Support NeoGAF

[egocrata]

What I mean is, Ebert, etc are not in the business of keeping up money by previews, interviews, etc. All they do is review the final product. They are not under the influence (ideally) of any party because they are reviewing the product when it comes out. They don't have to fight for exclusives, for ad dollars or whatever. They are not acting as the hype machines for movies as gaming sites/mags are for games.

That's why you really can't compare them because the circumstances are completely different. I don't about the games are art crap, had nothing to do with my point.

Because when Variety, EW or RS interviews an actor or director, has a making off featured article or writes about how awesome the X or Y movie looks like, they are not creating hype.

No, that´s just fucking reporting.

Please, give me a break. Games should fall under the same standards as any other media critic; this "you should be able to buy your review score via advertising" bullshit is just insane.

 

[Link]

How so?

You already got the answer from bishop, but it's because he used to write for Gaming-Age. So either you were:


1. Unaware of that (which ended up being the case), which is funny because it's the site this forum spawned from.

or

2. You were just being facetious, as if writing for GA doesn't count as being a journalist.


Like I said, it was amusing from either angle.

 

[PepsimanVsJoe]

Okay. This is the long version.

This is a great post.

 

[taconinja]

Holy shit. :lol Fighting for previews and ad dollars means that the line between journalism and commerce should be crossed with impunity?

Precisely. I hope that at some point in the future there will be a website specializing in news and reviews that game companies are forced to support because the site is so trusted and valued by the community that they're beyond being bullied into a ludicrous 8-10 review score system.

I am often dubious of this ever happening.

 

[SolidSnakex]

The guy that posted to forumopolis basically confirms how dire this whole thing is. Read what he's saying. Jeff wasn't specifically let go because he gave **** & ***** a negative review and the advertiser complained. He was let go because Eidos was the latest in a line of advertisers that complained to CNet marketing, and CNet felt he wasn't running things right because advertisers were unhappy.

It doesn't matter whether it was one review or ten. The implication is as clear as glass: Don't be too negative in reviewing games published by our advertisers.

How can an editorial staff work under THAT pressure?!

I don't even really think it has to do with the actual review. If reviewers were rather negative about a game but in the end gave it a good score I don't think advertisers would care because they probably see how a lot of gamers only really look at the score. And this should make you question other sites who often give reviews and the scores don't really match what the reviewer said.

 

[GDJustin]

I don't wanna be CNET apologists here, but doesn't anyone think it's possible he was let go just for general incompetence? I mean, you guys have read his reviews and seen his video segments. Does Gerstmann seem like EIC material, to you?

Compare him to Shoe, or Davison, or Peer, or McNamara, or any of the other big publication runners. He sticks out like a sore thumb among that group.

I think it's entirely possible that he was let go just because the whole EIC thing wasn't working out, and the K&L rumors starting swirling as a natural result of the poor timing.

 

[Richardfun]

If Jeff got fired because he unknowingly violated some ad revenue-for-points agreement that Gamespot had struck with Eidos, then this is truly tragic for him and for gamers. But if he knew an agreement existed and he was acting on behalf of gamers, then why didn't he just write a story about the agreement and expose that? To me, this would have been the more appropriate way to expose this behavior. On the other hand, what if he was found to be acting unprofessionally in the video review and had been warned to change his tone in the past or face termination? This is also a reasonable explanation.

Either way, for whatever the reason, JG and/or Gamespot owe it to gamers to explain what happened. If they truly cared about the integrity of the industry and the journalists that cover it, then they would dispel this rumor if it is false before it festers into fact and more people get harmed. If it is true, then a whole lot of medicine will be dished out and the integrity of the industry and the journalists that cover it will not be the only ones tasting the bitter taster when we have to all take that medicine. Either way, Gerstmann or Gamespot need to start talking and clear this mess up immediately.

