Game Journalist May Have Been Fired Over Negative Review [Slashdot] [Archive]

DP ServBot

11-30-2007, 10:30 AM

It started as a rumour post on Kotaku and a Penny Arcade comic strip: reviewer Jeff Gerstmann was fired from the gaming news site Gamespot for giving the co-op action title Kane and Lynch a low score, and snarking on the game in the review. The catch? The firing was dictated by games publisher Eidos, who didn't appreciate the veteran reviewer's tone in the piece. Their hideous ad campaign (spread across the entirety of the Gamespot site) may have been used as a bargaining tool of some kind. Joystiq has a lengthy, detailed summary of this event and its implications, which is no longer technically a rumour. Gerstmann confirmed to the blog that he has been let go from the C|Net-affiliated site, but as of right now can't talk about the details. "The ramifications of the story, if true, are huge. Readers should fairly expect there to be an inviolable firewall between advertising and editorial in journalism, and game journalism (yes, that includes "just reviews") is no different. While our industry has had its fair share of accusations of impropriety, nothing so far has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. Giving a publisher the power to fire a senior editor is a line no outlet should be willing to cross."Read more of this story (http://games.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/11/30/1317259&from=rss) at Slashdot.

Rob2600

11-30-2007, 10:57 AM

Here's a direct link to the Joystiq article:

http://www.joystiq.com/2007/11/30/rumor-gamespots-editorial-director-fired-over-kane-and-lynch-rev/

kaedesdisciple

11-30-2007, 11:05 AM

Gamespot management = fail for not standing up for their employees. That is hugely bad PR for Gamespot, and if he didn't receive some kind of severance package, should review the terms of his contract with a lawyer for a possible wrongful termination suit. If his company won't back him, he should do it himself. Firing a journalist for accurate journalism that a big check doesn't like is a slippery slope.

DeputyMoniker

11-30-2007, 11:19 AM

What I posted earlier. It's in response to Chrisbid's "Don't fuck with your employer" post.

To be perfectly realistic, you're right. You don't fuck with your employer, your employers partners, and if you fuck with your employers customers...you're out the door.
This is different though. We're talking about journalism. A journalist MUST have the right to express their beliefs or the entire thing is pointless. Having the ability to express your individual opinion in a coherent and persuasive manner is what makes a writer. If these guys can't be honest then they're Eidos' bitches....and therefor we become Eidos' bitches. "You will know what Eidos wants you to know!"
We aren't talking about Dell going on the record to say Vista is garbage. We're talking about a journalist reviewing a product. If Eidos threatened to pull their plugs, I don't know what GS should have done but they should have done something that preserved the integrity of their product. They sacrificed their reputation for one customer. Fucking stupid.

Rob2600

11-30-2007, 11:21 AM

For the record, the reason Gamespot fired Jeff Gerstmann hasn't been confirmed yet. The rumor is that it was because of his review, but we don't know for sure.

I hope that isn't the real reason.

otaku

11-30-2007, 11:21 AM

wow. Thats incredibly screwed up and just backs up the constant worries people have had about bias among reviewers for years now. I noticed the huge kane and lynch ad on GS last night. Jeff did a pretty good job at GS I think he may be better off without them but they sure as hell won't be without him

DeputyMoniker

11-30-2007, 11:27 AM

For the record, the reason Gamespot fired Jeff Gerstmann hasn't been confirmed yet. The rumor is that it was because of his review, but we don't know for sure.

Oh yeah. :P
Good call, Rob.

Juganawt

11-30-2007, 11:28 AM

Fast Forward 5 years from now. Every game gets at least a 9 out of 10....even Barbie Horse Adventures 2, Fuzion Frenzy 2, and Bikini Karate Babes 2.

Firing someone for an honest opinion, when his job is that of giving honest opinions, is quite frankly ludicrous. The ramifications could be disastrous for the industry as a whole.

Aren't they effectvely shooting themselves in the foot for letting Eidos dictate firing of employees? They've opened the door, now what? Does this mean they can dictate hirings too? Will websites and magazines be full of PR people from various companies with heavily biased opinions in the near future? Eidosgn.com? GameEidos? Eidoscritics.org?

This could very well lead to a slippery slope. If game journalism can't be trusted any more, what's the point of having it? If this forms a trend, then I can't see game journalism being sustainable.

This is simply an insane idea. Firing a reviewer for giving a review??? It's like firing a hooker for giving a blowjob.

swlovinist

11-30-2007, 11:33 AM

Every main online website that has paid advertisement from these companies is bias one way or another. Magazines do it in a different way, they just dont review the game, let everyone buy it, then they release their review. Sure some of them get their copy "late", but I dont buy that all the time. Anymore I just ask a friend or go to this site and see what others are saying about the game that I trust.

monkeysuit

11-30-2007, 11:39 AM

Firing someone for an honest opinion, when his job is that of giving honest opinions, is quite frankly ludicrous. The ramifications could be disastrous for the industry as a whole.

