GameSpot issues short comment on Gerstmann firing

by Kyle Orland { Nov 30th 2007 at 2:20PM }

In the wake of the rumors surrounding Jeff Gerstmann's suspicious removal as editorial director of Gamespot, Gamespot owner CNET has issued a short, official comment on the situation. "GameSpot takes its editorial integrity extremely seriously," the statement reads. "For over a decade, Gamespot and the many members of its editorial team have produced thousands of unbiased reviews that have been a valuable resource for the gaming community. At CNET Networks, we stand behind the editorial content that our teams produce on a daily basis."

As for Gerstmann specifically, CNET repeated their assertion that "it is CNET Networks' policy not to comment on the status of its employees, current of former."

While it's nice to see CNET taking the accusations seriously, the statement doesn't confirm or deny the facts behind the controversy, or add any significant information to the story. With the rumor still generating significant discussion throughout the online gaming community, such a short, pat statement seems unlikely to stop the gathering storm of attention.

Tags: BreakingNews, controversy, editor, eidos, fired, gamespot, gerstmann, jeff-gerstmann, journalism, kane-and-lynch

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)

Your Ad here 555-1923 @ Nov 30th 2007 2:27PM

Gamespot:Epic Fail.

Dan @ Nov 30th 2007 2:51PM

"we stand behind the editorial content that our teams produce on a daily basis."

...Unless someone pays us to say nice things about them, and one of our reviewers says their game is crap, in which case, we fire them.

mike_p @ Nov 30th 2007 11:40PM

How the fuck can someone get fired for telling the truth!?

To back it up, the Metacritic scores don't lie! Why Gamespot? Why!?

Anticrawl @ Dec 1st 2007 12:06AM

Shovelface.. I mean Jeff Gerstmann was probably already on track to being fired regardless of recent rumors. The man is mad and perhaps gamespot may gain some credibility again in my book.

A happy time for gaming indeed, one less rabid radicalist to sully the name of videogames.

mike_p @ Dec 2nd 2007 1:42PM

Anticrawl, you truly belong to corporate America.

Maybe you might not have agreed with all of his reviews but at least the guy knows what he's talking about. I hate it more when they have clueless gamers that NEVER play games and give a shit game a bloated score.

This guy is a bit on the looney side but fuck... at least he gives his honest opinion.

Rubix42 @ Nov 30th 2007 2:27PM

Maybe this really is none of our damn business. Last time I checked, Gamespot sucked anyways. We all know the best reviews come from friends who have played the game that have the same tastes as we do.

And come on, no one is unbiased. Reviewers post only their opinion of a game that they rushed through to play the next, so why does their opinion even count for anything.

Your Ad here 555-1923 @ Nov 30th 2007 2:42PM

Actually Gamespot reviews in past years were the most accurate, sometimes they underrated some titles here and there but I prefer underrated games to overrated games (Assassin’s creed).

Now with the fall of Gamespot I have to A) Go to blockbuster every time I want a game to rent it and decide if it is worth buying, that means spending in rents, gasoline and well popcorn and gummy bears (Hell is blockbuster after all) or B) Ask other gamers and well that normally isn’t a good idea.

Other options include the search of another site and that is going to be hard since 1up sucks, IGN just no, Gamespy is a mixed bag and Gamepro well lol.

Now please don't vote me donw into oblivion.

Riley @ Nov 30th 2007 2:43PM

I think what you said applies to Gerstmann. Whether I agreed with his reviews or not they always seemed honest and he generally knew what he was talking about. His reviews usually came out a day or two later than reviews on other sites, because I really got the feeling he explored games the way they were meant to be.

Riley @ Nov 30th 2007 2:43PM

I don't think what you said applies to Gerstmann. Whether I agreed with his reviews or not they always seemed honest and he generally knew what he was talking about. His reviews usually came out a day or two later than reviews on other sites, because I really got the feeling he explored games the way they were meant to be.

Rubix42 @ Nov 30th 2007 3:35PM

That's the beauty of it. We each have our own opinion. The only reviews I ever read are from Play Magazine, because they have people on staff that only review games in their favorite genre. So they find the redeeming quality of a platformer that a shooter fan would tear apart.

reconflux @ Nov 30th 2007 2:27PM

I like how out of all the external links link to different sites.

And of course I like how the word "significant" links to NEOGAF. =P

Kyle Orland @ Nov 30th 2007 2:34PM

"Significant" linking to NeoGAF was not intentional... the ordering is random. That said, I could have linked to a dozen more, if I wanted to. This is getting big.

