Rumours are circulating this morning that the editor of Gamespot was pushed out of his job because of a negative Kane & Lynch review.
Jeff Gerstmann, editor of CNet site Gamespot,is reported to have left the company after giving Eidos' Heat-inspired shooter 6 /10. The circumstances of his termination haven't been revealed, but considering the front of the site is awash with ads for the game, speculation has inevitably run wild.
Gerstmann dished out a 6/10 for Kane & Lynch, which sits right in the middle of the current review average of 65 to 69.
According to an anonymous Kotaku tipster, publisher Eidos "took issue with the review and threatened to pull its ad campaign."
Kane & Lynch currently features prominently on the front of the website. Allegedly, Gerstmann was then dismissed following the advertiser pressure.
"As writers of what is supposed to be objective content, this is our worst nightmare coming to life," the tipster notes.
Outside of confirming the departure, Gamespot and parent company CNet are keeping quiet.
It's a bit of a stupid thing to sack someone over though. Reviewers are there to look at the game, and give their personal opinion as to whether a game is good or not. If a reviewer gives a game a less than stellar review, well, fair enough. The review should be able to justify the final score. Whether or not the site/magazine the reviewers works for has an advertising campaign featuring said game should be irrelevent. Especially as the review score nestles comfortably in the middle of other review ranges.
Very s**tty thing to do really, bowing to a publisher having a strop and singling out one review out of several identical ones. Then for Gamespot to use it as a basis for sacking someone is just despicable. Both Eidos (gone downhill in recent years anyway) and GameSpot (never really liked the site, for no particular reason) should be ashamed.
On the other hand, that can't be the reason he was sacked.
Was he actually sacked, or did he see which way the wind was blowing and left before he was sacked?
What a joke. This reminds me of an IGN review for Pro Evo 2008. A 9.2 out of 10 convinced me to buy the game and after being utterly disappointed the IGN logo popped up at halve time. What a load of b******s.
Sets a bad precedence for future reviews as well - you can imagine people will probably question whether the reviews are truthful or swayed by external pressure.
I remember what must have been the biggest waste of ad money, the official nintendo magazine had a big ad for a new wipeout-clone called AERO GAUGE on the back cover - and there was a review three pages from the back dubbing aero gauge the worst game ever to grace a Nintendo console.
I think the problem with this news is that Gamespot has been regarded as trustworthy when it came to reviewing games. I have trusted them for many years and believed reviews on the site to be impartial and accurate.
With this news, the departure of someone who has been with the site for so long and the obvious reasons for him leaving, I doubt I will trust them for any future reviews and will not visit the site as much any more.
Game reviews cannot and should not be forcefully influenced by such pressures as advertisers.
Jeff Gerstman knows his games and if he says the game had problems it had problems. Game companies have no right forcing people to lie to us to buy their games, they are expensive, its not like seeing a bad film, if you make a poor decision it cost you. It just seems spiteful and pathetic, they made a less than perfect game and they should live with it. I'm sure I read the same review twice on this site with two different scores, one higher than the previous one.
It's the right to free speech and is only his opinion but judging by the other reviews out there giving it 8 or 9 out of 10 would make it look dodgy, a see a nice pay-off if it does actually turn out to be true!
It's the right to free speech and is only his opinion but judging by the other reviews out there giving it 8 or 9 out of 10 would make it look dodgy, a see a nice pay-off if it does actually turn out to be true!
The vast majority of reviews are not giving it 8-9 out of 10. The vast majority are giving it 6-7 out of 10.
His review was pretty accurate the game is flawed. Aiming is terrible and the AI of shot recognition is laughable. Its disgusting if this guy has been sacked.
If this turns out to be true I'm cancelling my subscription to gamespot. They've gone massively downhill since Rich left earlier in the year and if Jeff leaves I'm done. 1up is much better.
I loved watching his video reviews and amusing comments during On The Spot. He was a very honest and knowledgeable reviewer.
This is the gaming equivalent of a gangster trying to buy the jury. Eidos are just p**sed because their wannabe franchise has gameplay flaws and he pointed them out.
If this is all true, I hope Jeff Gerstmann sues Eidos .
I applaud him for sticking to his guns and being honest. I've always found Gamespot to be pretty accurate in their reviews so yes, I don't think anybody would have bought it if they were the only ones raving on about the game.
It's the right to free speech and is only his opinion but judging by the other reviews out there giving it 8 or 9 out of 10 would make it look dodgy, a see a nice pay-off if it does actually turn out to be true!