I just watched the video review on Youtube, and even though I only played **** & ***** for about an hour, I agree with most of what he said. I have no problem with the use of profanity in a game, if it's functional and makes sense in the setting of the game but to just have NPC's shout the F-word as a gimmick is a sad and pathetic way to make your game seem 'mature and gritty'. The gameplay mechanics do suck. I am no newcomer at shooters, first or third person, and it sucks in this game. You aim at someone who is right in front of you, not ten feet away, and you just keep missing. The cover system, which seems to be a viable possibility in games (GoW, RS:V) is completely shoddy and doesn't work.

I really didn't see anything in his video review that went 'over the edge'. Oh, and just so you don't think I am a Gerstmann groupie: I completely disagreed with his 8.8 and thought TP deserved a 9.5 for sure

 

[DenogginizerOS]

Edit: Denog, Jeff likely isn't speaking because his severance pay is probably dependent upon some sort of gag order regarding the conditions of his departure.

Whatever that pay is, it is chump change compared to the revenue he would get from developers who will line up to his website if this whole story is true. Imagine being the first developer that stands by Jeff and says they trust him and are willing to accept his score. If this whole thing is about him being fired because he didn't kowtow to the management at Cnet after Eidos complained, then him exposing this and giving up that pay will be well worth the respect he would gain from many gamers.

 

[Kintaro]

What are you trying to say here? Are you saying that CNET had the right to fire him? If so, then I agree, they absolutely did. Who's arguing that point? If you're saying that no one should be angry about the line being crossed here, then you're wrong.

No, be angry if you want. I'm saying I see their justification for doing so IF all of that is true. I can't get too angry at this because I've been fired over unfair shit and I've had to fire someone over unfair shit. Business sucks. I'm also saying that I don't know Gamespot's policies, I don't know what happened over the 11 years he's been there, I don't know.

Yes, you can write what you want, express your opinion how you want and so forth. Absolutely. That being said, I also understand that it's possible, just, you know, possible that the way you write may cause trouble for you sooner or later. That's kind of the trade off. However, you accept that for the right.

Jebus...

 

[MrPing1000]

If theres any good that has come of this it's how badly the gamer reaction has been. Eidos and cnet are fucking dumb. Eidos look like criminals and cnet lose credibility (albeit gamespot itself wasn't overflowing with that anyway)

 

[PepsimanVsJoe]

I don't wanna be CNET apologists here, but doesn't anyone think it's possible he was let go just for general incompetence?

He was working there for over a decade. Usually incompetent employees don't last 10 years.

 

[Zenith]

He was let go because Eidos was the latest in a line of advertisers that complained to CNet marketing, and CNet felt he wasn't running things right because advertisers were unhappy.

No it doesn't, that's just your exaggerated spin on things. It says it's because of the tone of his past reviews, and I agree his tone seems uncompromisingly aggressive and unobjective. It'd be like looking to ZeroPunctuation for well-balanced reviews.

 

[taconinja]

Why isn't Gerstmann talking? What gamer would not lift him to the heavens if he revealed that he was fired for violating some payola policy? He could start his own website and he would have legions following him for doing this and he would become a trusted reviewer at a height no one has ever achieved.

On the other hand, if he was fired for other reasons, and people who work at Gamespot or Eidos lose jobs as a result of this rumor, and he does nothing to clear it up, then he is doing a huge disservice to the industry he covered for 11 years.

Come on Jeff. Speak up.

What has been known to happen in cases like this is twofold:

1. Fear. If Mr. Gerstmann wants another job somewhere, he won't be a whistleblower. His career is dogfood if he gets that label.

2. Money. There might be a "compensation package" that he will lose if he talks, which he would have been forced to sign if he wanted to have any money as insurance while he tries to find another job.

 

[TekunoRobby]

1. Unaware of that (which ended up being the case), which is funny because it's the site this forum spawned from.

I actually "write" for Gaming Age as well and keep close contact with a lot of ex-writers but I don't bother with keeping up with every single person who used to write for them. No offense to bishoptl but I don't interact with him in any meaningful fashion so I don't bother remembering every little thing he's done. I just wish him well with Turok and any future projects. That's about it.

2. You were just being facetious, as if writing for GA doesn't count as being a journalist.

It's highly amusing you even contemplated that angle. :lol

 

[traveler]

He was working there for over a decade. Usually incompetent employees don't last 10 years.

