What is your current favorite source for video reviews?

I used to be all for gametrailers video reviews, but I honestly haven't watched a video review anywhere (besides watching old ones here) for some time. Honestly, most of my purchasing decisions in the video game department are influenced completely by this website. Quick looks show the games off and have the guys reacting to them, and then the podcast has them speaking indepth about their experiences with new games. I still read reviews and such on sites like kotaku, but the structure they have here is pretty much all I need when it comes to hearing about how good or bad a new game is.

Do Quick Looks count? I don't watch video reviews... hell, I rarely read text reviews.

I haven't cared about video reviews since around 2008 when Quick Looks became a thing.

Game Trailers mostly.

Though Good/Bad reviews never stop me from buying a game I'm interested in. Simple as that.

Angry joe is the one that actully dares to really rip the game apart and tell you what it really is and I respect that. Problem is that his reviews usally comes out pretty late. So I check IGN sometimes just for the fun of it (but I don't trust their reviews, 8.9 score for a game ,fuck off just give it a 9 haha...) Otherwise I check quick looks and the Swedish gaming site FZ for honest reviews.

Pretty much this, either quick looks or gameplay videos on youtube.

I only really use text/video reviews now to get a broader opinion than the one given on quick looks and on the podcasts. And when I do, I do like Joystiq.

The thing I don't like about quick looks is the staff often seems completely unprepared for them, and often makes factually incorrect statements or wild guesses throughout. Some are better than others, but something like the Mercenary Kings quick look can completely misrepresent a game.

I do enjoy quick looks, and I get that not knowing a game that well yet is part of their charm, but they're certainly no replacement for a review.

@spaceinsomniac: I don't think Quick Looks are a replacement for reviews either. I still read written reviews.

Gametrailers. Since I don't generally like reviews, it's nice that there's so much footage that I feel I can just make my own opinion on the game. Feels like you get a better scope of things with their reviews.

I usually check out quick looks to get an initial idea on a game since it's a nice extended look into the mechanics and such of a game. Not to mention they cover games you might not even get a review on. But when I want the additional info or opinion, I actually like Tara's reviews on Rev3Games. I think she covers a bit of everything nice and quickly, getting a nice overall look into the game in about 8 minutes.

I just watch whatever is made when I'm interested. I don't have a favorite, nor do I avoid anyone in particular. I probably would watch Gamespot or IGN stuff far more often than any other sources.

If I had to pick one it would be rev 3 when the sess was still there but even then it was rare when I watched a video review. I don't really like anything Gamespot does but I do go on there when I'm looking for old stuff because they are almost guaranteed to have a review of what I'm looking for. All in all I stopped watching video reviews consistently a long time ago.

Gametrailers I guess, but since I do most of my video game research at work (ha ha) text reviews are much more useful to me.

The Angry Joe show is quite a lot of fun. Detailed, long, funny reviews, somewhat styled like giantbomb.

Only he's been releasing them less frequently due to YT's dumb copyright issues etc

@spaceinsomniac: Let's keep it real. Brad is the worst on this, and lately he seems to be the only one playing games.

@jynxdaddy: Playing games in QLs or games in general? Because if it's the last, I disagree. Just look at Vinny tearing through DS2. But yeah, he seems to be "driving" a lot of QLs lately.

Anyways, I don't really read reviews anymore. I mostly watch QLs (if you judge those as what they are, often people playing a game for the first time, you're good to go) to get an impression of a game, and then read about the general reception on a forum etc.

I read Polygon and Killscreen reviews. I don't watch video reviews. If former GB intern Nick posts his video reviews from Rev3 to twitter then I'll probably watch that because of gold like this:

This is a game where you go into a butt and fart in that butt and that is the least strange thing you do in that butt.

Nick Robinson

I don't watch video reviews. I used to. A long time ago. Mostly GameTrailers stuff.

These days I'm not interested in game reviews. I don't care if the combat is visceral or if the sound design is a mixed bag. I'm more interested in consuming criticism and discussions after I've finished a game. I'm more involved that way. At least engaged, anyhow.

I very rarely watch video reviews. I used to watch Angry Joe Show, but realized his views very rarely lined up with mine, so I stopped doing that. Now I mostly watch Quick Look style stuff, and when it comes to reviews I prefer the text format, where I actually think newspapers tend to have the most well written and interesting ones, though Killscreen, Quarter to three, Eurogamer and US Gamer also tend to have pretty good stuff.