Couldn't have said it better myself. This is just another example, to me at least, of corruption in the media. I'm sure that somewhere they had some sort of contract with the publishers of the game that gave a few "guidelines" to follow when reviewing. It makes a lot of sense seeing as to how much advertising went into K&L, not to mention they had a movie deal before the game began production.

:shameful:

DreamTR

11-30-2007, 11:41 AM

Heh, this has happened before with editors, though. I think it's just the first time it was spread out all over news sites.

Aussie2B

11-30-2007, 01:17 PM

What gets me is how they would just throw away a senior editor of 10 years over this. I mean, okay, so Eidos is breathing down your neck, then pull the reviews and leave it at that. It's ridiculous to fire the man over his opinions and for just doing his job as he knows best. It would be a great disservice to journalism to buckle to the publishers in any shape or form, but this guy is reviewing as a job so if his employer chooses to not use his review or alter it, that's their prerogative. Let him have his opinion; he can post his review on a personal web site if he wants, but firing him is plain nonsense. I sincerely hope this is just a fake rumor that's gotten out of control.

Snapple

11-30-2007, 01:19 PM

For the record, the reason Gamespot fired Jeff Gerstmann hasn't been confirmed yet. The rumor is that it was because of his review, but we don't know for sure.

I hope that isn't the real reason.

True that. I'm not going to go on an anti-Gamespot crusade until I know for sure what happened. I HOPE it's not true. If it is true, I'll be extremely disappointed.

Here is Jeff's unflattering video review of K&L, for those curious as to what drove the advertisers crazy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBD0cUeeEQc

Rob2600

11-30-2007, 01:47 PM

Here is Jeff's unflattering video review of K&L, for those curious as to what drove the advertisers crazy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBD0cUeeEQc

We don't know for sure that the incident had anything to do with Eidos or advertisers. At this point, it's just speculation.

I just watched the video review and my impression is that the developers tried really hard to be "adult" and "mature" on purpose just because they think gamers will buy anything that features graphic violence and curse words. "We have blood and cursing in our game. It's guaranteed to be a hit!" Ugh.

Thank you Grand Theft Auto III. Will this "mature" trend ever go away?

Neil Koch

11-30-2007, 02:10 PM

This isn't really news. It's been going on for years, probably since there have been video game magazines. I remember that when Driver 3 came out, it was found that Atari paid off certain magazines to give the gave favorable reviews.

From my own experiences as a semi-amateur reviewer, I've personally had PR departments tell me to edit my reviews so they were more positive. When I refused, they mysteriously stopped offering review copies.

Thank you Grand Theft Auto III. Will this "mature" trend ever go away?

Probably not anytime soon. The GTA games at least have decent stories and approach the naughty bits with a bit of humor, but all of the imitators have missed out on that part. The worst example of this I can think of offhand is 187 Ride or Die - a take on US hip-hop culture written by French Canadians and voiced by untalented rappers. Thankfully, the game died a quick death, but that didn't stop a whole slew of similar games like 25 to Life and 50 Cent Bulletproof.

DeputyMoniker

11-30-2007, 02:18 PM

Thank you Grand Theft Auto III. Will this "mature" trend ever go away?

It isn't like that's the only game available to buy. I'm sure there are dozens of games on the shelf that you would enjoy playing. This "mature" trend doesn't need to go away.
Frankly, I do get tired of them eating up so much advertising space though so I hear what you're saying. Correct me if I'm wrong but I think we're both just tired of these games getting so much attention. The producers are the ones dumping so much money into advertising these things. On the other hand, gamers must be buying it or I'd think the "trend" would be over by now. Bad reviews or not, people must be buying. There are some poorly executed but good ideas coming from these developers. If the rumors are true then that's what makes this whole stink a big deal. Reviewers need to be able to call a spade a spade.

fishsandwich

11-30-2007, 02:29 PM

I've always felt that PLAY magazine has always been for sale to the highest bidder (the publisher of a game). Dave himself gave the last (shitty) Sonic game for the 360 a 9.5 out of 10 and went on and on about how fabulous and monumental it was.

He also said (I'm paraphrasing here) that Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness (also shitty) was a great game and that its reputation was due to other websites and magazines (except his) saying the game was crap and unfairly influencing consumers. He backed this up with sales figures. I do recall that AoD sold poorly in relation to earlier Tomb Raider games and that Eidos took the franchise away from from Core and gave it to Crystal Dynamics after all the bad reviews.

Rob2600

11-30-2007, 02:33 PM

The GTA games at least have decent stories and approach the naughty bits with a bit of humor, but all of the imitators have missed out on that part. The worst example of this I can think of offhand is 187 Ride or Die ... Thankfully, the game died a quick death, but that didn't stop a whole slew of similar games like 25 to Life and 50 Cent Bulletproof.

