GameSpot may receive revenue from affiliate and advertising partnerships for sharing this content and from purchases through links.

Spot On: GameSpot on Gerstmann

SPECIAL REPORT: Following days of controversy and the first post-Jeff podcast, GameSpot answers burning questions about the most controversial staff change in its history.

2879 Comments

For the past week, controversy has rocked the game news media--a controversy that originated here at GameSpot. The affair began last Wednesday when near-11-year veteran reviewer Jeff Gerstmann's tenure as editorial director ended. In keeping with the human-resources procedures of GameSpot parent company CNET Networks and in accordance with California State Law, no public comment was initially made about his departure.

In the void of information that followed, numerous conspiracy theories sprang up. First and foremost was that, as a result of pressure from publisher Eidos Interactive, GameSpot terminated Gerstmann because of his review of the multiplatform game Kane & Lynch: Dead Men. The game was released on November 13, 2007 for the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3. (The PC version of the game was released on November 20, but has not yet been reviewed.)

Hundreds of reports pointed to the fact that the Kane & Lynch video review was pulled and the text review's copy was altered as evidence substantiating this hypothesis. In many readers' eyes, the fact that the entire GameSpot site was "skinned" with advertisements promoting Kane & Lynch all but confirmed the theory behind his firing. In the gaming press, the subsequent furor has been dubbed "Gerstmanngate."

Due to legal restrictions and corporate HR policy, GameSpot could not initially comment on Gerstmann's departure. Though the site officially addressed the issue on Monday, the full story behind his exit could not be told--until now.

In the spirit of full disclosure to our readership, GameSpot News has been provided the following answers by management to the questions below regarding the circumstances surrounding Gerstmann's exit.

Q: Was Jeff fired?

A: Jeff was terminated on November 28, 2007, following an internal review process by the managerial team to which he reported.

Q: Why was Jeff fired?

A: Legally, the exact reasons behind his dismissal cannot be revealed. However, they stemmed from issues unrelated to any publisher or advertiser; his departure was due purely for internal reasons.

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.

Q: Why hasn't the video review been reposted since the "Gerstmanngate" controversy broke?

A: A determination was made by GameSpot Live, GameSpot's multimedia division, that reposting it would seem reactive and might exacerbate an inflamed situation. However, in the spirit of full disclosure, it has since been reposted, and is viewable on the site in its original form (See above). For those who want to be sure that it has not been altered after the fact, the video review is also available on YouTube for comparison purposes.

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.

Q: Why did the Kane & Lynch ads disappear from GameSpot right as the "Gerstmanngate" controversy began to heat up?

A: Advertising sales on GameSpot are sold by the day. The end of the Kane & Lynch "skin" promotion had been predetermined long beforehand. Internal documentation filed before the review appeared shows that the site skin was scheduled to run from November 17 to 29, 2007. Site-wide ad campaigns automatically change at midnight, hence the "skin" being removed after hours.

Q: Was Jeff's termination somehow tied to the departure of former GameSpot Live managing producer Tim Tracy?

A: No. Tim and Jeff are childhood friends and had been colleagues until Tim transferred over to other CNET Networks Entertainment properties. His exit was completely unrelated.

Q: Why didn't GameSpot write about Jeff's departure sooner?

A: Due to HR procedures and legal considerations, unauthorized CNET Networks and GameSpot employees are forbidden from commenting on the employment status of current and former employees. This practice has been in effect for years, and the CNET public-relations department stuck to that in the days following Jeff's termination. However, the company is now making an exception due to the widespread misinformation that has spread since Jeff's departure.

Q: When will the PC version of Kane & Lynch be reviewed?

A: We haven't decided when that will happen.

Q: GameSpot's credibility has been called into question as a result of this incident. What is being done to repair and rebuild it?

A: This article is one of the first steps toward restoring users' faith in GameSpot, and an internal review of the incident and controversy is under way. However, at no point in its history has GameSpot ever deviated from its review guidelines, which are publicly listed on the site. Great pains are taken to keep sales and editorial separated to prevent any impression of impropriety.

For years, GameSpot has been known for maintaining the highest ethical standards and having the most reliable and informative game reviews, previews, and news on the Web. The colleagues and friends that Jeff leaves behind here at GameSpot intend to keep it that way.

