so i haven't been visiting this site lately ever since the Gerstmanngate scandal cause i think they're all a bunch of fanboy retards (maybe except...o wait....nvm). I sign on every once in a while to see what new things have been happening, and i happened to sign on today. Well, i just received proof that gamespot is run by a bunch of total tools who have NO **** CLUE what they are doing

i love you so much gamespot

here's what i found in my inbox today:

You have been moderated with a Warning for a Terms of Use violation. If you repeat this offense in the future, you may receive a more severe penalty such as Point Loss from your level, Suspension or Permanent Banning. Having a paid subscription does not exempt you from being suspended or banned.

Here is a link to our Terms of Use:
http://www.gamespot.com/misc/tos.html

Reason for moderation: please use the stickied thread
Action Taken: Close Topic - No points were lost for this moderation.

See your moderation history for details.

this was for this thread:

well i was thinking a little bit about mods for GTA and how popular they are. Im sure R* noticed that user mods for GTA are really popular, so i was thinking what if the PS3 version is going to allow mods? UT3 allows user content and mods to be installed, so maybe GTA will too. Since MS got the exclusive episodes, maybe PS3 gets the ability to be modded. Philly H already said they are working closely with R* on something, but he wouldnt say what...maybe its mods, who knows

again, this is just speculation/dreams....but think about, how cool would that be

now, unless im effin blind, when did i create that thread? JULY bloody 22 OF damn 2000 and SEVEN! almost a DAMN YEAR AGO! but i get moderated now...why? please use the stickied thread....THERE WAS NO DAMN STICKIED THREAD BACK THEN YOU BUNCH OF RETARDS!

/rant

goodbye

o btw to prove im not lying

Guitar downstrum went out today. thats just 1 day of playing.

Tried this lo-fi fix, worked like a charm. back to rocking.

Been a couple of weeks. Finally jailbroken. its awesome

The whole world knows by know about the Gerstmann/Gamespot debacle that is currently happening. Bottom line is Gerstmann got fired, Gamespot shot its credibility all to **** and people are trusting reviewers about as much as I trust my grandma on which sweater to wear. Whether G-Mann got fired because of his Kane & Lynch review is irrelevant. What IS relevant is the silence of CNet/Gamespot on the matter. Inside sources have claimed Gerstmann was locked out of his office with no warning while CNet and GS have stated that the departure was something mutual and they saw it coming. But I digress. I don't want to give my opinion on Gerstmann, CNet and the bunch; I want to give my opinion on reviews and why they need to be changed completely.

As it stands, there are a couple of major flaws with the whole review system employed by virtually every videogame publication out there. First and foremost, how do you quantify the quality of games? How do you know what a 10 and 1 is in order to scale every other game accordingly? And with all the game genres, and some games that have no genre (Assassin's Creed), how can you accurately place a game in its proper category? Rainbow Six: Vegas is an awesome first-person shooter that can be compared with the likes of GRAW, Call of Duty, etc. but it's also a tactical game ala Metal Gear Solid and so on. So in essence if it's better than Call of Duty (which has a score of 9 for argument's sake) but worse than Metal Gear Solid (which, let's say, scored an 8.5), do you give it a 9, 8.5, 8, or lower?

In my non-expert opinion, and the opinion of others as I have read, the rating system should not be based on the school grading system. In the school system, a 5 is a fail, a 7 is average, and an 8 and 9 are on the higher spectrum with 10 being perfect. But using this system begs the question why is Call of Duty so much better, and thus AAA, when it only scored 0.5 higher than UT:3? Game rankings should be on a 1-10 scale, but the average should be a 6 and everything else scaled accordingly. This way, the lower end of the spectrum gets used up with games that are mostly crap, while the upper echelon (the higher 8's and 9's) is reserved for truly outstanding, innovating games. This way people will be able to make a clear distinction between an average game of let's say 7 and a truly amazing experience that has received a 9.

