Gamespot Editor Gets Fired Over Game Review

[ExhileVoid]

http://kotaku.com/gaming/rumor/gamespot ... 328244.php
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic

Reports have been buzzing today that Jeff Gerstmann, a long time game reviewer and executive editor at GameSpot, was fired this week allegedly for the low scoring review he gave for Eidos's recent third person action game Kane and Lynch: Dead Men. Both Kotaku and Shacknews have reported via unnamed sources that Eidos threatened to pull the ad contract for Kane and Lynch off GameSpot because of Gerstmann's review of the game where he gave it a score of 6 out of 10 (a score that is just a hair below the average score the game has received from other media outlets). Gamespot's web site currently has a Kane and Lynch theme which can even be altered at the reader's whim to have either character alone as a web site theme or the two character's together. Gerstmann's written review is still posted at Gamespot but his video review of the game has apparently been pulled from the site.

Anyone heard about this yet? If the rumors indeed turn out to be true then Gamespot just lost a lot of credibility.

[VR7]

The rumours are true.

http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/50134

I liked GameSpot because it was one of the online game magazines that I could've sworn was generally unbiased. Guess I was only thinking of the writers. I guess it just proves what everyone else has been trying to convince me of when it comes to mainstream gaming outlets.

To be honest, I think Kane and Lynch runs one of the worst game advertisement campaigns ever. It's not just the forced ads of the game, viral marketing and the firing of Jeff over one review--well it's that too. The problem is that Eidos handles it so suspiciously, and so poorly that they make it way too easy to see the corruption in gaming journalism, or in the American game industry for that matter.

That itself is far more surprising than one guy being fired, since he could find a similar job easily with GameSpot on his resume.

Edit: Oh and one more thing, this thread is probably very prone to flamebait considering the actual situation on this topic. I'll keep it open for now, but try not to cause a stir.

[ExhileVoid]

This is just completely outrageous then! I bet some Gamespot reviewers are now afraid that if they give a bad review for a big game they'll get fired over it. Fire the person for giving incompetent bad reviews. Fire the person for breaking workplace violations. Fire the person for harassment. Fire the person breaking contracts. Fire the person for creating false information. NEVER EVER fire the person because he gave a justified bad review for a game the same company that's advertising on your website.

The thing is I'm really worried about Gamespot future and its credibility. They've been a really great non biased game review site in the past. I'm also really proud of Jeff Gerstmann for not selling out and standing up for his own beliefs even if it meant being fired when they asked him to reevaluate his review.

Edit: I'm not trying to start anything or ask people to start flaming/boycott Gamespot or Eidos. All I'm interested is hearing everyone's opinion over this matter.

[wing zero alpha]

Actually, this is a fairly common practice with magazines and newspapers: firing writers and reviewers because the object that they're going over just happens to be a major source of income for the company as a whole or if it's a political issue, the company executives' views don't coincide with the writers' (Hollywood anybody?). So in summary, I'm not really surprised by this.

[Mwulf]

As a writer, allow me to say that ANY writing, once money is involved, becomes tainted to some degree or another. It's like prostitution. There are varying degrees of quality, but everyone's still a whore. I don't see why this should surprise anyone... it's just a simple case of a "John" paying for the full service and not getting to go all the way. ~__~

If that metaphor will fly here, of course.

I ignore professional reviews--any and all reviews that are purchased. Just go to GameFAQs.

EDIT: You know, for a pair of absurdly old nerds, these two are really up to speed this week.

[Deus EpS Machina]

I dont ever read the official reviews that gaming sites throw up...especially while there are massive marketting gimmicks running on the site for that same game...

Most gaming sites wth reviews also have an average of reader reviews. I always look at what the regular joe says, cuz its always been more correct.

funny though, seeing as Eidos threatened to remove the ads if (i assume) something wasnt done about the review...and yet the ads are gone and so is Jeff.

[Tafumi]

You're kidding me? Jeff has always been known for having really decent reviews. And I watched his video review a week or two ago it seriously wasn't that bad.

All he did was mention the fact that the controlls are clunky and unintuitive (which they were,) the graphics were bland and painful (again, they were) and they dropped the F bomb so many times that it was rediculous. Every other word out of their mouth was four letters.

But he did praise the MP aspect.

His review was really no different than the ones I read on IGN, 1up, etc.

That's a bit bunk. He was my favorite reviewer.

[VR7]

Edit: I'm not trying to start anything or ask people to start flaming/boycott Gamespot or Eidos. All I'm interested is hearing everyone's opinion over this matter.

Not to stray from the topic too far, but when I mean prone to flamebait, have you ever did some surfing around on the topic? There's been a flood of troll raids on a number of places such as the Eidos or GS forums, along with a full season of net drama episodes over this one topic.