Noshino @ Nov 30th 2007 2:46PM

Kyle, cmon dude, you need to show the video review, that's where the good stuff is...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBD0cUeeEQc

DantE @ Nov 30th 2007 2:30PM

wow, now we know that we know nothing and we won't get any information, neither from gamespot nor from eidos, great :P

BIG-JG @ Nov 30th 2007 2:57PM

gamespot blows chunks...it was funny when that duude got teabagged in thier halo 3 beta streame

Crono (NDF - Knight of the Old School) @ Nov 30th 2007 2:53PM

True knowledge is knowing that we know nothing.

-Socrates

I leaned that from Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure.

WiNG @ Nov 30th 2007 2:34PM

Yes Gamespot sucks, honestly I only trust IGN's reviews, but still, this is bullshit.

tentaclesex @ Nov 30th 2007 2:40PM

At least Gamespot articles are proofread. IGN publishes some of the sloppiest articles in the business. They regularly contain an astonishing quantity of grammatical errors.

Your Ad here 555-1923 @ Nov 30th 2007 2:56PM

But only grammar Nazis care about that anyway :P .

Oh and sorry for the "donw" I mean "down”, I need to change this keyboard ASAP.

Now the problem with IGN is that they aren't as reliable as GS was. They might have some good reviews here and there but normally those are reserved for unknown games or games which don't have any hype.
A quick example would be their PSP reviews, those are good because no one really gives a damn about the PSP but if you see their XB360 reviews is a different story.

Also their movie reviews suck, big time.

Smoke_Dawg_187 @ Nov 30th 2007 2:34PM

I really liked Jeff, and I value Gamespots ratings probably the most. I find Gamespots reviews some of the most accurate and unbiased.

Xelloss @ Nov 30th 2007 2:36PM

I canceled my Gamespot Total Access Subscription. I lost a lot of faith in CNET. Not sure what will happen, but still waiting to see.

Mr.ESC @ Nov 30th 2007 3:08PM

And I was banned on porpouse by posting Goatse and flamming about the Ps3 and the Wii in the system wars forums because I also lost credibility on Gamespot..and I was so pissed I did all that months before this.

Viva la Gerstmann!

Huey2k2 @ Nov 30th 2007 2:37PM

Well it's official. I have now cancelled my Gamespot subscription and will never be going back there.

This is utter BS.

tentaclesex @ Nov 30th 2007 2:37PM

I've always thought Gerstmann was a good reviewer. It's really lame if he really got canned because he wasn't afraid to come out and say that McGriddles taste like shit.

Chrysee @ Nov 30th 2007 2:40PM

I agree. If that's actually the case then they really have a conflict of interests and I don't think their reviews can count for much anymore, not that they did.

eugene @ Nov 30th 2007 2:39PM

Pretty sad, I used to trust cnet and would always go to them before making any major electronics purchases. Not anymore. Suddenly, all their reviews are suspect.

Jason @ Nov 30th 2007 2:42PM

""For over a decade, Gamespot and the many members of its editorial team have produced thousands of unbiased reviews.."

At this point I gave up reading their crap.

Everyone knows that site, along with quite a few others, are reviewing games based on advertising budgets.

I come on Ratchet and Clank Future Tools Of Destruction, a 7.5.... PLEASE.. I think even the most biased fanboy can tell it's a 9.something...

Vegeta (aka Ska Oreo) @ Nov 30th 2007 2:50PM

hmmm. Funny since Psychonauts and Zack and Wiki both scored much higher than R&C, and I'm pretty sure the publishers for both games weren't paying GS top dollars for ad space.

gonk @ Nov 30th 2007 4:52PM

i'm guessing that with some big titles, you expect lots of advertisement, but if they (being r&c in this case) doesn't cough up the dough, you might lower their score a bit

I dunno if that happened for the new r&c, but i've heard of it happening in the past for some things

Vegeta (aka Ska Oreo) @ Nov 30th 2007 11:12PM

@gonk

But the question is, do the reviewers even give a shit about ad space? I mean how much of that money Edios gave Gamespot do you think trickled down to the actual staff of gamespot. Probably not alot. In fact I honestly doubt Jeff got a bigger check because of it.

Yazzer @ Nov 30th 2007 2:43PM

I don't have a GameSpot account, but if I did I would cancel it.
:)

Hollywood Ron @ Nov 30th 2007 2:46PM

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

FrankTheCrank @ Nov 30th 2007 2:48PM

I love when journalist and editors get all full of themselves and become holier than thou and start talking about their integrity...please!

Half these journalist would give any company a free pass for nothing more than a free console and some games. Just imagine what you get for a free press junket to Redmond or L.A.

