[QUOTE="bretthorror"]So the source says there's a mass exodus on the way because of Jeff, yet he's showing up late and being a dick? How does this make sense?Serraph105

you have a point howeverit could bethats made up and gamespot is simply tryingto regain credibility

The comments are suggesting that Jeff showing up late were a cause for the poor quality of the video review, the reason for it's pulling being it wasnt high quality (in its production, because it was rushed,not in its message). That could be fair enough, I suppose.

I suggests to me that the disparity beteween Jeff and the management was because Jeff saw gamespot the way WE see gamespot, but the suits did not.

I suspect the possible mass exodus is because the editorial staff feel that as the credibility of Gamespot is shot, they want to get out and go somewhere they can prove their own integrity...

[QUOTE="dogsounds"]

Will you two please stop spamming this thread with your adverts for that site?

DeeJayInphinity

Report and move on. :)

Oops, our comments crossed :)

I would, but I think the mods et al have enough to deal with ATM...

[QUOTE="dogsounds"]

I hope that makes sense.

m240guy

You are as smug and patronizing as Gerstmann was. You still do not address the issue that everyone is ASSUMING that is why he was canned. Maybe he was fired because he is a jerk-off and cannot follow instructions (not saying that is the case, but it isn't like any of you know any different).

I am 33 years old and have been with Gamespot since it was a button on the CNET page. I have been a paid subscriber since paying for a subscription was an option.

I fail to see why my words make me smug and patronising. You wanted to know what the hubub was about, I simply told you the issues and rumors that are making people angry. I haven't put my personal opinion in there, nor did I say I intended to adress the issues. I am just reporting the facts (what there are) and rumors for your benefit, the information you asked for in your question. I also wrote it in such a way that it would maybe help the other people who have asked exactly the same question as you here and there. If answering your question ( to save you the hassle of reading over 12,000 posts) is patronising, then you misunderstand my intent, and I apologise if I should have added a smiley at the end to make my intent plain for you.

If this is what I get for trying to help you out and reduce the amount of stuff you have to read through to get all the information, then don't bother asking again.

Incidentally: I am 36 and have been coming to this site in all its various forms since 1996, when it was VideogameSpot.com, before CNet and even ZDNet even knew it existed.

End.

I don't get what all the hub-bub is about. I always thoughtGerstmann was sort of a smug tool that intentionally low-balled some of his reviews just so he could be the dissenting opinion that was somehow smarter than everyone. Everyonejust assumes that he got fired just for panning Kane and Lynch.m240guy

The "hubbub" as you call it, is not actually about Jeff getting fired. Not specifically. It is for the reasons behind the firing, and what that means to us as paying customers, and the industry as a whole insofar as the ability of Gamespot to provide what it has always stood by - honest, un-influenced reviews and recommendations.

The problem is this - if events transpired as rumors suggest, then it means that Jeff wrote an honest review of a game, and was sacked for doing so, because the game developers - who had invested a significant amount of money in advertising on the site - threatened to pull this significant advertising revenue as a result of the not-brilliant review.

It means that, for all intents and purposes, although the editorial team at Gamespot are honest and have integrity, the suits at CNet - the company that owns Gamespot - do not. It means they are prepared to put advertiser revenue before honest and reliable content. And prepared to sack those who do not tow the company line, even if they are the most respected part of the public face of Gamespot.

It brings into question the whole nature of sites that are funded by advertising the products they review.

Let me give you an imaginary example. Let's pretend the developer of Big Rigs pays a whole mess of money to advertise on Gamespot, then when their game is reviewed, the reviewer writes "this is the biggest piece of garbage ever produced, don't buy it". Then, obviously unhappy with this, the developer calls CNet and says "if you run this review, the advertising is SO pulled" - a loss of revenue for Gamespot of perhaps hundreds of thousands of dollars. So, the suits at CNet, who have no real concept of community, exert pressure on the reviewer, demand that a more favourable review be written. His choice is a) rewrite the review to say "hey, this game has a few issues, but is great and you should buy it" or "screw that, I will not lose my integrity, The game is a piece of crap and I will not recommend it" (in which case he gets fired).

Now, given this example - and assuming that you know about Big Rigs being the worst game ever made on the planet, ever - I would assume that if the reviewer had taken the path of least resistance and falsely rated the game as good, and you bought it, you would be pretty upset, right? You would rather have the honest review that saves you from wasting your hard-earned cash on rubbish. Right?

THAT'S the point. From the rumors around the web, to the comments made by the staff at Gamespot, it seems right now that this is exactly what CNet are doing. Allowing the power of the advertisers - the raw power of the dollar - to influence reviews, and therefore making the money that you ( I assume) pay to subscribe to this service, wasted. And worse, the honorable editorial team at Gamespot - who have strived to do right by us all these years - are now in a position where they are thinking "if a big-name game sucks, and I say so, will I lose my job if I do not lie?" That is not fair.

People are upset because of Jeff leaving, sure. You may not have liked him, but a LOT of people did. But most of the anger you see round here now is because f the political and moral issues this has raised. Should gaming websites accept adverts from game companies? If they do, how can you be sure they are honest and not kow-towing to those advertisers? If they are. what is the point of the review system? What are you paying your money for, a forum? Psssh.

It is the big issue that is setting the media sites afire; this sort of practise is probably widespread through the industry, but this is the first time it has been pointed out in an undeniable way. The execs at CNet have been caught with their hand in the cookie-jar, and are getting the backlash from the people who trusted them. Jeff is just the figurehead; for it took him to lose his livelihood for us to be made aware of the truth.

