Gamespot fires Gerstmann

P

PARANOiA

Veteran
GS better be quick to respond to these apparent "allegations". The minute the public percieves that they only rate games based on how much they get paid by the developer/publisher, their reviews will count for nothing.

Should be interesting to see what the PA editorial will say to go along with the comic. It's interesting to note that PA recently posted an editorial where they explained their stance regarding advertising on their site, and how it relates to their opinions about the games in question (in short, they don't advertise sh*tty games). Which was precisely opposite of what they're implying that Gamespot is doing. You have to admit, the timing is extremely suspicious.

It also furthers my belief that you should never base a purchase on any single review. Whenever I'm on the fence about a title, I read reviews across the board, from as many of the big sites as I can think of. I also pay close attention to what actual gamers say, on any of the several game-related message boards I visit. That tactic appears to be even more important based on this, especially if it's even slightly true.
 
Wow...

The NeoGAF thread is huge and expanding rapidly!

For those who do not know, Jeff has been with Gamespot since the beginning and a figurehead of the site for a long time. Aside from former EIC Greg Kasavin, he was the most recognized reviewer the site had, and one of the key personalities on The Hotspot (podcast) and weekly show On The Spot. His review history is dotted with some major controversies that sparked a lot of criticism from the gaming community, most notably Tony Hawks Pro Skater 3 (10), Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess (8.8), and Shenmue (6.0). The Kane and Lynch: Dead Man review was par for the course as far as his reviews go, and looking at the MetaCritic score not far from what other reviewers have said.

With that aside, I think we need someone from GameSpot or Cnet to say something to clear this mess up, because if the rumours are true, and he was fired due to pressure from the Cnet marketing team I will never visit GameSpot again.

Also, a lot of people are calling for a banning of all Cnet sites on NeoGAF if the allegations surrounding Jeff's firing are true. I say Beyond3D should do the same, as supporting a network of sites that suppresses journalistic independence would be wrong.
 
http://forums.penny-arcade.com/showthread.php?p=3689682#post3689682

Gabe from Penny Arcade said:
The comic is true. You should see the news breaking soon.
Click to expand...

This is actually really saddening. I remember when Gamespot was the only site on the net you'd put any stock in, and a high score generally meant something. A damned shame if you ask me.

And regarding an "official comment"... what can CNet say exactly? Yes, we fired a reviewer for giving a low score to a highly sponsered title? It would be the end of the site forever.

Edit: and Gamespot says:
People, don't direct your anger at Gamespot. This is CNet's meddling. Gamespot consists just of the editorial, news, community, and development teams. It's CNet's marketing that puts the ads up. CNet's marketing that complained. CNet is who can fire their EIC.
Click to expand...
http://au.gamespot.com/pages/forums/show_msgs.php?topic_id=26072117&page=10
 
Last edited by a moderator:
He apparently did a video review for it as well which was pulled from the site, though you can still see it on their player

He absolutly ripped the game apart in it, i actually started to laugh at the end. If they were paid a decent some of money by Eidos to advertise the game (it takes up most of the front page) and asked him to bump the score to please a sponsor, in which case he seems like the kind of guy who would defend his decision, i certainly see him being fired for that review. In the end he quite literally says its not worth it to buy the game at full price.
 
SugarCoat said:
He apparently did a video review for it as well which was pulled from the site, though you can still see it on their player

He absolutly ripped the game apart in it, i actually started to laugh at the end. If they were paid a decent some of money by Eidos to advertise the game and asked him to bump the score, in which he seems like the kind of guy who would defend his decision, i certainly see him being fired for that review. In the end he quite literally says its not worth it to buy the game at full price.
Click to expand...

If you release crap you should expect crappy reviews. Firing the reviewer after the review just means that you can't trust c-net. They're going to have to defend this decision and the story is already generating an unreal amount of traffic.
 
I always knew there was something dodgy at Gamespot.

