Been a long time since I've been here, but in the wake of Jeff Gerstmann's firing and Alex Navarro's leaving, I thought I'd put in my two cents. I'm not going to pretend I knew it 100% that GameSpot was losing its credibility, but from my last blog post, I knew I had to be on to something rotten. Turns out I was right.

For those who never saw it, there was a blog post made by a freelance journalist basically saying quite plainly that from what he heard happened behind closed doors, he believed CNet told GameSpot's editors that they can either start being softer on games (especially games they have active advertisement partnerships with), or they can walk. All that has happened since then only reinforces this.

Alex Navarro is famous around these parts for being brutally honest, and he knew it. That was the sole reason he put in his two weeks, I firmly believe; he knew he too would be more honest than CNet and their advertisers would allow, and he'd be fired for it just like Gerstmann was. That's what he meant when he said he felt he no longer belonged at GameSpot. He didn't want to know every review he wrote from that day on would have to have cushions tied to either side before it was allowed viewable by us.

And due to that revelation put forth by this freelance writer, it also showed us that CNet's explanation of what happened to Jeff was more than just damage control, they were offering outright lies to us. What does this mean? It means that anyone who chose to remain at GameSpot agreed they would not be hard on games, even if they deserved it. What does this mean? It means the collective credibility of GameSpot from this day forward MUST be put into question. No matter what review you read for any game, you'll have to ask yourself from now on "Were they being as hard on this game as they wanted to? Am I going to buy a copy and be disappointed when I get home?"

Anyone sad to see Alex go doesn't understand why he left.

Alex Navarro, I salute you, because you had to integrity to stand up and show them you refuse to be held back from stating your true opinion about these games we love to play so much and these investments that can't be taken too lightly as to be trivialized by a greedy company wanting to roll in some extra advertiser dollars at the expense of disappointed core gamers.

To that end, you may never read this, but if you did by some stroke of luck, once again I believe you did the right thing. You were good to GameSpot as long as you were here, but it did not return the favor.

And readers, personally I don't like turning to a site as questionable as GameSpot has become when I have to decide whether I want to spend $60 on a new game. GameSpot is falling apart at the seams. Every editor that has agreed to abide by CNet's new terms of content softening has also agreed to lie to us if it means not hurting the feelings of the advertisers. This sends a terrible message.

I speak for a good handful of people when I say I'm starting to look at moving on to greener pastures. Or pastures that have any green to them, period.

Metroid Prime 3's review score itself is not in my list of gripes. Of course one could say that an 8.5 is hardly worthy of what the game deserves, and I would agree. Though 8.5 is "great" on a spectrum of 1 to 10, games rated 5 and below by GameSpot and other sites that follow a "half-decent means 7.0" review model are still garbage from my experience, which makes 1-4 absolutely pointless since it's needless subtle levels of terrible/do-not-buy.

No, the last straw for me is the review's actual contents and how it's all a sign that we are never going to get fair Wii coverage from GameSpot, ever. In the review, it takes a jab at Metroid Prime 3, a single player game, by saying it was disappointing that it had no multiplayer.

By that strand of logic, I guess we should look forward to Mario Galaxy being docked points because it isn't going to have deathmatch. GameSpot, go find a toilet and fish out your credibility before someone hits the handle. Or maybe it'll just be docked points for being a Nintendo game, who knows anymore?

Of course, they also griped because the game's controls are too good.

Yes, that was in their list of cons; the controls were good. If someone posted a topic on the Wii forum saying that, they'd be moderated for trolling, but make no mistake, making ignorant statements is quite fine as long as you're an editor at GameSpot.

The worst point GameSpot glossed over sealed the deal that we were never going to get fair reviews here at GameSpot ever again... Metroid Prime 3 was slammed for not doing anything different.

Keep in mind for comparison's sake, Halo 3 is going to walk away with Editor's Choice when it arrives (call it spider sense, BS sense, what-have-you) despite the fact that the game is not and never was innovative or new, and certainly won't be in its third iteration.

Above all, GameSpot will probably not slam Halo 3 for being a simplistic, repetitious, run of the mill shooter even when it is (since it's immune to being faulted for its own genericism for reasons no one can explain).

Although some may question my motivation behind this comparison I make between Halo 3 and Metroid Prime, it is only by coincidence that I'm comparing games that are in somewhat similar genres. My main point is that it seems to be okay for one game to be recycled and unoriginal, repetitious and mindless, as long as it's got a cult following. But when another game is (according to them) also like that, it gets points subtracted for it. I'm sorry for my oversight last time; GameSpot has left me nothing left to believe that they do have some sort of bias, or that their reviewers are incompetent, getting old and jaded, and understand nothing of what they're playing anymore.

