Jump to content


The new video reviews


  • Please log in to reply
59 replies to this topic

#21 BBUCK

BBUCK

    Fanatic

  • IMG Writers
  • 83 posts

Posted 10 August 2005 - 09:48 PM

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

I just got the following email:
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.

View Post


Hey everybody, this is Blake Buck.  Sorry to steal your thunder Matt.  Just a comment, I tried to stay fairly close to your review while adding in a little of my own flair.  I hope I captured what you were going for.

Anyone have any comments on the content on the review itself?  All this back-end mumbo jumbo is making my head spin.

As for a larger version, I have one and it is a possibility, but at the moment, won't fit in the web interface.  We're currently looking into our options.

Any and all feedback is appreciated!

#22 George the Flea

George the Flea

    IMG Comma Junkie

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

Posted 11 August 2005 - 12:10 AM

bobbob, on August 10th 2005, 05:33 PM, said:

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.

If like me you really dislike scripts opening new windows, I'd advise you to download Saft and give it a try; one of its myriad features is to allow you to force new windows to open as new tabs instead.  I'm very happy with it myself.  Alternatively, Firefox has a very nice extension which allows you to do the same thing (but with more options).

My reason for suggesting this is that opening a new, smaller window for things like video clips is standard behavior for the internet; most people find it the most user-friendly experience.  For the rest of us (including myself, I might add), we have the option to force tabbed behaviors on websites that want windows.

I looked back to your original post before this flame-fest started, and here's the basic answer: sorry, but we're sticking with the new window for a variety of reasons, some of which were mentioned.

Anyway, for other people: we'll definitely be working on making sure that the video and audio work in the future.  Please continue to inform us of any problems you have.  Not being involved with the encoding aspect, I'm not sure whether we'll be able to support sub-QuickTime 7 or not, but please be assurred that we'll do what we can.  Unfortunately, it just might not be feasible.

And as Blake said, any comments on content would be great.  While it's important for us to hear about what's not working, that wasn't really the feedback that I was looking for.  ;)

Lastly, thanks for sharing the email, Matt!  And thanks to whoever wrote the email for your kind comments!
Ian
IMG Flunky

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

#23 bobbob

bobbob

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3367 posts

Posted 11 August 2005 - 01:15 AM

George the Flea, on August 10th 2005, 11:10 PM, said:

we're sticking with the new window for a variety of reasons

I posted the gist of doing it how you want without requiring javascript for it to work, so hopefully sticking with opening a new window doesn't mean leaving it alone.

#24 Matt Diamond

Matt Diamond

    Master Blaster

  • IMG Writers
  • 2478 posts
  • Location:Holland, PA; US
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 11 August 2005 - 05:38 AM

BBUCK, on August 10th 2005, 10:48 PM, said:

Hey everybody, this is Blake Buck.  Sorry to steal your thunder Matt.  Just a comment, I tried to stay fairly close to your review while adding in a little of my own flair.  I hope I captured what you were going for.

Anyone have any comments on the content on the review itself?  All this back-end mumbo jumbo is making my head spin.

As for a larger version, I have one and it is a possibility, but at the moment, won't fit in the web interface.  We're currently looking into our options.

Any and all feedback is appreciated!

View Post


It was great. Despite the flashy game clips, I could tell you were at pains to discuss the pros and cons. So it felt like a "real" IMG review, light tone, but real meat in the discussion.

It might be harder to pull off if you were to disagree strongly with some aspect of the written review, yes? I thought I could feel you putting slightly different emphasis than the written review in a couple of spots, but it was done very properly.

I'm joking about this replacing the written review. The video has the luxury of saying something like "let's face it, GameRanger stinks compared to the GameSpy option we didn't get" but the written review has to explain such statements in a little more detail. That's all as it should be.

I think your summary of the AI behavior was possibly better than mine. More succinct and yet you covered the same points. Although, neither of us mentioned that setting the difficulty level higher allows the AI to be better (they basically just move around more, as far as I can tell) so their decisions might be the same but they are harder to hit.

I'm not sure that the AI example you picked to show, namely the AI not shooting back at you very quickly, was fair though. It looked to me like that was a reaction time built into the AI to make them less inhumanly fast and accurate (not a difficult thing for a computer player to be.) A better example might have been a unit not even turning to face an obvious threat in the first place, or like you mentioned in the audio, not taking or defending a nearby control point at an opportune moment. But you'd have to shoot a lot of video before you happened to capture such a moment on film, so I think you made the best of it.

Speaking of making the best of it, as you know there was more that could have been said about multiplayer, namely the workaround for starting a game on GameRanger. This was late-breaking news, and the video just refers vaguely to difficulties joining a game. This is maybe the only topic that I felt was short-changed in the entire video.