For a special report on Jeff Gerstmann's dismissal and a tribute to his legacy, tune in tomorrow to GameSpot's weekly live webcast, On the Spot. For a personal look at Gerstmann's exit, listen to the latest HotSpot podcast in which host Vincent Caravella discusses the controversial event with longtime Gerstmann colleagues Ricardo Torres, Ryan MacDonald, Alex Navarro, and Ryan Davis.

Got a news tip or want to contact us directly? Email news@gamespot.com

Join the conversation
There are 2879 comments about this story
2879 Comments  RefreshSorted By 
GameSpot has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to toxic conduct in comments. Any abusive, racist, sexist, threatening, bullying, vulgar, and otherwise objectionable behavior will result in moderation and/or account termination. Please keep your discussion civil.

Avatar image for Azerith
Azerith

44

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Been coming here for many years and subscribing for almost as many. Now I'm leaving.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for frozenchimp
frozenchimp

37

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

everyone to IGN!\ haha

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Creeper6
Creeper6

43

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

So he gets canned for expressing his personal view instead of reading and doing what hes told. antonius05 said it best. I think i'll close my account and go to IGN.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for antonius05
antonius05

849

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 17

User Lists: 0

Gamespot, it seems the last year you have been run by moneyhungry dictators. Firing a man for stating his opinion? All time low.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Lisandro_v22
Lisandro_v22

1319

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

they forgot to ask "should users who cancelled their suscriptions suscribe again? yes, they should" please we aren't THAT stupid, all questions were made only to point to cnet's innocence

Upvote • 
Avatar image for WeeklyReader
WeeklyReader

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Next time? Unless I find out that Jeff was fired for something other than giving what he felt were honest reviews I won't be around next time. In addition, who ever it was who said that GameSpot is a business and needs to make money so we should understand if they want to please their advertisers, I call BS. The only reason this product would be worth anything to its readers is if they could trust it not to be biased. What is the point of purposely subjecting ourselves to advertisements wrapped in a review format? It appears GameSpot knew this at first, since it supposedly kept its writing and business operations separate, but we need to know that this is the case now.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for peacee
peacee

126

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

What we know. 1. The guys on (On the spot) dident fire Jeff. 2. Jeff was not fired as a result of pressure from an outside companny. 3 Game spot are all good people and trully wish things were handeled differently. Dont be mad at Gamespot or those on (on the spot) if your mad. They dident fire Jeff, someone els did. Who? We dont know who fired Jeff. Most likely someon higher up form all those at games spot that apperently just saw Jeff as a number and not a good funny guy. They obviously dident know him so it wasent a problem for them to fire him. 4. It sounds like whoever fired him wishes things were handled differently now that they see the out come of it all. 5. Things will be handled differently next time. I hope they let him visit sometime, that would be nice. God Bless.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for GrandKing203
GrandKing203

39

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

the faces of gamespot are all gone rich, gerg, and jeff

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Mousse420
Mousse420

70

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Wow Jaydough, creepy. Right, corporations NEVER lie! Ever. Also note the above article is written by "Staff"... Also creepy. At first I was expecting to see the name of some GS staff member whom the lawyer told what to type, but then I see this is actually the work of some even scarier, anonymous "STAFF" person. Most likely a Cleaner sent in from CNET.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for galduke
galduke

149

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

I just watched the vid, the review wasn't that harsh, though insulting the char.s and story might upset some Hollywood execs. Another possible reason for taking the vid. down would be that sh-t and f-ck were left uncensored in the subs, though this is assuming whoever put it back up was uninformed of this problem by the guy that took it down. On another note, when the vid. started, I was greeted with an ad for Ace Combat 6. Unless this is yet another "coincident", I think we've found the true perpetrator of this whole scheme (black helicopters).