The vast majority of reviews are not giving it 8-9 out of 10. The vast majority are giving it 6-7 out of 10.
That's quite shocking really if true. I've always liked the guy myself. I never trust only one review. Especially not these days. Maybe 10 years ago but there's so much money in it nowadays, i'm unsure. I'll stick to looking at 10+ reviews before deciding.
It would appear that Gamespot has been hit by some backlash about this news. If you visit Gamespot and look at the Kane & Lynch reviews there are numerous user reviews of 1.0 citing support for Jeff.
It's the right to free speech and is only his opinion but judging by the other reviews out there giving it 8 or 9 out of 10 would make it look dodgy, a see a nice pay-off if it does actually turn out to be true!
The vast majority of reviews are not giving it 8-9 out of 10. The vast majority are giving it 6-7 out of 10.
I think that's what they meant as they seemed to be replying/adding to a previous post, it just needed the grammar to be a bit clearer.
'Judging by the other reviews out there, giving it 8 or 9 out of 10 would look dodgy' i.e. if gamespot were to rate it highly then it wouldn't seem right compared to all the other reviews out there.
Shouldn't Eidos sack the development team of Kane and Lynch for producing a 6 out of 10 game? Or spendinbg more of that marketing budget on a game that gets good scores and great word of mouth?
Here's the problem, the bottom line is, games review mags (whatever the media) rely on publishers to provide them with review material and can lean heavily on the editors by threatening to cut off their supply.
It's bad enough when reviewers have to visit a developer and review a game in a controlled environment (Bioshock), or are send review code that doesn't have all the 'features' enabled (for features read advertising or pain in the bottom copy protection).
At best, I'm the cynical sort. However, being serious for the moment, kicking the editor doesn't suprise me at all if the website wants to survive and is under threat of.....sanctions. So much for integrity eh?
Trouble is, whether it's true or not, we, the buying public are going to believe it because we're sick of poor quality products at high prices.
Why should we buy rubbish games when (particularly at this moment in time) there's a lot of great titles out for every platform. So far in November, I've bought 3 games; Crysis (almost lives up to the incredible hype), Mass Effect (best Sci-Fi RPG ever, and not a crappy Jedi in sight) and Endless Ocean for the Wii which is just so cool.
I'd love to buy more, but I'd have no time to play them.
Honest reviews and second opinions are very important. It's no secret that I think reviewers across the board have lost their way slightly. Particularly with PC games where a lot of important factual data (basically, the systems used to test the games, at least 3 different setups should be used; min spec, rec spec and uber beast. Resolution played at etc..) is hardly mentioned, but plays a large part in deciding which games to buy.
At least we have each other to rely on. Nothing beats looking at a forum 2 weeks after release for some good feedback. Obviously, there's going to be people who'll never admit to a game being crap if they've just spent Ł35 etc... on it. On the other hand, if a game doesn't live up to expectation, there's always old farts like me who'll put the boot in and give a good reason why.
Here's to kicking the industry (publishers, developers and reviewers) up the bottom and getting them back on track.
Make a good game, make people happy, make lots of money. How's that for a mission statement?
Sh1t is sh1t, that's the truth! 6 for Kane&Lynch is generous, i think this game should deserve 5 points out of 10. This guy is a brave man, he stands against the advertiser! Give him an applause, men! Gamespot nowadays is not the old Gamespot we've known. See Crysis? They gave it 9.5/10 while Call of Duty 4 or Unreal Tournament just have below 9 points!
If GameSpot had any principles, they should have told Eidos to go make a better game and keep their damn advertising money, refuse to review any more Eidos games and make it BLATANTLY clear why they've done so.
This is not a precedant that should be started.
It's b******s, plain and simple. GS, do the right thing, hire him back, and send the advertising money back to Eidos and tell 'em to stick it.
thank f**k i only rented this game it dosent deserve a 6 its f**king s**te its hard enough to aim and when you do get a target the bullets dont regester WTF
thank f**k i only rented this game it dosent deserve a 6 its f**king s**te its hard enough to aim and when you do get a target the bullets dont regester WTF
He's an honest bloke so he wont be out of a job for long, shame on gamespot for allowing them to be bullied by Eidos. Did anybody notice that gamespot gave The Simpsons game a favourable review? they are part owned by fox who own The Simpsons rights! You can't trust anybody anymore
Like someone else said earlier, when I saw this news article I assumed it would be some obscure hack on an equally obscure rag... but Jeff Gerstmann! I mean, Wow! Like him or loath him he's probably one of the most widely known games journalists around at the moment and for him to leave GameSpot under such speculation just puts into context the sort of s**te less well known writers probably have to battle with on a daily basis.
