What is Digg?111 Comments
- Murrabbit, on 12/02/2007, -8/+95Wow, you mean that the entire game journalism industry - which gets it's money almost exclusively from advertisements from game publishers and developers, in the rare cases where the publications aren't outright owned by publishers - is actually a poor source of unbiased information about video games?
This changes everything! - mal4242, on 12/02/2007, -7/+43I find this entire issue hilarious. The REAL press in this country are bought and paid for by big corporations and advertising, and no one says a word. Thats not a problem at all. A VIDEO GAME site that has ALWAYS given SKEWED reviews (read: they all do, and always will) shows a little too much of the man behind the curtain and this ***** erupts. You crazy *****.
- xdevit, on 12/02/2007, -3/+39All this really has cooked GameSpot's goose..
- Bahimiron, on 12/02/2007, -7/+28In other news veggieburgers taste better with bacon and cheese. And made out of meat. :(
- Aroundtown27, on 12/02/2007, -6/+24I agree with what he's saying... Reading the articles surround this issue, no one really knows why he was fired. Sure he did write a bad review for the game but there is no evidence that it was the reason he was let go at all. It's all assumptions right now
- dpl_, on 12/02/2007, -0/+18The article wasn't really about game sites being bought.
I wonder how many people have actually read the article before digging/commenting, because the title and description don't really tell what it's really about. The author was giving some sober thought to this whole fiasco, and criticizing the rampant rumour mongering that's been going on. - ShugNinx21, on 12/02/2007, -0/+9Dig me down but,
"The other problem is that writers are reporting rumors as fact, and visibly biased. It is “clear” that Gerstmann was fired due to a low review score given to a game with major advertising on the site. Why? According to most of these websites, correlation is causality. No other facts are needed," - He says that people writing about Jeff getting fired for a bad review are jumping to conclusions without any facts, as well as the readers.
"it's the industry covering the affair (and readers as well.)" - He's saying that his article is about the people who are writing stories about jeff geting fired for a bad review and their readers.
"It is interesting to note that computer game magazines tend to be far more mild and reasoned, perhaps due to the older demographic of the more expensive machines, and the single, dominant platform." - And here is where he sports some of his PC elitism as well as using the term "graduated" when describing getting his first computer.
"The entire Jeff Gerstmann fiasco is a shining example of how infantile and unprofessional the industry really is, and why video games will be considered infantile, despite out-grossing the Hollywood movie industry these days." - and here is where he comments on the infantile nature of said writers and their readers.
Yes I RTFA and understood it, did you? - staticneuron, on 12/02/2007, -1/+7"Ironically, GameSpot’s reviews have had the reputation of being the stingiest in the industry, and gamers could very well be sinking a serious gaming site for no reason save moral, righteous – and as-of-yet-unfounded – indignation. It does not help that, judging by postings and written reactions, that most of the gamers are immature, either in age or in personality, which is, of course, emblematic of the entire industry. This reporter has no idea about the true nature of the firing. I don’t profess to know anything about it, simply because I don’t take anonymous sources seriously, nor do I give weight to associates of Gerstmann, who have probably personal or professional interests in him. I don’t find CNet’s simple “It wasn’t the review” response as informative, and Gerstmann’s silence seems to be more intent on holding GameSpot hostage rather than legality. Additionally, if his silence is legally enforced, then it must be something more serious than a reaction to a review, especially since it wasn’t the first time a writer on GameSpot wrote a negative review about a game that was advertised on the site – and a 6.0 review isn’t a 2.0 review."
Even if you do not like the tone of the article he does have a point. - KargeOfTylenol, on 12/02/2007, -0/+6get a dictionary, proffessor.
- unrequited, on 12/02/2007, -1/+5"Additionally, if his silence is legally enforced, then it must be something more serious than a reaction to a review, especially since it wasn’t the first time a writer on GameSpot wrote a negative review about a game that was advertised on the site – and a 6.0 review isn’t a 2.0 review."
He's not taking into account the possible wrongful termination suit which is forcing Gerstmann's silence. - DarkHornet, on 12/02/2007, -3/+7All of you people saying "Oh, it was so obvious all along!" are annoying. Yes, a lot of us sure did have suspicions about it (and in some cases especially, one would have to be a complete retard to *not* see it), but the difference here is that the company pretty much came out and *said* "look, we're taking bribes!". There is pretty solid proof to this particular claim, and to have it out in the open without a shadow of a doubt is the reason this is so big (at least as big as video game reviews can be to any given individual).
