Blog Style or Sort By Most Bumps This... Day  Week  Month  Life



Tip: Use + to search with multiple terms, - to exclude a term, and quotes to get specific... [Examples]

Showing 1 through 7 of 7 stories found.
Too much clutter? Try Quick Search
.


GameSpot (Finally) Responds to 'GerstmannGate' QuestionsPosted 12:39pm Thu Dec 06, 2007 by Aaron Dunlap Tags: jeff gerstmann, gamespot, kane and lynch, eidos, cnet


At long last, GameSpot has issued a full Q&A regarding Jeff Gerstmann's firing and the swarms of conspiracy-theory rumors surrounding it, his Kane & Lynch review, the many edits to it, Eidos's reaction to it, and what really motivated the firing.

Unlike the last statement, this post contains significantly less legal stonewalling and seeming coverup.

Q: Why was the Kane & Lynch review text altered?

A: Jeff's supervisors and select members of the edit team felt the review's negativity did not match its "fair" 6.0 rating. The copy was adjusted several days after its publication so that it better meshed with its score, which remained unchanged. The achievements and demerits it received were also left unaltered. Additionally, clarifications were made concerning the game's multiplayer mode and to include differences between the Xbox 360 and PS3 versions of the game.

Q: Why was the Kane & Lynch video review taken down?

A: Both the text and video reviews of Kane & Lynch went up on Tuesday, November 13. The morning of Wednesday, November 14, the video was taken down due to concerns of quality. Specifically, its audio was deemed inferior due to a faulty microphone. There were also concerns about the limited amount of footage, which was unrepresentative of the game in the review.

Q: Why wasn't the video immediately reposted?

A: Due to the crush of high-profile games being released the following week, there were insufficient resources to reshoot and re-edit the video review.

And...

Q: Was Eidos Interactive upset by the game's review?

A: It has been confirmed that Eidos representatives expressed their displeasure to their appropriate contacts at GameSpot, but not to editorial directly. It was not the first time a publisher has voiced disappointment with a game review, and it won't be the last. However, it is strict GameSpot policy never to let any such feelings result in a review score to be altered or a video review to be pulled.

Q: Did Eidos' disappointment cause Jeff to be terminated?

A: Absolutely not.

Q: Did Eidos' disappointment cause the alteration of the review text?

A: Absolutely not.

Q: Did Eidos' disappointment lead to the video review being pulled down?

A: Absolutely not.

Q: Why was GameSpot "skinned" with Kane & Lynch ads when Jeff was terminated?

A: Due to design and development considerations, media buys on GameSpot are made weeks in advance. The timing of said ads was extremely unfortunate but was purely coincidental and determined solely by the game's release date of November 13, 2007.

It seems like a rather thorough squelching of the fires. It was just a fantastic series of coincidences all happening at just the right time in just the right order to completely throw several companies' credibility into question. Happens all the time.

[gamespot.com]
Bumps:
2
  Email This      0 Comments   
Gerstmann's K&L Review Was Heavily 'Toned Down' Post-FiringPosted 10:31am Wed Dec 05, 2007 by Aaron Dunlap Tags: jeff gerstmann, gamespot, kane and lynch, eidos, cnet

We all knew that shortly after Jeff Gerstmann was fired from GameSpot, some changes were made to his Kane & Lynch review. What we didn't know was how extensive those changes were.

Going off of a Google cache of an EB Games page that featured the original review, Joystiq was able to piece together all of the edits made to the original version.

Basically, it was heavily toned down in attitude. The wording of several complaints goes from active to passive neutral, such as the line:

"it's extremely difficult to care about anything that's happening to them." [the main characters]

...being changed to...

"it'll probably be tough for you to find anyone to latch onto and care about, even if you typically go for this sort of crime drama on TV or in movies."

And...

"So whether you're doing the shooting yourself or hanging back and letting your men do the dirty work, the game is a real letdown."

...to...

"So whether you're doing the shooting yourself or hanging back and letting your men do the dirty work, the game is a real disappointment, especially when you consider how well this same sort of stuff worked in the developer's previous squad-based game, Freedom Fighters."


