Avatar image for anthony
#1 Posted by Anthony (286 posts) -

It's been over 3 months since the last video review which I think was LA Noire. Have the guys said anything about stopping video reviews? I suppose a Quick Look is a decent replacement since it will show the gameplay.

Avatar image for giantstalker
#2 Posted by Giantstalker (2346 posts) -

I find video reviews are a bit redundant... expressing an opinion about a game just doesn't show character as much as the Quick Look does. Words are fine.

But you're right, it's been awhile, and they haven't specifically addressed it either.

Avatar image for crusader8463
#3 Posted by crusader8463 (14757 posts) -

I don't think they really care to do them, since they basically just parrot what they say in the written review. Jeff has said several times that between the quicklooks and them talking about it in the Bombcast you can get a good enough idea if it's going to be good or not if you base your buying decisions on what they like.

Avatar image for dogma
#4 Posted by Dogma (1011 posts) -

They usually only do video reviews for games that had access to early AND that they find big or extra interesting. The team seems very picky in what kind of games that gets the video review treatment. This is a wildshot but Gears of War 3 could be a contender for getting one.

Avatar image for afroman269
#5 Posted by Afroman269 (7440 posts) -

Maybe, I wouldn't be surprised to see a MW3 or Uncharted 3 video review.

Avatar image for vyse
#6 Edited by Vyse (76 posts) -

They do even really do that many reviews, and video versions of those reviews only come when its a really big game or something one of the crew is really into. I'm actually kind of surprised when I see a video review on the site.

Avatar image for ak_the_twilight
#7 Edited by AK_the_Twilight (54 posts) -

I really like the video reviews, but I'd agree with the fact that the Quick Looks do a sufficient job of showing the game's overall quality. The Quick Looks are thorough and lengthy, so comparing that to a five minute video review feels a small bit regressive.

Avatar image for uprooteddreamer
#8 Posted by UprootedDreamer (30 posts) -

For the most part I do not think that we need video reviews, all you really need to form an opinion on a game is game trailers, written previews, written reviews and actually renting the game before you decide to purchase it.

Avatar image for kyreo
#9 Posted by Kyreo (4681 posts) -

@Afroman269 said:

Maybe, I wouldn't be surprised to see a MW3 or Uncharted 3 video review.

Yeah those seem like the Triple A titles should have video reviews.

Avatar image for sooty
#10 Posted by Sooty (8193 posts) -

I would prefer to see a round up video that is done every now and then when a bunch of new games come out and it just shows the guys talking about what games they have been playing along with some footage of the games.

But then again that would basically be making the "What've you been playing?" segment of the Bombcast into a video.

Avatar image for bibamatt
#11 Posted by bibamatt (1129 posts) -

I LOVE the Giant Bomb video reviews. I'm a really satisfied user of the site and love the content but if I could ask for ONE thing, it'd be more video reviews.

You've all seen the 50 Cent Blood on the Sand video review, right? Best piece of video content Jeff has ever made.

Avatar image for deegee
#12 Posted by DeeGee (2192 posts) -

Video reviews are entirely dependent on getting an early copy of the game.

Avatar image for branthog
#13 Posted by Branthog (5777 posts) -

I was noticing how long it has been sine we've had a video review, too. I kind of miss it.

Avatar image for fishmicmuffin
#14 Posted by fishmicmuffin (1058 posts) -

On several occasions they've said that it takes too many man hours to do it for just any game. It has to either be a game that a lot of people are looking for coverage on, or... 50 Cent Blood On The Sand.

Avatar image for deusx
#15 Posted by Deusx (1943 posts) -

I like video reviews but I appreciate the fact that they don't do them to get more people to see other exclusive Giant Bomb content.

Avatar image for immortalsaiyan
#16 Posted by ImmortalSaiyan (4748 posts) -

I feel like this question gets asked every few months. They seem unnecessary.  The written review, quicklook and what is said on the bombcast are better are telling you about a game better then a Video review would be.

Avatar image for kelbear
#17 Posted by kelbear (536 posts) -

I think they don't like doing video reviews because it's difficult to organize. The reviewer needs to write the review as they play the game! If they want to say something and show video of it, they need to save nearby it, and duplicate the event (especially annoying if attempting to show gamebreaking but inconsistent bugs). They haven't even formed a complete opinion, but need to save up spots for the video review. Then they need to get out the recording equipment, and play through each of those sequences again to match the completed review notes. Kind of a pain in the ass. Might not be as bad for a big site like Gametrailers where the reviewers must have their own individual sets of recording equipment and just editing down later. But it's a bit much for a small site like GB. 

