backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 94 comment(s) - last by SandmanWN.. on Dec 3 at 1:30 AM
Blasting Kane & Lynch may have left Jeff Gerstmann swinging in the breeze

When deciding what game to spend their hard earned dollars on, players often turn to review sites for information if playable demos are not available. Naturally, one would hope that the writers for these review sites are remaining unbiased in their views of a game -- if it's wonderful, say as much, if it's flawed, point it out, and if it's absolute rubbish, leave it at the side of the curb for pickup.

Unfortunately, when the game in question is the same one that the front page of the website is devoting a banner ad and a full-background splash to, problems can arise. What began as a rumor across gaming forums worldwide last night has been all but confirmed early this morning -- GameSpot's editorial director, Jeff Gerstmann, has been fired for writing a negative review.

While the text-based review for Kane & Lynch: Dead Men certainly doesn't paint a sparkling picture of the game, it makes it seem like a AAA title compared to the brutally scathing video review. When many of the same written words are spoken, the context and inflection of "Kane & Lynch is an ugly, ugly game" and "if you have a chance to see it, take a look - but it's probably not worth the purchase" takes it down to a whole new (lower) level of garbage.

In a bit of prophetic cartooning, Penny Arcade posted a comic outside of their usual schedule (language may offend some) up last night, showing poor Mr. Gerstmann being asked if he understands the connection between the torrent of Kane & Lynch advertisements and the box of his possessions outside his locked office.

While Jeff has responded to Joystiq confirming his termination, he stated that he was "not really able to comment on the specifics of (his) termination" at this time. Joystiq has promised to continue digging, but already the Eidos forums have come under attack from legions of angry fans, which required them to be taken offline and restored to a snapshot from Thursday -- currently, some members are reporting that they are completely unable to post.

The Kane & Lynch user review score on GameSpot has also rapidly plummeted -- currently sitting at 3.9 -- as reviews of "1.0 - Abysmal" flood in from disgruntled users.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
wow
By Moishe on 11/30/2007 10:16:36 AM , Rating: 5
If that's true (and if the review was honest)... it's seriously messed up and GameSpot deserves a beating over it.




RE: wow
By SandmanWN on 11/30/07, Rating: -1
RE: wow
By Sahrin on 11/30/2007 10:27:38 AM , Rating: 5
"Hey boss, I don't really want to do the work that you're paying me to do because I don't like it."

"You're fired."

Different Situation. Same Outcome.


RE: wow
By SandmanWN on 11/30/07, Rating: -1
RE: wow
By DigitalFreak on 11/30/07, Rating: 0
RE: wow
By Moishe on 11/30/2007 11:20:35 AM , Rating: 3
pretty extreme? his post is just about as worthless as 50% of the posts on this site including some of mine, and yours.


RE: wow
By cochy on 11/30/2007 12:38:59 PM , Rating: 3
points for making me laugh though heheh


RE: wow
By SandmanWN on 11/30/07, Rating: -1
RE: wow
By Treckin on 11/30/2007 3:18:59 PM , Rating: 5
Oh wow.
I.
Think.
You.
Just.
Proved that playing violent video games, coupled with the certain destiny of remaining a virgin for the remainder of your miserable life causes violent and idiotic tendencies within prepubescent males...

Also, Jesus just took a dump on your eternal soul :P


RE: wow
By SandmanWN on 11/30/07, Rating: -1
RE: wow
By Sahrin on 11/30/2007 10:39:11 AM , Rating: 5
Ad hominem.

To allow a writer to decline writing something due to an inherent bias requires a very high degree of integrity as a news service.

Gamespot clearly lacks the integrity necessary, if they chose to fire a writer based on a negative review of a client's products. They pay him to create content - not to report the company line. It's fundamental.

Either you're saying he should have been honest with his dishonest bosses, in which case it seems he would've been fired anyways; OR you're suggesting he should've stuck his head in the sand and "towed the company line" to save his neck, sacrificing his integrity, the integrity of Gamespot and betraying his audience.

Now how do I "know nothing about" this situation?


RE: wow
By Parhel on 11/30/2007 10:52:10 AM , Rating: 3
That's just not how it works for professional writers.

A professional critic shouldn't have to decline writing a review due to a bias. Roger Ebert doesn't slam each and every movie of a particular genre that comes up. Why? Because he's a professional.

If a particular reviewer only wanted to review FPS, I would seriously question whether that person possessed the necessary qualities to write reviews. If I were that person's boss, I wouldn't accept it.

That said, if the game sucks and they fired this man for doing his job and telling it like it is, I will never trust another Gamespot review again and probably wouldn't even go to their site.


RE: wow
By Sahrin on 11/30/2007 11:09:54 AM , Rating: 2
Wow...you just took what I said, and restated it with more words.

I was granting the premise of the poster to whom I replied in order to show the logical fallacy of his argument.

Doesn't mean I subscribe to his views.


RE: wow
By Parhel on 11/30/2007 11:25:19 AM , Rating: 2
Sorry, I must have misunderstood you.


RE: wow
By SandmanWN on 11/30/07, Rating: 0
RE: wow
By Sahrin on 11/30/2007 5:55:34 PM , Rating: 2
The two statements by him are conflicting.

Here are the two statements I made: (in summary)

It requires a lot of integrity on the part of the news service to allow a writer to decline to write a story based on bias. (This comment was made in response to your assertion that the writer 'might not like FPS's, it might just be bias' - for which you provided no evidence).

I think went on to say that Gamespot, if it fired a reporter for writing a legitimate piece, lacks the integrity required to allow a writer to decline to write said story. (Again, made in response to your baseless assertion of bias on the part of the writer).

Finally, I stated that REGARDLESS of WHAT the writer chose to do (within the scope of your baseless assertion of bias) - he would've been "compromised" (that is, the result would be the same - he would be fired, or lose credibility).

You say I said that a writer with a bias should have enough integrity to not write a review. - This isn't true. I said that you are wrong about your assertion of bias, because in THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION - he would've been fired EVEN IF HE WAS BIASED.

My essential point, in any event, was that you are wrong - the writer would've been fired in any situation, and that's bad.

Parhel said, in response:

That said, if the game sucks and they fired this man for doing his job and telling it like it is, I will never trust another Gamespot review again and probably wouldn't even go to their site.

Or, to summarize in my own words: No matter what the writer did, he would've been fired...and that's bad.

Respond to my points, don't pick out subtle grammatical errors and focus on them like they're the meat of the argument.


RE: wow
By SandmanWN on 12/3/2007 1:30:34 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
It requires a lot of integrity on the part of the news service to allow a writer to decline to write a story based on bias.

Most reviewers are broken into specialties. Like another poster here confirmed with first hand experience. They generally only cover certain genres.

quote:
Finally, I stated that REGARDLESS of WHAT the writer chose to do he would've been "compromised"

This is a baseless claim. Choosing not to write about something you have a bias about is not a compromise. Its called journalistic integrity.

quote:
Respond to my points, don't pick out subtle grammatical errors and focus on them like they're the meat of the argument.

Are you senile? What grammatical errors? WTF are you talking about.

In the end it comes down to this... You assume he will be fired regardless of what he chose to do but you cannot possibly know this. You have no proof of your assumption either. Its all an assumption until it happens.


RE: wow
By Moishe on 11/30/2007 10:55:02 AM , Rating: 2
exactly.
The writer has a choice that he was probably fully aware of. He can lie and keep his job or tell the truth and hope the bosses have integrity.