My two favorite moments: the Windows+John Williams music gag, and the visual demonstration of the mouse movements needed to turn a starfighter. That latter was funny, but it also illustrated the point better than trying to describe it in a written review. And this is the biggest reason I'm excited by the video review- there are some things which can be shown better than they can be described. I hope IMG makes a habit of these, because in my opinion you knocked this one out of the park.
Matt Diamond - www.mindthecube.com
Measure twice, cut once, curse three or four times.

#25 tthiel

tthiel

    Heroic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 397 posts
  • Location:Phoenix, Az

Posted 11 August 2005 - 07:04 AM

I couldn't hear half of what the 12-year old with the bangs was saying due to the annoying thumping muzak. When I could hear him it sounded like he had marbles in his mouth due to some sort of accent.  Get rid of the muzak and have someone who can speak clearly and it might not have been so bad.

#26 Turtle

Turtle

    Fanatic

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 130 posts

Posted 11 August 2005 - 07:23 AM

IMG News, on August 10th 2005, 12:30 PM, said:

Inside Mac Games has posted a review of Star Wars Battlefront, published by the Mac by Aspyr Media. The written review is also accompanied by our very first video review (QuickTime 7 required).

View Post


IMG video reviews? Don't get me wrong, I love video reviews, it's the main reason why I frequent GameTrailers.com. Though stick to the formula that GameTrailers has in their video reviews. Seriously. No really. Get those people out of the video for the love of god! Don't record the reviewer in a huge room, the audio is echoing everywhere and the game audio isn't crisp either.

It's a start but again, get rid of the people, work on recording audio and get that in game audio crispy.

Not trying to slam you guys, just thought I comment. Good luck in the next review, i'll be looking forward to it.  :cool:

#27 Siriusfox

Siriusfox

    Legendary

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

Posted 11 August 2005 - 08:06 AM

I thought that the music added to the review. I would recommend increasing the volume of the reviewers voice, or possibly increasing audio quality a little. With the minor exeption of swinging up the Battlefront box, That looked a little cheesey, the review was great.

Good Job.
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

#28 the Battle Cat

the Battle Cat

    Carnage Served Raw

  • Admin
  • 17436 posts
  • Location:Citadel City, Lh'owon
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 11 August 2005 - 08:30 AM

bobbob, on August 10th 2005, 11:15 PM, said:

I posted the gist of doing it how you want without requiring javascript for it to work, so hopefully sticking with opening a new window doesn't mean leaving it alone.

View Post

bobbob, on August 10th 2005, 06:24 PM, said:

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>

View Post

You mean that?  That code is jam packed with Javascript inside an HTML anchor tag.  It wouldn't work with Javascript turned off.  Fm's point was that the entire site runs off of Javascript goodies and in order to please the few that don't have Javascript turned on would mean producing TWO of each page in order to get them somewhat functionally the same, one that utilized Javascript and one that didn't.  That is the bloat he mentioned.  That is TWICE the work, much more than adding a simple HTML anchor tag.  Please stop trying to second guess the webmaster and stick to critiquing the video review itself.  George the Flea has already requested this, any more deviance from the topic will get deleted because it is just a distraction.  You may feel free however to take it to PM with any of us you care to discuss it with.

tthiel, on August 11th 2005, 05:04 AM, said:

I couldn't hear half of what the 12-year old with the bangs was saying due to the annoying thumping muzak. When I could hear him it sounded like he had marbles in his mouth due to some sort of accent.  Get rid of the muzak and have someone who can speak clearly and it might not have been so bad.

View Post

The "12-year old with bangs" is standing right here.  BBUCK, may I introduce you to your biggest fan tthiel?  Tthiel, BBUCK.
Gary Simmons
the Battle Cat

#29 EyceNine

EyceNine

    Macologist

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 55 posts

Posted 11 August 2005 - 08:38 AM

Turtle, on August 11th 2005, 06:23 AM, said:

IMG video reviews? Don't get me wrong, I love video reviews, it's the main reason why I frequent GameTrailers.com. Though stick to the formula that GameTrailers has in their video reviews. Seriously. No really. Get those people out of the video for the love of god! Don't record the reviewer in a huge room, the audio is echoing everywhere and the game audio isn't crisp either.

It's a start but again, get rid of the people, work on recording audio and get that in game audio crispy.

Not trying to slam you guys, just thought I comment. Good luck in the next review, i'll be looking forward to it.  :cool:

View Post



I agree totally. Not seen video reviews before. Good concept but more game footage less reviewer.

