Quote :

"People get pissed at review scores because they actually do have a pretty significant effect on game sales. If a game doesn't get reviewed well, it won't sell well. If a game doesn't sell well, then there is no chance for a sequel. So people who liked the game and wanted a sequel will get pissed because low scores mean less chance for a sequel. This isn't like the movies where anything with boobs and explosions will sell tickets. Gamers are actually some of the most informed buyers out there."

i completely disagree.

[Edited on November 30, 2007 at 2:13 PM. Reason : asdf]

11/30/2007 2:12:51 PM

^Well, unfortunately it's true. Read:

http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB119024844874433247-5Lxg_ED6VC_nqgeX0XZ2GZLpzxo_20071020.html?mod=tff_main_tff_top

Another one:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/11/arts/television/11game.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

[Edited on November 30, 2007 at 2:31 PM. Reason : :]

11/30/2007 2:24:57 PM

Gamespot is still around? I haven't read that site since, idk, probably 1999.

11/30/2007 3:51:42 PM

Reading that review, he wasn't exceptionally scathing. He seemed reasonable about his complaints and expressed them well. Him getting fired over that is crap.

Really, I can only think of one time where I read a review that warranted some one being fired. That one case is the recent Variety review of Mario Galaxy. The guy has every right to dislike the game if he wishes, but he went out swinging and basically just used the review as a venue to attack the console and Nintendo's other popular franchises. That can get someone fired (though I don't think it did).

This Gamespot reviewer stepped on an advertiser's toes and got burned.

11/30/2007 6:51:52 PM

The video review is what supposedly got Eidos so worked up:

11/30/2007 7:24:10 PM

After watching that video, I can't believe he gave it a 6. Everything he said was a slam on the game. I was expecting the game he was talking about to get a 2 or 3 at best.

11/30/2007 8:09:19 PM

The video review is a bit more scathing, though I can see the guy's public speaking skills (or lack thereof) being a large factor. It was negative through and through, though I still can't see anyone getting fired over that legitimately.

11/30/2007 8:09:42 PM

from http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB119024844874433247-5Lxg_ED6VC_nqgeX0XZ2GZLpzxo_20071020.html?mod=tff_main_tff_top

Quote :

"Metacritic's scores aren't always on the mark as a sales predictor. That's especially true with games based on movies, where a well-loved, well-marketed film can lift sales of even games most critics dislike. Despite relatively poor scores, analysts believe Activision's Spider-Man 3 game will likely closely match the more than four million copies sold of Spider-Man 2 in the U.S. and far outsell the first game in the series."

i guess you're right, though, but there are still people out there who will buy mediocre games every month. i know some of them, and they tend to disregard game reviews and critics in general.

11/30/2007 9:11:11 PM

^^^For a game to get a 2 or 3, it has to be close to unplayable. As in the numerous graphical issues and framerate problems, audio cutting out, and unworkable control issues.

12/1/2007 12:28:29 AM

Aside from the cinematics.. the videos I have seen of this game look like shit. And the multiplayer seems to be a joke. This guy was kind to it probably.

12/1/2007 1:04:58 AM

Reading some of the insider information got me kinda worked up.

Apparently, they got new management 2 years ago. They were waiting until after the last AAA game of the year came out to fire this guy (who has been working there longer than anyone else - 10 years). If they fired him before then, they knew the rest of the writers would go on a semi-strike, which has happened.

Gamespot is probably the most credible source for reviews up until this point. Jeff would use the 0-10 scale, instead of the industry average 7-9. I don't think anyone would disagree with his review, and if they did, they should atleast be able to understand why he didn't enjoy it.

I have a feeling alot of shit is about to happen in the next few weeks.

12/1/2007 9:18:49 AM

I'm wondering if his fairly negative review wasn't also in part because he was pressured up front to be glowing about this game. He said both good and bad things about the game, and judging from the ingame clips they played it does look fairly flawed.

That being said the multiplayer component does look like a pretty interesting idea.

12/1/2007 11:13:33 AM

I can't tell if this is really cool, or just kinda gay.





http://kotaku.com/gaming/advertorials/1up-shows-support-for-gamespot-reviewers-328882.php

12/1/2007 7:32:50 PM

kinda gay

12/1/2007 7:54:49 PM

or .."Read our reviews, look what Gamespot/Cnet does...we have integrity! they don't!"

12/1/2007 7:58:43 PM

Quote :

"Remember SimCity? Remember what a joy it was to build up a fully functioning, living, breathing city, full of life and wonderment? Then, at some point down the road, after you've built up your city to the peak of its productiveness, you'd start mashing the disaster button and a wide variety of tornadoes, earthquakes, and fake Godzillas would come tromping through, laying fiery waste to every bit of what you'd worked so painstakingly to create? Yeah. It's a little bit like that. Except someone hit the disaster button for me."

-- GameSpot editor Alex Navarro on the state of CNET after the tech publisher fired his colleague Jeff Gerstmann, editorial director of the videogame-reviews site, on still-unexplained grounds.

12/2/2007 4:47:29 PM

http://www.joystiq.com/2007/12/05/comparison-shows-significant-edits-to-gerstmanns-kane-and-lynch-r/

Quote :

"An archived version of the review found in a Google cache of an EBGames page shows that, while the review's overall determination remained the same, significant changes were made to its tone and focus."

Looks like there's a reason the review was not removed and doesn't seem that bad.

[Edited on December 5, 2007 at 12:53 PM. Reason : ..]

12/5/2007 12:45:31 PM

Hahahaha, you can't hide from google.

12/5/2007 1:02:04 PM

http://www.gamespot.com/users/mosaic/show_blog_entry.php?topic_id=m-100-25273350

Not that anyone cares anymore, but a longtime Gamespot contributor will no longer work with the site.

Quote :

"Farewell, GameSpot It's true, I'm no longer contributing to GameSpot. I believe CNet management let Jeff go for all the wrong reasons. I believe CNet intends to soften the site's tone and push for higher scores to make advertisers happy. I won't lie to people and tell them a game is good when it isn't. I won't downplay negatives that readers have a right to know about. And so, the "Frank Provo era" at GameSpot ends after nearly 8 years of contributions. March 2000 through December 2007. It was a nice run. I feel sorry for the GameSpot staff that have to continue to work there because they have no choice if they want to be able to pay bills and feed their families. For such upstanding people, the CNet overloads have created the ultimate soul-crushing work environment. "

It's a wonder they haven't taken the blog post down yet.

1/7/2008 11:03:53 PM

DOES THIS MEAN MONEY CONQUERS ALL??!?!?

1/7/2008 11:11:52 PM

Quote :

"nerd drama is the most pathetic kind of drama."

1/8/2008 8:16:26 AM

the game jeff got fired over is actually that bad - just as he described it. i think i will be visiting ign now more than often, and its sucks because i can't trust what i once considered the best video game review site ever.

[Edited on January 8, 2008 at 9:13 AM. Reason : dfth]

1/8/2008 9:11:27 AM