO.

And yet they had 70 video reviews in between 2008 and 2011 and there was still a tonne of Quick Looks and Endurance Runs.

#32 Posted by 71Ranchero (2794 posts) -

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

@Atramentous said:

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

@Atramentous said:

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

@Atramentous said:

I would like to see reviews done away with from GB. QL's provide a far better idea of if you will enjoy a game or not and thats all that matters.

Idiotic statement. If you watched The Deadlight QL it looks like a great game, but in the review not so much.

Nonsense. Every game is fun to somebody and anybody can have fun with every game if you let yourself. Stop being a sheep and start enjoying video games.

Hahahahaha. Whats that got to do with anything. I'm saying you cant judge a game on a 30 minute quick look of the tutorial\opening of the game.

It has everything to do with it. Does it look fun? If yes, play it. If no, then dont. You see it all the time, people will love some games that get shit reviews and hate others that get great reviews. The review is irrelevant. The best way to tell if you will have fun with a game is actually seeing a chunk of it being played.

Yeah but your talking about paying 60 dollars for a game because the intro looked good?

Your generalizing. I could also say that your talking about paying 60 bucks because someone ELSE said it looked good. 30 minutes should be enough for you to decide if something looks FUN or not and if thats not enough then play a demo if its available. But christ, it shouldn't be that difficult. They are video games. Digital toys.

#33 Posted by Warchief (658 posts) -

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

Their has only been 5 video reviews in the last 12 months. As a site like GB is really video focused why is their so little video reviews?

because GiantBomb is focused on interesting content [reviews are a dime a dozen] and you can also think of the quicklooks as quasi-reviews.

#34 Posted by morrelloman (608 posts) -

I voted yes. Video reviews are great and require zero reading! After reading the comments however, I must say that I was wrong to vote yes. Especially considering the circumstances surrounding the current state of the site............Off-topic - If the CBS aquisition is kiilling the site it could be because the guys salaires are probably more locked in. Before they were just doing it for themselves, and now they are employed by a large company, probably with the same potential for raises as you or I.

#35 Posted by Toxin066 (3319 posts) -

I don't come to GB for reviews, so no. And I also think that video reviews are a waste of the crew's precious time.

#36 Posted by Bourbon_Warrior (4523 posts) -

@Warchief said:

@Bourbon_Warrior said:

Their has only been 5 video reviews in the last 12 months. As a site like GB is really video focused why is their so little video reviews?

because GiantBomb is focused on interesting content [reviews are a dime a dozen] and you can also think of the quicklooks as quasi-reviews.

Yeah but they have taken on more staff and are producing less content. There was a time where their was a ER everyday, bombcasts, video reviews and quick looks and they lived together peacefully.

#37 Posted by Brodehouse (10105 posts) -

I'd rather more Quick Looks and features. I'd rather some features on old games or the history or 'culture' of gaming. It seemed like a big part of the site was supposed to be a complete catalog of the history of games, by people who were excited about them. Now it seems they spend most of their time in meetings to set up appointments to make arrangments to meet people to see a new game for five minutes and then wait until the day before it comes out to say what they saw. Like everything on the site has been pushed aside in order to create 'professional' content based around games that publishers want to sell and not interesting stories about Sword of Sodan.

#38 Posted by wewantsthering (1586 posts) -

@believer258 said:

30 minute Quick Looks provide far more insight than any video review ever could

I feel like the Deadlight QL is a perfect example of why this isn't always the case. I was super excited to get the game based on the QL, but the review tells a story of a much more middling game. Sure the actual review covered that, but a concise video review is nice when I'm not in the mood to read it/also want to see some video as he's basically reading the review he wrote.

#39 Posted by yevinorion (702 posts) -

@FakeKisser said:

I love the Quick Looks, and I feel like those could be better served, in many cases (not all), by having the reviewer give his thoughts while doing the Quick Look. I don't need an edited GameSpot style Video Review. I just want video of the game while someone tells me how the game is (overall). They can totally talk about other parts of the game, even if they are only playing 15-30 minutes at the beginning of the game.

This exactly. Doesn't matter if it's called a "review", but I just want to see video of the game itself while hearing the opinion of the GB staff.

#40 Posted by Bollard (5746 posts) -

@KaneRobot said:

@Chavtheworld said:

Video reviews add little to nothing to a review. They are just for people with too short an attention span to actually read the damn review. Also they waste the GB crew's time in making worthwhile content.

Oh bullshit. Half the time the "worthwhile content" is Quick Looks that do a disservice to a game (see: Fez) as they don't put the game in any sort of proper perspective. They're fun and entertaining but I don't put much stock in them when it comes to a purchase recommendation. Video reviews are just as valid as any other form of content on this site and it's a shame they don't do them more often. Text reviews are nice but video reviews are cheese with the wine.

If you like your wine watered down, sure.

#41 Posted by Gaff (1847 posts) -

I wonder if anyone here has access to the page views Video Reviews get compared to the Quick Looks, Endurance Runs, news articles, text reviews and forum visits and whether they are worth the effort of going through the game (maybe twice), summarize the review in five to six paragraphs, selecting and saving points that elucidate the review's points, capturing them, editing them together, book time in the green screen room, setting up the teleprompter (which may or may not have moved with the guys after the Whiskey Media split), record the "live" footage, editing the live footage and game footage together, etc, etc.

Because that's the basic rule of most businesses, video games or otherwise: if you don't get a good return on your efforts, you should probably considering stop doing that.

So, anyone have Google Analytics / Alexa data for Giant Bomb? Preferably ones that break down page views per section of the site (Quick Looks, Video Reviews, Trailers, News, Forum, etc)?

Hello? Anyone? Yoohoo?

Online
#42 Posted by Bourbon_Warrior (4523 posts) -

@Gaff said:

I wonder if anyone here has access to the page views Video Reviews get compared to the Quick Looks, Endurance Runs, news articles, text reviews and forum visits and whether they are worth the effort of going through the game (maybe twice), summarize the review in five to six paragraphs, selecting and saving points that elucidate the review's points, capturing them, editing them together, book time in the green screen room, setting up the teleprompter (which may or may not have moved with the guys after the Whiskey Media split), record the "live" footage, editing the live footage and game footage together, etc, etc.

Because that's the basic rule of most businesses, video games or otherwise: if you don't get a good return on your efforts, you should probably considering stop doing that.

So, anyone have Google Analytics / Alexa data for Giant Bomb? Preferably ones that break down page views per section of the site (Quick Looks, Video Reviews, Trailers, News, Forum, etc)?

Hello? Anyone? Yoohoo?

Well personally before I spent time on video game sites I only really visited them for video reviews.

#43 Posted by bchampnd (108 posts) -

Gonna agree with the majority here and say that they don't need to do video reviews on Giant Bomb. The written reviews provide plenty of insight and I think that the Quick Looks and TNT are what sets GB apart from other sites when it comes to coverage. I don't necessarily agree with including the Bombcasts as a reason for not producing video reviews since the Bombcast is a long show and it's not formatted in such a way that makes it easy to skip right to the coverage of a particular game.

If they found some unique way of presenting the video review that set it apart from the coverage offered by other sites - meaning the reviewer doesn't just rattle lines from the written review verbatim while short clips of cutscenes and gameplay are displayed - then I think there'd be some value to a video review. If it'd be just like every other site's video review, no sense in doing it and the GB staff's time would be better spent doing Quick Looks and other things. There hasn't been much coming out lately which makes the timing seem right for an endurance run.