Journalistic Integrity?

[incoherent]

That said, the only game reviews I read are the gamefaqs ones, where you have two hundred unpaid people either gushing about the game, or ranting about how bad it is. Aside a few exceptions (people posting scores of 10 for Shaq-Fu for example), the system works well enough to at least give you a ballpark, and you don't have to consider that the website is infamous for always giving Nintendo games top reviews.

GameFAQs reviewers have two possible scores: 10/10 (this game is good and I'll shank you if you say otherwise) and 4/10 (this game is terrible and all those 10/10 people are losers). There's the occasional good review, but you get to sift through piles of 10s and 4s before you get to the ones with actual points to make.

I guess your point is that the proportion of 10s to 4s gives you a ballpark figure, but some of those 4s are just "hi I'm an internet rebel and I'm taking a contrary position just to tick you off".

 

[Russ Pitts]

Aww.. but I like you Russ, I don't want you to get fired!

In order for Russ to get fired, another editor would have to slay him in a gladitorial arena battle and take his place. That's just how we do things here.

Two editors enter, one editor leaves!

Dude, I practiced on the bungie swing at the State Fair for just such an event. I'm prepared.

 

[tentaclesex]

goodnight sweet prince. anyone reviewing a game that unhilariously badly needs slating in my opinion, times change, let them change, i know he did a good job for a long time, but things change, and always will.

You're making the assumption that the game isn't a huge turd. This may be a mistake.

Watching gameplay movies certainly makes it look awful.

You may also notice that it's getting pretty mediocre scores from most reviewers: http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages4/934403.asp

 

[SatansBestBuddy]

Do you prefer the battle axe or the broadsword?

 

[Kronopticon]

goodnight sweet prince. anyone reviewing a game that unhilariously badly needs slating in my opinion, times change, let them change, i know he did a good job for a long time, but things change, and always will.

You're making the assumption that the game isn't a huge turd deserving of such a review. This may be a mistake.

Watching gameplay movies certainly makes it look awful.

You may also notice that it's getting pretty mediocre scores from most reviewers.

erm, i mean that the game may indeed be very bad, but he isnt making the review funny.

 

[tentaclesex]

erm, i mean that the game may indeed be very bad, but he isnt making the review funny.

OK, well, Gamespot isn't a comedy site, and the rumor isn't "Editorial Director Fired for Not Being Funny Enough."

I get the feeling that he was pissed at the way the site was shilling for the game, and he channeled some of that rage into his review.

Remember when the IGN McGriddles thing seemed completely ridiculous? Now it doesn't seem that out of the ordinary when a whole site is reskinned for advertising purposes. Crap.

 

[Num43]

A mudpit fight...while wearing bikinis.

 

[GrowlersAtSea]

This whole thing is getting pretty interesting. The level of concern that has erupted on many sites really is something to behold.

With that said, there is this...

http://blog.wired.com/games/2007/11/gamespot-inside.html

These sources aren't great, but it's something along the lines I would expect someone at GameSpot to say. I hate having to sight forums and blogs, but there is so little to go on right now. It is possible that this is a just a very bad coincidence in timing, but firing one of the toughest reviewers they have after giving a less than stellar review to one of their sponsors just looks bad.

But even when you look at it, it wasn't really that bad a score. 6 out of 10 isn't that abysmal, but it is looked at as such by the gaming community at large. Looking at that raw number, that would mean that it's still more good than bad even.

Rating systems, review sites, gamers perceptions, everything seems wrong here. I hope this might make people examine the big sites more, maybe they'll try to reform, or maybe this can even give the opportunity for some of the smaller sites out there to succeed because of their perceived integrity next to sites that receive thousands of dollars from the people they're reviewing. Maybe just wishful thinking, though.

 

[Mage26]

I lost all faith in game review sites a long time ago. (With the exceptions being this excellent site and gamerevolution.com cuz they badmouth everything.) So this is no shocker.

And Russ would destroy, Russel Crowe style.

 

[KurtNiisan]

Jesus, what a load of shit. Did Sony kick up a huge stink at IGN for their 4.9/10 for Lair? Eidos needs to take the carrot out of their asses and get over it. Their game sucked - Whoop de do.

 

[krysalist]

Reviewers are a dime-a-dozen to the big sites. Gerstmann is no exception. If you don't pull the right game's weight, chances are you're going to disappear. Even if this situation is unrelated (spidey-sense sez, "No effin' way!"), there's plenty of other examples to look to.

