Do you care which system GB mostly uses to cover console games?

I would rather them use PC whenever reasonable. If you really need to know how well the console versions run, there are plenty of other places to get that information. Digital Foundry does videos for most high profile games, that's a good place to start.

If it's not available on PC, then obviously they'll have to use whatever's available.

I wouldn't mind if GB covered more versions of each game. But when it comes to pre-release or press copies, they get their games from the publishers, and it's the publishers that will dictate which version of a game gets coverage.

Even if Quick Looks are starting to skew more towards PS4 Pro versions because of this trend, between the Beastcast and Bombcast, they usually give their experiences playing the same games on an Xbox One or original PS4. But at the end of the day, places like Digital Foundry investigates this sort of stuff much faster and with more depth than GB. And I usually don't look to the GB crew as my primary source for the technical sides of video games. I mostly rely on GB for their personal reactions and connections to games and the industry, and supplement it with other sites that actually specialize in video game news.

@rikiguitarist: @justin258: are the publishers really dictating which model console to use? I get the DF argument but doesn't it make more sense to present games on the most popular platform and people on the platforms w the smaller userbase to be directed towards more specialize places?

@liquiddragon: I was speaking about publishers sending out Xbox One versions as opposed to PS4 versions. Games come on a single disc for every SKU of each console, so publishers really can't control if a game gets played on a Xbox One or an Xbox One S.

Yeah, the most popular console does have something to do with it partially. The PS3 was more powerful than the Xbox 360, but most press copies were 360 copies. Granted a lot of third party games were worse on PS3 due to the difficulty of programming on its Cell architecture.

Publishers want the best-looking console version of their game out there to be covered. Yeah, they could send PC versions, but that comes with the $1,500 burden of owning and maintaining a gaming PC that would alienate a lot of people. And PC ports are usually the last thing that gets worked on, sometimes causing PC launches of the same game to be weeks or months after the console versions. So it's easier to have a blanket policy of sticking to the best looking console version.

Additional Edit: I don't think the most popular platform is a top priority for GB when they cover a game. A lot of Quick Looks have been on PC with them using an Xbox controller. I think GB is just here to provide coverage on games, and less about following a checklist of how it performs on every console.

There are sites which do the port or comparison analysis for games well (either in reviews or in dedicated coverage); I just want to hear GB team's opinion on the game. Often if a game runs horrendously on one platform it comes up on the bombcast anyway.

You somehow left the Amiga CD 32 off of this poll so I can't answer it.

Seriously though, as long as they say what they're playing on and call out any versions that have serious problems (like low frame rate or glitches) I don't care. For many games (such as 2D pixel art games) there's literally no difference, and for most other games you can pretty much approximate what it will be. As others have said there are other places to look for comparison videos.

I tend to have Giant Bomb on in the background anyway so it's not like I'm carefully staring at the screen to see the additional Tressfx in the PS4 version of Tomb Raider. Even when there are differences they're usually pretty minimal these days.

Just tell me what you're playing on and warn me if there's a version that's terrible, and we're good.

@liquiddragon: I think there's something to be said for them capturing Quick Look footage from base models. They always talk about the reviewer's duty to use the defaults, be that difficulty or controls, what have you. That way they cover the most common experience. The base model consoles are cheaper and therefore extremely likely to be the most common models out there for quite some time to come.

I personally think bumping up to the Pro (or One X) should be the exception rather than the rule.

I don't really care which version they show, as long as they try the game out on other platforms and can comment accordingly. Showing five or even two versions of a game in each Quick Look just doesn't make sense logistically, but it would be nice to hear how big the graphical gaps are.

I've been thinking about this for a while. I guess it comes down to what a quick look meant to be for.

If it is to show the game in a good light, than they should use the pro, it makes games look and run better.

If QL's are meant to replace reviews as purchasing advice for users they should definitely use the standard, it's far and away the more common console.

For example if they are playing a game on the pro and it has long load times or frame rate issues, the fact they are on the pro will mitigate some of those issues in a way that is actively unhelpful to the most users.

I cant think of what game it was (maybe Persona 5?) but I bought something after watching a QL for it here and was kinda annoyed by the difference in load times from what the QL showed.

Super don't care.

So if they cover a PC game should they show what it looks like on every video card/CPU combination as well? They should point out if it runs worse but theres no need to provide video evidence of it. The internet will let everyone know if a game runs like puppy.

I only care when it might lead to confusion over what someone on another platform might experience.

No, I liked that it was a Playstation this year for selfish reasons like I could relate to the button references, menu screens, accidental pop up notifications and so on. But I don't own a Pro, I don't own a computer or a TV that displays at 1080p and I don't own any other consoles, so I never really expect their content to show me anything other than how a game plays. I played my PS3 on a 25" Philips CRT with component cables until 2012/2013 when I was gifted this 720p 50" LG and I can see all the blurry edges and what not when I play a game on another person's television but really I don't care much about graphics (don't get me wrong, I love a good showcase), so what system they use is not the relevant part of the equation for me. I just want to hear them talk and see what the game does.

