Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.
Fired for Negative Video Game Review
If you haven't noticed already, there's a big hub-bub going around. Here's the ongoing coverage. And here's the Penny Arcade coverage.
Here's what I've got to say about this. First of all, 6/10 is not bad. 6/10 is the same score as 3/5. That's above average. The thing that gets me is that people consider 6/10 to be bad. If I were the editor in chief of GameSpot, I would have fired this guy also, but not because he pissed off the sponsor. I'd have fired him because he basically trashes this game and then gives a 6/10. If you read the text of his review, or watch the video, it sounds a lot more like a 2/10 the way he describes it. Grow a nut, and give the game the score it deserves.
Another thing I don't get is how companies are still thinking that people make game purchasing decisions based on reviews. If Halo 3 had gotten a score of 0 in every video game magazine, you think it would have sold any less? If Smash Bros. gets low scores everywhere, you think it will sell any less? If Pony Friends gets perfect scores on every site, you think it will sell any more? Gamers already know what games they are going to get, and review scores hardly influence them. People who aren't gamers make purchasing decisions based on the video game box on the shelf in the store.
Lastly, more than anything I think this demonstrates how out of touch the video game media is. Don't they notice guys like Penny Arcade, Angry Video Game Nerd, and Zero Punctuation taking all the attention? Having truly honest, ballsy, entertaining, clever, witty, and intelligent games journalism is the way to get people to like you. Firing people for doing so is not the way to go.
Here's what I've got to say about this. First of all, 6/10 is not bad. 6/10 is the same score as 3/5. That's above average. The thing that gets me is that people consider 6/10 to be bad. If I were the editor in chief of GameSpot, I would have fired this guy also, but not because he pissed off the sponsor. I'd have fired him because he basically trashes this game and then gives a 6/10. If you read the text of his review, or watch the video, it sounds a lot more like a 2/10 the way he describes it. Grow a nut, and give the game the score it deserves.
Another thing I don't get is how companies are still thinking that people make game purchasing decisions based on reviews. If Halo 3 had gotten a score of 0 in every video game magazine, you think it would have sold any less? If Smash Bros. gets low scores everywhere, you think it will sell any less? If Pony Friends gets perfect scores on every site, you think it will sell any more? Gamers already know what games they are going to get, and review scores hardly influence them. People who aren't gamers make purchasing decisions based on the video game box on the shelf in the store.
Lastly, more than anything I think this demonstrates how out of touch the video game media is. Don't they notice guys like Penny Arcade, Angry Video Game Nerd, and Zero Punctuation taking all the attention? Having truly honest, ballsy, entertaining, clever, witty, and intelligent games journalism is the way to get people to like you. Firing people for doing so is not the way to go.
Comments
I get free games for review (board and video) and I give them as honest of a review as possible. A free $30 game is not enough to buy a positive review from me if the game sucks. Spending 10K+ in advertising dollars every month on my site or magazine WILL influence my opinion.
There is no contractual or legal agreement between Gamespot and the sponsor that they will get a high review score. If there is, then I see lawsuits in the future. If the sponsor agrees to buy ads, they agree to buy ads and must pay. If you review them honestly, and they want to stop advertising, that's tough shit.
It works for Penny Arcade. They refuse to advertise any game they have not played and liked. Even when they trash games, those companies keep coming back to buy more ads when their next game comes out. Gamestop, and apparently you also, are just push-overs.
Penny Arcade can survive with or without the video game industry. Industry magazines are dependant on the industry they cover. We see the same thing with politics, piss off a candidate and you lose access. Piss off a video game company and you also lose access.
Penny Arcade is also in the same position a site such as TechCrunch is in. They are seen as gate keepers, even a bad review gets your name in front of millions of people. Any press is good press!
It is also a question of who needs who more. As a one man operation I need those advertising dollars more than than the video game company needs my review. If that $10K a month was 1% or less of my monthly revenue than it would not be enough to buy my opinion. I'm just being honest here.
Also, by "buying" my opinion I do not mean that I would give a glowing review it just means that I would gloss over failings and focus on the good parts of the game. Or I simply would not run the review at all if the game was utter crap.
I've used Gamespot for years, it's a good way to keep an eye on stuff that is coming up. They are generally not as annoying as 1up or IGN. I don't buy games based on reviews but I will often read them. I've read many of Jeff's reviews and of anyone on that site I would say I respect his opinion the most. I also listen to the "Hotspot" podcast. Jeff is funny, writes well, and knows video games. It was a stupid move to fire him and sets a bad precedent.
I read the review, it is pretty rough on the game. The game isn't actually broken technically, it's just not very fun. That's they way I took it anyway. It's playable and if it's what you are looking for you may be interested just make sure before you buy it. On another podcast I listen to, a host went to a media weekend and played the game. His views were it's wasn't that great. They asked the developers about no co-op multiplayer, and the developer responded with "we basically screwed ourselves on that one, we couldn't do it with the engine we built for the single player mode." That's seems telling to me. Even the developer knew there where problems with the game. The other podcaster ended with it's ok, worth a rental, they have a neat idea with the multi-player but you have to play with friends or it will be just annoying.
All I have to say is good luck to Jeff, he seems like a decent guy, and now we know he took is job seriously.
The problem with video game publications is that they don't have a differentiated market. They lose EA, where are they going to turn to make up that revenue? Niche markets are always more beholden to their sponsors.
Also, those other ads may not be direct ad sales. They may be using a third party service that sends ads to them (Frederated Media, Google, etc...). Those ad networks work by allowing an advertiser to buy a bunch of impressions and tell the network what sort of sites they want them to appear on.
On the whole, it looks like Cnet were caught with their pants down. They clearly weren't prepared to handle something like this. It isn't shocking that people are distrustful of corporations, especially the media. If there was nothing seeding going on then clearly stating that they stand behind the review and it wasn't the reason for his firing would probably have quashed the rumours before they got off the ground.
It's just my speculation, but I'd going to have to echo the thought that even if it wasn't the reason he was fired, it mightve been a significant consideration. The events thus far definitely breed suspicion.
2/10 games are games that are absolutely unplayable. 6/10 games are games that have some good qualities, but don't deserve a purchase. The single player is badly written and is nothing special, but the multiplayer has a lot of potential that ends up being somewhat repetitive. It's playable and CAN be fun, but there are already a lot of better shooters in the market already. Based on Gerstmann's video review, the game definitely deserved the score that it got. A score of 2/10 should really only go to games that are UNPLAYABLE, like Super Rub-A-Dub and Championship Sprint.
Either way, he has already proven his testicular fortitude by turning away from a major sponsorship and revealing the mediocrity of a game that was providing a large sum of money to the company he works for.
With this problem now brought to a head in this issue I hope someone starts a review site that isn't afraid to really explain who would like each game without an overall score for the masses or at least a scale that goes from 1 to 10 (or 5) using the whole range and none of this decimal place crap.
These issues were actually addressed in the Editors' commentaries. It's actually somewhat surprising how "in tune" the editors are to their readers, but you can clearly tell how much they are controlled by their "higher-ups".