GameSpot has shot down speculation that advertiser pressure was responsible for the heavily publicised recent departure of editorial director Jeff Gerstmann.
Gerstmann, who had been with GameSpot for 11 years, left the company last week amidst reports that he'd been nudged out the door after giving Eidos' Heat-inspired shooter Kane & Lynch 6/10.
At the time, the circumstances of his departure weren't revealed, but considering the front of the site was awash with ads for the game, speculation inevitably ran wild.
"Due to legal constraints and the company policy of GameSpot parent CNET Networks, details of Gerstmann's departure cannot be disclosed publicly. However, contrary to widespread and unproven reports, his exit was not a result of pressure from an advertiser", GameSpot has now said in an official statement on the matter.
Greg Brannan, CNET Networks Entertainment's vice president of programming, has added, "Neither CNET Networks nor GameSpot has ever allowed its advertising business to affect its editorial content.
"The accusations in the media that it has done so are unsubstantiated and untrue. Jeff's departure stemmed from internal reasons unrelated to any buyer of advertising on GameSpot."
Like they would come out and say "it's true." They will have a hard time recovering from this with fans of the site. Gamers are a stubborn bunch, just ask Sega
Even though I thought gamespots reviews were fair and I did used to enjoy there show 'on the spot', I am having a really hard time in going back to Gamespot without thinking about the money grabbing suits in the back ground pulling the strings. Saying that though, I am now in doubt of any video game site with advertising plastered all over there home page!
Cnet is full of crap, every editor's blog on the site hint it is true, they can't and wont say officially but by the words and tone they use you can tell, even the former head of the team Greg posted and hinted of the fact it was true, Cnet can try and spin this all they like, but the gaming public know what the real deal is.
Cnet is full of crap, every editor's blog on the site hint it is true, they can't and wont say officially but by the words and tone they use you can tell, even the former head of the team Greg posted and hinted of the fact it was true, Cnet can try and spin this all they like, but the gaming public know what the real deal is.
Exactly, of course its true, and for cnet and gamespot the damage is done, ill not be visiting their site again because of this( maybe thats anal lol, but i do have principles ), if it was untrue they and he would reveal why exactly
I think it's a little too coincidental that someone who had been with them for 11 years left without warning at exactly the time the advertisers were pressuring them about the score.
But they'll never admit it because then he could sue the ass off them.
I read and commented on Jeff's blog the other day (I wish I could remember the link now) and it looks like he's now considering looking into game development as a future path. Would be an interesting move, since he knows first-hand what exactly makes one game better than another.
"The accusations in the media that it has done so are unsubstantiated and untrue. Jeff's departure stemmed from internal reasons unrelated to any buyer of advertising on GameSpot."
Then sue those media outlets? Oh what, you're not going to? I wonder why.....
Maybe he really did just leave for a completely different reason. It's not beyond the realms of possibility that the media have seized upon this just to sensationalise a non-story.
On a lighter note, maybe Jeff thought Kane & Lynch was so bad, he could no longer continue his gaming career, and has taken a job with "Your Tractor Monthly"!
Yeah, so get Jeff to say that. I know that there are termination clauses, that forbid you to say why you are fired, but they usually expire in a few months. I'll wait until then to get back on Gamespot.
There have been quite a few of his reviews I have disagreed with. But saying that, the points he makes in his reviews themselves have always been fair and valid. Twilight Princess for example - I was in shock when he awarded it the score he did, as I was majorly hyped about the game (as i am with every major Zelda game). But after playing it all the way through, even though a great game, I admit I had to agree with his views on certain aspects.
There have been quite a few of his reviews I have disagreed with. But saying that, the points he makes in his reviews themselves have always been fair and valid. Twilight Princess for example - I was in shock when he awarded it the score he did, as I was majorly hyped about the game (as i am with every major Zelda game). But after playing it all the way through, even though a great game, I admit I had to agree with his views on certain aspects.
Really? Then how do you explain the Metroid 3 score? 8.5?! From the same site that gave the underwhelming Halo 3 in the 9s? Something doesn't smell right...
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court, 30 Monmouth Street, Bath, UK BA1 2BW England and Wales company registration number 2008885
I could bring Sega back in no time... honest 