I actually like and watch GamesRadar's new video review style. It's different.

i used to rely heavily on video reviews but im able to get so much more info for justifying a purchase from GB Quick Looks.

It used to be this site, but over the past few years, the format has changed and I don't find a whole lot of content that connects with me on this site anymore.

So I go to Joystiq, Angry Joe Show, IGN, Gamespot, wherever has video reviews up on time for new releases etc.

I just watch the Quick Look. If it looks interesting on that, I'll investigate further. If not, I probably won't.

I still go to IGN out of habit but I enjoy Rev3games' reviews particularly Sessler's ones.

Have to agree while Joe may not be everyone's cup of tea he Always seems to hit the nail on the head when it comes to talking points/score, truly making the phrase "Fair and Balanced" mean something with his videos.

Video reviews are so strange to me anymore. An exercise in spinning plates. They can't be as plainly informative or thorough as written criticism, and they can't be as directly engaging or entertaining as more long-form video content has come to be.

Instead they are these micro-fractured versions of a review written elsewhere. Bullet points excavated out of a manuscript to be recited over quick snippets of captured video. A Twitch stream or an extended playthrough might get me a better visual sense of how the game plays.

Before the rise of Let's Players and Twitch, I think I relied a bit more on video reviews to provide me that second-hand experience of a game. But now the method just seems antiquated. Could see it still having worth if you just want a quick evaluative snapshot of something.

I hate Angry Joe's reviews. He comes off as an asshole who hates everything, and the screaming and shouting over and over has never been a style that I have found amusing or informative. The whole "angry" part of his routine makes it difficult to take anything he says seriously.

I used to watch Rev3's reviews back when Max was around. Though I'll still watch some over there if Tara's the reviewer.

I actually bounce between GB QL's, and TotalBiscut. I find that most often than not, they have an extremely stark contrast with one another.

One may get on the hype train, while the other has more of a critical view. The more recent one that comes to mind is Goat Simulator. Some may see it as a great time, and have a lot of fun with it. While others may see it as gimmicky, and not worth the money. I'm not saying this happens often, but it does happen.

I think having such a contrast like this, really does give you a larger view of the games, and in turn helps you make a better purchasing decision.

@liquidprince: Agreed. I've never cared for much of Angry Joe's content. He always comes across like he's playing a character. It feels too much like he talks at me rather than to me. It's just uncomfortable.

I like the video reviews from Rev3Games. I haven't been there much after Adam retired, but Tara's reviews are pretty good.

It's been a while since I've used reviews to make a buying decision. I can figure out all that I need to know about a game between podcasts, quick looks, Twitch, social media, ect. I haven't been nearly as picky as I used to be (or should be) with buying games recently. I'm not sure if it's the way they're covered, the quality of games, or just me being a bit more comfortable financially than I used to be. Hearing what someone else thinks of a game doesn't mean as much to me anymore (though I still enjoy discussing games). I can see a game being played for 10 minutes and know it it's something I'll enjoy playing.

Reviews aren't as important as they once were, but I don't know if it's a personal thing or an actual shift in games coverage.

It used to be Rev3 because of Adam Sessler. Now I like Angry Joe. That guy is extremely articulate for a guy that calls himself Angry Joe. Also they're like 30 minutes long. I don't watch too many but when there's a big game I usually try to find his video for it.

I no longer watch video reviews. I check out the Quick Look and some written ones.

Generally I will start with GB or GS, but what I end up doing is researching written reviews through Meta-critic, say initiated at Steam for example. I will of course have an idea what the developing average is, that was Meta-critic's origonal purpose. But it is important, especially if I want to still have an interest in the game, or grasp why it did poorly, or just to rejoice it did well (for the moment anyways Bioshock Infinite, lol!) to read the reviews. I do tend to stay away from the more 'opinionated/axe to grind/rep to be made' ones, figuring they may slew too much to the negative or the positive, having already a rep for being in a sense, well, opinionated. (Mr. Sterling)

It's a weird question when I think about it. If it's a game I'm interested in then I look up whatever videos I can. I'll (reluctantly) pop into IGN and see if they have a video review up just because. I'll search Youtube for videos and it doesn't have to just be a review.