If true this is a real kick to the solar plexus, but even if - in this case - it's not the industry in general doesn't exactly seem all that interested in changing the current state of affairs.
thank f**k i only rented this game it dosent deserve a 6 its f**king s**te its hard enough to aim and when you do get a target the bullets dont regester WTF
Picked up the box for K&L today and lo and behold what I saw quoted on the back:
"Slightly reminiscient of Michael Mann's Heat" - PC Gamer"
Usually quotes from magazines are attributed to the mags thinking very higly of the game. It seems that Eidos grabbed a PCG quote, any quote, and just used it to give this impression.
Eidos: "Guys! Say something great about this game so we can stick it on the box!"
PCG: "But, er, we thought it was pretty average. Crag gave it just 60%."
Eidos: "The mugs don't need to know that! Just say ANYTHING about Kane & Lynch!"
PCG: "Lynch is going bald."
Eidos: "Don't be f**king ridiculous! We can't put that on the box!"
PCG: "We don't want to you put anything on the box with our name next to it."
Eidos: "Oh ok. By the way, what do you think to Training Day, with Denzel. Wasn't that film the s**t?"
PCG: "Slightly reminiscient of Michael Mann's Heat."
Wow. I'll wait and see what Gamespot have to say on the subject before I pass my own judgement, but if there's even a speck of truth in the story, I hope it bites them hard where it hurts.
If he was pushed out for the reason mentioned in the article then it just confirms what has probably been happening for years. Haven't you ever wondered why the countless EA updates continue to score upwards of 8/10 when they offer little more than the last years installment?
However, I'm quite glad to see that fat, obnoxious, whiney voiced North American that the A Hole button in Halo 3 was invented to block out get the push!
You know, I'm trying to be suprised by this and I just can't quite achieve it. Fair play to the journo though, he must of had a fair idea what would happen before he published the review and he still published it. Nice to know there's still some mainstream gaming journos that have standards of integrity.
thank f**k i only rented this game it dosent deserve a 6 its f**king s**te its hard enough to aim and when you do get a target the bullets dont regester WTF
thats crap... it's not his fault the game sucks. I rented it and got about 4-5 levels in. It plays like a bad version of Hitman, except the aiming feels like you have a fatguy strapped to your gun.
Wow, it looks like the mods over at Gamespot have given up trying to close all the threads on the subject, and just taken the forums down in their entirety.
This is turning out to be a proper disaster for them.
Dare I say I enjoyed the game? Literally just finished it, and it was fun, tempered by a fair bit of frustration. I find I enjoy average games that get 6-7 out of 10, don't know why. Regardless, everyone is entitled to their opinions, and what has been done to the editor is beyond the pale. We rely on the media in the industry to give us unbiased reviews and opinions. The publishers may as well just each buy a mag/website and have done with it, the sneaking f**kers. Gamespot can't be trusted now, plain and simple.
Dare I say I enjoyed the game? Literally just finished it, and it was fun, tempered by a fair bit of frustration. I find I enjoy average games that get 6-7 out of 10, don't know why. Regardless, everyone is entitled to their opinions, and what has been done to the editor is beyond the pale. We rely on the media in the industry to give us unbiased reviews and opinions. The publishers may as well just each buy a mag/website and have done with it, the sneaking f**kers. Gamespot can't be trusted now, plain and simple.
Funnily enough I'm the same! I've bought many an average game in my time and enjoyed playing them. Sadly however, you're second point is all too true. This probably just as damaging to Gamespot as it is to Eidos and Kane & Lynch as a potential franchise.
I think it's great that reviewers are being honest with their ratings and in the run up to Christmas it's particularly important that reviews are balanced because otherwise every hyped up game that's out conveniently "just in time for Christmas" would be getting 8,9 or 10 out of 10. Imagine how gutted you'd be if you bought Assassin's Creed for xmas only to find out that you happen to agree with the 4/10 rating Games magazine gave it. I'd rather see a 4/10 review and disagree with it than a 9/10 review and be utterly disappointed after relying on such a rating to buy the game.
With limited funds, we all need honest journalism so we don't end up wasting Ł40 on crappy games. True or not, this debacle highlights just how unpleasant the business end of this industry really is. Christ, even Jeff Minter was kicking off about Space Giraffe not selling well the other week!
