I told you so (yet again)

[Walsingham]

I think my opinion of the official game press can be neatly summarised by the observation that I trust you guys a lot more.

[WILL THE ALMIGHTY]

You can't make a reviewer lie about graphics for example, or say the story is amazing when it's terribly shallow and everyone knows it.

 

Hey, some people like that story. A lot.

 

But yes, Halo 3 was ridiculous, since it had pretty much all the "good" awards it could possibly win.

[Nick_i_am]

Halowned.

[mkreku]

"The site admitted that Eidos representatives "expressed their displeasure to their appropriate contacts, 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," GameSpot said in their statement."

 

"Finally, GameSpot said that the timing of the ad campaign, which was purchased weeks in advance based upon the game's release date, was "extremely unfortunate but was purely coincidental..." The end of the promotion had been predetermined well in advance and had nothing to do with the Gerstmann controversy heating up."

 

Source: http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=88863

 

I believe them. This is exactly how it was for us too. The ads were purchased weeks (or months) in advance and sometimes they went up at the same time as the review. It looked bad sometimes when we awarded a great score to a game that the ads appeared on the same day..

 

Also, some of the bigger publishers read our reviews carefully and communicated their displeasure whenever we had to really axe a game. Some even joked about our latest reviews when we went to press meetings several weeks later. But they never threatened to pull ads or stop sending us review copies because of a non-flattering review.

[GreasyDogMeat]

Crimeny! If eidos thought gamespot's review was too low... look at the player reviews!

 

http://uk.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/kane...reviews;alluser

 

Over 74% of user reviews are 'abysmal'.

[SteveThaiBinh]

Crimeny! If eidos thought gamespot's review was too low... look at the player reviews!

 

http://uk.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/kane...reviews;alluser

 

Over 74% of user reviews are 'abysmal'.

Some of those may be people who are registering displeasure over the firing of Jeff Gerstmann, rather than genuine comments on the game.

 

So, what are we left with here? Is Eidos off the hook? It may be, but that doesn't mean Gamespot is. If I had to choose, I'd probably say that this was an attempt by Gamespot's moneymen to gain control over the editorial department by making people fear for their jobs - a random executions type thing. If so, I imagine there'll be more 'leaks' and probably resignations in the near future. If not, perhaps a different 'truth' will emerge...