Yeah, put me in the "don't care" crowd. Expecting them to demand multiple copies of each release to compare across the differing versions of consoles and present each to us seems a bit much to ask. It isn't conducive to a QL format as well, since the idea of them stopping their playthrough on one console to switch to another either means they'd need to match up the progress to the point they stopped at off-camera, replay the same bit on-camera, or play a different part of the game which doesn't make for a quality 1:1 comparison anyway, and none of those are good options.

As several have mentioned, there are places like digital foundry for this, and the internet indeed will more than happily complain every single time a game runs or looks "bad", so I don't feel like GB is obligated to provide this info that can be easily found elsewhere. I am curious to see if publishers start sending out Xbox One X versions of games (you'd think they would), but it's not going to bother me if the review copies/GB coverage continue to be mostly on the PS4 Pro. My only real ask is that in extreme cases like, say, Forza Horizon 2 where the Xbox One version was a markedly superior game to the 360 version, that it gets pointed out.

The difference isn't night and day so I really don't care. If you own a base model PS4 you can assume that it'll look and run ever so slightly better on a Pro. Expecting them to play a game on all hardware revisions is a bit much.

I'd prefer them to use a regular ps4 since that's what I've got and I wanna know if it runs okay.

I don't care even a little bit. Most games have minimal Pro support anyway.

Jeff does not come to my job and tell me how the catalog library books; so, I don't go to his job and tell him how to review the games.

I don't think it matters. Giant Bomb is not going to (and never has) reviewed versions of a game to do comparisons. Spreading out what systems they use for different reviews or determining arbitrarily what is "fair" is just not useful for their coverage. That sort of side by side comparison information is on other websites, most people know who those websites are and what they do. Those specialty sites have the expertise, equipment, staff and workflow to do that work well.

I appreciate the spirit of the poll, but I felt I could not vote in it, as it misses a 4th option - to show a game on whichever system they wish. The concern over different performance across platforms is valid to be sure, but the PS4 vs. PS4-Pro thing is to me not really any different from 'XONE vs. PS4' or 'A Console vs. PC', or 'PC with GFX card A vs PC with GFX card B', or any other combination. In the years I've been consuming GB content in all its forms, I feel the crew make an effort to let people know when a given game has notable issues on a given platform, if they have experienced them. For formalised 'head to head' comparisons, other sites carry that lantern; it isn't what GB is going for. In that sense, its more an argument for checking against a variety of sources about a game, to get a nice spread of different critical voices, focusing their attentions in different areas.

I'd like them to show both if there's a notable difference, but for the vast majority of games it doesn't matter. Especially on compressed internet video where half of the Pro improvements are lost in translation anyway.

I rarely watch QLs for purchasing advice, though. I watch them for the entertainment of the GB crew playing vidjagames.

I don't really care. If I want a detailed performance/technical analysis I'll go and check out something like digital foundry. I want to hear GB's opinion on the actual game not performance/tech stuff. If it's visibly bad then sure, they'll mention it, but I care more for their opinion on all other aspects of games, not performance etc.

And yeah, like some posters mentioned, I like watching GB for entertainment also and just them having fun, playing some games.

Don't give a shit. Console information is not why I come to the site. It's all about the crew and some curated exposure to new games for me!

This poll needs an "I don't give a shitt," option. If I am watching a quick-look I want them to use whatever system has their save file on it. Quick Looks are best when the staff doesn't overthink things, just load up their current save, or maybe use an older save if there is something cool to show off.

Honestly though, I don't look to quick looks as a one-stop-shop for purchase advice / recommendations. Because of that, if I had to choose, I would go for whatever platform looks the nicest. so that means I prefer watching a PC stream, or an Xbox One / PS 4 pro stream because the video looks better.

Doesn't bother me either way as long as which ever version they're playing is cited. If there's a marked difference in performance/quality they usually mention so I'm cool. If there's a big difference in actual features/content I'd like them to show the most complete/fully featured version.

I don't care at all what they use to cover games. Makes no difference to me.

Why only playstation options ?

I don't care as long as differences are acknowledged. I imagine it's simpler to set up to record a console.

Never really thought about it, i do remember a long time ago them saying they mostly do ps4 because that's what publishers sent but don't know if that's still the case with how some publishers don't send shit anymore. Anyway, I don't care or think it matters much I use quick looks as a starter guide to how a game plays and other means to see how it performs.

Pro, X, S, Base, I don't really care but it urks me when the dudders haven't done their research to inform the viewers which systems the game is on. I get it, PS4 is the only console these dudes care about. Xbone and all that. But as a proud Xbox owner, I would like to know. Don't just make it to seem like a game is always ps4 exclusive. Really sad. Rest of the internet I go in expecting that ignorance. Not Giant Bomb though. Expect better from this site.

Don't care and don't expect multiple platforms to be a consideration unless the coverage is a formal review. QLs aren't reviews.