Grand Theft Auto III may have been decent, but many of its imitators are shallow, soulless cash-ins. I'm disappointed with the whole crime/nudity/drugs/torture genre.

I think we're both just tired of these games getting so much attention. ... gamers must be buying it or I'd think the "trend" would be over by now. Bad reviews or not, people must be buying.

I know and it's a shame. To quote fellow DP member otoko, "People are stupid." :)

Nebagram

11-30-2007, 02:35 PM

I want to start up a videogame magazine/website of my own, just so I can hire Gerstmann.

Incidentally, I recently purchased my very first copy of EGM (issue 222 iirc), from a specialist newsagents that imports them. Holy CRAP there are a lot of ads in it. Yeah, there are in UK mags too, but rarely more than 1 or 2 double-page spreads per mag. Think I'll stick to gamesTM from now on. :-)

Rob2600

11-30-2007, 02:38 PM

I do recall that Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness sold poorly in relation to earlier Tomb Raider games and that Eidos took the franchise away from from Core and gave it to Crystal Dynamics after all the bad reviews.

From my experience working at a video game store, most people stopped caring about Tomb Raider after part three for the Sony PlayStation.

DeputyMoniker

11-30-2007, 02:39 PM

I want to start up a videogame magazine/website of my own, just so I can hire Gerstmann.

Good luck matching the opportunities he'll probably receive from established publications. Give it a shot though, dude. You'll never know if you don't try.

DeputyMoniker

11-30-2007, 02:40 PM

From my experience working at a video game store, people stopped caring about Tomb Raider after part three for the Sony PlayStation.

I cared a lot when AoD came out. I reserved a copy. I put about 5 hours into it before it fell into the shitty game abyss.

MrSparkle

11-30-2007, 02:53 PM

honestly i always tend to take these large reviewers with a grain of salt because i always figured companies would just pay their way into the limelight generally when reading gamespot or ign reviews i try to understand what the gameplay is like and decide if ill like it based on my own preferences. its always great when you see a review for a certain genre start out with the line i hate _______ genre of games.

alice_curiouser

11-30-2007, 03:03 PM

i always tend to take these large reviewers with a grain of salt because i always figured companies would just pay their way into the limelight generally when reading gamespot or ign reviews i try to understand what the gameplay is like and decide if ill like it based on my own preferences.

I agree. I never read game reviews; I look the game up on Amazon.com and read the readers' reviews. Granted, they're not out in advance of the game release, but I'd rather know what "real" people think of the game, rather than paid staff writers who are bound to have some level of an agenda.

MrSparkle

11-30-2007, 03:29 PM

as they say a pictures worth a thousand words and since game reviews generally clock in somewhere on the level of a thousand words or so just a few screens from the game can go a long way towards making up my mind alot of time i read these big review sites reviews not only for a description of what the game is but to check out the screenies which ign at least tends to have gobs of

Rob2600

11-30-2007, 03:29 PM

j_factor

11-30-2007, 04:17 PM

I've always felt that PLAY magazine has always been for sale to the highest bidder (the publisher of a game). Dave himself gave the last (shitty) Sonic game for the 360 a 9.5 out of 10 and went on and on about how fabulous and monumental it was.

He also said (I'm paraphrasing here) that Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness (also shitty) was a great game and that its reputation was due to other websites and magazines (except his) saying the game was crap and unfairly influencing consumers. He backed this up with sales figures. I do recall that AoD sold poorly in relation to earlier Tomb Raider games and that Eidos took the franchise away from from Core and gave it to Crystal Dynamics after all the bad reviews.

I think Dave Halverson just has a pattern of giving unapologetically positive reviews to games that generally have a mixed or poor reception from other reviewers. Sometimes it's refreshing to see an otherwise underrated game get its praise, but other times it results in some big "wtf" reviews. But it's not just Play; it goes back to Gamers Republic and Game Fan before that. Anyone else remember the Game Fan review of Skeleton Warriors? I think they gave it a 96% rating.

klausien

11-30-2007, 04:52 PM

I've always felt that PLAY magazine has always been for sale to the highest bidder (the publisher of a game). Dave himself gave the last (shitty) Sonic game for the 360 a 9.5 out of 10 and went on and on about how fabulous and monumental it was.

Interesting idea, but I think it may have more to do with the fact that Halverson has a strange, obsessive fetish over any game which allows you to jump around and collect sh*t. It can get really, really bizarre sometimes. Seriously, who wastes their time with Crash Bandicoot anymore? Dude has gushed about every platformer from Kao the Kangaroo to Super Magnetic Neo. I can dig passion for a genre, but come on now. That said, Play does have its good points, though it's no GameFan (nostalgia speaks for me here).

I take all reviews by video game journalists who work for corporate entities with a grain of salt. The truth is diluted by money in each and every part of our society, and this just follows suit. Everything in the US is marketing, EVERYTHING. No wonder everyone hates us, but that is a topic for another conversation.

