>>19660 Tried watching the first video. Almost a minute in and no game footage. I think I gave it until a minute after that.
Same with the second video really. Too much arsing about with your mates and not enough actually showing the games. I don't give a fuck whether you played some Commodore game in the 80s, this is meant to be a review of a current game. I think a current game? I hovered over the time bit and scanned through and I saw no game footage.
Before you write me off as being an opinionated arsehole (although I suppose I am one) bear in mind that I am your target audience. I watch quite a few reviews and let's plays on youtube. I play video games every single day of my life, usually for hours at a time.
If you want to do funny little sketches, do a bloody sketch show.
If you want to do videos about video games, for video games fans, then SHOW GAME FOOTAGE and not your ugly mug. Or at the very least, keep your faces in a tiny box in the corner while superimposed over you ACTUALLY PLAYING THE GAME. I couldn't be fucking arsed to keep watching until you did, so I don't even know if you ever did show any footage of YOU playing the game or just used stock footage.
This all looks like the sort of thing the one show runs, to explain video games to your gran. Yes yes, it's well shot and well produced...but it's fucking bland and boring and not something the target audience will give a shit about.
I wish I had a machine capable of capturing me playing. I wouldn't fuck about like this.
I've seen lots of game footage. I have only heard the reviewers voice, not seen his stupid face. He's done a comparison with a similar game (this one is more geared to realism than World Of Warplanes). Overall, a good 53 seconds, I'll keep watching.
This isn't a TV show. Youtube has a million other channels to switch to. If you don't grab me in the first few seconds, I'm gone. I almost turned off that one because he had that bollocks cut up footage from some old films, but thankfully he kept it short enough, while at the same time talking and leading up to actual game footage at 25 seconds. That's an absolute maximum for today's ADHD addled channel hoppers.
A bit caustically worded, but we appreciate the feedback! There was some concern that we were focusing too much on nostalgia and not enough on the meat of the actual review.
That said we were focusing more on entertainment, but in future we'll probably need to deliver the info in a more punchy format.
>>19660 It's a bit floopy doopy, RANDUM stuff - not my cup of tea to be honest.
Just show game footage, maybe some references to older stuff, maybe add some interesting behind the scenes facts.
The presenter is a bit rubbish. The way he narrates is just a bit flat and the stuff he talks about switches between what sounds like reading the back of the CD case out and pointlessly in depth mentions of why the game got removed from Steam or some other rubbish. That's all pretty much irrelevant to the gameplay experience.
I'm pretty impressed by the way the videos are cut, though. Your Premiere guy has potential. Not that the presentation is terrible. But in both cases you're trying to imitate what already exists. Doing a decent job of it, but don't do that, you can't master someone else's style. It's already been done. Explore your own.
>>19676 > We do like a bit of floopy doopy and some visual wankery, but you've made me realise perhaps game reviews aren't the place for it.
(War Thunder Review)
Very much so. Floopy doopy works in let's plays (sort of), but in a review I expect information first, entertainment second (just for reference, I'm the kind of snobby prick that watches the 10 minutes TotalBiscuit spends fawning over FOV sliders because I care about options). I watch game reviews to answer the question "Is it worth my time to play this game?" Floopy doopy witty banter that isn't embedded in information about the game is worthless to me though shame on you for not mentioning Sopwith the game, therefore not feeding my personal nostalgia. In all it seemed almost like a journo trying to expense a day out at a museum by doing a bit about it than a genuine review.
On the plus side the camera work was in keeping with the theme, the sound was good, the elocution of the speaker was very occasioanlly a bit mumbly but otherwise great.