Gamespot fires honest reviewer, sh*tstorm ensues.

[purplepopcorn]

http://kotaku.com/gaming/rumor/games...iew-328244.php

Jeff Gerstmann's been sacked for giving a 6.0 for Kane and Lynch, while the actual website Gamespot gave the game full site integration (front page background ad). After Eidos' massive amount of money spent on ads throughout the site, it only makes sense that there would be repercussions for straying from their plan.

Penny Arcade broke the story around 1AM this morning, later being confirmed by Gabe in the thread about it. (by that, I mean he posts in it saying that the comic is true)

http://forums.penny-arcade.com/showthread.php?t=42776

Obviously, many gamers have their own opinions about these events. Let's here yours.


PS: Jeff G. is the one that gave Twilight Princess an 8.8

PPS: No, I do not believe the TP review would be relevant to (or justifying) his firing, neither should you.

[zidart]

is he by any chance hte same guy that gave fire emblem a 6 , mass effect an 8 and timeshift a low score that i don't remember right now??

[ddr_f4n]

It's his opinion. That's what you get for an overhyped game.

[zidart]

Originally Posted by ddr_f4n

It's his opinion. That's what you get for an overhyped game.

in my opinion reviews should be done with the opinion of many reviewers at the same time....

i was subscribed to a mexican magazine that first listed the features of the game on their reviews then 3 reviewers posted their score and opinion, usually there was a difference in their scores however they always stated the reasons of their score (for example: "i don't recommend it if you don't like shooters" )

that's why i usually check gamefaqs or reviews from players on gamespot they give a more general information of the game, and i usually read the gamespot reviews just for more detailed info .

though i can't really give my opinion of that game because i haven't played it

[gabgabo]

Actually, the review's score should be of his average. Let's say he's giving 7 in average. A 8.8 would actually be a game he did like. He simply doesn't feel like giving 10s as the gaming industry will always get better. I do understand him. He didn't give a low score on a single incredible game, he gave low on all of them! That's what I think.

[ddr_f4n]

Originally Posted by zidart

in my opinion reviews should be done with the opinion of many reviewers at the same time....

i was subscribed to a mexican magazine that first listed the features of the game on their reviews then 3 reviewers posted their score and opinion, usually there was a difference in their scores however they always stated the reasons of their score (for example: "i don't recommend it if you don't like shooters" )

that's why i usually check gamefaqs or reviews from players on gamespot they give a more general information of the game, and i usually read the gamespot reviews just for more detailed info .

though i can't really give my opinion of that game because i haven't played it

Right beside the reviewer's score it displays the average score given from other users, which display's the score as 7.0

[plasmix]

8.8 is still a really good score, and Twilight Princess might have deserved less.

[-Fallen-]

Originally Posted by plasmix

8.8 is still a really good score, and Twilight Princess might have deserved less.

QFT.

[zidart]

Originally Posted by ddr_f4n

Right beside the reviewer's score it displays the average score given from other users, which display's the score as 7.0

hmmm well then it did deserve a 6 after all

and twilight princess should have gotten at least a 9.0

[smartdude1212]

Just like Halo 3 being overhyped when it's really the same thing over again with slightly different graphics and weapons

[MystictheHedgehog]

Originally Posted by smartdude1212

Just like Halo 3 being overhyped when it's really the same thing over again with slightly different graphics and weapons

Thank you someone else is not blown over by the name Halo in the world....

[purplepopcorn]

Well, this got off topic...

but anyway, the point of this event is Gamespot's willingness to fire an editor from the urging of its sponsors, aka selling out.

..and of course many people even pay money to subscribe to Gamespot's news, and such a blatant act of disrespect towards the site's customers is drawing many people away from the site.

[smartdude1212]

That's why you all listen to ZeroPunctuation and get completely raped.

[ogmsband]

well i will say it looks a lot better in the adds but it is fun as hell

edit:
qft=?

[Squeek]

But we all knew GameSpot's opinion is meaningless and rife with whored reviews.

Right?

I mean, Kane and Lynch is a pretty sub-standard game. I'd be amazed if anyone gave it over an 8.

[evilbutterfly]

Originally Posted by purplepopcorn

Well, this got off topic...

but anyway, the point of this event is Gamespot's willingness to fire an editor from the urging of its sponsors, aka selling out.

..and of course many people even pay money to subscribe to Gamespot's news, and such a blatant act of disrespect towards the site's customers is drawing many people away from the site.

Well I think it goes without saying that everybody thinks it's wrong.

Whether an outcry on the internet will change anything or not...well...yeah I guess we'll see.

[Chromer]

It doesn't help also that Gamespot is also partners with Microsoft. Say what you will, but if Microsoft is contributing to my paychecks, I'd be pretty forgiving of their games as well.

Also, the reason 8.8 is so mem-worthy is not because of the people who went around going, "Ha ha. TP got an 8.8." It was the Nintendo fans who sent death threats and other bull**** just because Jeff gave it an 8.8.

[cC@Zz]

Well I agree with him.

Kane and Lynch is a ****fest.

[Relambrien]

Originally Posted by smartdude1212

Just like Halo 3 being overhyped when it's really the same thing over again with slightly different graphics and weapons

Sorry to take it off-topic somewhat, but I have to respond to this.

Say you have two games: Game A and Game B. They're both the same in every aspect except graphics (same dialogue, same maps, you get the idea). Game B has superior graphics, but it came out after Game A. Which game deserves a better score?

Game B, obviously. If Game A got a 10, so should Game B. Games need to be reviewed alone, on the quality of the game itself. You can't compare Halo 3 to Halo 1/2, say it's pretty much the same thing, and use that to give it a much lower score. If it's the same thing with prettier graphics, then Halo 3 deserves a higher score than Halo 1/2 (I haven't played any, so I don't know just how similar they all are, but you get the idea). Why? Because Halo 3 is a better game.

[Squeek]

And yet, when most reviewers review franchise games, they always say

"This is not as good as the one before it" or "This is almost the exact same thing as the one before it".

I find it amazing that this holds true for everything except for Halo.