Having watched the YouTube, the reviewer did savage Kane & Lynch pretty badly, but honestly, Eidos's spiritually similar Hitman games were borderline poor to begin with so there really wasn't much to build on. I admit I could be exaggerating here, but they haven't made a truly great game since Soul Reaver, and that was how long ago? He was honest and I respect that more than anything else. With games retailing for $59.99 on the next gen systems, it is a journalist's duty to set the record straight. I admit that I tend to find games of this type off-putting (graphic language, adult situations and violence for the hell of it are virtually pointless if you are older than thirteen), but that doesn't change the fact that a bad game is a bad game regardless of subject matter. Kane and Lynch clearly sucks (the video footage was enough to show me that, regardless of what the reviewer was saying) and the reviewer did everyone a big favor with that review. If it was indeed why he was fired, the employment and journalistic practices of GameSpot to be nothing short of disgusting and completely lacking even a shred of integrity.

All of this really makes me wonder about Assassin's Creed. The early word was that it needed a whole lot more time in the oven to iron out the gameplay in the face of how beautiful it looked, but the reviews all seemed pretty positive. I haven't played it, but the text of the reviews I've read pointed to a game that should be a 6 or a 7, but got 9+ pretty much everywhere. t's pretty obvious that a mega publisher like Ubisoft has the magazines and websites by the proverbial balls. At least Ubisoft has made some truly great games in the past few years.

Snapple

11-30-2007, 06:20 PM

This whole situation reminds me of when Gamespy mysteriously changed their review of Donkey Konga 2 from a 1.5 out of 5 to a 3 out of 5 to a 3.5 out of 5.

chrisbid

11-30-2007, 06:21 PM

like i said in the other thread, the 100 point scale needs to be overhauled. there needs to be a concrete system to rate games, if you cannot give specifics to how a game earns points, then the system needs to be simplified.

the written review couldve been matched up with a score of 7.5 and nobody wouldve blinked.

movies are not rated in 100 point scales, why should games?

diskoboy

11-30-2007, 07:47 PM

To me... I could care less about the whole situation.

I've never considered Gamespot a credible site.

gepeto

11-30-2007, 09:14 PM

From http://www.joystiq.com/2007/11/30/rumor-gamespots-editorial-director-fired-over-kane-and-lynch-rev/

"Update - 12:52 AM EST: Penny Arcade, which helped popularize this story with their comic last night (http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2007/11/29), has posted an accompanying commentary piece (http://www.penny-arcade.com/2007/11/30) on the issue. The story they were told (by whom, we do not know) has Gamespot management angry at Gerstmann for long-standing problems with his reviewing 'tone.' The Kane & Lynch review, which allegedly caused Eidos to withdraw 'hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of future advertising from the site,' served as the straw that broke the camel's back. There's no named source for this information, but the piece does say that 'the firm belief internally [is] that Jeff was sacrificed.'"

"Update - 3:20 PM EST: We just noticed that Gerstmann's video review, previously accessible only through a direct link, has been removed from the site (Gamespot.com). Here's an alternate YouTube link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBD0cUeeEQc)."

That was a well written article. Thanks for the watchful eye. I always felt that some scores were bought.

I destinctly remember 3 reviews that when I read felt they were on the paid side.

number 1 was for toshinden. I will never forget the egm reviewer stating the the game was so much better than tekken greatest fighting game yada yada.

Number 2 was way of the warrior 3do I remember one reviewer gave it like a 9 or 10 whan everyone else was giving it a 3.

Number 3 was crash bandicoot I remember them saying it was better than mario. All hail the new king of the platform.

Not to bash but I have always wondered why every zelda and final fantasy, mario ultimately got stellar over the top reviews. I never read there reviews because I knew it would be high. One of the best features added recently was reader reviews.

I just think it is sad that a company can strong arm like that. The Gamespot should have stood by there reviewer. By stating it would pull every thing eidios related and print a full story about the gangster tactics. It just goes to show the desperation of companies trying to create for a next gen system. Jeff could be the first casualty. His tone might have been harsh but he always had a little sarcastic comments in his reviews and 60.00 is alot of money.

To edios's credit there was no kayne and lynch limited collector edition:)

gepeto

11-30-2007, 09:29 PM

.

Having watched the YouTube, the reviewer did savage Kane & Lynch pretty badly, but honestly, Eidos's spiritually similar Hitman games were borderline poor to begin with so there really wasn't much to build on. I admit I could be exaggerating here, but they haven't made a truly great game since Soul Reaver, and that was how long ago? He was honest and I respect that more than anything else. With games retailing for $59.99 on the next gen systems, it is a journalist's duty to set the record straight.
All of this really makes me wonder about Assassin's Creed. The early word was that it needed a whole lot more time in the oven to iron out the gameplay in the face of how beautiful it looked, but the reviews all seemed pretty positive. I haven't played it, but the text of the reviews I've read pointed to a game that should be a 6 or a 7, but got 9+ pretty much everywhere. t's pretty obvious that a mega publisher like Ubisoft has the magazines and websites by the proverbial balls. At least Ubisoft has made some truly great games in the past few years.