Not to mention the fact that don't you guys think that if this whole K&L thing has nothing to do with his firing, wouldn't Cnet, Eidos, and everyone involved want to make that clear as soon as possible so as to avoid the wrath they've incurred at this point? Plus there is the whole deal with Tim- apparently- leaving as well. All in all, I just can't see this NOT being the catalyst.

 

[Freedom = $1.05]

Yeah from a business standpoint it makes perfect sense.

But from a moral one its terrible. And it has some questionable legal ramifications (our 1st amendments' rights ! In case anyone wants to overlook that).

Our first amendment rights protect us from government censorship, NOT private censorship. If your employer fires you due to an opinion you gave while representing them they do have a legal right of terminating you due to any possible ramifications from said action. If you feel you have been wrong by your employer you have the right to file a civil suit seeking damages. Even whistleblowers are not 100% protected by the 1st amendment. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong; its been a while since I went to school.

 

[mj1108]

And there's the rub. It doesn't even matter if he was fired specifically for this score, or for something else. If the other Gamespot reviewers think he was fired for this review, it'll have the same effect. How could you ever write another low-scoring review after this?

...and that would explain why so many sites seem to use the "7-9 scale"....advertising dollars.

 

[taconinja]

Whatever that pay is, it is chump change compared to the revenue he would get from developers who will line up to his website if this whole story is true. Imagine being the first developer that stands by Jeff and says they trust him and are willing to accept his score. If this whole thing is about him being fired because he didn't kowtow to the management at Cnet after Eidos complained, then him exposing this and giving up that pay will be well worth the respect he would gain from many gamers.

Until he fairly and accurately gives a game a 4, which is what should be given to a game that is slightly below average--not the 7.8 which seems to be the industry standard.

 

[Richardfun]

Why isn't Gerstmann talking? What gamer would not lift him to the heavens if he revealed that he was fired for violating some payola policy? He could start his own website and he would have legions following him for doing this and he would become a trusted reviewer at a height no one has ever achieved.

On the other hand, if he was fired for other reasons, and people who work at Gamespot or Eidos lose jobs as a result of this rumor, and he does nothing to clear it up, then he is doing a huge disservice to the industry he covered for 11 years.

Come on Jeff. Speak up.

If this has went down the way P-A and alot of people here assume it went down, Jeff might be clamming up because he's planning on litigating later. Let's just wait and see what happens before we jump to conclusions on either side of the fence.

 

[GDJustin]

He was working there for over a decade. Usually incompetent employees don't last 10 years.

He was very recently promoted to EIC.

Jeff always seemed like a guy that could bang-out reviews like nobody's business, but not the kind of guy you'd want managing a stable of writers.

 

[acidviper]

All the major review sites are just paid advertisements. I'm not sure how a reviewer/advertiser has integrity.

 

[Kintaro]

By firing Mr. Gerstmann and claiming that it was his "tone," the company has sent a clear message: We can and will fire you at any time if you do not write the opinions we want you to write. Is this bad? Yes, because it taints any positive review in the future, which the gaming public must trust in order to fairly evaluate their purchases.

You wrote a wonderful post and I agree with you 100%

That being said, this part isn't completely true. Again, we don't know the inner workings of Gamespot. Also, isn't just possible that writers/journalists can simply be fired for their style? If their style just doesn't fit anymore, or doesn't jive with what they are going for. Not because of ad dollars?

 

[Talka]

I'm still not sure what Eidos did that's so terrible. They didn't fire Gerstmann, Gamespot or CNET did.

 

[Link]

Not to mention the fact that don't you guys think that if this whole K&L thing has nothing to do with his firing, wouldn't Cnet, Eidos, and everyone involved want to make that clear as soon as possible so as to avoid the wrath they've incurred at this point? Plus there is the whole deal with Tim- apparently- leaving as well. All in all, I just can't see this NOT being the catalyst.

There's also the "coincidence" that the whole ad campaign was taken down shortly after all this broke.

 

[Peru]

Yes, you can write what you want, express your opinion how you want and so forth. Absolutely. That being said, I also understand that it's possible, just, you know, possible that the way you write may cause trouble for you sooner or later. That's kind of the trade off. However, you accept that for the right.