#30 The iMac Man

The iMac Man

    Macologist

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

Posted 11 August 2005 - 08:49 AM

I just wish I could watch the stinkin thing.....    :(
-iMac

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

Get Mac Game Mods: Macologist.org

#31 Turtle

Turtle

    Fanatic

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 130 posts

Posted 11 August 2005 - 09:47 AM

EyceNine, on August 11th 2005, 06:38 AM, said:

I agree totally. Not seen video reviews before. Good concept but more game footage less reviewer.

View Post


Gametrailers.com has been doing Video reviews for a while now. They do have a larger library to review as the site is for all games. Bump up the over all quality of the video, most people with good connections can easily swallow 40-60mb movies.

#32 The iMac Man

The iMac Man

    Macologist

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

Posted 11 August 2005 - 09:57 AM

Turtle, on August 11th 2005, 10:47 AM, said:

...most people with good connections can easily swallow 40-60mb movies.

View Post



And that's not the majority of people.  Good connections still aren't commonplace, in America at least.

I have no idea where you are from or where you are refering to, as you haven't filled out any of the info in your profile... but, that's another story.  Heck, now that I'm going on that topic, I may start a new thread about it....   :glare:
-iMac

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

Get Mac Game Mods: Macologist.org

#33 Mandrake628

Mandrake628

    Heroic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 456 posts

Posted 11 August 2005 - 10:18 AM

Then there should be a quality toggle.  The people who have a good connection + QT7 will take the higher quality, and the rest the lower quality.  I'm sure there can also be levels in between.

Mandrake628

#34 Matt Diamond

Matt Diamond

    Master Blaster

  • IMG Writers
  • 2478 posts
  • Location:Holland, PA; US
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 11 August 2005 - 10:15 AM

More thoughts:

I agree with the comments about the thumping music. Lower the volume a tad after the intro so we can hear the reviewer better.

I disagree with the comments about seeing the reviewer less throughout the review. I personally thought it was a good mix. Might just be a personal preference, and I've played the game of course so maybe that's why I didn't particularly want more footage.

I thought the resolution was ok, could see the action well enough, but for a game like Civ3 that resolution might not be enough.

Maybe you could put the higher-quality version in the IMG Pro hot downloads area?
Matt Diamond - www.mindthecube.com
Measure twice, cut once, curse three or four times.

#35 Turtle

Turtle

    Fanatic

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 130 posts

Posted 11 August 2005 - 10:30 AM

The iMac Man, on August 11th 2005, 07:57 AM, said:

And that's not the majority of people.  Good connections still aren't commonplace, in America at least.

I have no idea where you are from or where you are refering to, as you haven't filled out any of the info in your profile... but, that's another story.  Heck, now that I'm going on that topic, I may start a new thread about it....   :glare:

View Post


True, true, I guess when you've had dsl/cable for a couple years then you kinda think "Hmmm, if I have it so does everyone else.".

Like mandrake suggested there should be a quality toggle.

I kinda like the mystique of being an anonymous coward :( but for what its worth, im here in portland area in oregon. With broadband offered almost everywhere here it's hard to imagine an area without a broadband service.

#36 BBUCK

BBUCK

    Fanatic

  • IMG Writers
  • 83 posts

Posted 11 August 2005 - 10:38 AM

tthiel, on August 11th 2005, 08:04 AM, said:

I couldn't hear half of what the 12-year old with the bangs was saying due to the annoying thumping muzak. When I could hear him it sounded like he had marbles in his mouth due to some sort of accent.  Get rid of the muzak and have someone who can speak clearly and it might not have been so bad.

View Post

Oh cruel fates!  I have been slammed by Tthiel!  Well I suppose I'll have to quit this video review thing and go back to selling Pokemon cards in the cafeteria.

Detractors like Tthiel aside, I would like to improve the audio quality of the videos.  The way the audio was recorded this time, I didn't have all my equpiment with me.  Hopefully by the next review (which is already in the works) I will be able to get a much better recording setup.

Also, while I think that a game footage only video would be a bad decision, perhaps future videos could feature more clips.  I personally think that the video of myself helps deliver the dialogue much better.  In addition, it's harder than you think to capture interesting game footage.  That was the reason I didn't have a better example of the bad AI, as Matt mentioned.

As for the thumping audio, that was really just a really dumb mistake on my part.  I edit all footage on my Powerbook, and the audio clips I got sounded fine here.  But when I watched it on a computer with some good speakers, I agree that it was far too loud.  I really don't want any bass at all, just some light treble to fill in the background.

And as for a higher quality version, I made one, but it wouldn't fit in the web interface.  If you guys want a downloadable higher quality version, I can talk to Tuncer about it.

#37 Turtle

Turtle

    Fanatic

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 130 posts

Posted 11 August 2005 - 01:43 PM

BBUCK, on August 11th 2005, 08:38 AM, said:

Oh cruel fates!  I have been slammed by Tthiel!  Well I suppose I'll have to quit this video review thing and go back to selling Pokemon cards in the cafeteria.