 

[Andy Chalk]

erm, i mean that the game may indeed be very bad, but he isnt making the review funny.

Oh god, don't tell me we have to be funny now too.

 

[Russ Pitts]

CNET Responds To GameSpot Payola Allegations

CNET-owned GameSpot's Executive Editor, Jeff Gerstmann, was fired from his post [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/79445-Gamespot-Editor-Fired-Rumors-Say-Eidos-Did-It] yesterday. Internet rumors soon followed suggesting the reason was his negative review of Eidos' latest, Kane & Lynch, a high-profile action game rumored to be the beginning of a new franchise. A feature film starring Bruce Willis is purportedly already in the works. GameSpot's website, as of this morning, had been heavily adorned with Kane & Lynch advertising banners

Representatives from CNET, GameSpot and Gerstmann himself have all pleaded "no comment" since this morning, but the official statement from CNET came this afternoon:

"GameSpot takes its editorial integrity extremely seriously. For over a decade, GameSpot and the many members of its editorial team have produced thousands of unbiased reviews that have been a valuable resource for the gaming community. At CNET Networks, we stand behind the editorial content that our teams produce on a daily basis.

"With respect to Jeff Gerstmann, it is CNET Networks' policy not to comment on the status of its employees, current of former."

Last month, CNET hired Steven Colvin, formerly of Dennis Publishing (the publishers of Maxim and Blender) to head up it's Entertainment and Lifestyle division, which includes GameSpot. Exactly how Colvin is involved in the furor surrounding Gerstmann's firing is unclear, as is whether or not GameSpot accepted compensation from Eidos for editorial coverage, a significant breach of ethics. Further questions and requests for clarification have been met with a firm "no comment."

Trusted sources at CNET say the rumors, regardless of their truth, have caused quite a stir at the network. One source suggested the implications have cast doubt on the editorial integrity of the entire organization, although CNET and GameSpot are in separate divisions and do not share a management structure.

"Stephen is a dynamic, experienced, and respected media executive who has an impressive track-record of building highly successful lifestyle media brands in the U.S. and international markets," said Neil Ashe, CEO of CNET Networks, in a press release from last month [http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/071025/20071025006333.html]. "We're extremely pleased to have him join our executive management team."


Permalink

 

[Lance Icarus]

I don't think this is any kind of payola thing since Gerstmann has been criticized pretty heavily before for his famously harsh reviews, but it does seem like some seriously bad timing to be firing him right after this review. If there is evidence of payola, then it'll just make me all the happier that the Escapist exists.

Viva la Yahtzee!

 

[Sylocat]

No wonder all the mainstream critics were afraid to give anything less than a perfect 10/10 score to the steaming pile of mediocrity and bare-bones competence that was Halo 3.

 

[GrowlersAtSea]

One of those instances where pleading no comment really doesn't make things look any better. It makes them look terribly corporate, which rarely has good connotations, however true it may be.

If these allegations were totally unfounded I would expect them, policy or not, to comment on what he was not fired about. Since although commenting on the specifics of a termination is not what most companies will do, saying what they weren't fired for, especially when it effects their reputation and strikes at the heart of their business, wouldn't be outrageous.

The things silence says...

I guess it's time to start looking for more good review sites. I wish the Escapist did more regular and easier to access reviews, they have some good writers that contribute and can usually give interesting reads.

 

[Lanowar]

Seems like a bad week for the medium of Videogame Journalism, what with IGN actually screaming (if you were unfortunate enough to download there podcast) at Penny Arcade for daring to question the reviews of Assasians Creed.

Yahtzee is pretty much one of the better reviewers out there at the moment.

 

[raigan]

"a significant breach of ethics"?!
i thought that was common practice for all the big gaming mags/sites. seriously. otherwise, why does even the worst game get a 6-7/10?

 

[diemkay]

When I first heard the news I thought about Yahtzee first, obviously this poor bloke at gamespot had a communication problem with the people handling the money, specifically the advertising budgets. Like Sylocat said earlier, no wonder critics gave Halo 10/10... considering they pumped so much money into it.

 

[shadow skill]

How does this guy get fired for this review which seems pretty honest to me having not played the game myself, and not the guy who reviewed R&C future and said it had too much spice....................That guy should have been fired for that.