Note to all developers and publishers: if your game sucks you only have yourselves to blame. Stop using hype and marketing as a crutch for lack of vision and put more faith in the creative muscle that puts the game together in the first place. How many games have been ruined because they were rushed to market or screwed around with by publishers trying to squeeze every mainstream penny out of a concept?
Finally the fact that 6/10 is deemed poor is yet another example of the skewed view people have magazine rating systems. The fact is that 6/10 is above average numerically, so why is that such a bad thing? Maybe it's because Eidos know that with games costing so much to make, and with consumer spending being so fickle, only 9/10 games will make a profit...?
There's nothing wrong with an average game, especially if it's your kind of thing. The reverse is also true. I don't enjoy FPS as much as I used to (in the same way the ubiquitous platformer dulled games in the early-mid nineties). HL2 and CoD were average games for me just because they're not exciting any more.
Look at how many people are enjoying The Witcher despite some average reviews. Hell, I remember GalCiv II Dread Lords getting some average reviews, but I love the game.
This whole 'score' thing is getting out of control. You can't just judge a game by a number which is why we rely on reviewers giving us the info we require. Generally, there's enough different opinions around to get an overall view as on review really isn't enough these days.
PCG & PCZ seem to have the 'average' review sorted between them, one mag will give a game 60% ish whilst the other mag will give the game 80% ish Just look at the reviews for all the Sam & Max episodes from PCG & PCZ if you don't believe me.
This does seriously need to be looked into before mole hills start becoming mountains. I wouldnt be at all be suprised to find out that they do indulge in such unscrupulous business practices, but not so blatant to be directly in the public eye.
Personally I do find gamespot a good site for the player reviews not the staff ones, although in all honesty I dont pay too much attention to reviews in general. But if it turns out to be true that Eidos did have something to do with this sacking, then I will boycott this game and all future products by this developer on principle, it may be no skin of Eidos's nose but I can assure them its none of mine either.
If true it is quite a shocking story and brings into question all reviews were advertising revenue makes up a large part of their income. Who are we to trust? This in effect is computer gamings equivelant of cash for peeriges .
Absolutely vile! Gamespot and Eidos should be ashamed and then shot! I never go to Gamespot because I usually don't agree with their reviews, but having someone fired over something like this is pathetic. If I were Gamespot I'd have told Eidos where to stick their advertising! Bastards!
Sadly, I think this sort of thing is widespread, only Eidos/Gamespot got caught out this time.
Look at LOTRO with this site & the massive amount of beta keys Codies were giving away here. Was there adverts too? I can't remember, but I always felt there was something very warped with the favourable score CVG gave that game...Of course, that's pure speculation on my part.
And let's not forget the 'goody bags' MS sent to everyone when it was time to review Halo 3. Even if it were not their direct intention to use this is a bribe, it's not cool to try and influence reviewers with anything except the game itself.
if i was jeff i would be really thinking about taking legal action, cos getting the sack for voicing your opinion about a game is just plain out of order, atari might as well release the original pong game again and say, whoever reviews this game they had better give it a 9 out of 10 or ill get you sacked. cos if this is the case i wont be on any game site anymore as i dont really think i could trust any review scores if this is wot happens. its discusting to treat jeff this way, hes been a absolute joy to watch and listen to over the years and now its all gone just cos eidos made a stinker of a game and didnt like the review score, well i say coblers to eidos you can keep your rubbish games and shame on you for costing a man his job, i really hope you and the people at CNET get wots coming to you.
Ah this is all good. Exactly what Eidos was hoping for a bit of scandal to hopefully sell a few more games. After playing it though i really d othink that 6 out of 10 was a bit to much.
Now im not the best player of games around (3 months to finish GOW and thats on easy!!!), but i complete this in 6 HOURS, a terible game that thankfully was shortlived. and now i will only have to play a fiver for mass effect as i will be using this abmoination to help pay the rest of the price.
It would appear that Gamespot has been hit by some backlash about this news. If you visit Gamespot and look at the Kane & Lynch reviews there are numerous user reviews of 1.0 citing support for Jeff.
i find that quite irritating actually, all those people who havent even played this game giving it 1.0 out of 10.0 just coz some guy lost his job, and they dont even know why he lost it anyway. For all they know he couldve been fired for looking at dodgy porn when he shouldve been working!! that would be funny... it would also explain why his reviews sucked lol
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court, 30 Monmouth Street, Bath, UK BA1 2BW England and Wales company registration number 2008885
Just look at the reviews for all the Sam & Max episodes from PCG & PCZ if you don't believe me.
.