- mille716, on 12/02/2007, -0/+3I agree with you that the "real" press needs to have more independence from their corporation motives. Two points though:
1.) Though the "real" press doesn't always live up to their responsibility of being independent reporting, it is accepted that that this ethic of independence is where journalists should be in their reporting. In other words, everyone thinks their should be integrity in the reporting even though it doesn't always live up to it. This gold standard of journalisim (integrity of reporting) should be brought to game reporting as well.
2.) Gamers and game reporting will always be in the journalism ***** if the readers keep acting so immature. We're a huge market yet haven't asked to be treated as grown-ups yet in the media. At first glance it might seem this is the big demand from gamers to keep reviews clean from advertisers money but the article was saying its actually showing the immaturity of gamers to jump to unfounded conclusions. We don't know why he got fired. Its all speculation. We have a right to ask why he was fired but not to assume it was from advertising pressure without evidence. - JCrusader, on 12/02/2007, -3/+6Wow, the author is on a high horse:
PROTIP: having a degree in journalism doesn't make you a good reporter - Travistan, on 12/02/2007, -1/+4Judging by the Gamespot-bashing comments, people are digging and not reading. The writer is claiming that Gamespot isn't the one without journalistic integrity, it's the countless news sites that reported on Gerstmann rumours as facts.
Two problems though: This guy pounds on journalists with a console bias, then espouses the virtues of PC gaming. Then he claims Seanbaby is a homophobe and a racist, completely missing Seanbaby's satire. - kidsix, on 12/02/2007, -0/+3i had my gamespot user account "suspended indefinitely" for commenting on the issue in a forum post. gamespot is falling fast.
- inactive, on 12/02/2007, -0/+3this is redundant. cnet owns metacritic. durrr.
- tektalk, on 12/02/2007, -1/+4I have to agree with this article, this whole Gertsmann fiasco is really getting blown out of proportions these days, it's nice to get a breath of fresh air from all these rumors wafting about. Hats off to you Jonah Falcon, for giving me an honest, sober opinion about the whole Gertsmann fiasco.
- GeneralGore, on 12/02/2007, -0/+3It's because reviewers are also influenced by fans. Halo fanboys are immature and can't go without killing something for more than 5 seconds, so they will get mad and boycott any site that gives it a bad review.
- jacenat, on 12/02/2007, -0/+3"Yeah, he basically said that everyone who wrote and dugg up articles here on digg about how Gamespot sold out and stop going to their site are a bunch on immature idiots who jump to conclusions."
so ... aren't they?
"And he has some sort of PC game reviewer elitist mentality."
He says that they are basically the same, just that in some sectors (casual games) the industry influence is far less pronounced.
"Basically saying that the area that he works in would never do something like this but everyone else, well, they are a bunch of sell outs."
He explicitly gives examples from within the pc-reviewing sector. WTF? Did you read the article at all? - ther4p1st, on 12/02/2007, -0/+3Hmmm, I wonder what CNET will do once they see that petition.
- gfnw, on 12/04/2007, -0/+2Hell just look at the ***** that erupted when Gamespot gave Zelda: Twilight Princess for the Wii an 8.8.
People were up in arms claming it was too low, despite the fact that the game wasn't even publicly avaliable yet. People expected a higher score just because it was a Zelda game. Can you imagine what would have happened had Halo scored lower than it did? - vdog, on 12/02/2007, -0/+2Did you even read this article?
- shootinputin187, on 12/02/2007, -3/+5"The other problem is that writers are reporting rumors as fact, and visibly biased. It is “clear” that Gerstmann was fired due to a low review score given to a game with major advertising on the site." Hmmm...This is interesting, especially due to the fact that when "Hour of Victory" was released and was given a 2.0 out of 10 on Gamespot, it still had major advertisements all around the site even 2 weeks after the review was posted. Seriously people get a grip. Who knows why Gerstmann got fired? It is all speculation as far as I am concerned.
- bejayel, on 12/02/2007, -0/+2While it is a good article with valid points. One still has to wonder why dude was fired. there is lots of evidence to the fact that it was the poor review, or the review may have been viewed as unprofessional. At some points during that video i did sometimes ask if this was just some guy on the internet or an actual paid reviewer.