Excellent points. What was edios last truly money making game? Tomb Raider Legend was but was really an uphill battle. I think there was so much pressure for this to be a money maker that the gloves had to come off. I can only imaging the salesman getting torn a new one.

Anthony1

12-01-2007, 12:18 AM

There goes any interest I had in the HotSpot podcast. HotSpot was my second favorite video game podcast, and it was almost entirely due to Jeff. I'm sure he will be hired by IGN or 1up within a matter of seconds. Of course, 10 years of seniority down the drain for him does suck in a major way. Maybe he will join the 1upYours crew for their podcast as the "real" replacement for Luke Smith. If he joins IGN, he can then be on like 4 different podcasts they do, so that would be sweet too. But no question, Hotspot is going to take a huge dive down my gaming podcast rankings.

G-Boobie

12-01-2007, 04:06 AM

You know, I sort of liked Gerstmann; he wasn't afraid to base his reviews on his gut feelings, and that's rare in 'games journalism'.

I can't say I'd be surprised if it turned out to be true, but I try and avoid 'games journalism' in it's entirety now; I get much more reliable opinions about games from people like the DP forum contributors than from magazines and sites that have to sell advertising space anyway.

Snapple

12-01-2007, 04:27 AM

G-Boobie

12-01-2007, 06:09 AM

Kotaku has also posted what is allegedly (and they emphasize the alleged part) a Gamespot employee commenting anonymously about the whole situation.
http://kotaku.com/gaming/rumor/alleged-gamespot-employee-spills-guts-on-valleywag-328797.php

If he really is from Gamespot, it sounds like the whole editorial staff is half ready to revolt and half scared to death that they're going to lose their job. It certainly sounds convincing, but I guess we'll have to reserve judgment until more details are confirmed.

Yeah, it's hard to posit an opinion when all we know for sure about the situation is nothing at all.

If that poster is on the level, then I empathize with the editors and hope things improve for them in the wake of the horrible publicity their management has earned.

Half Japanese

12-02-2007, 12:08 AM

Interesting idea, but I think it may have more to do with the fact that Halverson has a strange, obsessive fetish over any game which allows you to jump around and collect sh*t. It can get really, really bizarre sometimes. Seriously, who wastes their time with Crash Bandicoot anymore? Dude has gushed about every platformer from Kao the Kangaroo to Super Magnetic Neo. I can dig passion for a genre, but come on now. That said, Play does have its good points, though it's no GameFan (nostalgia speaks for me here).

I concur. Whenever you see Halverson's name attached to a review of anything remotely resembling a platformer, you know to take it with a bag of salt. Some of the other Play reviewers have their own moments of 'forgiveness' when it comes to average or above-average games getting excellent reviews (Stranglehold a 9? Don't think so), but then again Heather did a good job of explaining why it was a 9 for her and added a disclaimer that it wouldn't be for everyone. I think that's an appropriate and acceptable way to handle the situation. Play is the only magazine I currently subscribe to (not counting Game Informer, which is mostly a side effect of having the Gamestop card, though it's certainly better than average), and as long as you know what each reviewer's bias is (easily found at the beginning of the reviews section), you're golden for the most part. The only problem is that Play's editing is sloppy as hell and they occasionally forget to tell you who's actually reviewing the game.

Aussie2B

12-02-2007, 02:47 AM

Heather did a good job of explaining why it was a 9 for her and added a disclaimer that it wouldn't be for everyone.

I think that's a rather silly, illogical thing to include in a review. A review, being a critique, is by nature a subjective article, so by definition she's explaining why it is a 9 for her and only her. No reviewer is psychic and can predict how anybody else is going to receive a game. It's nonsense to include a disclaimer especially because what game of any kind is going to be a 9 or 10 for EVERYONE? Even your Mario, Zelda, Final Fantasy, Metal Gear, etc. games are not going to be appreciated by every last person on earth. Again, the very nature of a review defines that not every person will agree with all or any of its points.

veronica_marsfan

12-02-2007, 04:51 AM

Thank you Grand Theft Auto III. Will this "mature" trend ever go away?
Like asking: Will this "rap" trend ever leave the radio? Answer is no. It will always be there in some form. Teenies get their jollies hearing about killing & swears.

Reviews:

I don't trust any reviews except those coming from non-paid gamers (gamefaqs/amazon). The game magazines are too busy polishing the knobs of their bald-headed advertisers to give a truly lousy review for a lousy game.

They can't be trusted to tell the truth.

64Bits

12-02-2007, 11:58 AM

Like asking: Will this "rap" trend ever leave the radio? Answer is no. It will always be there in some form. Teenies get their jollies hearing about killing & swears.