Vegeta (aka Ska Oreo) @ Nov 30th 2007 2:54PM

Wow what are you talking about?

You do realize that most of these sites only have a couple of consoles that they use only for reviewing, and that if they want to play on their own time they have to buy their own consoles and games.

Also yeah they get swag from game companies, but I highly doubt a Master Chief plush toy is going to influence anyone's review.

dan stabbingworth @ Nov 30th 2007 2:55PM

What, being a dumbass about the console wars wasn't enough for you?

FrankTheCrank @ Nov 30th 2007 3:24PM

My point is that, some journalist can be easily bought. I don't know anyone at Gamespot, IGN or any other news site or blog, so I'm not attacking any individual or site.

But your telling me every single reviewer and writer is above it all?

I think what CNET did was pretty lame, but in the print media, these guys are always skating on the edge, they ALL have a sales department that has to sell ad space and they have people who have to review those companies products...you think they ever talk? do you think a writer or reviewer isn't aware of this? Of course they are.

FrankTheCrank @ Nov 30th 2007 3:32PM

Dan....your profile says it all. XBOX360Fanboy.

Sam @ Nov 30th 2007 2:49PM

"GameSpot takes its editorial integrity extremely seriously. ... For over a decade, Gamespot and the many members of its editorial team have produced thousands of unbiased reviews that have been a valuable resource for the gaming community. At CNET Networks, we stand behind the editorial content that our teams produce on a daily basis."

Translation: C'mon, trust us. You trust us, right? Right?

DangerMouse @ Nov 30th 2007 2:49PM

Don't let them off the hook. Keep hammering them with questions until you get an answer.

xXFenixKnightXx @ Nov 30th 2007 2:50PM

*Takes Gamespot.com off of bookmarks list*

Homer 918 @ Nov 30th 2007 3:22PM

I've removed the RSS feeds that I had and will not be going to their website on purpose until I see some serious action on their part. Anyone know how to cancel one of their basic membership accounts?

ScottG13 @ Nov 30th 2007 2:52PM

I sure wish I had a Gamespot subscription to cancel...

Po0py @ Nov 30th 2007 2:55PM

What the fuck kind of statement is that? Thats a completely vacant statement. It does nothing. It says nothing. It means nothing. What the fuck is the point?

Dave @ Nov 30th 2007 2:56PM

I also cancelled my GameSpot total subscription access pass.

Also added to my hosts file /etc/hosts
gamespot.com 127.0.0.1
www.gamespot.com 127.0.0.1

This isnt because Jeff is gone or because Jeff was fired about Kane and Lynch. It's because he was fired period. I was sad to see Greg and Rich go, but they left on their own accord. It's crazy and inexcusable for Gamespot to fire their best personality, who brought with him a huge fanbase. The best I can hope for now is the rest of the top crew (Ryan, Tor, Alex, and Brad) jumps ship as well.

Vegeta (aka Ska Oreo) @ Nov 30th 2007 2:57PM

agreed. I also love Tor and Brad. Hopefully they'll realize that this is a bunch of bullshit and jump ship.

Zsavior @ Nov 30th 2007 4:39PM

Exactly Dave, I don't care about this guy, I care about the integrity of gaming journalism. For them to out and out fire a guy over a bad review well that is just brazen and can't be ignored. Even though I don't think the game community should be ignoring any of it but there is a point where a line must be drawn in the dirt.

Dave @ Nov 30th 2007 10:18PM

Actually, I wasnt quite clear. I don't think he was fired over a review. Eventually that will come out. Of course employees there are going to be talking.

Eventually it'll be clarified that he was fired for something specific like coming in late constantly, or sexual harassment. But who cares? He was the best personality they had there. I hope every one of his fans cancels their subscription to Gamespot so the company knows exactly what their decision cost them.

Vegeta (aka Ska Oreo) @ Nov 30th 2007 2:56PM

Well what do you expect them to say? "Yeah we fired him because he said something bad about the game."

Most of my anger is directed towards the bigwigs and corporate bastards of GS and Edios. I understand all of the staff are just doing their jobs and I respect that.

Louie @ Nov 30th 2007 3:29PM

Strangely, the bigwigs at GS and Eidos are doing their jobs. The execs' job at Eidos is to sell video games, and they are working to do just that. The people working at GS, their job is to sell ad space, and they are also trying to do that.

The problem is more within a compensation structure that has a conflict of interest with the reviewer's job. Fix that, and you'll have honest and accurate reviews.

Of course, fixing that is not that easy...