This is not me getting upset over an 8.5, this is me getting upset because GameSpot just accused one of the most original and innovative games of our lifetime of doing nothing new, meanwhile they've hyped Halo 3 through the roof and guaranteed it a pre-determined Editor's Choice just by spending their resources creating a launch center for it. Ah, people who praise a game that pioneered nothing, but they act as if it pioneered everything... And to think, "reputable" GameSpot helps spread this as truth by ignoring faults it will gladly point out in other games.

Whatever pays the bills, am I right? I'm sure you don't get paid to create launch centers, create hype, and pre-determine review scores just like you don't get paid by random beverage and chewing gum companies to paint your whole site with their background logos every other day. And to think, if you just provided clean coverage instead, you'd have more happily paying subscribers to foot those hefty server costs for you. Sadly for you, when you lose a heavily networked user like myself, I take a lot of people with me.

I'm going to GameTrailers. My user name there is CaptainDingo, same as here; if you'd like to sign up there, drop me a friend request. I'll be doing my blogging there from now on and I have a feeling I'll have much less reason to be negative. I do my best blogging when I've got nice things on my mind.

Sorry GameSpot, I guess I just wasn't enough of a 1337 dethmatch d00d for you.

I don't like making a dismal point only to have it proven the day after, but firstly let me tell you that Metroid Prime 3 is #3 behind only Bioshock and Halo 3 on the list of most wanted/anticipated new releases, yet GameSpot saw it fit to write an abomination of a preview that goes into absolutely no detail whatsoever while Halo 3 (as mentioned previously) is getting its own big launch party.

If you want proof, you need only read the Metroid Prime 3 Preview on GameSpot for yourself and compare it to other sites. Namely, IGN's preview which can be found here.

If you don't really want to be bothered to read both in their entirety, I'm more than willing to gloss over the things GameSpot completely dropped the ball on. Or, summarized, everything.

They've both played the same version of the game and so we know that, in essence, we should be getting similar previews. Unfortunately this is not the case. In fact, GameSpot offers no details whatsoever about any of the game's new features. Reading their one-page word-wall of vaguery is migraine-inducing, and might even elicit a few painful wails, especially when you know what you're missing.

From GameSpot:

"The first thing we noticed in our time with Corruption was how often you will interact with other friendly characters."

That's funny... the first thing IGN noticed and reported on was this (From IGN):

"Metroid Prime 3: Corruption begins as space-drifting heroine Samus Aran awakens from a cryogenic sleep to a fleet of Federation Ships. In a first for the acclaimed franchise, you take control of the character well before her feet touch the ground. Your initial mission is to guide her Hunter-****Gunship to Docking Bay Five on the enormous battleship, S.S. Olympus. While you can engage its thrusters and tinker around with several of its in-cockpit gadgets, including a screen that tallies exactly how many kills you've amassed and even how many times you've shot your weapon, you don't ever really control Aran's ship so much as you select positions on a galactic map for it to fly toward. (Later, you'll be able to call the ship to Aran's side -- it can rain down extra firepower when necessary or, bare minimum, function as a portable save system, literally flying a save portal your way.)"

So the first thing you're going to miss out on is even realizing you can control the ship from the inside, or that you take control of Samus's hand with the Wiimote to do so. Completely omitted from GameSpot's preview which cuts straight to telling you that you'll use different beam weapons to do combat; which is duh for anyone who's even heard of Metroid. They also didn't say anything about using the ship for air strikes, or that it serves as a mobile save point. It all would have been nice to know; I hope nobody uses GameSpot primarily (or at all) to get their Wii information. And did you also know about the kill count tracking, how many times you've shot your weapon? Not if you heard it from GameSpot, you don't.

Instead, GameSpot has opted to talk about how characters have voice acting, something technical that isn't going to make a huge difference in how we play. We all knew about the lock-on, how the Wii remote handles aiming, but GameSpot dedicates several precious paragraphs of its already tiny preview to telling us all of this... again.

From IGN:

"Retro has designed environments that we didn't think were possible on Wii -- walls with jutting pipes, holographic displays, sparking particles, and all of them multilayered so that you will be able to see pistons chugging back and forth beneath glass walkways. The effect is very impressive indeed. Just as impressive, though, is that Corruption runs at an uninterrupted, silky smooth 60 frames per second 99.9% of the time."

This is only a portion of IGN's description of what has changed as far as Metroid Prime's environmental visuals go, while if you read GameSpot's preview, we get nothing but this (From GameSpot):

"Metroid Prime 3: Corruption looks a lot like its predecessors, both in ****and technology. However, everything is a little crisper and more detailed. For a Wii game, it also looks quite nice."

