Thanks!  I know a lot of people would much prefer watching reviews over reviews which is why i opted into doing it.  Otherwise a lot of people just look at the scores and don't understand the reasoning.  

Oh and thanks for the advice as well :)

Out of curiosity, who are your favorite reviewers and what reviews did you watch to prepare yourself for your reviews?

The thing with all of these "Unbiased reviews" is that nobody is given these games for free.  The reviewer goes out and buys these games and then tries to give a review without being a fanboy.  Some people might give Halo an inflated review because they like Microsoft or give Zelda an inflated review because they like Nintendo.  The few that have pitched in for these reviews tend to be pretty fair about giving their point of view about their personal experiences.  The criticisms and praises are usually legit and the final score reflects it.  The problem is, as stated before, they have to buy these games.  In a way, it's a more honest review than the pros because the reviewer lets us know if they got their money's worth.  In a way, it's less because--who buys a game that they don't intend to like?

So don't take the "unbiased" portion so literally.  It's just the name of the review series.

*dammit.  quoted the wrong person!*

I didnt watch any reviews to prepare and Kevin Vanhord.  Not sure if there is a reason for asking that or not.

So you didn't watch any reviews to identify best practices and things you should avoid...?

I can already see where this is going.  What I would appreciate you doing is to stop commenting in my threads.  I banned you from my channel to get rid of your repetitive posting style and though I can't do the same on VGC I would greatly appreciate you not commenting in my threads as I dont take you serious at all or any kind of critiscisms coming from you for good reasons considering your personality towards me in the last year.

@Everyone else (mostly) I have appreciated all the comments, supports, and criticisms.  I'm glad you all have enjoyed it so much and I will be continuing with more video reviews because of this.  In the mean time i will try and tune up the videos to increase quality.  Next review should be Tearaway for the PS Vita :)

So then the reviewers who didn't make an financial investment into the game are relatively more biased than those that did? Whereas a person who made a personal investment won't have their opinion influenced (have their frusturations even more amplified since they wasted their money, be more lenient so that they can justify their purchase more, defend the game because they want to defend their purchase and not admit they made a mistake)?

I'm sorry, I just think that the whole concept of an unbiased review is ridiculous.

If it even did exist, just imagine how boring it would be too. I want to get a review from a human being, with the history of games they played, their social background, their values and beliefs influencing their evaluation of a game.

The critical point is not that a reviewer be "unbiased" or "biased". It's how open the reviewer is about WHY they liked or dislike a game. That they're open about the reason and elaborate more (for example, a reviewer dings a game for a torture scene because they were once a soldier or because they feel it supports torture used by the US government). Hell, to me, that's a more interesting and insightful review than an "unbiased" one.

And to be open and more descriptive about those things, you need to openly do away with the whole concept of an "unbiased" review. You can't explain your unique opinions without acknowleding that you have them and that you want to express them.

Well see, I think this kind of is very telling of you and why you didn't decide to analyze other video reviews to learn from them. You don't seem to be very self critical of yourself. I mean, the very title of your reviews is unsettling, since by branding (and differentiating) yourself as "unbiased", you're implicitly claiming that majority of other reviewers are "biased".

I think that's a dangerous mindset and sort of sad in the end. You seemed to be really motivated, but if you want to maximize the results of your efforts you should be very self critical. Only perfect practice makes perfect.

Anyway, I think you might enjoy these critics (most of their videos aren't technically reviews) and you might be able to identify some stuff you like and don't like about their style:

No, the guys that pay for the game are likely to be more biased because, as stated, who buys a game that they don't intend to like?  So, every "unbiased review" has a little bit of bias already. But, for a review of a game I intend to buy, the opinion of somebody that sacrificed their hard earned money is definitely appreciated.  Aside from that little quibble, I think we're in agreement except for the bolded.  It's just a name.

So you're saying that the people who buy the games already have positive feelings about the game before they buy it???

Again, that can lead to many things.

An inflation of scores by "unbiased" reviewers since they all bought the game and thus had positive feelings beforehand.

The positive expectations could have also put a lens on how they experienced the game (they might be more willing to overlook the flaws for example).

Also, the positive expectations and the financial investment could make any backlash against a game even bigger than a person who came in netural and with no financial investment.