You don't. You can't. You won't. Not if you have any resemblance of integrity left in you.

 

[Doubledex]

Just for ole' times sake...

and he was right

 

[taconinja]

You wrote a wonderful post and I agree with you 100%

That being said, this part isn't completely true. Again, we don't know the inner workings of Gamespot. Also, isn't just possible that writers/journalists can simply be fired for their style? If their style just doesn't fit anymore, or doesn't jive with what they are going for. Not because of ad dollars?

It is true either way, though.

Scenario 1: Mr. Gerstmann was fired for his review of this specific game (I hate seeing asterisks, so I refuse to type it out.) This creates a chilling effect by intimidating other writers.

Scenario 2: Mr. Gerstmann was fired because someone with more power didn't like his style. The perception by the public and seemingly many industry people is that is simply code for Scenario 1; therefore, Scenario 2 doesn't matter. A chilling effect is still created.

 

[PepsimanVsJoe]

He was very recently promoted to EIC.

Jeff always seemed like a guy that could bang-out reviews like nobody's business, but not the kind of guy you'd want managing a stable of writers.

Why not? It's pretty clear you know more about him then I do. All I see is a guy who stood up for what he believed in and got a raw deal out of it.

 

[DenogginizerOS]

If this has went down the way P-A and alot of people here assume it went down, Jeff might be clamming up because he's planning on litigating later. Let's just wait and see what happens before we jump to conclusions on either side of the fence.

Agreed. I was more or less encouraging him to speak up at some point and not to clam up forever. I do feel bad for people at Eidos and Cnet who are now facing a PR nightmare. Not the management folks as much but the game designers. The longer the villification of Eidos/Cnet/and Gamespot goes on, the more people will be collected in the splash damage. But I respect Jeff's rights to speak whenever it is best for him.

 

[Chris B]

Gamespot subscription canceled.

 

[mosaic]

I don't wanna be CNET apologists here, but doesn't anyone think it's possible he was let go just for general incompetence?

The problem with this theory, besides his 11-year tenure there, is that the CNet brass had a chance to spell out the exact circumstances to the editorial staff at an in-house meeting yesterday. They've also had ample time to inform the other executive editors in private if such was the case. Instead, as numerous staffers have said, and as has been reported by Kotaku and other sites, the only explanation they've been given has been about the "tone" of his reviews.

C'mon, tone? Tone?! He's been churning out written and video reviews in mass quantities for more than a decade...

 

[taconinja]

I'm still not sure what Eidos did that's so terrible. They didn't fire Gerstmann, Gamespot or CNET did.

In effect, they deprived a man of his livelihood because he didn't cooperate.

 

[kaching]

OK, so when they say it was "understandable" that Eidos was upset, what exactly was understood?

That they built a whole ad campaign around a flawed premise that blew up in their face. I think that merits them being understandably upset, with themselves primarily. More importantly though is the question of whether they tried to force the issue in spite of the obvious folly and being upset (i.e. to get the review changed for the ad payola). As far as the account you quoted indicates, they didn't.

 

[MiamiWesker]

and he was right

And you are wrong.

 

[nightowl]

Whatever that pay is, it is chump change compared to the revenue he would get from developers who will line up to his website if this whole story is true. Imagine being the first developer that stands by Jeff and says they trust him and are willing to accept his score. If this whole thing is about him being fired because he didn't kowtow to the management at Cnet after Eidos complained, then him exposing this and giving up that pay will be well worth the respect he would gain from many gamers.

I'm with you that I'd love to hear *all* of Gerstmann's side of this. However, its very possible that any agreement he signed (before, during, or after his employment at CNet) would make him legally vulnerable to disclosing the details that we'd like to hear. Especially if those details would confirm things that appear to have the potential (or should I say inevitability) of severely damaging his former company.

I have no idea of course, but just because he isn't talking doesn't mean he doesn't want to or have valuable information to share. A situation of this nature likely may never see the full light of day since it revolves around the "why" question which almost always has varying shades of grey.