Reviews:

I don't trust any reviews except those coming from non-paid gamers (gamefaqs/amazon). The game magazines are too busy polishing the knobs of their bald-headed advertisers to give a truly lousy review for a lousy game.

They can't be trusted to tell the truth.

Nothing like stereotyping an entire age group. Gratz.

chrisbid

12-02-2007, 12:45 PM

Nothing like stereotyping an entire age group. Gratz.

sadly, stereotypes are not conjured out of thin air. they may be gross exaggerations of reality, but they are still based on reality.

Aussie2B

12-02-2007, 01:11 PM

Going with GameFAQs/Amazon reviews is really NOT an improvement. While you will find some good amateur reviewers, the extreme vast majority really couldn't care less about what they're doing. Most are written by teenage kids that are biased to the extreme, and to make matters worse, their writing abilities are pitiful so it's a miracle if you get anything in the way of detailed description.

For the love of all that is good, if you gotta go with amateur reviews, go to this site:

http://www.honestgamers.com/

Ironically, some of those reviewers also do professional work from time to time, and I've seen no difference in their attitude in their professional reviews and the reviews they write just for fun.

So there are good professional reviewers out there. If you rule out all professional games journalism, you're only making the problem worse, making all writing and credibility degrade. Good professional writers need to be supported, so the magazines or sites they write for can survive and improve further. If you recognize a publication as being poor, then, fine, boycott that one, but don't lump the quality ones in there just out of association. There are plenty of slightly more obscure magazines out there that cater to an older reader base than others, and I think you'll find their work very credible. Look into stuff like Hardcore Gamer and Video Game Collector before you completely give up on all professional writers.

mercarian

12-02-2007, 03:25 PM

Unfortunately most of these magizines are run off Ads they run, by the companies they are reviewing (Even atv, car, boat, cooking, gaming, etc), not by subscriptions. The problem lies in this, would you rather exaggerate the truth on a product, or risk losing thousands of dollars when the person pulls funds out of your company. Its obvious which route they took with this game. Even though these magizines are supposed to give people an insight into "good/bad games" its also a form of advertising for gaming companies. My opinion, is too watch reviews with a grain of salt, look at the gameplay/graphics and make your own decisions about the game itself.

j_factor

12-02-2007, 03:28 PM

Maybe there should be an Adbusters magazine for videogame reviews.

mercarian

12-02-2007, 08:33 PM

Maybe there should be an Adbusters magazine for videogame reviews.

It would probably cost a lot more to the consumers. Since they would have to make up the price difference for the magazine. Then again, the great thing now is you can look up reviews online often for free.

gepeto

12-03-2007, 07:28 PM

Some more new info

http://www.joystiq.com/2007/12/01/rumorang-gerstmann-gate-edition/

http://blog.wired.com/games/2007/12/fired-gamespot.html

heybtbm

12-03-2007, 08:23 PM

Gamespot damage control....

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6183603.html

Lame.

Half Japanese

12-03-2007, 08:59 PM

I think that's a rather silly, illogical thing to include in a review. A review, being a critique, is by nature a subjective article, so by definition she's explaining why it is a 9 for her and only her. No reviewer is psychic and can predict how anybody else is going to receive a game. It's nonsense to include a disclaimer especially because what game of any kind is going to be a 9 or 10 for EVERYONE? Even your Mario, Zelda, Final Fantasy, Metal Gear, etc. games are not going to be appreciated by every last person on earth. Again, the very nature of a review defines that not every person will agree with all or any of its points.

Agree to disagree. I'd rather a reviewer tell me in their review that they're a rabid fan of the franchise it's based on, or a complete fanboy of the developer than figure that out for myself with an average game and a wallet $50 lighter. I think that was the gist of her including the disclaimer in her review.

Maybe there should be an Adbusters magazine for videogame reviews.

So we can have shitty layouts, pretentious, masturbatory articles and articles about gaming culture in some third-world dump? Don't get me wrong, I appreciate what Adbusters tries to do, I just think they have a rather convoluted way of actually doing it. I'm all for game magazines with fewer ads (you Brits don't know how good you have it), intelligent reviews and articles and even a heart and soul, I just don't think Adbusters is the archetype for such a magazine. Maybe the late Punk Planet would be a better model, and they even ran articles on gaming in their last year or two in print, mainly focusing on indie developers and their belief that open-source was an extension of punk ethos. Also, how badly would it piss off publishers and console manufacturers for a gaming rag to support the ill-dated 'buy nothing day?'

As for the topic at hand:

Holy shit. I think this guy's take on the situation (http://youtube.com/watch?v=kbdSUHPhvPE) is about the best thing I've seen in a long time. Gameslop!

esquire

12-04-2007, 01:03 AM

Gamespot damage control....

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6183603.html

Lame.