No wonder no PS3 game gets a good review score, MS are one of c-nets partners. Everything is clear now ;)
 
Pretty fucked up....
Back then, Gamespot was the ONLY site worth reading... Now it seems that noone can be trusted. The bloggers and small sites are biased and the major "journalists" are on someones payroll...
That's what happens when a hobby becomes a multimillion industry.
 
Jeff is one of my favorite reporters in the industry and has been for very many years (Gamespot is probably the first thing I paid for on the internet ever). This is very ugly. I'll wait and see if this turns out to be undeniably true, and then withdraw my membership.

Also, I hate this kind of stuff. There's just too much tension between money spent on gaming review sites by advertisers and their actual work. It's a problem in many magazines, but I do not accept it as a necessary evil.
 
This is a scandal threatening to take down Gamespot! What do they do now? Reinstate Gertsmann?

The 3 "user soapbox's" right now on Gspot front page are "corruptspot"? "In Gamespot I trust no more" and "Gertsmann in retrospective" :LOL:
 
Hmm, well my opinion of gaming 'journalism' can't possibly be any lower anyway.
Although X-Play is the only one I've come close to liking. At least when I used to watch it it's been like a year or two since I've seen an episode.
 
People still believe sponsors don't have an effect on reviews?!

A friend of mine used to write reviews and interviews for a certain Finnish metal music magazine, and he told me how his review score was fixed in favor of a certain Finnish record company, which was (and is) the biggest sponsor for the mag. The album in question was from one of the top selling artists of the company. The funny thing is, they didn't change a word in the review, just upped the score by two points. :D

Nothing new there. Although, getting fired due to a bad review is a bit too much.
 
.Melchiah. said:
People still believe sponsors don't have an effect on reviews?!
Click to expand...

I am aware of this happening. However, that doesn't make it acceptable. If I discover that a source I trust is affected, then I drop that source or at the very least factor in the issue.
 
http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/50134

Update: CNET employee Tim Tracy has posted what appears to be a farewell notice on his GameSpot blog. Until July, Tracy was an editor at GameSpot, and since then has been working for CNET-owned MP3.com. If indeed Tracy is departing, it is unknown if it is related to Gerstmann's dismissal.
Click to expand...

that looks convincing. I don't know if a full-on censorship of the site is a good idea though. It seems like a trivial thing to do. Just don't post gamespot reviews.

I always liked gamespot's reviews but after this, I can't go to the site. maybe I'll follow gerstmann's reviews where ever he goes.

does anybody remember when gametrailers gave shadow the hedghog (which also had the whole front page covered in ads at the time) an 8 when nearly every other site gave it in teh 5-6 range? yeah, sponsors choose the scores. I'm guessing it's like what .Melchiah. said and they don't change any text, but the editor goes in and changes the final score. or in some cases the graphics, sound, etc. scores.
 
Arwin said:
I am aware of this happening. However, that doesn't make it acceptable. If I discover that a source I trust is affected, then I drop that source or at the very least factor in the issue.
Click to expand...

I find it hard to believe any of the bigger magazines or websites would be free to give negative reviews for their sponsors' products. If there's a big ad for ie. EA's game, I'd be surprised if their games got below average scores.
 
The reverse of this news is that Gesterman probably didn't feel his reviews were tainted in the past. I am not a GS defender (I think there system is borked and inconsistant and don't typically agree with the tastes of many of their editors), but the fact he stood up when asked to change his review would give some indication this is a first... probably related to the increased relationship with CNET over the last couple years.
 
I really doubt it's the first raising or lowering of a score because of a "Sponsor" at Gamespot.

It might've been the first time that his credibility would be brought into question and he felt he couldn't do it.

The game appears to be a stinking turd, so giving it an 8 would've done almost as much damage as this whole affair has anyway.
 
Wow, he was my fav guy in there... between this and the IGN podcast calling gamers idiots and getting in a fit over Gabe's comments of Asassin's creed on PA is been an interesting week in gaming... at least the guy stood up for his opinion and that has value. Hopefully he will be quickly hired at 1up, since that seems to be the last standing site that review games according to their opinion, even if you don't agree with it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
MS X06 Press Release Leak
Replies
1
Views
2K
StefanS
S
Back
Top