Upvote • 
Avatar image for micko_2
micko_2

424

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

what a load of **** gamespot, we all no why he was fired. cnet and gamespot, a bunch of bs noobs who dont no how to run a gamesite. comeup with a better story you noobs you wont restore my faith in gamespot. i hope gamespot loses big money from this. its such a BS copout, why you say there fired is so lame. he was very much liked so why fire him ****heads

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Mis_Led_Madman
Mis_Led_Madman

48

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

You know this is so stupid. He was my favorite person who reviewed the games. Now he got fired for speaking his mind. Well guess what guys? Not every game is going to have a nice review. Love where this country is going.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Blood_Raptor_X
Blood_Raptor_X

2913

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

This whole video game cyber world couldn't be any nerdier than it is now lol SOMEONE ACTUALLY LOST THEIR JOB BECAUSE THEY GAVE A FREAKING VIDEO GAME A BAD REVIEW. All because the company who made that game was paying the company he works for, lots of money...hahaha This website's main goal isn't to give honest reviews to video games, it's main goal is to make money lol So yea in the future, if we see a lot of ads for a videogame on here, expect that game to get a good review by this website.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for pp102974
pp102974

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Do we gamers look like idiots to you?

Upvote • 
Avatar image for IIRubenII
IIRubenII

2734

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

Dude, I have paid more than $100.00 dollars on this site in the past years. I thought, well, $30 bucks is worth downloading great video reviews for honesty by Jeff and by Greg Kasavin. Now, I think I'll downgrade to basic and stop the "automatic" payment cycle.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for MTGWARGOD
MTGWARGOD

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

The ONLY way i think Gamespot can erase this is to ADMIT and let Jeff BACK IN. Hard feeling will generally be absent amongst gamespot staff as they were not involved with the firing at all (the big wigs did). But then again how can they admit when: A: Legally, the exact reasons behind his dismissal cannot be revealed. Cause the same big wigs will fire any staff who fesses up probably. This article is completely controlled by corporate heads who tried to act like they have sympathy with us (one by providing a link to the old video review etc etc etc.) They are not stupid....but then again so arnt we.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for illkillyou
illkillyou

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

However... in response to people getting fired up about Gamespot's "can't disclose why he was fired" policy... That's a legitimate thing. It's a freedom we all enjoy. Think about it. If you've ever been fired from a job, you know your employers legally can't disclose the circumstances for why you were fired. If they could, some people would never be able to find a job again. Also, hey... even The New York Times needs ad revenue.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for illkillyou
illkillyou

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

I'm skeptical. Honestly, if Gamespot wanted to stand by its reviewer's opinion of Kane and Lynch, why did they change the copy to match the score, and not the score to match the copy? It's way easier that way, and a helluva lot more credible. It's hard not to speculate that to save future ad deals with Eidos, they changed the copy to match the "fair" score (which at least makes the game look okay), rather than change the score to match what the reviewer legitimately thought of the game.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for ryan69969
ryan69969

224

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

R.I.P. Gamespot - It is all-too apparent that what was once a great resource run by gamers is now just another amateurish toolset for ad-delivery. Note especially the vague, corporate-style, MBA 101 double-speak which permeates this article. The HotSpot podcast only provided more questions than answers as the editors reiterated over and over at how "p***ed off" they all are, rather than addressing why I should continue to bother with this site and its podcasts as opposed to the many other resources that are out there. How can I expect Gamespot to have any journalistic integrity at all when they can't even pull off basic PR? Such a shame. Mr. Gerstmann, best of luck to you in the future--hopefully this change will ultimately be for the best.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for LoneliestGoat
LoneliestGoat

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

lame.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for thered0390
thered0390

101

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

Sorry guys, this is gonna be stupid, but I have to say it. If Phil Collins were here, he'd call this article "just a pack of lies."

Upvote • 
Avatar image for linkman31
linkman31

231

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

"This article spends more time explaining why they *didn't* fire him, and sheds no new light on why they did. If the real reason why he was fired "cannot be revealed," then the purpose of this article is less sincere than intended. It has all the spin of a PR report. It elaborates on coincidences, is riddled with vague allusions, and hobnobs around the facts, without ever answering the essential question: Why was Jeff Gerstmann fired? By written standards, this article is a waste of time." Yup.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for linkman31
linkman31

231

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Its all over the place: the more adds a product buys the better reviews it gets. jeff didn't do it like that. Apparently cnet wanted him to. Really if i was on the gs senior staff I would get intentionally get fired and go with jeff to start my own ****