From the article:

Due to legal constraints and the company policy of GameSpot parent CNET Networks, details of Gerstmann's departure cannot be disclosed publicly

Translation of legalspeak: When we fired Jeff, we gave him a hefty severance package (probably a 6-12 month salary) in exchange for him signing a confidentiality agreement wherein both parties agreed not to discuss the firing, or be subject to forfeiture of the severance or penalized in unspecified liquidated damages. Meaning, he talks, he loses the severance. We talk, we have to pay him more money or be subject to a lawsuit for unlawful termination and/or defamation of character.

Griking

12-04-2007, 02:08 AM

Nothing like stereotyping an entire age group. Gratz.

Lol, someone accuses an age group of getting their jollies hearing about killing & swearing and you're more offended about the age group being targeted rather than the joy of the killing & swearing.

As for the article, meh, that's just the way corporations are nowadays and noting will even change as long as people continue to buy their products. If you really want to make Gamespot and Edios understand how you feel then not only will you refuse to support either company any more but you'll make them (and everyone else) know exactly why. They're going to do their best to sweep this under a carpet. If people let them then they'll just do it again and again. and if you absolutely have no self control and need to play this sub par game for some reason at least purchase it used or just rent it.

ZackyH

12-04-2007, 08:14 AM

Half Japanese

12-04-2007, 11:34 AM

If you're going to do a boycott of gamespot don't you also have to do a boycott of gamefaqs? They're part of the same network, right? Guess people will actually have to figure out games on their own now :-D

Many of the faqs on gamefaqs aren't exclusive and can be found at other sites as well. A boycott of gamespot/cnet would also include sites like gamerankings and metacritic and tv.com as well, not to mention download.com.

Here's a question: why did cnet buy both gamerankings and metacritic, since metacritic already covers games?

It's also worth mentioning that many of these sites are much better and easier to use before they're bought out. Tv.com is the best example, as its precursor tvtome was much easier to use and wasn't filled with nearly as many ads from what I can remember.

Oobgarm

12-04-2007, 11:44 AM

This image of article tags had me rolling.

http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.joystiq.com/media/2007/12/gerstmanntags.jpg

Adolf Hitler? Autoerotic Asphyxiation? Bologna?

neuropolitique

12-04-2007, 05:11 PM

Many of the faqs on gamefaqs aren't exclusive and can be found at other sites as well. A boycott of gamespot/cnet would also include sites like gamerankings and metacritic and tv.com as well, not to mention download.com.

Dang, I already boycott the entire CNET media family. I'm ahead of the curve.

rbudrick

12-04-2007, 06:02 PM

Hitler, yeah, that's the watchamacallit theory of online discussions. Bolgna, sure, as in Bullshit, but autoerotic asphyxiation? WTF?!

-Rob

GarrettCRW

12-04-2007, 08:35 PM

This image of article tags had me rolling.

http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.joystiq.com/media/2007/12/gerstmanntags.jpg

Adolf Hitler? Autoerotic Asphyxiation? Bologna?

Mmmm.....cake.....*drool*

gepeto

12-05-2007, 02:56 PM

The fire must be getting hot. Not sure if they anticipated this much backlash but then again.

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6183666.html?action=convert&om_clk=latestnews&tag=latestnews;title;0

Sweater Fish Deluxe

12-05-2007, 03:33 PM

Dang, I already boycott the entire CNET media family. I'm ahead of the curve.
Yeah, that's what I'm saying.

I mean, do gather that some of you people in this thread actually read Gamespot? Like on purpose?

The only contact I ever have with them is when I'm searching for information on a game and have to skip over a hundred results saying that Gamespot is my number one source for trailers, screenshots, reviews, cheats and news about whatever game it is that I'm looking for and which they of course never have even a single trailer, screenshot, review, cheat or piece of news about.

...word is bondage...

gepeto

12-05-2007, 06:52 PM

I do enjoy there site. I love looking at the preview videos because for me gamespot streams the best.

boatofcar

01-11-2008, 12:06 AM

Looks like all that bad online press did Kane and Lynch little harm. It just sold one million copies (http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=8616&Itemid=2). Just goes to show what a controversy on the internet isn't.

calthaer

01-11-2008, 11:16 AM

Why people are still reading those sites (Gamespy, Gamefaqs, Gmaespot, etc.) is beyond me. They're obviously corporate shills. Thanks for the link to honestgamers, Aussie2B.

Rob2600

01-11-2008, 12:59 PM

Jorpho

03-25-2012, 12:15 PM

Hey, remember this?

I saw Gerstmann's name on Gamestop just now, and I went to Wikipedia to find out why. It's about what you'd expect, really.