Another thing reviewers must consider in depth while reviewing is the depth and quality of the game. It still puzzles me why Assassin's Creed has received so many 9's and 8's when the technical side of it is mostly crap. No doubt, the story is revolutionary and the plot twists are amazing, but everything else seems to lack. Gameplay is mostly solid, but lacks depth as you do the same actions over and over again. Climb, pickpocket, investigate, interrogate, eavesdrop and assassinate. Granted it's a fun experience it gets extremely repetitive and boring after the second or third assassination. The fact that interiors are unaccessible and you can't interact with NPC's doesn't help either. While all this may be overlooked, the graphical and performance issues can't. All the glitches, clipping, screen tearing, jaggies, freezes, and even cloning make a beautiful game look like it was developed by a developer that has no QA team. I don't want to look like I'm bashing Assassin's Creed or Ubisoft, but a game with so many wrongs that sometimes overshadow the good cannot receive a 9. Innovation does not guarantee success. Just because a game has decided to stray away from the generic formula it does not mean it is automatically GOTY material.

Of course, there are many other small things that are horribly wrong with reviews, such as rushing through the game because of a backlog of games, boosting the score because of managerial pressure, awarding a game a low score because you're an FPS fan and this game was an adventure title, etc. At the end of the day/week/life one thing still stands though, reviews as they are right now are horribly wrong, and unless they change for the better, they will be trusted less and less.

is tomorrow. Assassins Creed finally arrives. Its been getting mixed reviews so far. 7.7, 9, 7, 9.1, etc. i guess i just have to look for myself.

EDIT: 1UP you **** **** thank you for ruining the goddamn plot twist of the game in your review. What kind of "professional" **** journalists are you when you post spoilers in a **** review and don't even warn the readers. I hope you all die and burn in hell you asswipes.

If you even remotely like FPS's, get it. NOW!

Got a call from Gamestop today telling me CoD 4 should arrive tomorrow evening. So excited, I've been waiting for a good modern-day FPS to fill the void of Battlefield 2.

PS: There go my grades

Well I convinced my dad to camp out with me on black friday, so he took the day off. Now I need to make a list of what I want to get so I don't lose track.

1. Xbox 360 - Funny how i lasted 2 years without one. Most likely it wont get marked down, but the games will, so i still get something in return.

2. iPod Touch - Really been wanting one of these for a while. Maybe i'll finally snap one up

3. In-car sound system - Alpine Deck + Amps, Kicker Sub, Xplod speakers...mmmm..

4. Laptop - Kinda looking for mobility

OK, let's keep this simple

Pros
+ AI is smarter
+ cars look amazing
+ hard to explain this one, but cars just feel like theyre fundamentally different...they seem to have a "personality"
+ in-car view is orgasmic
+ DFP (Driving Force Pro) is holy ZOMGIMGUNACUM!!!
+ its shiny (no kidding)

Cons
- AI still not smart enough
- Lots!! of jaggies
- Lexus IS-F sucks
- no damage
- not enough cars
- Lexus IS-F sucks something awful
- dynamic weather would be nice
- release a US demo
- Lexus IS-F needs to BURN! (get the point yet?)

Ok, here's a little run down on what's going on right now. I know I said I was going to post a review of Heavenly Sword, sorry I just couldn't get around to it; instead here's a little shortcut review:

The game in itself is awesome. The graphics are amazing, the physics are perfect, and the sound is something you need 5.1 to fully experience. The gameplay, while it gets a little repetitive, it still interesting enough to make you want to finish the game. If the gameplay doesn't keep you hooked, the storyline and acting is sure to. Andy Serkis does an absolutely amazing job as King Bohan, and all the other characters and villains are superb. The voice acting is done so realistically you forget you're looking at a cutscene, not a movie theater screen. The only fault this game has is that its too short. Way too short. I think I beat it in about 7 hours on my first run. Hell mode will give you a little bit of replay value, but its not much.

All in all, its a great game. Worth a rent.

and my opinion in two words:

it sucked.

thank you for reading.

out of boredom