I hope that makes sense.

I just posted the following in Tor Thorsen's hearfelt blog entry.

"Thankfully, not ALL of us are raving highschoolers. I'm 36!

I feel pretty confident that 99.9% of people are simply shocked and venting their anger - anger felt towards The management and those above you who now (assuming that the anonymous writings on other sites are genuine) put you in the horrible position of living with the fear that, at some point, if you are are given a godawful game to review that is also a major revenue stream by way of advertising, you will have no choice but to give a less-than-honest review because of pressure from the PR and marketing suits, and those above them, higher up in the food chain that you. Or, more realistically, have your honest review cannibalised and b*stardized by someone else to suit the advertiser's needs.

We feel for you all, and we know that your ultimate loyalty in all of this is to your own families, husbands, wives, girlfriends and boyfriends, parents and children. The people who depend on you bringing in the paycheck every month. Nothing takes a greater priority in life. And we allso know that, should you be in the awful dichotomy I noted above, that you would feel a darkening of your sould to carry out that which goes against your integrity and honesty.

So don't feel so bad when you hear "Gamespot sucks" and whathaveyou. I think it is fair to say that for the majority, we use "Gamespot" to refer to the suits at the top of the chain, Not you, or Ryan, or Tim, Brian, Aaron, Vinny or any one else in the team we have come to know and love over the years.

There is a reason we look forward each week to listening to the Hotspot. There is a rason we wait patiently through the pre-show quiz that never changes before On The Spot. What is this reason?

Because we are loyal. But not loyal to Gamespot. Loyal to the merry band of staff that, to us, make Gamespot something more than it is. The Gamespot we insult is a corporate entity. That Gamespot that you all have built up so very hard over the years is different altogether - it is a home, a community. It is to that which we are loyal. And it is for that that we feel so sad right now.

Many people have said "I will never trust a Gamespot review again". But it is important to know that we do not mean that we will never trust you or your fellow editorial staff. What we mean is that we will never be able to trust that the higher-ups haven't prostituted the review to curry favour with the advertisers. We know that, although you have your principles and standards, honor and integrity, at the end of the day, until you find somewhere else to express yourself, you still have to pay those bills and look after the people you love the most. And we will NEVER hold that against you.

We, and I hope I speak for all of us here, hope and pray that you are, all of you, able to find other jobs elsewhere, to get away from the black marks that now stain the corporate entity that is CNet's Gamespot.

So say we all."

I would hope you all agree with my sentiment. Go echo my feelings and help put the staff wwe trust at ease, even if just a little. We owe them that much.

Tor's Blog

Okay, this may have already been posted, so profuse aplologies, but I'm still reading through page 175 and it is almost 2am here in the UK.

Seems that the impact has been even greater than expected - 1up's staff - a natural competitor of Gamespot - have come out in support of Jeff, and game journalists in general:

http://kotaku.com/gaming/advertorials/1up-shows-support-for-gamespot-reviewers-328882.php

It says something when staff from another company come out to protest the sacking of a member of staff from a competitor.

As other folks have said here, if you are based in the SF area ( I am not, I am in the UK), show your support against the corporate shills and arrange a similar protest. This whole debacle has spread across the industry, and the internet, like wildfire.

What the...

Jeff was my favourite member of the team, very very closely followed by Ryan and everyone else.

This site was like a home, I would keenly await the Hotspot and On The Spot each week, not so much for the game news but just for the witty banter and warm personalities.

Now? Gamespot can go to hell. I'm sorry, but if they are prepared to destroy one of the best little teams on the entire net, then they obviously care nought for the people who make them their money - us.

The "Hotspot" team made Gamespot something different from all the other faceless gaming sites - they were the Bungie of the gaming journalism world. Now Jeff has been elbowed out for totally corrupt and unjustifiable reasons, Tim has left - one would assume in support and because it is against his conscience to work for such a corrupt site - Ryan is rumoured to have gone also. I would urge the others that we have come to love so much over the years to do the same - leave, cripple this self-motivated organisation and let them drown in their own crapulence. Wthout the stellar theam they had, they will become as irrelevant as IGN and other sites - faceless, bland, reporting with no personality or character.

Jeff, Tim and anyone else who has the courage to leave on principle - I wish you all the best of luck - I have no doubt that you will find work soon enough, with a more reputable and trustworthy site. Set up your own in competition! I guarantee that a high percentage of gamespot regulars would give this site the finger, right royally, and come over to you in a shot.

Gamespot - you are shills, nothing more, and I am sad that I am not a paid subscriber - for my decision to cease using your site will cause you no harm. But I will post a blog entry, to address my utter disgust, and then you will hear from me no more.

Send me no mails, forward me no updates - my belief in you as a credible and unbaised site is gone. perhaps it was naive to think that you were any different to the other, less creditable sites.

RIP the phenomenon and home that was Gamespot - I shall now have no gaming shore upon which to land.

Hey Gallego

 Thanks for the information. But that only really deals with the issue of slow file downloads - can you offer anything on why the site seems so slow? I can take me up to a minute to load a webpage on here - no other sites give me this problem. And as you can imagine, when I am typing in a blog or comment like this, it becomes almost impossible, with the text on screen about 10 seconds behind my typing...it really does seem to be a site issue. I hve replicated the same slowness on several different PC's, on different networks.

Any thoughts would be much appreciated :)