In essence, I'd like for this to be what you're intending for this topic, rather than degenerating to how the people on GS or other assorted forums are actually taking it, like "I don't like that Jeff got fired! I say we raid the Eidos forums in retaliation!"

Back on topic, I've never actually agreed with all of GameSpot's reviews. For instance, their reviews of Halo are certainly questionable. I thought it was funny when Jeff gave Twilight Princess an 8.8, because that was what I felt it deserved as well. For the most part, though, I thought their reviews were generally more critical and thoughtful than what I saw on say, IGN. (i.e. Have you seen GS' score for Gundam VS. Z Gundam? 6.something, I thought that was pretty fair, but all IGN gave was a 3 paragraph page about why the game was a total abomination.) And I definitely trusted them when the game is so bad, you absolutely must not play it, like Big Rigs.

[wing zero alpha]

Well I watched Jeff's apparently final video review.

Not that I've played Kane and Lynch for myself, and therefore have no leg to stand up for it if I wanted to, but aside from the gameplay, I don't think he knew what he was talking about. A sizeable portion of the review had him ranting on about the storyline, the "ugly nature" of the characters and the constant usage of the F bomb. In case Mr. Gerstmann didn't notice, that's the game's alleged selling point: it's supposed to be ugly.

The two main characters are escaped deathrow inmates, who were obviously put in there for reasons beyond "the corrupt arm of the law", that go to work for a criminal organization. Just who did he expect them to be? Clint Eastwood escaping Alcatraz? Or Antonio Banderas sticking it to the drug cartels with his guitar case? These aren't supposed to be Hollywood anti-heroes that you root for in the movies, these are criminals that you're not supposed to root for at all. And as far as the F Bombs go, as annoying as their constant usage can be, it adds to the grittiness (if that's a word) and realism of the game. Having a relative that worked as a prison guard (now works in juvie), I've been told many a story of prison riots and confrontations, but one of the things that has stood out is for whatever reason criminals and overall "tough guys" just love to use the F word whenever they can get away with it. It's almost on the same stereotypical level as black gang members using the N word on each other.

For the rest of his review, I can't comment. As I said before I haven't played the game, but I can definitely comment on what the designers intended for the tone of the story and characterization. So for all I know Jeff was spot on with the rest of his review, no pun intended; it's just one of my pet peeves when reviewers miss the "big point" of the object of their study.

Still though, when looking over GameSpot's DC Two Step style explanation of the event, in which they claim Jeff got fired due to being overly obnoxious with his work and having a rebellious streak (the latter might actually be real), I've seen worse reviews on video games given by them. And last I checked, none of those reviewers were fired for the reasons they're giving out here. Add that to the fact that this is a firm that prides itself on giving harsh reviews to big names, and you can almost feel the hypocrisy from your computer screen.

[Tafumi]

Trust me when I say that if you should happen to play it, what he commented on will make a lot more sense.

Yes, the game is supposed to be gritty and dark. You're playing a psycopath and a hitman. There's a difference between taking a glimpse into the dark and seething underbelly of the criminal world and just going over the top. It went over the top many, many times. It just wasnt told in a way that really came together.

You seriously garnered no real attachment to any of the characters during the entire course of the game. The only point of relation that anyone might be able to connect with any of the characters is how much Kane's daughter seems to hate him. Assuming you have a sniveling teenager of your own who hates your guts.

There just isn't anything there that makes you feel that Kane is a logical extension of yourself. All this stuff is happening to him and the only thing you can think of is how little of a care you give.

Granted, I don't think any of us can connect to them on a criminal level. The story itself is ugly. It's supposed to be. But when he meant it's ugly, he meant the way the story is fed to the player. Real ugly.

[ExhileVoid]

Other sources have said that Jeff was already on thin ice when he gave past reviews to games like Zelda: Twilight Princess an 8.8/10 compared to other critics:

GameSpy (100/100)
1UP (100/100)
GameInformer (100/100)
IGN (95/100)

This outraged a lot of fans who called Gamespot biased against the Wii. I think the K&L review may have been the last straw.

[Yuusha Tokkyu Might Gaine]

Wait...so if a worker gets fired for giving the game a low score, then why not ban members of the site itself?

[VR7]

Wonder if you guys have seen this:

http://kotaku.com/gaming/rumor/alleged- ... 328797.php

Having read this, I miss Greg Kasavin already.

[ExhileVoid]

The readers and subscribers of Gamespot seemed to be very pissed off at Eidos where 75% of people out of 834 players gave a 1.0 Abysmal rating to Kane & Lynch. Now Gamespot have stopped users from posting player reviews of Kane & Lynch. I heard worse stories like people going on Eidos forums and posting VERY inappropriate content that expressed their hatred for what has happened. Eidos had to close down these forums and delete a lot of users and threads. I curious now to see how well K&L will sell during the holiday seasons where a lot of players may have probably boycotted this game.

