Jump to content


The new video reviews


  • Please log in to reply
59 replies to this topic

#1 George the Flea

George the Flea

    IMG Comma Junkie

  • IMG Writers
  • 680 posts
  • Location:Seattle, WA
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 10 August 2005 - 03:08 PM

Hey folks,

As you may have noticed, IMG has just launched our first ever video review of a game (Star Wars Battlefront), and I'd like to hear community feedback.

One thing that I'm specifically curious about is the eternal question of video reviews of size vs. quality.  Did the quality of picture and sound work for you?  Was the filesize too big, given your connection?  Would you have prefered a lower quality option with reduced filesize? Please let me know.

One note: for now we'll likely only be doing video reviews for the really big titles, but any suggestions for upcoming games that you would like a video review attached to are welcome (although we can't promise anything).

I'd also love to get comments, critiques, praise, suggestions, or whatever else.  Just please keep criticism constructive, or I'll call out the Battle Cat to wail on you like you've never been wailed on before.  :)
Ian
IMG Flunky

Me + web = Beckism.com | Tagamac | One Crayon

#2 The iMac Man

The iMac Man

    Macologist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2422 posts
  • Location:IL (USA)

Posted 10 August 2005 - 03:10 PM

The need for QT7 is keeping me from being able to watch it here at work, as we have not been approved to install QT7 yet....
-iMac

(The PC to Mac CoD Mod Converter)
Heat of Battle
Revolt
SWAT
Others

Get Mac Game Mods: Macologist.org

#3 bobbob

bobbob

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3367 posts

Posted 10 August 2005 - 03:27 PM

The iMac Man, on August 10th 2005, 02:10 PM, said:

The need for QT7 is keeping me from being able to watch it here at work

Who cares? H.264 makes it better.

The link to view.php is a bit sloppy. Javascript with no fallback, opening a new window for no good reason, setting off every popup blocker within a hundred miles, etc. Just give us an embedded movie or even a link to the mov and it'd work itself out.

#4 The iMac Man

The iMac Man

    Macologist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2422 posts
  • Location:IL (USA)

Posted 10 August 2005 - 03:45 PM

bobbob, on August 10th 2005, 04:27 PM, said:

Who cares?

View Post



Uh, me!   :glare:


One of the first things I learned in web design... never elimate potential viewers by using some new fangled technology they might not all have yet.
-iMac

(The PC to Mac CoD Mod Converter)
Heat of Battle
Revolt
SWAT
Others

Get Mac Game Mods: Macologist.org

#5 Siriusfox

Siriusfox

    Legendary

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1148 posts
  • Steam Name:opensiriusfox
  • Location:Washington State

Posted 10 August 2005 - 04:00 PM

The iMac Man, on August 10th 2005, 02:45 PM, said:

One of the first things I learned in web design... never elimate potential viewers by using some new fangled technology they might not all have yet.
I can't get it to run in QT7. I have cookies set and all. The audio is fine (little low quality but I don't want a bigger file, and it's good enough) but the video never came through. I can't save the file to my Desktop either, I get an error -2037.

I dislike having the add in the window, but I guess that we can't do much about adds unless we go to Pro.

[edit- I went into the source, and found the URL. I then downloaded the file to my desktop, that plays fine in QT. But the file hosted at IMG still doesn't load right.]
20'' iMac Intel Core Duo 2GHz, 10.6.5, 2GB RAM, 256MB ATI X1600

"Home computers are being called upon to perform many new functions, including the consumption of homework formerly eaten by the dog." -Doug Larson

#6 Tuncer (IMG)

Tuncer (IMG)

    Pimpbot 5000

  • Admin
  • 923 posts
  • Location:Calgary, Canada
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 10 August 2005 - 04:04 PM

joefox, on August 10th 2005, 03:00 PM, said:

I can't get it to run in QT7. I have cookies set and all. The audio is fine (little low quality but I don't want a bigger file, and it's good enough) but the video never came through. I can't save the file to my Desktop either, I get an error -2037.