Thanks for the elaboration! And don't forget, the game looks nice... for a Wii game. None of us are disillusioned and think the Wii has similar specifications to an Xbox360 or a Playstation 3, but be damned if we're not treated like we are. You know, 360 and PS3 games look good too... for consoles.

From IGN:

"Aran gains a new Phazon Enhancement Device, or PED Suit, that dramatically changes her appearance and works hand-in-and with Corruption's central theme. Samus is able to use this special new suit to go into hyper mode (by holding plus button), at which point time appears to slow down and she can unleash a powerful onslaught of gunfire, but it comes at a cost. If she stays in hyper mode for too long, she runs the risk of becoming corrupted and quite possibly dying."

Hyper mode? Huh, never saw a word about this in the GameSpot preview. I'd compare, but there's nothing to compare to.

From GameSpot

"The first level ended with a boss fight we'd seen before. This mechanical monstrosity wasn't a difficult fight, but it was exciting. Once it was over ..."

*Facepalm.*

From IGN:

"Samus oftentimes interacts with environmental pulleys and levers, all pushed, pulled and twisted with the Wii remote. You'll actually make the appropriate gestures with the peripheral to perform these functions. For instance, you might have to pull backward on the Wii remote to pull a lever down, then twist left with the controller to twist the on-screen device, and finally push forward to lock it back in place."

There's not a word about this out of GameSpot, but it sure would have been nice. We knew about the specific side-door lock mechanism we saw in old E3 videos, but it was IGN who enlightened us to how much this feature actually gets use, also that we'll get to do this to all sorts of levers. This is a very pleasing aesthetic, and it's a shame GameSpot totally ignored it in favor of telling us about a few ways they shot stuff with guns.

But GameSpot's Metroid Prime 3 Preview does not stand alone; it is a sample of GameSpot's hurried, lazy, ridiculous Wii coverage that it has been (not) doing for as long as I can remember. It's okay though, I hope you guys have a real blast at your Halo 3 launch party while I wonder why the person who writes your Wii previews hasn't gotten fired yet.

Of course, then there's that whole silly achievements/badges/unlockables thing too they added, but who cares, right GameSpot? Doesn't even exist!

My name is Jason Brown. I've been playing games my whole life; I'm currently unemployed at age 21, and have never once gotten a pay check. I live in relative poverty. I am capable of writing better than most, I understand games, I understand how they're made and the entire process start to finish. I know technical lingo, I can build a PC from scratch. I have a lot to say on every facet of gaming and I'm not afraid to say it. I know communities, I know people, I know what they want and what they don't want. I understand the niche gamer, and how much coverage they need, because without them, gaming would never progress beyond mainstream garbage. Games like Psychonauts would remain in the 5-digit sales numbers while millions flock to the next Madden.

Look at your Wii section. Are you out of helping hands? Where's the coverage? Where are the previews? The gameplay videos? The recent screenshots? Are you aware your Metroid Prime 3: Corruption shots are over a month old? Did you bother looking for more, did you bother asking for more? Did you know the only gameplay videos you can find on your site of Metroid Prime 3 are user videos? Are you aware Metroid Prime 3 is arguably the biggest future release on the Wii? Then why are we still getting article after article about Halo and football? Halo 3 has a launch center; where is Metroid Prime 3's? Where will Mario Galaxy's be?

Hire me, I'll fill out your Wii section. I'll do it single-handedly, and I'll thoroughly enjoy it. I'll work overtime on it.

Are you aware that your latest Wii news consists of a Boogie review and something about Tomb Raider? Where are your screenshots and videos of Endless Ocean? Did you bother to play it yet? There's not a preview in sight. Where did all these other videos come from I see plastered all around the internet? Don't tell me you've never have access to the game. I had to run a search just now to make sure you guys even knew the game was titled Endless Ocean and not Forever Blue.

You need someone who gives a flying damn about keeping that Wii section up to date. I'm raising my hand up high, here.

Super Smash Bros. Dojo has new screenshots every weekday. It's August 21st, why are your latest shots from the 1st? You've missed umpteen weekdays worth. There are people out there who don't know the Dojo exists. Do you even care if your databases are filled out with the latest possible updates or not? You're supposed to at least look like you want people to visit your site for game information. Samurai Warriors: Katana probably isn't netting you many hits.

You have no videos of Battalion Wars 2? How? Your most recent news/preview is headlined as a release date for Metroid Prime 3. The two before that aren't even previews. Have you played the game? I saw plenty of other journalists that have had access to it. Where's the previews? The gameplay videos? The impressions? If I visit your site to get information about this game, I'm going to come away not knowing a thing.

I've got both hands held up high! Send me on a trip to where these games are debuting, I'll play them, I'll come back, I'll write you a three-pager and have more media with me than I can carry.

So are you hiring, or not? I think you need help.

