Support NeoGAF

[Idleyes]

I've been on the internet since dial up and I never herd of this site. Marketing might be their issue.

 

[Puscifer]

It'd be nice if this keeps them from succumbing to payola (i.e., getting paid to give certain products certain ratings), but for some reason I doubt it.

I mean I donate to open source projects but I'm just not sure about this one. Just put some ads for boxes of cereal or dollarshaveclub no one will care about that.

 

[Miyazaki’s Slave]

A major benefit (well...at least I saw it as a benefit) is the present as very unbiased to me. They do great research on the products they review, they are consistent, and they provide a clean, digestible "rating" on the devices they review.
I know they have to charge because they are not in any particular manufactures back pocket but $120 (annually) for reviews I use two times a year, if that, is a bit pricey.

I do wish them luck and I will sub when I want their opinion on a TV.

 

[moogman]

A major benefit (well...at least I saw it as a benefit) is the present as very unbiased to me. They do great research on the products they review, they are consistent, and they provide a clean, digestible "rating" on the devices they review.
I know they have to charge because they are not in any particular manufactures back pocket but $120 (annually) for reviews I use two times a year, if that, is a bit pricey.

I do wish them luck and I will sub when I want their opinion on a TV.

Yeah, I think what they're proposing is a way of monetising while staying unbiased. In the video they hinted there were other ways but I guess that's paid reviews etc like some other sites do. It looks like AI has really done one on them, and stopping AI trawling the site wouldn't help as it wouldn't help get their clicks back as they wouldn't be referenced. They're not $120 a year though - the annual subscription is $45 and $31.50 with the current discount.

Thinking about it, there's a similar site in the UK called Which that has gone paywall and is doing OK. That had a massive brand and history here though, so I'm not convinced it will work for Rtings.

 

[Tomorrow]

I've been on the internet since dial up and I never herd of this site. Marketing might be their issue.

it was one of the best review sites if you were looking for a TV/monitor. i used it first time about 5-6 years ago when i was looking at getting an OLED tv. and again when buying monitors for my PC. was on it not too long ago because i have been thinking about getting a new TV later this year or maybe next. my current TV still works but a lot of the pixels are dying. it's really bad now.

i'm gonna miss it

 

[Laptop1991]

Never a good move this in the end imo, it just means you end up with less subscribers but yeah you make some money, and there is other sites most will go to, when the newspapers did this i didn't see the point apart from that, no point having stories most people don't read, what a shame.

I will be getting my new OLED Monitor in a few weeks time and i did use RTINGS for video reviews but it wasn't the only site i used for info.

 

[Little Mac]

Right before I buy my first OLED TV … of course. I'm getting either a LG C5 or a Samsung S90F and use RTINGs for their calibration settings.

 

[Miyazaki’s Slave]

They're not $120 a year though - the annual subscription is $45 and $31.50 with the current discount

That is a different story in my case. That's entirely reasonable at least imo.

Thanks for pointing that out as I just auto-completed the yearly cost in my head (and post).

 

[WhamBamThankYouMaam]

While I understand the need, they might as well start charging per article.

The best review site for hw.

 

[Diddy X]

I'm pretty sure I can do without them.

 

[Tomorrow]

they not backtracked yet?

 

[Signalis]

I don't think this is going to work out well for them.

 

[Celcius]

They had a lot of great info but I don't need another subscription in my life. Just removed the site from my bookmarks. RIP.