Electro is back, shillier than ever! We missed you, dude. Who else was going to say Jeff was fired for having sex with a goat but is unable to prove it because it's personal matters?
Djiem on
0
Options
KageraImitating the worst people. Since 2004Registered Userregular
edited December 2007
wow, then Jeff was pretty lucky to have worked at Gamespot for ELEVEN YEARS for being such a shitty employee I guess. :roll:
I can't think of many previews that were very negative on a game, in fact previews always seem to hype the game up even if it's Barbie's Horse Adventures.
Well previews exist to detail features of upcoiming games . If you review a game that's 6 months from completion that's hardly fair to the customer/reader or the developer.
yeah but if there are flaws in the game that are really glaring especially in hands-on previews they should be noted. I'm not talking stuff that's common to betas and pre-final builds either.
Previews are naturally more positive than reviews. I, myself, have written glowing previews and then bashed the game at review time. It just...happens, and quite innocently. I mean, if I notice something god-awful in a preview I might say "here's to hoping suchandsuch gets fixed before retail release" or if the entire game rubs me the wrong way I might say "well, they have a lot of work ahead of them," but the thing is, previews are generally positive and if it's a preview for a shitty game, one might not even bother previewing it anyway. I've passed on previewing garbage before. Why give it editorial space if it sucks? A preview isn't the same as a review, it's basically "hey, take a look at this and keep an eye out for it in the future."
* Afterwards his video review of K&L was removed from gamespot
* The review itself is modified to give a more favourable tone
Actually, according to the Gamespot podcast recently, it was pulled because the gaming editorial team wasn't happy with the quality of the video itself IE: sound quality was bad, they had only used footage from the first level so it was not as representative of the entire game as it should have been, and so on. They said it was just a really bad case of time that the video was pulled when it was.
Whether you believe them is another thing, but it's an alternative reasoning for the Video Review issue anyway.
The sheer amount of circumstantial evidence is overwhelming that he was fired for his review.
I think it is more likely that he had an issue with the direction management was going and his review of K&L was the "last straw". I suspect he wasn't fired over the review per se, but rather because the review was an indication (can you say "fuck you") to management that he wasn't going to (as Bill Hicks would say) suckle Satan's pecker.
themightypuck on
“Reject your sense of injury and the injury itself disappears.”
― Marcus Aurelius
wow, then Jeff was pretty lucky to have worked at Gamespot for ELEVEN YEARS for being such a shitty employee I guess. :roll:
now ask me if that was sarcasm.
Like I said, it's what I believe, of course not all those things could have happened, I was just giving EXAMPLES, it also entirely depends on how (in)tolerant the management is too....
Also he could have worked his ass off for the first 5-6 years, then as he became more well known, started to slack off a bit, and as the years go on get worse and worse.
I have a few employees like that too.. 2 of them come in late EVERY day, but when they are here they work their ass off, and do exceptional work, so I can easily turn a blind eye to it. Every once in a while I send out an email stating that coming in late and leaving early DIRECTLY effects their raises at annual review time, and it does a bit, but I guess to them it is worth it.
But now if they started coming in an hour late every day, leaving an hour early, taking 2 hour lunches, and pissing off clients, yes I would tell them they either have to change RIGHT AWAY or have the risk of being terminated.
wow, then Jeff was pretty lucky to have worked at Gamespot for ELEVEN YEARS for being such a shitty employee I guess. :roll:
now ask me if that was sarcasm.
Like I said, it's what I believe, of course not all those things could have happened, I was just giving EXAMPLES, it also entirely depends on how (in)tolerant the management is too....
Also he could have worked his ass off for the first 5-6 years, then as he became more well known, started to slack off a bit, and as the years go on get worse and worse.
I have a few employees like that too.. 2 of them come in late EVERY day, but when they are here they work their ass off, and do exceptional work, so I can easily turn a blind eye to it. Every once in a while I send out an email stating that coming in late and leaving early DIRECTLY effects their raises at annual review time, and it does a bit, but I guess to them it is worth it.
But now if they started coming in an hour late every day, leaving an hour early, taking 2 hour lunches, and pissing off clients, yes I would tell them they either have to change RIGHT AWAY or have the risk of being terminated.
I miss my job where nobody gave a fuck when you came in and left so long as you got your shit done. The downside was that sometimes getting your shit done meant conference calls at 10pm. Or 6am.
themightypuck on
“Reject your sense of injury and the injury itself disappears.”
― Marcus Aurelius
* Afterwards his video review of K&L was removed from gamespot
* The review itself is modified to give a more favourable tone
Actually, according to the Gamespot podcast recently, it was pulled because the gaming editorial team wasn't happy with the quality of the video itself IE: sound quality was bad, they had only used footage from the first level so it was not as representative of the entire game as it should have been, and so on. They said it was just a really bad case of time that the video was pulled when it was.