The whole thing seems watered down to remove some of the "bite." It makes you wonder, if GameSpot actually had a problem with it, wouldn't they have changed these things during the pre-publishing process where nearly everybody on the review team looks over and makes changes to a review? The fact that the changes were made after publishing makes it seem like the changes were done at the request of an outside party.

If Jeff was fired for submitting an angrily-worded review instead of a nice, casual, everbody's-a-winner one, the review either wouldn't have been published or the changes would have been made before publishing. Making the changes after publishing means somebody saw it and decided it needed to be changed, be them from CNet management, a GameSpot manager who didn't see the review pre-publication, or someone from some outside party like a game developer or something.

The full body of the review with modifications highlighted by Joystiq is included after the jump.

Continue reading...


[joystiq.com]
Bumps:
6
  Email This      1 Comments   
GameSpot (Finally) Issues a Statement Regarding GerstmannPosted 8:28pm Mon Dec 03, 2007 by Aaron Dunlap Tags: Jeff Gerstmann, Ziff Davis, ZD, CNet, GameSpot, Kane & Lynch

Though rumors and questions have been spiraling out of control for 4 days now, including proposed boycotts of GameSpot, all of their advertisers, and Eidos, GameSpot has only now issued a statement regarding Jeff Gerstmann's departure from the company.

The article is carefully worded and includes no mention of why Jeff left, or even whether he was fired or not. Although, it does include this:

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.

(Emphasis added.)

Greg Brannan, CNET Networks Entertainment's vice president of programming, is quoted as saying, "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."

Comments posted to the article seem to be largely of the opinion that GameSpot's statement is too little, too late. There is still the question of why Gerstmann's video review of Kane & Lynch (a game I wasn't too impressed with) was taken offline along with all Kane & Lynch advertisements immediately after Gerstmann's departure.

According to GameSpot, several staff members will be posting tributes and farewells in the coming week.




[gamespot.com]
Bumps:
3
  Email This      1 Comments   
ZiffDavis Shows Their Support For GerstmannPosted 8:39pm Sat Dec 01, 2007 by Aaron Dunlap Tags: Jeff Gerstmann, Ziff Davis, ZD, CNet, GameSpot

Several staff members from Ziff Davis Media (owners of, among other things, 1UP and EGM) put together banners and marched down the street from their San Francisco offices to CNet's office where GameSpot is based and held an impromptu support rally from the street.

This whole fiasco has really brought everybody in the gaming media together in communal outrage. I'm sure that these folks, CNet and GameSpot's largest competators, are genuinely showing support here, but the whole thing was recorded and could very well be a bit for the 1UP Show. Either way, I applaud the notion.

[flickr.com]
Bumps:
4
  Email This      4 Comments   
Idea: Maybe GameSpot Needs A Writers StrikePosted 11:55am Fri Nov 30, 2007 by Aaron Dunlap Tags: Jeff Gerstmann, GameSpot, EIDOS, firing, politics, Kane and Lynch, strike, WGA
If you've been following entertainment news lately you're probably aware that the Writers Guild of America (the people who write our TV shows and movies) are on strike because studio executives refuse to increase the percentages of online and DVD sales distributed to the writers.

Writers fear they are being treated unfairly, so they strike. They stop working, showing management how important they are.

If you've been following video game journalism news lately, you're probably aware that Jeff Gerstmann, an editor from GameSpot was apparently fired because Eidos put financial pressure on them of CNet, their owners, over a negative review Gerstmann gave to Kane & Lynch.

If I were a writer at GameSpot now, I would be terrified to submit any writing in fear that my job could be at stake for simply crafting an opinion: what their job requires. I couldn't do my job if it became apparent that credibility was for sale.

I'd go on strike. I'd stop submitting reviews or news. I'd stop working.

That's what I'd do, maybe it's what GameSpot writers should do.

Interesting to note, there haven't been any reviews posted at GameSpot today or yesterday. Maybe they're already refusing to submit reviews.

