Author Topic: Gamespot Editor fired for 'unfavorable' review? (Read 28382 times)

Kairon · « **Reply #50 on:** December 02, 2007, 08:49:00 AM »

Hmm... I takes it back. Video reviews can be done well.

Djunknown · « **Reply #51 on:** December 02, 2007, 01:33:02 PM »

His video review was essentially a transcript of the text one. Its also typical Gerstmann style, so I don't see the video review as the tipping point, if anything, it shows the shoddy visuals and mediocre gameplay.

Good on 1up for taking a stand. or just getting some publicity Solidarity is not one of the gaming presses strong points, so to have this happen is one of those lunar/solar eclipse-type events.

I love the "Is this good for the Company?" banner. Nothing like an Office Space reference...

NinGurl69 *huggles · « **Reply #52 on:** December 02, 2007, 02:58:24 PM »

I HAVE PEOPLE SKILLS

Enner · « **Reply #53 on:** December 02, 2007, 07:18:01 PM »

Perhaps the only Gamespot video review that I remember were good to watch are the Metroid Prime and Halo 2 vids. Everything else is a random mesh of gameplay clips and recycling the review text.

Thank goodness for GameTrailer's efforts in actually editing the video clips and having a great narration that fits.

Oh, as for the Gamespot staff member I wasn't aware of the situation. Now that I am, I don't really care even though I hit up Gamespot for news, reviews, and previews (along with IGN, GameTrailers, and NWR). This sounds like an upper managment call at worst since the written review hasn't been changed as far as I know. I don't think it's fair to damn Gamespot and CNet just yet. At least until there is a suspicious rise in average scores from GameSpot. Perhaps that's me being naive and thinking this is just a bad, isolated incident.

Also, why the keep-away from GameFAQs? Most of the things that matter on it are user made anyway.

Crimm · « **Reply #54 on:** December 02, 2007, 07:24:00 PM »

See, I disagree. I found some of the GameSpot's video reviews for epic-bad games to be amusing ways with which they got across their point, "This game is bad, avoid it!"

Enner · « **Reply #55 on:** December 03, 2007, 12:15:45 PM »

Ah, I remember watching one. Personally, I find those a waste of data

Oh well, YOU'RE WINNER

Smash_Brother · « **Reply #56 on:** December 03, 2007, 01:53:09 PM »

I like the Gametrailers reviews. They seem pretty straightforward.

As for the whole debacle, I watched some of Jeff's reviews and he's a pretty straight shooter. If I had a review site, I'd hire him.

NWR_pap64 · « **Reply #57 on:** December 03, 2007, 02:12:18 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
I like the Gametrailers reviews. They seem pretty straightforward.

I like 'em as well. No extra razzmatazz, no lame attempts at cheesy humor, no sarcastic wit or anything special. Just you, the game and the reviewer. They also seem pretty fair in their reviews. They mentioned what worked and what didn't work and wrap things nicely. Maybe its just me, but I've gotten tired of "gimmick" reviews in which they are a comedy act first and a review second. The only exception has been Yahtzee's zero punctuation reviews because even if he puts a lot of sarcastic wit into he is fair and mentions the game's flaws and good qualities.

Djunknown · « **Reply #58 on:** December 03, 2007, 03:13:57 PM »

Quote
Also, why the keep-away from GameFAQs? Most of the things that matter on it are user made anyway.

Because GameFAQs is under the umbrella of Cnet, who in turn own Gamespot, MP3.Com, Filmspot, Download.com, Gamerankings to name a few. I personally am avoiding Cnet's sites as to not give them traffic. It even says when you see the title screen, a gamespot logo is over GameFAQs.

That being said, I'm in the market for a new site to get user-created walk-through, cheats and strategies. Or does GameFAQs corner the market on this one?

Destructoid joins in on the fun. That banner is indeed priceless!

GoldenPhoenix · « **Reply #59 on:** December 03, 2007, 03:20:38 PM »

I'm starting the anti-boycott movement, I'm visiting Gamespot and gamefaqs more now because boycotting something based on unconfirmed rumor is for goobers.

Enner · « **Reply #60 on:** December 03, 2007, 03:56:43 PM »

A principles thing then. I neglected that fact. Sorry. I'm finding myself with a lack of them and tact these days. My thinking is that this is overblown, whatever the incident actually is. One longtime editor is (supposedly) sacked by a company looking out for its bottomline due to a third tier publisher who has put out a mediocre game from a developer that is known more for violent content than exceptional quality. (Blech, run on) A sad state of affairs, yes, but something I believe the press community will see through quickly. And if things linger... well, then I guess that would be the proper time to start with the boycotting.

I guess I just think its a bit harsh to start with the avoiding now until we're absolutely sure. Then again, things like this probably won't ever be shown in full light until it's too late. Hmm... this is tough.

Oh, and GameSpot rolls out the fire control article that says everything is hunky-dory other than a guy being let go. Yay.

Most FAQ writers submit through multiple sites, though GameFAQs tend to get most due to popularity. You might be missing out on some by the lazier submitters. I'm sure you'll find a suitable alternative that is basically the same content. Maybe try IGN?

And, LOL at Destructoid.

Crimm · « **Reply #61 on:** December 03, 2007, 06:14:54 PM »

More lulz from Eidos!
Lying about scores that are readily available online? I mean, come on! All I have to do is do a few seconds of Google searches...