Upvote • 
Avatar image for rvm444
rvm444

55

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I mean first it was this .5/.0 B. S. that this site decided to use to be able to please more publishers by blurring the lines of quality. And this...forget it.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for rvm444
rvm444

55

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Gamespot's integrity: 5.5/10.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for deactivated-5e7f221e304c9
deactivated-5e7f221e304c9

14645

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

Hurrah for conspiracy theories that are complete b.s and were made up by some random person of whom everyone believes is more credible than Cnet.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for master_spoon
master_spoon

275

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

Uh...it seems like Gamespot is admitting they suck here.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Cyke
Cyke

88

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

I don't need to read more than this: "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." That's the problem right there. How should the content match the score? The score is a REFLECTION of the content, so if the content indicates a lower-than-60 score, then it is the SCORE that should be changed to match the content. If the content of the Kane & Lynch review was negative, then the score MUST be adjusted to meet such negativity, not the opposite.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for frozenchimp
frozenchimp

37

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Q: Why is gamespot becoming crappier? A: because we are being paid millions of dollars by eidos to do whatever they wish. cant believe they fired jeff for that, this is so stupid

Upvote • 
Avatar image for yao1994
yao1994

136

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Just one more post before GS tries to place this behide it's other fake information. $#@! Jeff Gerstmann !@#$

Upvote • 
Avatar image for yao1994
yao1994

136

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Q: When will the PC version of Kane & Lynch be reviewed? A: As soon as we recieve the huge load of cash and force staff to kneel down at Eidos.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for yao1994
yao1994

136

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

now i wonder which game will be the game of the year... ha

Upvote • 
Avatar image for awheaten
awheaten

833

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Hey I don't pay for Game sites. However, I will say this: this needed to happen. The last few reviews for some of the more steller PS3 games were not justified by their reviews from this site. To be honest, it was rather dissappointing that GS gave 7 score to Ratchet and Clank and gave Uncharted an 8 score. Of both scores, GS ought to be ashamed of themselves for letting these reviews to be taken place. Any of you heard me before in forms, I aways thought that GS was alittle bias, for what ever reason. I'm going to continue to come to the site, thats just because it hard to leave a site that you've been coming to for years. However, you guys need more justification for some of these high profile PS3 game you all are giving low score to. I'm a fanboy, not going to lie but these games you've given low score are really good games it is just a shame that Z net (who ever is in charge) had to make an example of one of the more highly profiled GS cast. I hope this stops the PS3 conspiracy ratings. I'm out

Upvote • 
Avatar image for dannyman31531
dannyman31531

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Gamespot, I have come to your website for 5 years, trusting in your integrity. Obviously my faith was misplaced. Gerstmann was a fantastic reviewer and didn't let advertisers sway his reviews. My brother and I both had subscriptions and both are now canceled. I'll now turn to more reputable sources. DW Wilson

Upvote • 
Avatar image for thatonekid393
thatonekid393

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Completely believable; a busted mic is evidently the cause of the video being taken down and a more positive one being put up to cover the game's unglorified ass. I totally buy that story. I'll be at IGN.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for ska_dude101
ska_dude101

405

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

I now have no choice but to question the integrity of Gamespot now. I'm sorry, but the trust is gone and it isn't coming back.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for bahamut_0
bahamut_0

690

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Right, so here's how I see it: Jeff reviews a game which has been largely hyped, gives it an accurate review (K&L in no way lived up to the hype), and has been fired. In case you can't notice GS, there is a glaring problem here; why the hell was he fired? This "cannot be disclosed for legal reasons" crap will only hold up for so long. Just come clean rather than drag this thing out.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for crazyman5
crazyman5

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

can anyone tell me how over 20 coincidences happen in the course of a weekend, ending up in Jeff getting fired? If you want to hear more about my take on the "Gerstmanngate," check out my blog.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for PilaMin
PilaMin

4878

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

To many people, "Gerstmanngate" represents a larger problem: who maintains the veto power on GameSpot, ads or individuals? I am sure there are fanboys who admire Gerstmann, and that is their right. But even for those of us who are interested in Gamespot in general, "Gerstmanngate" exposes plenty of food for thought; namely for those who pay to see honest, unfiltered content.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Dadamac67
Dadamac67

54

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Am i the only one who's tired of this whole "Gerstmanngate"?...The guy got fired...maybe because of advertiser pressure....maybe because of some other reason....when it all comes down to it....who cares?...was He really that Great?....I was never a fan...always thought he was just a smart-alecky fat guy. Some of you people who are so upset sound like you know the guy,..or like maybe he saved your kitty from being stuck up in a tree?.....he was a video game nerd....got payed to play video games....he had a nice run...I'm sure someone else will pay him to play video games....must be nice. Quit your whining about it already....jeez!....I welcome all Flames!....crybabies!