On March 15, 2012, it was announced that CBS Interactive had acquired the Giant Bomb and Comic Vine websites from Whiskey Media.[15] CBS Interactive is the parent company of CNET, which operates GameSpot. As part of the deal, the non-disparagement agreement between Gerstmann and CNET was nullified, allowing him to finally speak publicly about his termination over four years later. Later that evening on GameSpot's On the Spot web show, GameSpot VP John Davison appeared on camera with Gerstmann, marking Gerstmann's first appearance on the GameSpot web site since November 2007. He explained that the reason for his firing was the result of long-standing tension between the editorial staff and the new marketing staff that had recently been put in place. According to Gerstmann, new marketing staff was in place that wasn't familiar with video game journalism or how to deal with annoyed publishers. He revealed that the problems began after publishing the review for Ratchet & Clank Future: Tools of Destruction that went live on October 23, 2007. The review was written by Aaron Thomas and scored a 7.5 (good). The publisher, Sony Computer Entertainment America, complained to GameSpot over the score and threatened to pull their advertising money. Gerstmann, as Thomas' boss, was "called into a room" to discuss the review. He said the marketing team freaked out over Sony's threats and didn't understand how to handle threats like that. Tension continued between marketing and editorial, coming to a head after Gerstmann published his review for Kane & Lynch: Dead Men on November 13, 2007 and scored it a 6.0 (fair). His frankness of the game's quality led to the publisher, Eidos Interactive, also threatening to pull their advertising money. At the time of the review going live, the GameSpot home page was covered in ads for Kane & Lynch. Gerstmann said he was once again "called into a room" where he was sternly admonished over the review. After over two weeks of even thicker tension between marketing and editorial, Gerstmann was yet again "called into a room" and was informed he was being fired on November 29, 2007 effective immediately. He said they essentially caved to advertiser pressure despite vehemently claiming they didn't just days after the firing.

On a humorous note, during the show, Gerstmann claimed he ran into a few members of Kane & Lynch developer IO Interactive at a convention a few months after his firing. He claims one of the people he ran into said, "Yeah, Kane & Lynch wasn't a very good game." Gerstmann responded, "You should totally call up my old bosses and tell them that."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Gerstmann

Frankie_Says_Relax

03-25-2012, 12:31 PM

Hey, remember this?

I saw Gerstmann's name on Gamestop just now, and I went to Wikipedia to find out why. It's about what you'd expect, really.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Gerstmann

Glad he left for whatever reason.

The GiantBomb podcasts are a pleasant weekly ritual that I'd hate to go without.

Kitsune Sniper

03-25-2012, 12:37 PM

Glad he left for whatever reason.

The GiantBomb podcasts are a pleasant weekly ritual that I'd hate to go without.

But they're now owned by the parent company of the very same website that fired them.

It won't take long before they start sticking their hands in the site and someone gets fired.

BetaWolf47

03-25-2012, 12:49 PM

Hey, remember this?

I saw Gerstmann's name on Gamestop just now, and I went to Wikipedia to find out why. It's about what you'd expect, really.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Gerstmann

So, in other words, the Kane and Lynch review was only part of the problem. It had everything to do with Gamespot staff giving honest reviews, however.

Frankie_Says_Relax

03-25-2012, 01:13 PM

But they're now owned by the parent company of the very same website that fired them.

It won't take long before they start sticking their hands in the site and someone gets fired.

While anything is possible, I sincerely doubt that the same events that were responsible for Jeff leaving GameSpot would occur again in a way that was somehow unavoidable, and if he IS fired AGAIN for giving a negative review to a game, it would be a pretty fucking epic nexus for game journalists to rally around.

But, again, I doubt that would ever happen. The Giant Bomb brand is strong and they're pretty even keel as far as controversial reviewers are concerned.

Griking

03-25-2012, 01:15 PM

Why would he have had a non-disparagement agreement wit a company that fired him? Was he getting something in return for agreeing to it?

Trebuken

03-25-2012, 03:05 PM

So when can we start relying on Gamespot reviews for their undeniable integrity?

Gamereviewgod

03-25-2012, 03:34 PM

But they're now owned by the parent company of the very same website that fired them.

It won't take long before they start sticking their hands in the site and someone gets fired.

There was a livestream interview in which all was explained. It happened under new ownership who didn't grasp the situation fully. They merely saw ad dollars disappearing. Those people responsible for firing Gerstman are long gone.

WCP

03-25-2012, 03:41 PM

Why would he have had a non-disparagement agreement wit a company that fired him? Was he getting something in return for agreeing to it?

He got a severance package. Part of getting that was agreeing to not discuss why he was "released".

G-Boobie

03-25-2012, 06:40 PM

But they're now owned by the parent company of the very same website that fired them.

It won't take long before they start sticking their hands in the site and someone gets fired.

Maybe. Honestly though, I doubt it. Gamespot is headed up by John Davison, one of the best and longest-serving executives in games journalism, so we have some hope that the Giant Bomb guys will be left alone to do their thing. After all, Giant Bomb was on most of the 'best websites' lists for last couple of years, whereas Gamespot was not.

On the other hand, 1UP is a broken and ruined mess, so who knows. As long as we have the Bombcast, it's all good.