Whether you believe them is another thing, but it's an alternative reasoning for the Video Review issue anyway.
Why didn't the team catch this before they put it up?
I can't think of many previews that were very negative on a game, in fact previews always seem to hype the game up even if it's Barbie's Horse Adventures.
I've noticed a few recent EGM previews have been skeptical of upcoming games, something that took me by surprise because yeah, historically previews have been little more than glorified press releases with screenshots.
I appreciate it when a reviewer is willing to trusts their instincts about an upcoming product that they have a bad feeling about. Often times you can read between the lines in a preview to get a glimpse of that editorial. I don't think it is the job of professional enthusiast publications to be a branch of a developer's PR department by running down the press release bullet points; but it is also not fair to developers to go so far as assign a "score" to a game before the title is finished.
GFW Radio on 1up.com had an interesting insider response to this Gerstmann incident which included some discussion on what purpose a preview should serve. I think its worth checking out.
The guys at GFW tackle this subject every few episodes, and it's always worth a listen. Without naming names but otherwise going into specifics, they tell stories about the ways in which PR folks try to pressure their coverage. They're critical of games journalism overall and routinely slam paint-by-numbers reviews. They frequently discuss the relationship between magazines and publishers/PR folks. Always enlightening.
You just have to sift through many, many tangents on random subjects to get to that stuff.
I appreciate it when a reviewer is willing to trusts their instincts about an upcoming product that they have a bad feeling about. Often times you can read between the lines in a preview to get a glimpse of that editorial. I don't think it is the job of professional enthusiast publications to be a branch of a developer's PR department by running down the press release bullet points; but it is also not fair to developers to go so far as assign a "score" to a game before the title is finished.
GFW Radio on 1up.com had an interesting insider response to this Gerstmann incident which included some discussion on what purpose a preview should serve. I think its worth checking out.
The guys at GFW tackle this subject every few episodes, and it's always worth a listen. Without naming names but otherwise going into specifics, they tell stories about the ways in which PR folks try to pressure their coverage. They're critical of games journalism overall and routinely slam paint-by-numbers reviews. They frequently discuss the relationship between magazines and publishers/PR folks. Always enlightening.
You just have to sift through many, many tangents on random subjects to get to that stuff.
The gamasutra article they mention in the podcast is worth read as well here
I don't mind positive style previews though, my experience from playing betas of games is that it really doesn't take a lot to turn a game from being 'off' into being awesome.
* Afterwards his video review of K&L was removed from gamespot
* The review itself is modified to give a more favourable tone
Actually, according to the Gamespot podcast recently, it was pulled because the gaming editorial team wasn't happy with the quality of the video itself IE: sound quality was bad, they had only used footage from the first level so it was not as representative of the entire game as it should have been, and so on. They said it was just a really bad case of time that the video was pulled when it was.
Whether you believe them is another thing, but it's an alternative reasoning for the Video Review issue anyway.
I call BS on this. I watched this review a few weeks before this all began and the review was fine audio and video.
Gamespot always has repeating video on all its video reviews check out for yourself, I dont know what they are talking about.
Why did they not take it down 1-2 weeks before all shit hit the fan? It just does not make any sense to me.
Yeah, I wanted to be convinced by the editors' FAQ, and whatnot. Unfortunately, they admit they don't actually have any answers. The whole FAQ boils down to: "We don't actually know what happened or why, but management says it's okay, so thumbs up folks!"
It's cognitive dissonance, in my opinion. They've invested a lot into the company, and aren't yet willing to let that investment become a waste -- so they have to convince themselves it's okay and rebuild. It's a good thing, probably, but not the best way to get to the truth of things.
I can't think of many previews that were very negative on a game, in fact previews always seem to hype the game up even if it's Barbie's Horse Adventures.
I've noticed a few recent EGM previews have been skeptical of upcoming games, something that took me by surprise because yeah, historically previews have been little more than glorified press releases with screenshots.
Yea... Lost Odyssey in particular was a shock to me, simply because of the studio involved. I mean, I'm not a huge fan of EGM, but their previews lately has been a refreshing sight.
* Afterwards his video review of K&L was removed from gamespot
* The review itself is modified to give a more favourable tone
Actually, according to the Gamespot podcast recently, it was pulled because the gaming editorial team wasn't happy with the quality of the video itself IE: sound quality was bad, they had only used footage from the first level so it was not as representative of the entire game as it should have been, and so on. They said it was just a really bad case of time that the video was pulled when it was.
Whether you believe them is another thing, but it's an alternative reasoning for the Video Review issue anyway.