Bumps:
5
  Email This      8 Comments   
Gerstmann Firing Not GameSpot's Fault, Says ModPosted 10:34am Fri Nov 30, 2007 by Aaron Dunlap Tags: Jeff Gerstmann, GameSpot, EIDOS, firing, politics, Kane and Lynch, CNET
According to a post by a moderator at the linked page of the GameSpot forums, if anybody at the GameSpot (not Eidos) side of this issue is to be blamed, it's CNET, not GameSpot itself. CNET handles advertising for GameSpot and all other property sites, and they handle hiring/firing.

From the thread:
People, don't direct your anger at Gamespot. This is CNet's meddling. Gamespot consists just of the editorial, news, community, and development teams. It's CNet's marketing that puts the ads up. CNet's marketing that complained. CNet is who can fire their EIC.

This makes sense to me. CNet, as owners of GameSpot and damn near a thousand other websites, would be the ones handling HR and marketing rather than having each individual property doing it themselves; that would be redundant.

So who should we blame here? Eidos for pressuring CNet into firing Gerstmann over a bad review of a game they've been paying CNet to promote, or CNet for caving to pressure and firing a journalist for doing his job?

UPDATE: However, there would of course be people within GameSpot's management that can fire people. Complete control wouldn't be handed over to CNet.


[gamespot.com]
Bumps:
1
  Email This      1 Comments   
Long-Time GameSpot Editor Fired. Negative Review To Blame?Posted 8:04pm Thu Nov 29, 2007 by Aaron Dunlap Tags: Jeff Gerstmann, GameSpot, EIDOS, firing, politics, Kane and Lynch

We have it on good authority from a source close to GameSpot that Jeff Gerstmann, a GameSpot employee for over 10 years and more recently titled as an editorial director was abruptly fired yesterday.

While there is no official reason for this, many people (our source included) and convinced that he was fired because of a somewhat negative review of EIDOS's Kane & Lynch: Dead men. EIDOS had been advertising pretty heavily on GameSpot recently, and apparently the 6.0 didn't please them.

We received the following statement from the Human Relations department of C|NET after inquiry.

"... it is CNET Networks company policy to never comment on individual employees current or former regarding their job status. This policy is in place out of respect for the individuals privacy."

Interestingly, the online gaming-themed comic Penny Arcade has just published this strip, featuring the firing of Gerstmann. How they knew about it is anybody's guess at this point, as no news story has been posted for it yet. Keep in mind that there is no official confirmation from any parties about the firing.

Today there was no episode of On The Spot, a video segment that Gerstmann typically hosts.

GameSpot's 6/10 review of the game, while low, isn't unique. GamePro and GameSpy also gave the game 60% scores, with no high-profile outlets giving any scores above a 90%.

Bumps:
6
  Email This      3 Comments   

Go to page

Tag Search
Features
Reviews
Previews
Videos
Screenshots
Game Demos
GamingHorizon Archive
Current Events
e3Feed Work For Us
Most Used Tags
Xbox 360 (252)
PlayStation 3 (239)
PC (127)
PSP (121)
Wii (119)
Sony (118)
PlayStation 2 (113)
Nintendo (89)
Screens (81)
Editorial (74)
Microsoft (61)
Nintendo DS (61)
E3 2008 (51)
Update (39)
Rumor (37)
Xbox (37)
Virtual Console (36)
People (32)
Activision (28)
Square Enix (27)
Ubisoft (27)
E3 (26)
Playstation Store (26)
EA (23)
Xbox Live (21)
Halo 3 (21)
Xbox Live Arcade (20)
Capcom (20)
Nintendo Wii (19)
GameBump (19)
Assassins Creed (19)
Sega (16)
Politics (16)
DS (15)
Konami (15)
Eidos (15)
World Of Warcraft (14)
Call Of Duty 4 (14)
Electronic Arts (14)
Valve (14)
Japan (14)
Rockstar (13)
Namco Bandai (13)
Scores (13)
Devil May Cry 4 (12)
Rock Band (12)
Sales (12)
Atlus (12)
Blizzard (12)
Gallery (11)