Mar
17th
2019
Video reviews · 6:58am Mar 17th, 2019
Why they so bad? Like nine out of ten youtube video reviewers of pony fan fiction are just terrible. I've gotten to the point where I'm all caught up on the BMRL but still have the energy to work on it. So I once again dipped into the video reviews bookmarks. Which once again reminded me why I don't do them as a regular thing. Half the time finding out what story is being reviewed is a struggle. Just link the damn story properly, dang it!
The only ones I've ever seen are Super Trampoline's. <.< You mean there's more out there?
5029150
Yeah, a decent amount. I mean, not compared to the text reviews as far as I can tell, but in the dozens or maybe low hundreds?
5029150
Correction, after counting I've got at least 300-400 video reviews on the BMRL. So even more than I thought off the top of my head.
I feel attacked.
5029150
5029286
Yours are some of the better ones, seriously.
5029309
In all seriousness, I think the answer is: it's lower-effort. People typically don't produce written material unless they're willing to commit to giving it some thought. And while it's certainly possible to produce good video reviews — good video editing is a difficult and valuable skill that I don't want to discount — people say a lot of things while talking that they wouldn't commit to paper.
Part of it, too, is that the genre mismatch disproportionately attracts people who don't have high skills. Just like the Anthro tag is a wasteland because most authors who use it are avoiding writing about ponies despite being drawn in by a show about ponies, I think most people who make video reviews … aren't putting a lot of thought into it. Maybe they haven't considered their audience; if they're doing this for the benefit of readers, why make a non-written product? Maybe they're not confident of their writing skills and are falling back on a medium (talking) where they feel more comfortable. Maybe they're being lazy, or otherwise consciously taking a route where the lower effort is a feature.
I know 5029326 does drunken reviews; drunken talking is easier than drunken writing. But I also think that Tramps made a deliberate choice of media in a way most of the others don't. "Lazy" is actually the best case here: someone with demonstrable author skills goofing off. I'm using it as a compliment.
5030031
The more I explore that website, the more confused I get.
The way I see it: most video reviewers lack a presence or a style. Some may try to replicate another's style in an attempt to attract that person's audience and—more often than not—they end up failing.
Others may not have experience reviewing stories and may struggle to come up with a review structure, so they end up trying to give out a description to a story and what worked and it'll end up coming out like they're attempting to describe to you how to code simulation of the solar system.
I won't claim to know how to do video reviews as I'm camera shy. I'd also prefer to keep a textual format when I review. It's more fun. If I ever did do video reviews however, I'd try to do animated ones in the vein of the old Spill.com animated reviews.