I call BS on this. I watched this review a few weeks before this all began and the review was fine audio and video.
Gamespot always has repeating video on all its video reviews check out for yourself, I dont know what they are talking about.
Why did they not take it down 1-2 weeks before all shit hit the fan? It just does not make any sense to me.
Issues like this are something you're supposed to catch during editing. Anyone who believes the excuse they came up with is pretty ignorant.
I find it funny when companies claim that they are just really incompetent instead of malicious.
Its pretty much the same thing as the difference between ignorance and stupidity. Ignorance is forgivable... stupidity is not.
Im just as intolerant of both. Ignorance isnt an excuse in my book. If anything, its worse than stupidity. Because you can do something about being ignorant, but chose not to. Stupidity isnt something you can easily rectify.
The_Scarab on
0
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
I find it funny when companies claim that they are just really incompetent instead of malicious.
Its pretty much the same thing as the difference between ignorance and stupidity. Ignorance is forgivable... stupidity is not.
Im just as intolerant of both. Ignorance isnt an excuse in my book. If anything, its worse than stupidity. Because you can do something about being ignorant, but chose not to. Stupidity isnt something you can easily rectify.
I'm not sure about that. When people are ignorant about things that should come down to common sense, that's when it falls under the line of stupidity. I'm ignorant about, say, car engines (how to build, repair, what the parts are, etc). That just means I don't know, but it isn't exactly necessary to know (aside from how to check your oil and other basic maintenance). Stupidity, aside from shit like not touching the stove top after it is or has been on, is mostly a social based thing.
I find it funny when companies claim that they are just really incompetent instead of malicious.
Its pretty much the same thing as the difference between ignorance and stupidity. Ignorance is forgivable... stupidity is not.
Im just as intolerant of both. Ignorance isnt an excuse in my book. If anything, its worse than stupidity. Because you can do something about being ignorant, but chose not to. Stupidity isnt something you can easily rectify.
Ehhh ignorance is forgiveable. I don't know how many people live in Alaska. I'm ignorant of this fact. Now if someone told me how many people lived in Alaska and presented solid proof and I choose to ignore it, now Im being stupid.
EDIT: Beaten by Henroid.
MistaCreepy on
PS3: MistaCreepy::Steam: MistaCreepy::360: Dead and I don't feel like paying to fix it.
I find it funny when companies claim that they are just really incompetent instead of malicious.
Its pretty much the same thing as the difference between ignorance and stupidity. Ignorance is forgivable... stupidity is not.
Im just as intolerant of both. Ignorance isnt an excuse in my book. If anything, its worse than stupidity. Because you can do something about being ignorant, but chose not to. Stupidity isnt something you can easily rectify.
Ehhh ignorance is forgiveable. I don't know how many people live in Alaska. I'm ignorant of this fact. Now if someone told me how many people lived in Alaska and presented solid proof and I choose to ignore it, now Im being stupid.
EDIT: Beaten by Henroid.
But if your job was that you worked for the US census board, then ignorance would not be a valid excuse for not knowing how many people livei n Alaska.
Ignorance is not an excuse when it is your job to know the stuff you are ignorant about.
That was really my main point. I dont mind if you dont know how many people live in Alaska, as long as you dont try to tell me you do and dont earn money from doing so.
In addition, though, you can only do something about ignorance when you're aware of your ignorance. This is how people end up with wild misconceptions; you can't fact-check every single piece of knowledge in your brain all the time.
Being ignorant of something like how firing a pretty famous reviewer from a pretty large site and taking down a video review after he gives a game a bad review won't go over well requires a huge amount of ignorance..
I appreciate it when a reviewer is willing to trusts their instincts about an upcoming product that they have a bad feeling about. Often times you can read between the lines in a preview to get a glimpse of that editorial. I don't think it is the job of professional enthusiast publications to be a branch of a developer's PR department by running down the press release bullet points; but it is also not fair to developers to go so far as assign a "score" to a game before the title is finished.
GFW Radio on 1up.com had an interesting insider response to this Gerstmann incident which included some discussion on what purpose a preview should serve. I think its worth checking out.
The guys at GFW tackle this subject every few episodes, and it's always worth a listen. Without naming names but otherwise going into specifics, they tell stories about the ways in which PR folks try to pressure their coverage. They're critical of games journalism overall and routinely slam paint-by-numbers reviews. They frequently discuss the relationship between magazines and publishers/PR folks. Always enlightening.
You just have to sift through many, many tangents on random subjects to get to that stuff.
The gamasutra article they mention in the podcast is worth read as well here
This piece is fantastic. Thanks for posting the link.
I find it funny when companies claim that they are just really incompetent instead of malicious.
Its pretty much the same thing as the difference between ignorance and stupidity. Ignorance is forgivable... stupidity is not.
