I've been reviewing the last year, as is almost compulsory around this time, and how could I not look back on my years worth of game purchases when trying to select my top ten games? 
All this retrospect has made me wonder something about Giant Bomb itself. Or rather the effect it has on me. So I fully confess that I have bought a game purely because of something posted by one of the GB crew. Not only that but I know that it's not just me effected in this way. Usually with gaming sites I'll read the odd preview of a game I'm interested in and maybe look at review scores and skim the text itself (I find that some sites reveal key moments in games). Yes this can influence my gaming purchases but I can't remember reading about a game I'd not heard of, and then buying it as a result.
So I have to wonder what it is about Giant Bomb that does this? And what percentage of it's readers are afflicted?

On "what it is":  
 
I think the passion these guys have for the medium really shows. Conscious or not, the Giant Bomb crew exudes knowledge of and love for the craft of video gaming and the act of playing games. This love inflects their writing, personalizes their podcasts, and focuses the video content posted on the site.  
 
As a result, I think we, as viewers/readers/followers, understand that their opinions are genuine. And flagrantly genuine opinions are usually the easiest to rally behind. The guys at Giant Bomb aren't reviewing games to make the act of reviewing more academic a la IGN or even Gamespot. They've stripped away the formalities because they understand the core word in the phrase "video game". That core word is "game", and the objective of any game, as has been the case for hundreds of years, is to create and propagate fun amongst its participants. So they're here to tell us why a game succeeds at being fun, or why it doesn't. And they do so by talking to the site's users as equals. Not as an audience.  

" On "what it is":   I think the passion these guys have for the medium really shows. Conscious or not, the Giant Bomb crew exudes knowledge of and love for the craft of video gaming and the act of playing games. This love inflects their writing, personalizes their podcasts, and focuses the video content posted on the site.   As a result, I think we, as viewers/readers/followers, understand that their opinions are genuine. And flagrantly genuine opinions are usually the easiest to rally behind. The guys at Giant Bomb aren't reviewing games to make the act of reviewing more academic a la IGN or even Gamespot. They've stripped away the formalities because they understand the core word in the phrase "video game". That core word is "game", and the objective of any game, as has been the case for hundreds of years, is to create and propagate fun amongst its participants. So they're here to tell us why a game succeeds at being fun, or why it doesn't. And they do so by talking to the site's users as equals. Not as an audience.   "

" @Sir_Ragnarok said:

" On "what it is":   I think the passion these guys have for the medium really shows. Conscious or not, the Giant Bomb crew exudes knowledge of and love for the craft of video gaming and the act of playing games. This love inflects their writing, personalizes their podcasts, and focuses the video content posted on the site.   As a result, I think we, as viewers/readers/followers, understand that their opinions are genuine. And flagrantly genuine opinions are usually the easiest to rally behind. The guys at Giant Bomb aren't reviewing games to make the act of reviewing more academic a la IGN or even Gamespot. They've stripped away the formalities because they understand the core word in the phrase "video game". That core word is "game", and the objective of any game, as has been the case for hundreds of years, is to create and propagate fun amongst its participants. So they're here to tell us why a game succeeds at being fun, or why it doesn't. And they do so by talking to the site's users as equals. Not as an audience.   "

That brought a tear to my eye.  One solid, formidable tear. "

I don't think I'm wrong from a macro perspective, but I'm not trying to assume I know your particular motivations.
 
You're right in that the Quick Look shows us what's going on regardless as to whether or not the staff is enjoying playing it.  I think it says a lot for a game like P4 that one could watch the whole thing and still want to get it.  A lot of the other Quick Looks here feel like pans, but that would decrease the urge to buy the games.  I've still found some games interesting that the staff didn't like while playing, so you're right, this sort of partial walkthrough perspective is much more informative than a full block-of-text review in some cases.
 
You should mention the Quick Looks in your thesis, I guess. 

Well it was less a thesis and more of a musing.
I probably should have given an example but I didn't want to limit myself. After all the Persona stuff wasn't a Quick Look either, and I'm sure some people have bought based on reviews etc despite the fact that the site remains largely unbranded.
I don't think there's even a link to whether the team liked something or not. Speaking for myself I don't always agree with them, I tend to agree with Yahtzee more if anything. Still, when they say something I know where I stand in relation to that. But is that a factor is why so many (at least so they claim) go on to buy after being shown on GB?
I like the idea that it's their passion, that we as game players recognise and resonate with that and subsequently that sometimes effects our purchasing decisions.

I think it's because they treat their viewers and followers not as consumers but rather as friends. 
 
Think about when a friend shows you a video game (like a quick look) when they give you their impressions (like a review) or even talk up a game that hasn't come out yet or that no one knows about. And that is exactly what the GiantBomb crew does, treat us all like friends who play video games. 

"On "what it is":   I think the passion these guys have for the medium really shows. Conscious or not, the Giant Bomb crew exudes knowledge of and love for the craft of video gaming and the act of playing games. This love inflects their writing, personalizes their podcasts, and focuses the video content posted on the site.   As a result, I think we, as viewers/readers/followers, understand that their opinions are genuine. And flagrantly genuine opinions are usually the easiest to rally behind. The guys at Giant Bomb aren't reviewing games to make the act of reviewing more academic a la IGN or even Gamespot. They've stripped away the formalities because they understand the core word in the phrase "video game". That core word is "game", and the objective of any game, as has been the case for hundreds of years, is to create and propagate fun amongst its participants. So they're here to tell us why a game succeeds at being fun, or why it doesn't. And they do so by talking to the site's users as equals. Not as an audience.   "

I haven't bought games simply because of good reviews on GB, but I will admit that I really want to go get Shadow Complex thanks to them and that the GB crew's opinions have definitely put games on my radar that weren't there before.

I bought torchlight for 5$ today on steam because of these guys. I liked them even  way back at gamespot and been a huge fan of their sense of humor.