Jumanji

@Sanj: Yeah definitely. There's no real easy answer to this after thinking about it some more. I don't know how that stuff works, the only thing I know is that something has been missing lately and it started before CBSi.

@FengShuiGod said:

Don't expect anything more than Youtube-esque entertainment from Giantbomb. It's easier that way.

Ha, easier is just taking my time and money to another site.

I think Jeff has already explained himself about the mechanics. Even if they have some basic knowledge, I still think they're damned either way, because someone will have a problem with the way they play, but whatever.

@wjb

I agree with your statement about planning -- always have -- but I never considered Quick Looks to be on the same level as a review. I don't think that was ever their intention. If someone is making purchases purely from Quick Looks, then they get what they get. If however amount of money is that important to them, then like I said, they need to go to more than one site.

@Gamer_152 said:

For example I've heard a lot of complaints about how staff aren't reading instructional text in games when it appears, but what are they supposed to do? Sit there in silence while they diligently read through every word?

Yes. Yes, that is exactly what they are supposed to do. Or they can read it out loud/to each other, whatever.

Trying to get someone (Jeff) to like something they don't particularly care for because "it's their job" is a crap-shoot, so you might as well go somewhere else for that particular coverage or else don't care so much.

@Nickieroonie said:

edit: I suppose the bottom line is that you shouldn't necessarily expect a QL to be a good, informed look at a game. Sometimes they are, and sometimes they aren't.

Yeah, this statement pretty much nails it. I only watch them for the funny moments now. If I want real coverage of a game, I'll usually check 1-2 more sites to see what the game's really like. It sucks that I don't really use this site for any of that anymore, but that's just the way things are. I end up finding a lot of really awesome things about a game that I didn't know were in it, because it wasn't shown here. Oh well.

@Gamer_152

The quick looks are meant to be a basic representation of the experience you'd have with a game and it didn't seem unrepresentative that Jeff's experience was not knowing about dodging because the game hadn't conveyed information about it's mechanics properly. From what a lot of people have said in here it also doesn't seem like dodging is that fundamental a mechanic or would have been that advantageous for him anyway.

@atomic_dumpling said:

@Slag said:

@Baillie:

It just makes me wonder if I resub if the money is just going to get pocketed by CBSi mgt.

Well, Vinny could have bought several tricasters by now if they had any free reign over the subscription money, which CBSi probably just lists as "miscellaneous revenue" or something.

I meant pocketed by people higher above the CBSi foodchain than the GB crew. I figure all the sub money goes straight to CBSi AR dept now and Giantbomb has to petition and fight for every dollar they need for equipment and such.

Which is why they probably still don't have what they need. Karen is right they need a "fixer", or producer or something to go to all these meetings and get them the stuff they need, so they can get back to doing their real jobs.

@A_Talking_Donkey said:

This might seem like a weird way to look at it, but who cares? Up to that point they've proven they were the two best teams, if they want to prize split that should be acceptable. It's money they've earned and they should be able to do what they want with it. I also find it odd that the viewers are such self entitled babies that they believe they're entitled to watching a good match. Why? I think the only biggest problem in all of this is that people care so much about prize splitting. It isn't that big of a thing.

The point of the tournament isn't to decide the better team. The point of the tournament is to DRAW EYEBALLS AND MAKE MONEY.

Bombcast is worth a buck a week to me, but maybe not to others. So long as the Bombcast quality doesn't decline like the video quality, I will stay subbed. 
 
I agree with above criticisms that Quick Looks have become especially disorganized and uninformative. If it was up to me, I would dispense completely with reviews, and focus energy on polished video content. If "polish" means "knowing basic controls when you sit down to play the game for your paying audience" then so be it.

Let's review the victim's policy:

IF the victim is involved in a collision with an underinsured driver AND that other driver is at fault THEN Progressive will pay the difference on the settlement.

Given a legitimate dispute about the facts of the collision (here, it would certainly be about either the victim's negligence or the uninsured driver's), the victim and Progressive would either go to litigation or hash out a settlement. THIS IS COMPLETELY NORMAL. IT HAPPENS EVERY WEEK, IF NOT EVERY DAY, IN EVERY CIVIL COURT ROOM IN AMERICA.

BUT

Because of the law in Maryland, Progressive can't be a counterparty in a suit with the victim. The uninsured driver becomes the proxy for what would in any other state be a totally routine proceeding.

IF you want to avoid this kind of situation, get some no-fault coverage that doesn't turn on the other driver's error.