Clowns like Tthiel aside, I would like to improve the audio quality of the videos.  The way the audio was recorded this time, I didn't have all my equpiment with me.  Hopefully by the next review (which is already in the works) I will be able to get a much better recording setup.

Also, while I think that a game footage only video would be a bad decision, perhaps future videos could feature more clips.  I personally think that the video of myself helps deliver the dialogue much better.  In addition, it's harder than you think to capture interesting game footage.  That was the reason I didn't have a better example of the bad AI, as Matt mentioned.

As for the thumping audio, that was really just a really dumb mistake on my part.  I edit all footage on my Powerbook, and the audio clips I got sounded fine here.  But when I watched it on a computer with some good speakers, I agree that it was far too loud.  I really don't want any bass at all, just some light treble to fill in the background.

And as for a higher quality version, I made one, but it wouldn't fit in the web interface.  If you guys want a downloadable higher quality version, I can talk to Tuncer about it.

View Post


Having a person on camera delivering lines will not allow that person deliver them better. Anime is a great example of good and bad voice actors. Like Cowboy Bebop voice acting versus Dragonball Voice acting. There have been a few GT Reviews that I've watched that had a sub par speaker but thankfully they got rid of them.

With appearances, the review felt like a foray into independent theater, leave the skits to the professionals. That 10 or 15 second skit footage would be better spent reviewing the game.

Video quality is real easy. Over a weekend play around with encoding, I personally enjoy sorenson on a variety of settings. Sorenson is also universal for mac and windows (I think). Make a low quality320x240 and a high quality 480x360.

What im curious about is how you got the game play footage.

#38 BBUCK

BBUCK

    Fanatic

  • IMG Writers
  • 83 posts

Posted 11 August 2005 - 02:08 PM

Turtle, on August 11th 2005, 02:43 PM, said:

Having a person on camera delivering lines will not allow that person deliver them better. Anime is a great example of good and bad voice actors. There have been a few GT Reviews that I've watched that had a sub par speaker. With appearances, the review felt like a foray into independent theater, leave the skits to the professionals. What im curious about is how you got the game play footage.

View Post

I wasn't suggesting that being on camera improves delivery, that's obvious.  What I was suggesting is that seeing the dialogue delivered increases it's effectiveness and impact.  Imagine Cowboy Bebop cutting to a shot of something else when a character delivers an important line.  It lessens the impact.

As for the "skits", I would really just call it the humor factor.  I guess you thought there was too much joking and not enough reviewing.  It's a fine line balancing information and entertainment.  I think if a review is too information driven it will become boring by the end.

What does everyone else think?  Too much joking around?  Not enough?  Just right?

P.S. try not to edit your posts Turtle, as I had to re-write this reply.

#39 The iMac Man

The iMac Man

    Macologist

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

Posted 11 August 2005 - 02:22 PM

Come on, let the kid be on camera.... it's an "in" with tha ladies.   :thumbsup:
-iMac

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

Get Mac Game Mods: Macologist.org

#40 Turtle

Turtle

    Fanatic

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 130 posts

Posted 11 August 2005 - 02:32 PM

BBUCK, on August 11th 2005, 12:08 PM, said:

I wasn't suggesting that being on camera improves delivery, that's obvious.  What I was suggesting is that seeing the dialogue delivered increases it's effectiveness and impact.

More importantly though, what did you mean by "With appearances, the review felt like a foray into independent theater, leave the skits to the professionals"?

What aspects of the video did you feel were unprofessional?  Should there be less humor and more content?  Anybody else have any input here?

View Post


I got distracted while I was modifying my post accordingly. I enjoy a bit of humor but the skit was incredibly unnecessary. In the review you had a lot of "uhs" and pauses which slowed things down. Those segments really stood out to me. Don't bring in elements that aren't relevant, such as slamming Microsoft, it was cute and a bit funny but it's not something you can keep doing. Who knows some one might get a tiny bit offended ;) Hopefully this adds a little more light to what I was getting at.

Also the overlay of game footage while you were talking needs to be bigger. Trim the round border up a bit cause you can't see much of the footage in its current form.

Edit+ Hahaha, now im playing edit catchup ;)

What you say about line delivery is true and most of the time the lines were fine to me. Perhaps it wasn't the delivery but some of the dialogue that bugged me. It's always the bad lines that stand out, while you never think twice about the good lines.

I usually find humor in reviews that show the quarks of a game or really funny game footage. The funny is there, in the game, so you shouldn't have to make up humor. The parts of your review that showed AI and over the top animations of characters tumbling around are great examples of humor thats just there.

Other then that lose the rock intro/outro music and throw together a snappy animation. hope this clears things up :)