Avatar image for marokai
#18 Posted by Marokai (3593 posts) -

Video reviews only seem like they're done on the huge releases that they think would draw in an audience to the video. So I suspect they'll have one for MW3, BF3, perhaps Skyrim as well. ME3 for sure, early next year. Other than that, they never seem to do them anymore.

Avatar image for masha2932
#19 Posted by Masha2932 (1336 posts) -
@ImmortalSaiyan said:
I feel like this question gets asked every few months. They seem unnecessary.  The written review, quicklook and what is said on the bombcast are better are telling you about a game better then a Video review would be.
Avatar image for mooseymcman
#20 Posted by MooseyMcMan (12573 posts) -
@Masha2932 said:
@ImmortalSaiyan said:
I feel like this question gets asked every few months. They seem unnecessary.  The written review, quicklook and what is said on the bombcast are better are telling you about a game better then a Video review would be.
Avatar image for kingzetta
#21 Posted by kingzetta (4497 posts) -

their a waste of vinny's time

Avatar image for shockd
#22 Posted by ShockD (2487 posts) -

I miss them too. Definitely want some more video reviews.

Avatar image for fateofnever
#23 Posted by FateOfNever (1876 posts) -

This question again? Hmm.. lets see.. why, in the middle of summer, when jack shit came out, would they not have any video reviews.. Maybe they're just not doing them anymore, I dunno.

Avatar image for soldierg654342
#24 Posted by SoldierG654342 (1899 posts) -

Video reviews are very time consuming. First they have to write the review. Then they have to comb threw potentially tens and potentially hundreds of save files for the footage they want. Then they have to rehearse the review and film the review. Then the review has to be edited so you get all that footage and all those fancy effects. All to convey the same information that is given in the written review.   
That time is best spent elsewhere. 

Avatar image for mars_cleric
#25 Posted by Mars_Cleric (1649 posts) -

every other site does video reviews

I guess they'd do one if there's something that's easier to say in a video than it is in text

Avatar image for staticfalconar
#26 Posted by StaticFalconar (4918 posts) -

learn to read bro

Avatar image for ajamafalous
#27 Posted by ajamafalous (13567 posts) -

I just looked at this yesterday. There have been 4 video reviews this entire year. Pretty ridiculous.

Avatar image for arch4non
#28 Posted by arch4non (472 posts) -

I think video reviews are kinda outdated. They either don't show enough gameplay or they don't get enough information across in the review itself. Quick Looks paired with written reviews are the way to go. You can glance at the star rating to see if a game is even worth considering, check out a Quick Look to see what it's like, and if you're still on the fence read the full written review to learn about all its flaws/features.

Avatar image for simmse
#29 Posted by Simmse (136 posts) -

Just look at the older video reviews, their are big gaps between most of them. 
Hunting through an entire game for a couple minutes of footage for a review that already exists in written form is basically fucking pointless because quick looks exist.

Avatar image for subyman
#30 Posted by subyman (726 posts) -

Written review is fine with me. Quicklooks give you a taste of the gameplay before they give their final word via written review. There really isn't a need for 3 different forms of review.

Avatar image for brendan
#31 Posted by Brendan (9107 posts) -

Video reviews don't seem like a good use of time. I'll watch them, sure, but I don't miss them, and I don't feel like there is anything about a game that I am not getting by not having a video review.

Avatar image for countershock
#32 Posted by CounterShock (436 posts) -

Isn't it just for relatively large releases? Which there really hasn't been since LA Noire, unless you want to argue for Deus Ex.

Avatar image for falling_fast
#33 Edited by falling_fast (2905 posts) -

I remember Vinny said in a video that video reviews are incredibly time consuming, and that they'd be cutting way back on them in favour of more quick looks.

which seems fair enough to me. video reviews in the giantbomb/gamespot format have always been basically shorter versions of the written reviews anyway, so we're not losing anything.

Avatar image for dystopiax
#34 Posted by DystopiaX (5697 posts) -

They take alot of time and often they just read the written review on camera. I'd rather they put out other video content.

Avatar image for siphillis
#35 Edited by Siphillis (1353 posts) -

A 30-minute quicklook, a Bombcast discussion, and a written review are more than enough to make an informed purchasing decision.  That said, their video reviews are a cut above anyone else.