Having read on Joystiq about the widescreen support, or I guess "lack thereof" for Bioshock, and the reactions to it, I could do nothing but laugh. There are people who truly believe this matters, and that makes me feel very sad for them. I can understand why they're upset, they forked over a lot of money and fell into one of the biggest scams gamers these days can, which is buying a widescreen TV.

Nope, I'm on the developer's side here, so you're not going to get sympathy from me if you're one of the people upset because Bioshock isn't utilizing your widescreen TV in the way you wanted. Instead, I thought it might be better to educate on the whole idea of why I'm saying, and will continue to say, that a widescreen TV is a waste of your money, and why if you disagree, you're looney. That sounds like an arrogant assertion, but I am being serious and trying to remain modest, which is why I'm going to explain the whole thing now.

Widescreen is NOT a hardware feature. It is a software feature.

That's it. That's the explanation. You can have just as much field of view on a standard TV as you can on a widescreen TV. Widescreen is a software setting, not a hardware feature; but if it makes you spend a ton of money, they'll make you think you need one, and laugh themselves to the bank. In my mind, to be the sort of person to buy a widescreen TV, you'd have to also be the kind of person to buy something like, say, a DVD Rewinder...

And I really hope that didn't sound like a good idea to you.

At any rate, you can have the exact same field of view on a full screen TV. You of course need black bars on the top and bottom of the screen, so there is no stretching of the picture, but that's all a widescreen TV is. It's a longer-looking TV. The physical shape has been altered, when it doesn't need to be; the software's field of view is the only thing that needs changing.

What's next? Are we going to zoom the view out, not cut the tops off, and make people buy "fullER screen" TVs (that one might be a bit too obvious, and yet...)?

Enjoy Bioshock, folks, and don't even think about what aspect ratio you're playing the game in. It doesn't matter.

Wii games are having a rough time convincing the discriminating graphics-whore to buy into it, and as much as your average low-IQ System Wars goer may say it's because the Wii is a weak system, the truth of the matter is that developers are lazy.

They're so lazy in fact that it feels like half the "new" games we see lately are ports... of Playstation 2 games, games for a console which was weaker than the GameCube.

I'm no graphics whore, myself. You won't see me in line to buy an HDTV anytime soon, nor will you see me caring whatsoever about what resolution the next big game runs in; I believe these are petty things that your run of the mill rich kid values. All I ask is that a beautiful game is made that utilizes a console's capacity. That's all. And the Wii games so far are not in any way representative of its capacity.

The Wii is incapable of bump-mapping, normal mapping, and all those other DirectXish bells and whistles. What they don't bother to tell you is that the Wii has its own methods of achieving the exact same effects; but because it's not the norm that developers are used to, they will continue to plague the world with insulting visuals all because they're just too lazy to learn how to program for something different, even if it means they can be one step closer to creating a possible masterpiece. And who was the only developer to this day to even bother with the GameCube's impressive visual effects? Factor 5. Yes, unlike every single other developer out there, Factor 5 was the only ones among them to learn how to use the GameCube's capabilities to use its own versions of bump-mapping and advanced lighting techniques. Go play Rogue Squadron II again if you've forgotten what a GameCube game was supposed to look like.

Where any other developer would have just slapped some textures onto a Star Destroyer and called it a day, they went above and beyond the call of duty and showed us the GameCube could match the graphical effects of the Xbox.

Of course, this was swiftly forgotten.

Nowadays we fast forward to the Wii, and see that the exact same thing is happening. Developers are only now discovering Wii graphical features that have been on the GameCube all this time; imagine how little ambition one must have to do no research on the console they're developing for.

That said, one need only look at Super Mario Galaxy to see a sample of what the Wii can accomplish. While the Wii console does not support "pixel shaders," you'll still oddly notice that Super Mario Galaxy has bump mapping, rim lights, bloom effects... wait, isn't this stuff pixel shaders?! It is, but it's Nintendo's own version of it; a clever copy that produces the exact same end result. And what is the outcome? Super Mario Galaxy's lighting is superb, the rim lighting makes every object pop out and feel vibrant. The grass seen on many of the miniature planets has true raised texture to it, and looks like soft green velvet, every nook and cranny lit as it should be, as the game continues to run at a silky smooth frame rate and generally look on-par with many Xbox360 games with a similar art style.

But what can be done? For one, Wii owners can make themselves more vocal about developer laziness, as they completely ignore how to properly program a Wii game all for the sake of making some terrible, washed-out ports. Is it possible to petition developers? Who knows. Perhaps someone will try it. Or, perhaps as with the GameCube, Nintendo and Factor 5 will be the only ones who bother to use any of the console's visual features, and we'll have to deal with another generation of clueless System Wars junkies rattle on about the "GameCube 1.5," continuing to give us all a headache.