No, no I don't.

I feel like this poll is missing out on this option.

No, I don't.

If there are noticeable issues between versions, I would like gb to mention them, though... Although I understand most times that information is not available at the time of the videos.

Seconded.

No because games are pretty much the same on consoles.

Multiplatform games are almost always pretty similar across the platforms. We all know the PC version supports higher framerate and some sharper textures, but the core gameplay is the same anyway. So, no I don't care much which platform they cover it on, but if they play on console and the bad performance is the deal breaker than they should definitely try it on PC as well.

4th option - No, I don't care at all it is all the same shit.

No, could not care less.

Yeah, seems odd. Especially when the OP mentions the inevitable PS4 Pro to Xbox One X comparisons, but doesn't give any discussion points for the current PS4 to Xbox One comparisons.

Or giving us the option that constant technical analysis is not why we come to GB or what we expect from them.

@tuxedocruise: We already know why we see mostly PlayStation QLs for console games. That's the dominate platform, that's most likely the lead platform, that's what the publishers wants you to see and that's what they get sent. That can change with the XB1X if it has enough horsepower to automatically outperform PS4/Pro, publishers might start sending XB1 games instead if they know the site's gonna present the game with the XB1X.

I'm just asking, as a generalist site, is that beneficial to a userbase that probably overwhelmingly has base PS4s. How many people are going to own an XB1X vs a base PS4? Let's says 1 out of 20, which I think is being super generous. Most people don't need hard numbers, just need an idea about how it runs and make sure it's not fucked up. Does it make sense for 19 out of 20 to have to go to Digital Foundry to see how it runs when you can just make it 1 out of 20? Especially when the guy with the XB1X is more likely to be the one that's nitpicky about performance. I'm raising the same question with PS4 vs. Pro.

If you don't care then the option is 1. You're fine with what their using now, which is the Pro.

But wouldn't it be kind of awesome if he did? If he just popped into your workplace and started giving you instructions on how to catalog the books?

He has thought a lot about cataloging media. He might have some good ideas!

Your thread title is misleading because it's very general and doesn't name any specific console ecosystem. So the general thinking is that you're asking PS4, XB1, PC and maybe Switch owners as well. But your poll choices are only for PS4, when a decent portion of QLs are on PC as well, which is usually where games perform and look their best.

The idea behind Quick Looks is that we get the GB crew to give us their initial reactions or impressions of a game at, or even before, its launch. GB can record and bang out QLs within the same day. Holding off a few days for recording QLs to contact publishers so they can get Xbox One copies of every game they Quick Look, so they can do XB1 X and PS4 comparisons is counter-productive to the spirit of QLs. And even then, not all publishers will send out multiple copies, so GB has to start financing every QL they do with $60 games, that will get really expensive, really fast. Digital Foundry has those funds because that's what they specialize in. I'd rather GB use those production funds to go into their more personalized content, such as Steal My Sunshine, Beast in the East, E3 night shows, etc.

As mentioned by other posters, if a game's performance is notably inferior, it will usually get mentioned in a podcast.

It's not that I don't care about how GB does Quick Looks, it's that they operate with more than just PS4 and PS4 Pro only. So I feel that the poll choices should reflect that.

Not really, they seem to test off-camera and/or keep up with the chatter about how games perform on other platforms (I feel like Brad, Jeff, and Jason especially do a great job of this) soooooo...ya know....that's good enough for me.

Where is the 'no/I don't care' option?

Nope, not even a little bit.

The following is my joke response, and I say it because I love Jeff, Giant Bomb and Rick & Morty. [It is a joke...I love Jeff and I think he is brilliant.]

Jeff is the master of his universe, and yet he are dripping with Red Bull and Diet Coke. His enormous mind literally vegetating 'one can' at a time. I have no doubt that he would be bored senseless by cataloging books, the same way I'm bored when I brush my teeth and wipe my ass. Because the thing about repairing, maintaining, and cataloging books is it's not an adventure. There's no way to do it so wrong you might get mean Tweets or weird memes created about you. It's just work. And the bottom line is, some people are okay going to work, and some people... well, some people would rather talk about video games to an audiences of millions. Each of us gets to choose.

I'd think it'd be more useful to viewers to use the base PS4 since that's what the majority of the market has and you don't have worry about Video card differences in PC market etc.

Chances are everything is going to run decently on a PS4 Pro so that's not really useful information to viewers. Whereas since the PS4 has lower specs maybe it chugs with a game or two that the Pro might not.

boy a lot of people think this question is about xbox versus playstation, don't they?

@excitable_misunderstood_genius: I mean, the thread does speculate about the eventual market competition of the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X, and if the XB1X will become the dominate platform in terms of publishers sending out copies for the most powerful console. Just like how base PS4 is the lead platform over base XB1. While the difference in PS4 Pro versus base PS4 is, a lot of the time, negligible to non-existent.

I do not care. Digital Foundry can provide plenty of in-depth info on specs and performance on a console-specific basis.