Upvote • 
Avatar image for PilaMin
PilaMin

4878

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

This article spends more time explaining why they *didn't* fire him, and sheds no new light on why they did. If the real reason why he was fired "cannot be revealed," then the purpose of this article is less sincere than intended. It has all the spin of a PR report. It elaborates on coincidences, is riddled with vague allusions, and hobnobs around the facts, without ever answering the essential question: Why was Jeff Gerstmann fired? By written standards, this article is a waste of time.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for splotto
splotto

37

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@hallr64 I cast my vote and cancelled my subscription. I spend the majority of my spare cash on gaming and thought my GS subscription was money well spent. Jeff's dismissal proved that theory wrong. Although I know how corporations think. They'll rely on the consumer memory to be brief and wait for a new wave of gamers to start subscribing. In the end they don't care about us. Nevertheless they can’t have my money anymore. For god sakes just tell us the truth and bring Jeff back!!!

Upvote • 
Avatar image for khallus
khallus

38

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

FFS Gamespot,cnet,eidos!! Havent any of you fools ever heard of a verbal warning? is it smarter to kick an employee of nearly 11 fricken years out on his ass close to christmas for doing what you paid him to do in the first place? ...oops sorry you paid him to lie to us to make the big bosses fatter and richer,my bad.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for hallr64
hallr64

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Whatever the case my be Gamespot, until you put the truth out people will make up whatever story they think or want it to be. If it really was 'CNET' that fired him 'unilaterally' then Gamespot must be a pretty sorry place to work at considering their biggest star and pretty much longest tenured person was gone in a blink of an eye. Since it was a 'corporate decision' let me speak in terms they will understand; No more money from me! I will not renew my subscription. 'Corporate people' will listen when they start losing money.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for Bgrngod
Bgrngod

5766

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 32

User Lists: 0

@FlauM Because this article is on the K+L page, and anytime someone hits a K+L page it "ranks up" on the top 10 most visited list. Lots of hits = higher rating.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for jrabbit99
jrabbit99

2836

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

Jeff was loved by all. There will deffinitely be unrest in the office now that he's gone. The Publishers of Kane and Linch light have threatened the company with a lawsuit for misrepresentation of the game. Cnet then terminated Jefff to avoid it

Upvote • 
Avatar image for otakuboy68
otakuboy68

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

i have lost all faith in gamespot. how am i supposed to trust ANY review after this. Im sure all the reviewers are "scared straight" now. ah it was a good run gamespot, but i think its time to see other people.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for FlauM
FlauM

67

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

"Top Games: Mass Effect | Kane & Lynch: Dead Men | Assassin's Creed | GTA: San Andreas | Unreal Tournament 3 | Tom Clancy's EndWar | Crysis" That's in the GameSpot footer (In n00b terms, the bottom of the page) Don't know if anyone's pointed this out, but how did K&L get in a "Top games" section? :/ It has a rating 6 by GS, and a user rating of something like 2.5. Unless the script organizes these games on the amount of times the pages have been visited, then GS is obviously being corrupt and pushing advertiser's games into the "Top Games" section - obviously tryna brown nose the advertisers.

Upvote • 
Avatar image for RockaWuzHur
RockaWuzHur

185

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 0

If you read an issue of GameInformer you will see the exact same thing. When they are reviewing some games they flat out tell you. "This game sucks, don't buy it" What makes this any different? If the game sucks, it sucks! End of story. But the idiots at Cnet and Eidos cant accept the fact that maybe their game was complete and total garbage. Jeff was just warning us about this and I thank him for that. Now I know that I will not be purchasing this game.

Upvote •