GoldenPhoenix · « **Reply #62 on:** December 03, 2007, 07:02:30 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Crimm
More lulz from Eidos!
Lying about scores that are readily available online? I mean, come on! All I have to do is do a few seconds of Google searches...

Hate to break it to you, but that stuff happens all the time whether it be a movie or game. I fail to see how this has ANYTHING to do with issue going on.

KDR_11k · « **Reply #63 on:** December 03, 2007, 09:03:04 PM »

Well, it says that Eidos is pretty desperate. I wonder if the misrepresented websites could sue Eidos.

GoldenPhoenix · « **Reply #64 on:** December 03, 2007, 09:08:57 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
Well, it says that Eidos is pretty desperate. I wonder if the misrepresented websites could sue Eidos.

Yeah, because it never happens. Seriously EVERY entertainment based company does this to some degree, it is taking things out of context especially for things with mixed reviews. It is flat out silly now to be singling out Eidos like they are the only one that does this.

NWR_insanolord · « **Reply #65 on:** December 03, 2007, 10:36:17 PM »

Taking things out of context is one thing, giving fake review scores is something completely different. It's the difference between creatively manipulating what's there and out-and-out lying. I'm with you on not making judgments on Gamespot based on rumors and unconfirmed statements, but in this case Eidos has clearly done something stupid that crossed the line.

Shift Key · « **Reply #66 on:** December 03, 2007, 10:57:42 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: insanolord
Taking things out of context is one thing, giving fake review scores is something completely different.

They're both lies - the only difference is you're happy to swallow one of them because its a "little" lie.

NWR_insanolord · « **Reply #67 on:** December 03, 2007, 11:33:59 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Shift Key
Quote
Originally posted by: insanolord
Taking things out of context is one thing, giving fake review scores is something completely different.

They're both lies - the only difference is you're happy to swallow one of them because its a "little" lie.

I'm not "happy to swallow" anything. I hate that game publishers and movie studios publicize taken-out-of-context quotes but I know it happens and so does everyone else. Giving fake review scores is much more blatant and stupid and it's something that's (I think) much less common. You took my statement out of context there, I was arguing against GP's defense of Eidos for something she said was common.

oohhboy · « **Reply #68 on:** December 03, 2007, 11:49:18 PM »

Eidos/Cnet should be singled out because they were caught red handed. Given an event like thing as relatively rare, why NOT send as strong a message as possible. None of this is acceptable and should be made known industry wide. Other forms media may do this kind of thing as standard practice, but WHY should we accept it? Why not hold them to a high standard? If they can't meet that standard, they should get the heck out.

UncleBob · « **Reply #69 on:** December 04, 2007, 01:11:45 AM »

It's one thing to accept a lie because you think it "happens all the time" and you can't tell the truth from the lies.

It's a whole different thing to accept a lie after having the facts shown to you.

It's about the difference between suspecting your spouse of having an affair and walking in on your spouse having sex with the neighbor.

bustin98 · « **Reply #70 on:** December 04, 2007, 02:55:40 AM »

About the Eidos advertisments and quotes from previews, couldn't it be argued that the stars are just part of the design and not meant to be taken as review scores?

Either way, I just looked at the site and the stars are no longer present. Looks like some one is scouring the Internet for bad news and cleaning things up as quickly as possible.

I don't know if companies should go down for this fiasco, but there should be management whose heads should roll. I'll be happy if there was an announcement stating that so-n-so was let go due to unethical practices from both CNet and Eidos.

Crimm · « **Reply #71 on:** December 04, 2007, 04:15:26 AM »

It's just interesting that this particular game has had such a torrent around it.

KDR_11k · « **Reply #72 on:** December 04, 2007, 04:16:02 AM »

Taking out of context is selective reporting (and hiding your weaknesses), falsifying scores is fraud. Also false advertising is illegal in most countries.

About the Eidos advertisments and quotes from previews, couldn't it be argued that the stars are just part of the design and not meant to be taken as review scores?

If it's sufficiently close that you cannot tell the difference it's false information.

GoldenPhoenix · « **Reply #73 on:** December 04, 2007, 05:18:00 AM »

When you are only publicizing one company, you aren't holding everyone to a high standard. I swear this issue has made people act childish in a "Got your nose hehe" type of way when we still don't have all the facts. I've seen false review scores before, chances are they get away with it because it may have been correct in context (Perhaps that score was taken from User opinion or something like that)? Or perhaps it is a generic tagline because I guess they gave the GI quote a 5 star rating and they don't even use a 5 star rating. The fact remains that whether it is taken out of context or even IF it was fabricated it is still lieing and deceptive, all should be held to that standard not just Edios, which is what people are doing now. Focusing on Edios is not putting the industry's feet to the fire, it is just perpetuating that Edios=bad, and while that may be the case, it still doesn't mean you are holding the industry to the fire.Also I think Gamespy set them up big time for it with their hands-on.

Quote
As this holiday season fills to capacity with excellent games, we are pleased to see Kane & Lynch: Dead Men clawing its way to the top of the pile. With so many triple-A games rushing to release, Kane & Lynch provides a cool, anti-hero angle that few other games are going to be able to match.

UncleBob · « **Reply #74 on:** December 04, 2007, 12:20:01 PM »

But Edios should be taken to task because they've been *caught*. I can look at five gang members and I can "know" they've all broken laws, but I can't do crap about it until I catch them.

If Edios is allowed to fly buy the gaming community with this, who knows what publishers will try next.

News:

Author Topic: Gamespot Editor fired for 'unfavorable' review? (Read 28382 times)