On the other hand, both parties refuse to give decent details on the whole thing. One claiming legalities, the other claiming simply "it wasnt cause of the review."
Some definite answers would be great to put end to all this speculation. - bkellgren, on 12/02/2007, -0/+2What about the film industry? This exists in plenty of entertainment industries don't ya think?
- smek2, on 12/02/2007, -0/+2"The [...] writers themselves have little to no actual business education, frequently commenting on complex industry news as if they’ve received business MBAs at Harvard or had interned at The Wall Street Journal. Various writers [...]have clear agendas which are referred to as “fanboyism”," -- while this certainly don't apply to ALL writers, he really got a point there. Also, it is your own fault if you really trust videogame review ratings. Sites like IGN even sell out entire articles to paying sponsors (among them the US Airforce) and most publishers advertise on those sites. How can anyone expect fair ratings about a product, a paying sponsor is advertising on the very same site? Financial shenanigans aside, it is also sad that most of these "videogame experts" are no experts at all, giving out superb ratings to lame rehashes of the same old formula and pretending we're living in a gaming paradis of true innovation.
- p0tent1al, on 12/02/2007, -0/+2Highly probable speculation, which has been confirmed by sources that are 99% of the time right on the money. Adding fuel to the fire, the video review has been removed, even though the review is on YouTube. Maybe the writer of this article would care as to explain that away before saying everyone is jumping to conclusions. Because when it does come out from Gerstmann's mouth that this indeed happen, the guy behind this article is going to look stupid
- ShugNinx21, on 12/02/2007, -2/+4Yeah, he basically said that everyone who wrote and dugg up articles here on digg about how Gamespot sold out and stop going to their site are a bunch on immature idiots who jump to conclusions. And he has some sort of PC game reviewer elitist mentality. I thought it was interesting that he claimed console fans are immature but a guy who writes for the PC has journalistic integrity. Basically saying that the area that he works in would never do something like this but everyone else, well, they are a bunch of sell outs.
- Hojohto, on 12/02/2007, -1/+3I can recall a few occurrences when Gamespy has been filled with ads for such and such game, and then have gone on to get terrible ratings. My real preference has been small genre driven outfits that are much more likely to give fair opinions (Mixnmojo has been ready and willing to take a piss on Lucasarts when they deserve it, and they do, almost all the time nowadays.)
- jacenat, on 12/02/2007, -0/+2So them removing his video review is proof that he got fired for writing/narrating it?
You know what proof means, right? - Murdats, on 12/02/2007, -0/+2why is it news?
because while you would say that 99.9% of reviews are propably paid for, this is solid proof.
its the equivalent to thinking someone is probably a drug dealer, and actually having videos of them handing over drugs for cash - G-RaZoR, on 12/02/2007, -0/+2Because that would dig them into a deeper PR hole.
- inactive, on 12/02/2007, -1/+3i remember when people used to say that video game articles were skewed to support their sponsors. those people were called ***** crazy. jeff thought they were ***** crazy and posted his own opinion. who's ***** crazy now? who is indeed...
- Portachking, on 12/02/2007, -0/+2Why?
- jaynemother, on 12/02/2007, -0/+2Yeah, but SeanBaby never makes any sense, I found his old stuff in EGM kinda funny, but now it's just nonsense.
- tektalk, on 12/02/2007, -0/+2Oh certainly not you... of course you wouldn't be the fool to actually understand that assumptions do not lead to facts. That is definitely not you, you're way above that kind of rational thinking. So teach us Mr. Drogoganor, surely you have a much better and well written counter-argument against this blubbering buffoon and his ridiculous journalistic integrity ideas.
/sarcasm - ByteGuerilla, on 12/02/2007, -0/+2According to an anonymous source who claims to be a Gamespot employee, the delay in firing Jeff was because they didn't want to risk a walkout by Gamespot staff in the middle of a heavy reviewing season.
