Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I'm curious what folks prefer when it comes to reviews of wargaming products. Do you like Videos or Text and Pictures and why?

My own opinion is as follows:

In recent years, more and more folks seem to be opting for using youtube or similar video services for putting out reviews of wargaming products. As yet, I fail to see many benefits to this. In most cases a video review takes more time to view than reading a text and picture review and since they're usually taken with less than stellar cameras, they actually show less detail than a few well taken pictures. Also, as far as the verbal review, the done-while-filming nature of the audio means that you get less carefully weighed opinions and thoughtful comparisons to other products. Things that are more likely with a well composed and edited written review.

I realize that a webcam quick review probably takes less effort for the reviewer, and for the careful reviewer with good equipment, there can be benefits to a review in terms of seeing more dimensions of a product and perhaps some entertainment value for those reviewers who develop a following or have a particularly good stage presence. However for me just don't see where the benefits outweigh the negatives. I've started watching so many video reviews, only to click them away in disgust that now when I see that a review is a video, I tend to avoid it completely, especially if someone else is reviewing it elsewhere with text and pics.

I prefer photos with text. This is due to my constant panicking of using too much Internet bandwidth with videos and because I find it easier to find where I left off from text than from video.

Depends on the quality of the images and communication in both instances. Many picture-less reviews can be 1000x more informative than the ten minute unboxings many youtubers call a 'review', and similarly a picture can tell what 1000+ words can't. Depends more on the reviewer than the medium imo.

Always prefer text and pix - I can read faster than you can talk, or I might just want to look at the pictures.

I like text and pics.
Gws 360 pics are great too.

Videos suffer compared to picture/text in several ways

1. You can't consume them at your own pace, your dependant on how the video is set up, whereas you can easily skip forward/back at a glance with text. (

(and as said above it's much easier to find your place again on a page of text than trying to remember what the timestamp on a video was)

2. Many videos just don't show you the actual item your interested in in enough detail either because the camera's or camera man is not up to it, or because they just end up spinning/moving it around

3. A fair number of the people doing video reviews may well be passionate about the subject, but just don't work on camera

4. Bandwidth (for those where it matters)

Agreed with basically everything that's been said (typed!)

I have no interest in listening to some random (and usually poorly articulated) rambling for 20-30 minutes to find out information that would take me a few seconds to scroll through in a written review.

 Eilif wrote:
I'm curious what folks prefer when it comes to reviews of wargaming products. Do you like Videos or Text and Pictures and why?

My own opinion is as follows:

In recent years, more and more folks seem to be opting for using youtube or similar video services for putting out reviews of wargaming products.

I suspect the reason is that is seems fancier, easier to create, and appeals to vanity (you see and hear yourself on the small screen!)... while at the same time being a bit easier to monatize for the larger outfits. I personally prefer by far text and pictures as I can zoom in as needed and also fully access it even on a bad internet connection (like spotty cell phone service). Videos also don't seem to go as indepth in general as a text/picture review probably because the text/picture requires more effort to do right as opposed to pressing the record button and then uploading to youtube.

Definitely text and pics for me, so I can read at my own pace rather than having to sit through a video and pause to try to get a clear look at whatever it is.

There's also the fact that most of my browsing these days is either on my phone (small screen, but I can at least zoom in on pics) or at work where I have no sound.

Another vote for good ol' fashioned text and pics. It's hard to get a good long look at something in a video without pausing at that exact moment, while a competent reviewer can provide pics from all the relevant angles that stick around indefinitely, so it's just far less fiddly.

Also, and this is also the reason I tend to avoid video batreps, a lot of people simply don't have the presentation skills on camera to convey information and be engaging, something that is generally easier in text. If I'm getting someone writing something, there's no risk of the stumbling over words, mispronunciations, shaky cameras, constant backtracking/repetition that seem to crop up in a good deal of videos.

I dont hear well and the audio on the videos is often poor.
I'll rather read them, thanks.

At the time of posting the scores are 0,0,2,4,14.
Initially I was surprised that no one has voted for videos just yet but then they're probably watching wargames videos and not reading this thread.
This poll will probably be pretty biased.

For me, it depends on what the review is about. If it is a review about something I want/need to digest well, I prefer text with pictures. Game rules, text with pictures all the way. Miniatures...I like to see nice hi res shots of the miniatures/sprues, but I like to also catch a video to see it from different angles and in context. Hobby supplies (paint/washes/pigment/basing material/etc.), I prefer video. I want to see it being used.

I strongly prefer written content with pictures.

I'll decide for myself what is relevant and where I want to focus, thank you very much.

Video has its uses - but has become waaay to widespread on the internet nowadays. (I suspect mainly because it's easier to force you to watch advertising before hand)

Though there's no reason you can't have a written review with pics and a short video(s) where it's relevant.

weeble1000 wrote:
Hobby supplies (paint/washes/pigment/basing material/etc.), I prefer video. I want to see it being used.

Even there, video is useful for showing how to use the item under review, but I want good, high-resolution photos of the effect. Video just isn't high-quality enough. Even at 1080p, that's only 2 megapixels. Most videos will be much lower resolution.

Think I like both equally. Like to see a video of the product in action, only problem with videos is that the quality varies a lot, the person might also not be explaining the product well or keeping on topic. With text/pictures though, in a blog type format, it always tends to be better and more fun, especially if they are honest in their opinions.

Yeah, pics and text please. But not too much text. Otherwise, it gets boring.

 Eilif wrote:
I'm curious what folks prefer when it comes to reviews of wargaming products. Do you like Videos or Text and Pictures and why?

People should always ask themselves : do I actually need a video ?

I mean, you know... Do you review things that actually move or make sounds ?

If not, please, please... just type it.

Videos take longer to view, I can't skip parts or focus on things that matter to me, they suck my bandwith, they usually have poor audio and video quality too. Not to mention they actually make sound. I may want to listen to music (or not to make any noise) instead of having to hear something someone could - and should - have written.

Videos are relevant if you're reviewing guitars or pinballs... But for miniatures, brushes or paints, please, no. Just. NO.

I don't watch any video reviews.

Can't view them at work