I dislike having the add in the window, but I guess that we can't do much about adds unless we go to Pro.

View Post


Joe,

Are you on broadband or modem?
Tuncer
Inside Mac Games

Twitter - http://www.twitter.com/tuncerdeniz

#7 Siriusfox

Siriusfox

    Legendary

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1148 posts
  • Steam Name:opensiriusfox
  • Location:Washington State

Posted 10 August 2005 - 04:19 PM

Tuncer (IMG), on August 10th 2005, 03:04 PM, said:

Joe,

Are you on broadband or modem?

View Post

256KB per sec. DSL.

I'm watching the downloaded file now, it's great.
20'' iMac Intel Core Duo 2GHz, 10.6.5, 2GB RAM, 256MB ATI X1600

"Home computers are being called upon to perform many new functions, including the consumption of homework formerly eaten by the dog." -Doug Larson

#8 Tuncer (IMG)

Tuncer (IMG)

    Pimpbot 5000

  • Admin
  • 923 posts
  • Location:Calgary, Canada
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 10 August 2005 - 04:23 PM

The movie not loading in the IMG viewer might be a problem with the anti-leech. If so, we need to know from which server it is failing from. Please try again and post what server it fails from (look at the source).
Tuncer
Inside Mac Games

Twitter - http://www.twitter.com/tuncerdeniz

#9 Siriusfox

Siriusfox

    Legendary

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1148 posts
  • Steam Name:opensiriusfox
  • Location:Washington State

Posted 10 August 2005 - 04:36 PM

I tried for the third time, and now it works. I'll post if it happens again.
20'' iMac Intel Core Duo 2GHz, 10.6.5, 2GB RAM, 256MB ATI X1600

"Home computers are being called upon to perform many new functions, including the consumption of homework formerly eaten by the dog." -Doug Larson

#10 the Battle Cat

the Battle Cat

    Carnage Served Raw

  • Admin
  • 17429 posts
  • Location:Citadel City, Lh'owon
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 10 August 2005 - 06:59 PM

George the Flea, on August 10th 2005, 01:08 PM, said:

One thing that I'm specifically curious about is the eternal question of video reviews of size vs. quality.  Did the quality of picture and sound work for you?  Was the filesize too big, given your connection?  Would you have prefered a lower quality option with reduced filesize? Please let me know.
Quality and sound were excellent.  The file completely loaded the first minute into the film, I'm using ADSL.  I would have preferred slightly larger dimensions on the screen as some things being pointed out were pretty tiny.  Very impressive overall.

Quote

I'd also love to get comments, critiques, praise, suggestions, or whatever else.  Just please keep criticism constructive, or I'll call out the Battle Cat to wail on you like you've never been wailed on before.  :)

View Post

Just let me at 'em!  I'll murdalize 'em!  I strangle them with their own intestines, fry their face in cyborg servo oil, then eat it with a pickle!!   ::grrrr grrrrrrrRRRRR::
Gary Simmons
the Battle Cat

#11 Frigidman™

Frigidman™

    Eye Sea Yew

  • Admin
  • 4265 posts
  • Steam ID:frigidman
  • Location:East mahn, East!
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 10 August 2005 - 07:18 PM

bobbob, on August 10th 2005, 03:27 PM, said:

Who cares? H.264 makes it better.

The link to view.php is a bit sloppy. Javascript with no fallback, opening a new window for no good reason, setting off every popup blocker within a hundred miles, etc. Just give us an embedded movie or even a link to the mov and it'd work itself out.

View Post

Typical of you, no clue what you are talking about when it comes to the web.

A new window, so you can go do something else while it loads in a smaller controlled window. Not everyone wants a massive movie trying to load in the body of an article. Talk about sloppy, throwing a link to a movie file is the most pathetic way to present a movie.