[wing zero alpha]

@Tafumi

Actually, I don't blame him for being negative on something like that, because it is hard to connect to a gritty and dark story along those lines and characters like that. But like I said, that's kind of the whole point to it and as proven by Grand Theft Auto and whatever traversty Rockstar puts out, people are into over-the-topness. Again, not defending the game, my problem is Jeff came across to me as someone that doesn't quite know what he's talking about and going by some of his past review work, I'd almost say he's one of those tough guy critics that likes to slam things for the sheer hell of it (I think people were pissed off for more than the 8.8 rating to Zelda). I find those kinds of reviewers highly distasteful to say the least.

The readers and subscribers of Gamespot seemed to be very pissed off at Eidos where 75% of people out of 834 players gave a 1.0 Abysmal rating to Kane & Lynch. Now Gamespot have stopped users from posting player reviews of Kane & Lynch. I heard worse stories like people going on Eidos forums and posting VERY inappropriate content that expressed their hatred for what has happened. Eidos had to close down these forums and delete a lot of users and threads. I curious now to see how well K&L will sell during the holiday seasons where a lot of players may have probably boycotted this game.

This all happened after Jeff got fired? Wow.

[Tafumi]

Well, I do know that Jeff made a lot of controversial reviews. I wouldn't go as far as saying he was a ball-breaker as he was moreso a flag waver. Sometimes it worked, usually it didn't. I wouldn't have fired the guy over it.

Either way, looks like Edios made their bed with this. They got to sleep in it now.

World keeps spinning.

[Dygenguard]

As a writer, allow me to say that ANY writing, once money is involved, becomes tainted to some degree or another. It's like prostitution. There are varying degrees of quality, but everyone's still a whore. I don't see why this should surprise anyone... it's just a simple case of a "John" paying for the full service and not getting to go all the way. ~__~

If that metaphor will fly here, of course.

I ignore professional reviews--any and all reviews that are purchased. Just go to GameFAQs.

Quoted For Truth. The Mighty Dollar has a way of guiding your pen/keyboard more than anything else that might be thrown at a writer. In the end, you have to decide if your words will be for your own gain or for others to gain from. The latter tends to be the way most writers think, preferring to pull down a few bucks on the side.

Paint me cynical, but the more the internet and TV advertise and hype a game, the more inversely proportional I am in excitement about it. There's a reason it's called a "video game industry", they're just trying to sell plastic in a pretty box to you. And in order to do so, they'll use any means necessary including telling you about it during commercial breaks, paying people to give it their "highest rating ever", and buying into console-exclusive contracts. Also, attempting "damage control" by claiming a low-score reviewer had a "rebellious streak". That indicates that he had a reason for doing so, only making their reputation worst.

Now, I'll admit there are some exceptions. Mass Effect and Bioshock, two of the biggest hyped games this season, were worth every penny if you ask me. Assassin's Creed, sort of, but everyone I know hated the plot twist while I thought it made the game have a whole new layer of intrigue. But the difference is that while I saw the trailers and heard the hype, I waited until I saw actual gameplay before I ran out and threw money into it. I did this using GameTrailers.com or YouTube's user videos and watching my friends play it.

The lesson, kids? Be wise consumers. You wouldn't buy a car just because someone told you to. You have to test-drive it, get the information, and make sure it suits your interests. Don't pre-order stuff just because you get free swag, then play half the game and exchange it for "the next big thing". You're stuck with a plastic figure of a game you hated and you're getting ripped off exchanging four games for one, anyway.

[Kurando]

I love how in the news section in gamespot about jeff getting fired clearly just self advertises itself. Saying that even though jeff is gone, we will still bring you the latest news, great videogame reviews ect. It also states the reason for him being fired cannot be told and that the rumours are false..

suuure....

Also Edios just wanted to have their game advertised, No better advertising than a scandel that will make more than half of gamespot members give the game attention (This most likely wasen't their plan, But it sure helps getting something well known fast). Of course, This is bad reputation Edios have just gave their game and will certianly put people off the game too. Look at the amount of 1.0 player reviews on the kayne and lynch page!

good going Edios

[Dygenguard]

If sales on the game go up because of this scandal, I'll probably lose more faith in the gaming community. No doubt Eidos fanboys will run out and get it out of spite. That's how Scientology works; they buy-out Hubbard's books in bulk in order to get him more prestige.

This has set a precedent. Reviewers must now tread carefully and be the puppet of gaming companies. Sad, really.

[ZeonfromHell]

I must say though, after watching his review on Gamespot.com, he was rather trite and unprofessional in it. Although he sounds candid, he just kinda bashes the game. Regardless of how bad the game is, you have to be careful not to hurt the reputation of the company, and to the degree he went in his review, he could have. Not to say he shoud be fired over this, he just could have at least shown some humility.