Proof that game reviews are balls

[Asher]

Wiglaf, you are an ignora....... ...ut*.

*don't ban me, bro

[Kataphraktoi]

i predict these boards will have a temporary reprieve from wiggy VS asher

arnt i a psychic?

[vee4473]

My popcorn ran out so i'll post.

I have become annoyed with GS full screen background ads, and I can certainly see that ads for games and a game review site are not compatible and cause warranted suspicion.

But, I mostly agree with GS reviews for the games that I have played. That doesn't mean that what is implied here doesn't exist in the corporate world. Most certainly not.

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by Wiglaf
You are one of the most annoying posters on this site, regularly sweeping in to post one sentence snide jabs at people and then a token smiley face that would not be out of place on one of my dbag exgirlfriends.

Thanks!

Also (second sentence ) I should point out I believe in efficiency. When you can point out the unbelievable stupidity of someone's position with one sentence using more is just wasteful.

[Wiglaf]

You were not pointing anything out, you were making an unsubstantiated, toolish opinion. You waste space by spewing your crap without justifying it.

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by Wiglaf
You were making an unsubstantiated, toolish opinion. You waste space by spewing your crap without justifying it.

You will be pleased to know that it's been a long day for me and the irony of this post has almost finished me off.

[Wiglaf]

I know it was like so ironic rite??

[Ming]

Wiglaf, Asher and DrSpike... see you all later. I'll release you all some time this weekend. Next time, pay more attention to the warnings.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Ming
and DrSpike

Oh pshaw!


Well, this COULD be a good time to discuss the Sims

OTOH, its not like there are enough people (here) playing it anymore for a decent discussion, and most who do have moved on to Sim2 and have probably forgotten the original game. So ixnay on that.

[DrSpike]

I'm glad to see no one had time to start a Sims thread whilst I was gone.

[Wiglaf]

I was right, game reviews are for tools

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 overlords have created the ultimate soul-crushing work environment.

http://www.gamespot.com/users/mosaic/

Also, this is the dorkiest way to go out, ever:

In a Nov. 30 blog post, Navarro compared his situation in the wake of the firing to a game of SimCity where "someone hit the disaster button for me."

For the past two days, I've been communicating back and forth with numerous members of GameSpot's editorial staff. They've filled me in on a lot of background info. I'm not willing to spell that out or to name names, but this anonymous quote from one of them sums up what they've ALL said:


"[The Penny Arcade comic] obviously simplifies things, but the core of it seems accurate from where I am. The management didn't like how jeff was running reviews, something that seemed informed by the complaints they were receiving from publishers and advertisers.

Basically, he was defending our editorial integrity, and they cut his ass loose over it."

[Wiglaf]

Oh still more ownage for Asher

Running this whole GameTrax operation was a guy named Josh Larson. But after Broady, Kasavin, and others left GameSpot, Larson took over the editorial aspect of the site as well. So here you had Josh Larson -- the man behind selling sponsorships of editorial -- now placed directly in charge of the editorial itself. You tell me if you see any potential conflict of interest there.

Around the same time, Steven Colvin, known for having launched such publications as Stuff magazine, took over CNET's entertainment and lifestyle group, of which GameSpot is a part of. I don't know what his editorial influence has been on GameSpot, if any, but his track record didn't exactly point to editorial integrity as one of his prime values. Stuff magazine, for example, used to run game reviews that were written based off of screenshots and fact sheets, before the games were even playable to the press (I knew several freelancers who made lots of easy money from this). So yeah, you had the guy in charge of GameTrax and the guy who launched Stuff overseeing all editorial on GameSpot.

And so the stage was set for the events of last November to unfold. Eidos paid a substantial amount of money to have its ads point to the GameSpot review of Kane & Lynch. The Kane & Lynch review wasn't very favorable. Eidos freaked. GameSpot caved. Internet exploded.

From a post on Valleywag by an unnamed GameSpot editor:

Our last executive editor, Greg Kasavin, left to go to EA, and he was replaced by a suit, Josh Larson, who had no editorial experience and was only involved on the business side of things. Over the last year there has been an increasing amount of pressure to allow the advertising teams to have more of a say in the editorial process; we've started having to give our sales team heads-ups when a game is getting a low score, for instance, so that they can let the advertisers know that before a review goes up. Other publishers have started giving us notes involving when our reviews can go up; if a game's getting a 9 or above, it can go up early; if not, it'll have to wait until after the game is on the shelves.

I was in the meeting where Josh Larson was trying to explain this firing and the guy had absolutely no response to any of the criticisms we were sending his way. He kept dodging the question, saying that there were "multiple instances of tone" in the reviews that he hadn't been happy about, but that wasn't Jeff's problem since we all vet every review. He also implied that "AAA" titles deserved more attention when they were being reviewed, which sounded to all of us that he was implying that they should get higher scores, especially since those titles are usually more highly advertised on our site.

I know that it's all about the money, and hey, I like money. I like advertising because it pays my salary. Unfortunately after Kasavin left the church-and-state separation between the sales teams and the editorial team has cracked, and with Jeff's firing I think it's clear that the management now has no interest at all in integrity and are instead looking for an editorial team that will be nicer to the advertisers.

When companies make games as downright contemptible as Kane and Lynch, they deserve to be called on it. I guess you'll have to go to Onion or a smaller site for objective reviews now, because everyone at GS now thinks that if they give a low score to a high-profile game, they'll be ****canned. Everyone's ****ing scared and we're all hoping to get Josh Larson removed from his position because no one trusts him anymore. If that doesn't happen then look for every game to be Game of the Year material at GameSpot.

http://www.1up.com/do/blogEntry?bId=8587828&publicUserId=4561231

[Asher]

Wiggy, that post you quote is from directly after the incident and has already been discussed in this thread.

Now, it's very possible the guy was fired from GS for being negative in the light of the sponsorship, but what's also being made abundantly clear by your own links is this is a new thing to Gamespot that did not exist before this new "suit" took over.

That was my point. You still try to claim this discredits all reviews on any site with ads, ever, but your own sources specifically mention how a new guy is responsible for this nonsense.

Owned indeed...

[Tuberski]

Not to say that Wiggy is 100% correct, or even right in this instance, but, this the big reason that Consumer Reports does not accept advertising.

ACK!

[DrSpike]

As I recall the earlier debate was about whether GameSpot reviews have been 'balls', not about whether they will be.

And I seem to also recall pointing out that if indeed Jeff was fired for sticking to his guns on the review, this actually proves the points several of us made countering the OP.

I don't see what's changed here.