No pop-up blocker I tried, blocks an initiated click of a link that opens a new window. At least in the four mainstream browsers I tried that all have a "block popups" option turned on, they had no trouble. Maybe broken-ass beta good-for-nothing piece-of-junk web browsers might have a problem with it. However we don't support those.

Anyone who turns off ALL javascripting (which has to be done to make the very basic javascript, NOT function), is someone who is used too every website in the world no longer functioning fully or well. Too many websites use basic javascripting now as a requirement. Much like needing cookies.

I can add extra bloat-code for the minority who turn off all javascripting, to throw them to the same link in the big massive window they are in. However thats a lot of extra useless code that has to fill up the html just for a very very small few who do not deserve it.

It works great how it is designed now. We just need to get that movie file playing video! (I had the same trouble, and it took about 3 tries to finally get the video to load in too, and I'm on modem, ugh).

-Fm [1oM7]
"I'm not incorruptible, I am so corrupt nothing you can offer me is tempting." - Alfred Bester


#12 bobbob

bobbob

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3367 posts

Posted 10 August 2005 - 07:33 PM

Quote

A new window, so you can go do something else while it loads in a smaller controlled window.

I loaded the page in its own tab for a reason. If I wanted it in a window I'd open it in a window. If I wanted it in a small window I might even resize the window, but I don't care. Heck, if I just wanted to watch the video I wouldn't even need a new tab, and spawning a midgit-sized window would just get in the way.

Quote

I can add extra bloat-code for the minority who turn off all javascripting, to throw them to the same link in the big massive window they are in.

Bloat? A link is bloat? I hope someone at IMG is a capable web designer.

#13 Frigidman™

Frigidman™

    Eye Sea Yew

  • Admin
  • 4265 posts
  • Steam ID:frigidman
  • Location:East mahn, East!
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 10 August 2005 - 07:47 PM

bobbob, on August 10th 2005, 07:33 PM, said:

Bloat? A link is bloat? I hope someone at IMG is a capable web designer.

View Post

Like I said, you have no clue. Obviously you don't understand what is required to make a web page behave normally for the vast majority, AND behave less restrictive to those who turn off javascripting.

I am not going to waste anymore time with you, because we all know you are a troll here when it comes to dealing with anything needing an ounce of intelligence.

-Fm [1oM7]
"I'm not incorruptible, I am so corrupt nothing you can offer me is tempting." - Alfred Bester


#14 Siriusfox

Siriusfox

    Legendary

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1148 posts
  • Steam Name:opensiriusfox
  • Location:Washington State

Posted 10 August 2005 - 07:58 PM

It done gone and happend again.
<TD BGCOLOR="#535353" ALIGN="center" VALIGN="middle">
	<TABLE BORDER="0" CELLSPACING="10" CELLPADDING="0" WIDTH="100%">
	<TR>

  <TD BGCOLOR="#000000" ALIGN="center" VALIGN="middle"><EMBED 
   SRC="http://downloads3.macgamefiles.com/files/movies/Battlefront_review.mov" 
   WIDTH="320" 
   HEIGHT="256" 
   BORDER="1" 
   PLUGINSPAGE="http://www.apple.com/quicktime/download/" 
   TARGET="myself"></EMBED></TD>

I assume that is what you need. I have the whole thing saved if you need more.

[edit- funny I loaded the text that I saved as html again, then it loaded the thing with video. This might be a QT7, or Safari bug.]
20'' iMac Intel Core Duo 2GHz, 10.6.5, 2GB RAM, 256MB ATI X1600

"Home computers are being called upon to perform many new functions, including the consumption of homework formerly eaten by the dog." -Doug Larson

#15 bobbob

bobbob

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3367 posts

Posted 10 August 2005 - 08:00 PM

Frigidman, on August 10th 2005, 06:47 PM, said:

Like I said, you have no clue.

Put a link to the page with the embedded movie inside the noscript tags. No script? The link appears. Script? The javascript is used and adds a link that works how you want other people to see it. I'm sorry if I offended anyone.