I find viewing gameplay more helpful and interesting. I find short, cut up, overly produced videos, usually characteristics of review videos, to not be fulfilling. I like Giantbomb because videos are at least 30 mins long and avg around 45 mins to an hour. If it's something I'm interested in watching then the longer the better. I'll sit and watch six hours of video. That's my style.

I can say for sure that I don't visit sites like Game Trailers, Gamespot, Joystiq etc and not for any particular reason. I've just never used those sites. I only ever check IGN for something because that used to be the site I used. Long before Youtube ever existed, long before IGN had an overly complicated site appearance crammed with ads and stuff was overly produced. Before they had to post a girl on a video in an attempt to fish in viewers. There was IGN and Gamespot and I looked at IGN. I had PC Gamer and PSM Magazines being delivered. That was about 15 years ago now I guess lol.

Totally different these days. So I didn't vote on this. I looked and thought about it and then decided to write this to churn my thoughts. These days I consider things like Totalbiscuit's "WTF is?" and Giantbomb's Quick Looks as reviews. IGN might be the only traditional reviews I ever look at but it's so rare that I don't think it counts. I've watched Yahtzee's stuff ranting on a game. I've watched Classic Game Room videos. I've seen Angry Joe videos before. I found out about Rev3 when Adam joined them but I found their content to be that sort of overly produced short stuff. I like Tara. But Adam left and I had already kind of stopped watching their stuff so I unsubscribed.

Very interesting. I was wondering if video reviews were still something people cared about, and it seems,at least on Giant Bomb they are not. Obviously this survey is slightly self-selecting as Giant Bomb has not had video reviews for quite sometime now and I guess anyone who was bothered by that would probably be patronising other sites.

As far as I am concerned, video reviews were never really about informing myself, they were more about entertainment. I generally only watched them in the hope of some funny commentary, or snappy editing rather than to make a purchasing decision. They really do seem redundant in an era of Let's plays/Quick Looks etc and a real relic of an internet era when we were still trying to produce video content in the same formats we had known from printed media. The only possible current use I can see for them is as reviews for people too lazy to read, otherwise everything they offer can be done better elsewhere.

I find most video reviews to be a waste of time.

Gametrailers has always been my most valued source of reviews. Production is excellent, but I agree with their scores more than any other site. Been that way for years.

Giant Bomb has my favorite written ones despite Jeff's opinion rarely matching mine (and that's ok!) Alex and Brad are excellent writers, which is great because they don't need video reviews to get a point across.

But Gametrailers has a script that matches their video structure very well.

Video reviews are probably my least favorite way to learn about a game.

I'll take written reviews, Quick Looks and Let's Plays any day.

The last time I really cared about video reviews was probably pre-2008 X-Play.

I used to watch those but eventually stopped and now if I ever want to see if I'll like a game I watch quick looks and someone doing a let's play. Just to see a bit of the game in motion and then decide.

I used to watch rev3 because Adam was extremely good at putting together video reviews. Now I don't go anywhere.

I get more out of Quick Looks for a game anyways.

Angry Joe always seemed like the guy that would rate something 0 on metacritic or amazon because it's the popular internet thing to do. I watched a few of his reviews and quickly realized that he and I have very different opinions on games.

Yahtzee/Zero Punctuation is the closest to Video Reviews that I watch.

My first exposure to any form of video review for games was x-play. After that I continued to search for any reviews by The Sess, be it on G4 or Rev3. Nowadays, I watch video reviews from a lot of sources i.e. IGN, Gamespot, CGR, Machinima, but mainly to just see more video game footage, rather than listen to the actual review. The only video review I actually give a damn listening to the content is by Whitty a.k.a UltimateChance Youtube as most of the time I find his reviews informative and unbiased...sometimes.

that 52% is full of shit and they know it. Anyways Angry Joe is the right answer.

I don't watch reviews anymore. Especially not the 'Angry Joe'-type ones. I found almost no review is similar to my taste in games. I only listen to discussion now. Reviews are very one sided and they describe the game from one side. I'd have to watch several of them and see where they disagree with each other in order for it to come whole. I might as well just eliminate a step in the process and immediately go for the discussion.