 

[X26]

Maybe the whole situation is like The Office (UK). Jeff is kinda out there in his way of doing his job, higher ups hate him for it, fire him unfairly and he sues (and wins).

Now Jeff needs to show up at the GS offices constantly unannounced and it would be perfect

 

[Richardfun]

Agreed. I was more or less encouraging him to speak up at some point and not to clam up forever. I do feel bad for people at Eidos and Cnet who are now facing a PR nightmare. Not the management folks as much but the game designers. The longer the villification of Eidos/Cnet/and Gamespot goes on, the more people will be collected in the splash damage. But I respect Jeff's rights to speak whenever it is best for him.

I'm reserving judgement as are you, but you must admit that there are quite a few 'coincidences' in this whole story. Of course, being completely unbiased isn't possible and I am inclined to choose Jeff's side until more info comes out. But perhaps that's just because I've developed a new, vile hatred for corporate America after following the whole WGA Hollywood strike :lol

 

[GDJustin]

Why not? It's pretty clear you know more about him then I do. All I see is a guy who stood up for what he believed in and got a raw deal out of it.

I dunno him super-well either. But I've encountered plenty of "Gerstmann-types" over the years. They're good at what they do, as long as you give them a lot of direction.

All I'm saying is I've been on both sides of the coin - I've been the low-man of a publication, and an EIC of a publication. And in-between as I climbed upward. And you begin to see a pattern. Who's equipped to manage and motivate a group of writers. Who isn't.

It's ironic, but even though I'm the boss, I'm not the best writer at my own website. REVIEWING skills are a completely different skillset than MANAGEMENT skills.

...I'm kind of going off on a tangent here. Point is, I was very surprised when Gspot elected to have Jeff G. replace Kasavin in the first place, and I distinctly remember thinking at the time that they'd be regretting that decision before the year was out. He just doesn't seem like a guy I'd want to work under. BUT, he is a more-than competent reviewer.

Edit: I 100% concede that I could be way, way off-base. I'm mostly just arguing to be contrary, here. I'm just putting this out there as a theory.

 

[FieryBalrog]

Precisely. I hope that at some point in the future there will be a website specializing in news and reviews that game companies are forced to support because the site is so trusted and valued by the community that they're beyond being bullied into a ludicrous 8-10 review score system.

I am often dubious of this ever happening.

That will never happen and you can thank the fanboys for that. The only websites that end up making people are happy are the ones that give most games 7-10 IGN style, and every AAA game a 9+. That way you don't piss off any fanboys. Sure, now you have a worthless scale that doesn't actually get anything done, but that doesn't really make people angry so long as their favorite games get 9's and 10's.

The amount of bitching and crying over the smallest criticism for a fanboy property (Zelda omg 8.8!, R&C, whatever) feeds directly into this nonsense.

This is why I think games shouldn't have scores at all, only written reviews. When GFW did this it was awesome.

 

[Link648099]

Not to beat a dead horse, but I just confirmed through an independent source (outside of the situation) I trust very much that Eidos did in fact put some pressure to fire him. Directly links the two IMO.

 

[No6]

Because when Variety, EW or RS interviews an actor or director, has a making off featured article or writes about how awesome the X or Y movie looks like, they are not creating hype.

Variety, EW, and RS are not considered to be top-tier review outlets like Ebert or the NYT/LAT; most if not all of the highest regarded movie reviewers work for publications that have multiple sources of completely unrelated income. The parallel to movie criticism probably shouldn't have been made in the first place simply because game criticism isn't as established (yet) and mostly exists online. Game criticism has been making strides towards that goal, though.

He was working there for over a decade. Usually incompetent employees don't last 10 years.

Actually they can and do in infant industries, simply because standards didn't really exist. I've long been confused as to how Gerstmann managed to keep his job simply because a lot of his reviews were just poor quality; I assumed that his seniority was the key, and also thought he has/had some sort of financial/power stake in the site.

Both Gerstmann and Kasavin wrote reviews I strongly disagreed with, but at least with Kasavin I could always understand his stance. Getting canned due to legitimate revenue loss is terrible, but I just don't think that's the prime reason they tossed Gerstmann.