(cite: google "javascript link fallback", third result should be "the javascript co-existence page")

#16 Matt Diamond

Matt Diamond

    Master Blaster

  • IMG Writers
  • 2477 posts
  • Location:Holland, PA; US
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 10 August 2005 - 08:03 PM

Okay, calm down everyone.

Bobbob, we got the suggestion, thanks.

Frigidman, might want to work on just thanking people for their feedback. :-) Obviously if a lot of other people had problems loading or wanted the movie embedded, you'd have to consider it, yes? Even if it offended your sense of web standards? So there's no need to fight with one person over their opinion, just take it as part of the overall feedback and see what other people think too. This is where we LISTEN to the feedback. Judging it out of hand might discourage other feedback, and our glorious Editor-in-C started this thread to get feedback.
Matt Diamond - www.mindthecube.com
Measure twice, cut once, curse three or four times.

#17 Matt Diamond

Matt Diamond

    Master Blaster

  • IMG Writers
  • 2477 posts
  • Location:Holland, PA; US
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 10 August 2005 - 08:20 PM

I just got the following email:

Quote

Subject: video review

Amazing !!!

More more more !!!

;-)

Of course I wasn't responsible for the video review, just the written one, so I figured I'd pass this along.

I enjoyed the video review a heck of a lot, myself. But I'm also annoyed, because who's going to bother reading my well-reasoned, organized prose when they can watch a video review that says the same thing but flashier and more succinctly? (Not me!) This must be how that radio star felt. You know, the one that video killed.

Sigh. But we can't rewind, can we? We've gone too far.

Anyway, kudos to Blake Buck and everyone else involved! Great job.
Matt Diamond - www.mindthecube.com
Measure twice, cut once, curse three or four times.

#18 bobbob

bobbob

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3367 posts

Posted 10 August 2005 - 08:24 PM

Maybe put the reviewer in the sub-rectangle when the game is on, because he's less detailed and interesting ;) Oh, and don't reuse clips.



Having almost no experience in web design, I did some further research and here might be a competent way to handle it:.

<a href="somedoc.html" target="newWindow" onclick="window.open(this.href, this.target); return false">click here</a>


#19 Siriusfox

Siriusfox

    Legendary

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1148 posts
  • Steam Name:opensiriusfox
  • Location:Washington State

Posted 10 August 2005 - 09:18 PM

Matt Diamond, on August 10th 2005, 07:20 PM, said:

I enjoyed the video review a heck of a lot, myself. But I'm also annoyed, because who's going to bother reading my well-reasoned, organized prose when they can watch a video review that says the same thing but flashier and more succinctly? (Not me!) This must be how that radio star felt.
One word, podcast. Hey, they will be reading your review, at-least.
20'' iMac Intel Core Duo 2GHz, 10.6.5, 2GB RAM, 256MB ATI X1600

"Home computers are being called upon to perform many new functions, including the consumption of homework formerly eaten by the dog." -Doug Larson

#20 Eric5h5

Eric5h5

    Minion Tormentor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7160 posts

Posted 10 August 2005 - 09:27 PM

Matt Diamond, on August 10th 2005, 09:20 PM, said:

I enjoyed the video review a heck of a lot, myself. But I'm also annoyed, because who's going to bother reading my well-reasoned, organized prose when they can watch a video review that says the same thing but flashier and more succinctly? (Not me!) This must be how that radio star felt. You know, the one that video killed.

Me, actually.  I'd way rather read a review than watch a video, no matter how well produced.  Even if I wasn't on a modem.  But then, I cancelled my satellite TV service two or three years ago...I just don't like watching video that much.  Probably I'm in the extreme minority.

As long as we're talking about websites and design and modems and stuff, any chance of fixing IMG so that those of us who sometimes surf with images off don't get black text on a very very dark background?  Thanx....

--Eric