- goffy59, on 12/02/2007, -1/+3I was going to write a lot more but basically to sum it all up. Gamespot offers horrible reviews and very rarely has any worth reading. Halo does not deserve a 9/10 neither does Halo 2 and so on. How come Fallout 1 and 2 didn't get at least a 9/10? Fallout would probably be one of the best CRPG's ever made. But gamespot gives it a worse review then a generic game like Halo. Is it because everyone now days enjoys instant gratification and no turn base? It seems gamespot gives good reviews to games that offered shiny graphics and fast action. I know this article is about something different but I just had to verify to everyone here that gamespot gives good reviews to games because they are paid to do so. They are biased and do not give enough criticism to games these days. Among other game websites. So many over hyped games. As soon as you pass all the features they showed off to the public, the game is really really boring. FEAR is a good example. The story seems really cool but they keep making you go through the same turn around and same "scary" scenes. Over and over again. Theres probably only up to 6 character models throughout the whole game. I think everything I'm saying here plays into account about how games are advertised and the ones that are reviewing them.
- demonsnake69, on 12/02/2007, -0/+2The only thing I like about this blog entry is how he bashes EGM. I always felt that magazine tried too hard to cater to the 18-25 male demographic, and the fact that they review "preview builds" of games is ***** stupid.
As for the rest...we'll have to see how this all pans out. - JonahNYC, on 12/06/2007, -0/+1Correlation is not causality.
- Topher06, on 12/02/2007, -0/+1I would care about this issue if it was not about a someone working(ed) for cnet. I mean, is there anybody here that doesn't believe cnet gets paid big bucks for its positive reviews about anything? From games to computers to software to consumer electronics, the site is filled with mediocre reviews that both try and tell you a product is crap, but then recommend the product anyways. I don't know how many times I have read a review like "This product has serious flaws, but it gets our cnet editor's top pick!" So, a game reviewer gets canned for dissing a game that paid heavily for advertising on a cnet affiliated site. Wow, this so ain't news.
- jaynemother, on 12/02/2007, -0/+1See the one problem is that this guy says that gamespot doesn't deserve this negative attention, then he says that it has some of the stingiest reviewers, don't the editors comprise what the site is? Doesn't that mean it is a bad site?
- JonahNYC, on 12/06/2007, -0/+1I wish I was. I'd get PAID if I were a shill. (rolling eyes)
- Topher06, on 12/02/2007, -1/+2Is that all you had to do? I knew Gamespot was sh*t like 6 years ago when they refused to let me cancel my subscription and kept charging me. I had to actually phone up my credit card company and they treated it like fraud before the subscription was actually cancelled and I got my money back. Lucky you.
- HanSolo69, on 12/02/2007, -0/+1Video game news is not journalism. Any "news" is just a rehashed press release (at best) and as we have seen even before the Gertsmann thing reviews can't be believed.
- Whoodini, on 12/02/2007, -0/+1I'm sure there are certain, "pressures" when big companies advertise on a site/mag that is going to review their material, that applies to any industry I would guess not just the gaming industry. I take any magazines/sites reviews with a grain of salt and just try to get the basic information about it and draw my own conclusions. If I'm going to invest my 60$, I want it to be because I think it's worth it, not because some website/reviewer said I should....
- ImpactedColon, on 12/03/2007, -0/+1Seanbaby thinks he is a misunderstood artist who won't be confined by The Man. Rather, he is unwatchable, unlistenable, and unreadable.
- goffy59, on 12/06/2007, -0/+1Theres a huge difference between console gamers and PC gamers. PC gamers are usually older, and Console gamers are people who could care less what a game scores; as long as it has killing and its easy. Gamespot should still do their job and critically review ALL games. And for the record; ***** HALO! They have used that game model for years. I feel like I've played Halo about 120 times. Including all the times I beat Quake 1/2/3/4 Doom1/2/3 and ETC. I've beginning to think consoles are geared towards dumb asses because they are more willing to give up the money. When PC gamers want quality games that bring something innovative and new. At least Nintendo Wii is innovative. I wish PC's had that controller. Even Crysis is pretty generic aside from its graphics.
- JonahNYC, on 12/06/2007, -0/+1Are you talking about rags like The National Inquirer, who aren't taken seriously because they ignore basic journalism, or important periodicals such as Variety, which DO THE BACKGROUND WORK and CHECK THEIR SOURCES and VERIFY LEADS?
- funkyjunk3, on 12/03/2007, -0/+1Did I say I am in the midst of it? No, I didn't. I am simply saying there are legions of people out there rebelling. The fact is, Jeff HAS become a martyr to many, many people.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 107 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is