 

[bodyofanamerican]

What I mean is, Ebert, etc are not in the business of keeping up money by previews, interviews, etc. All they do is review the final product. They are not under the influence (ideally) of any party because they are reviewing the product when it comes out. They don't have to fight for exclusives, for ad dollars or whatever. They are not acting as the hype machines for movies as gaming sites/mags are for games.

That's why you really can't compare them because the circumstances are completely different. I don't about the games are art crap, had nothing to do with my point.

Respectfully disagree.

Ain't It Cool and other film "scoop" sites like that have been denied access to certain productions, set visits, directors, etc. if they haven't spoken highly of the production in the past. Can't those things be substituted for game previews/interviews/etc. for the sake of this discussion? To be fair, the film sites are accused of favoritism as well.

However, I can't remember the last time someplace like AICN fired a reviewer for panning a film. Those sites are ad based too, yes? They survive.

I think my question here is why gaming sites like the one in question (and many others) are so much more beholden to gaming advertisers than film and tv sites as far as reviews go. Can't they just forgo any gaming advertisement and just support themselves with the other 400 billion products and brands that are looking to reach the M18-34 demo?

 

[Opus Angelorum]

Not to beat a dead horse, but I just confirmed through an independent source (outside of the situation) I trust very much that Eidos did in fact put some pressure to fire him.

I've no reason to doubt you, but if it really is the case then...this story hasn't even begun.

 

[PepsimanVsJoe]

Not to beat a dead horse, but I just confirmed through an independent source (outside of the situation) I trust very much that Eidos did in fact put some pressure to fire him. Directly links the two IMO.

Oh?

 

[kaching]

He was working there for over a decade. Usually incompetent employees don't last 10 years.

Not to imply *anything* disparaging about Gerstmann, but sadly that's not true. Incompetent employees can and do manage to rather easily get by in jobs for 10 yrs or more.

 

[Talamius]

You are absolutely correct. But do we know what the guidelines are inside of Gamespot? No, we don't. Again, there's still more here, but this isn't COMPLETELY due to his review of **** of ***** either. We just don't know.

That being said, has any other website had Eidos threaten to pull their future advertising dollars BECAUSE of their review of **** and *****? Don't know that either.

Plausible Deniability. If you ever think we're going to directly hear from CNet "Hey, we fired Jeff because he gave K&L a low score." you're foolish.

Ask yourself this: What does PA have to gain from stirring this up? Kotaku is Kotaku, but why would PA make this up in such detail? Why is the video producer gone now as well?

 

[Kintaro]

You don't. You can't. You won't. Not if you have any resemblance of integrity left in you.

Right, so you go on, do your own thing and keep on truckin' because you love it. But you come to an understanding that just because you have the freedom to say it, doesn't mean people will hire you or care for how you say it.

Anyways, straying off topic.

 

[DenogginizerOS]

I'm reserving judgement as are you, but you must admit that there are quite a few 'coincidences' in this whole story. Of course, being completely unbiased isn't possible and I am inclined to choose Jeff's side until more info comes out. But perhaps that's just because I've developed a new, vile hatred for corporate America after following the whole WGA Hollywood strike :lol

In journalism, the moment you report coincidences as fact, you are lost. As a reader, the moment you accept reported coincidences as fact, you become a sheep. I don't doubt there are many layers to this story and we may never know the whole truth. But I doubt Eidos likes people thinking they were involved in Jeff's firing. And I doubt Gamespot likes people thinking they fired their EIC over a review. Something about all of this tells me there is a lot more to this story than the coincidences that have been reported.

 

[Talka]

In effect, they deprived a man of his livelihood because he didn't cooperate.

Eidos didn't. Gamespot and CNET did.

Eidos pushing an advertising client to fire a reviewer is a pretty big accusation, and nobody has any proof of that yet.

 

[jacobs34]

Eidos didn't. Gamespot and CNET did.

Eidos pushing an advertising client to fire a reviewer is a pretty big accusation, and nobody has any proof of that yet.

In time good chap, in time.