Im just as intolerant of both. Ignorance isnt an excuse in my book. If anything, its worse than stupidity. Because you can do something about being ignorant, but chose not to. Stupidity isnt something you can easily rectify.
Ehhh ignorance is forgiveable. I don't know how many people live in Alaska. I'm ignorant of this fact. Now if someone told me how many people lived in Alaska and presented solid proof and I choose to ignore it, now Im being stupid.
EDIT: Beaten by Henroid.
Just to chime in on this, I neither know nor actually care about the population of Alaska. Does anyone really care? Do Alaskans even care?
Drez on
Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
0
Options
KageraImitating the worst people. Since 2004Registered Userregular
I find it funny when companies claim that they are just really incompetent instead of malicious.
Its pretty much the same thing as the difference between ignorance and stupidity. Ignorance is forgivable... stupidity is not.
Im just as intolerant of both. Ignorance isnt an excuse in my book. If anything, its worse than stupidity. Because you can do something about being ignorant, but chose not to. Stupidity isnt something you can easily rectify.
Ehhh ignorance is forgiveable. I don't know how many people live in Alaska. I'm ignorant of this fact. Now if someone told me how many people lived in Alaska and presented solid proof and I choose to ignore it, now Im being stupid.
EDIT: Beaten by Henroid.
Just to chime in on this, I neither know nor actually care about the population of Alaska. Does anyone really care? Do Alaskans even care?
I care only for the reason that once the zombie plague hits and the undead start decimating the world I would like to know the least populated areas that are habitable to escape to.
I find it funny when companies claim that they are just really incompetent instead of malicious.
Its pretty much the same thing as the difference between ignorance and stupidity. Ignorance is forgivable... stupidity is not.
Im just as intolerant of both. Ignorance isnt an excuse in my book. If anything, its worse than stupidity. Because you can do something about being ignorant, but chose not to. Stupidity isnt something you can easily rectify.
Ehhh ignorance is forgiveable. I don't know how many people live in Alaska. I'm ignorant of this fact. Now if someone told me how many people lived in Alaska and presented solid proof and I choose to ignore it, now Im being stupid.
EDIT: Beaten by Henroid.
Just to chime in on this, I neither know nor actually care about the population of Alaska. Does anyone really care? Do Alaskans even care?
I care only for the reason that once the zombie plague hits and the undead start decimating the world I would like to know the least populated areas that are habitable to escape to.
I think by referring to the PA forums as bad, Gabe meant pretentious. Let's face it; a lot of us are pretentious douchebags.
You know, quite a few years back this forum was pretty bad. I mean, just nasty as all hell. I read it from time to time but had zero inclination to sign up. (I finally did a few years back, but that took a while.) The place drove newbies away like buffalo off the cliff. It was ugly.
The forum you see today bears little resemblance to what the forum used to be, in my opinion. Far different place now; great discussion, a better overall tone, strong community. Excellent forum. I can only assume Gabe was turned off early on and never returned.
Maybe so, but the forums are kind of dead these days. I think a forum needs some conflict to stay interesting, and groupthink makes for really boring discussions.
For example, almost no one in this thread is defending CNet's decision to fire Gerstmann. Maybe that's because people here have been trained to fit in and go with the status quo.
I said that he should have been let go for other reasons.
I think by referring to the PA forums as bad, Gabe meant pretentious. Let's face it; a lot of us are pretentious douchebags.
You know, quite a few years back this forum was pretty bad. I mean, just nasty as all hell. I read it from time to time but had zero inclination to sign up. (I finally did a few years back, but that took a while.) The place drove newbies away like buffalo off the cliff. It was ugly.
The forum you see today bears little resemblance to what the forum used to be, in my opinion. Far different place now; great discussion, a better overall tone, strong community. Excellent forum. I can only assume Gabe was turned off early on and never returned.
Maybe so, but the forums are kind of dead these days. I think a forum needs some conflict to stay interesting, and groupthink makes for really boring discussions.
For example, almost no one in this thread is defending CNet's decision to fire Gerstmann. Maybe that's because people here have been trained to fit in and go with the status quo.
I said that he should have been let go for other reasons.
Yeah, I remember looking at here a long time ago when I first started to read PA and I had no interest in signing up. It's much nicer now. Although I signed up to get involved in a religious argument, so maybe not all that much has changed.
I think nobody is defending the supposed story because the supposed story is indefensible. Some people have said he should be fired for other reasons though.
I think by referring to the PA forums as bad, Gabe meant pretentious. Let's face it; a lot of us are pretentious douchebags.
You know, quite a few years back this forum was pretty bad. I mean, just nasty as all hell. I read it from time to time but had zero inclination to sign up. (I finally did a few years back, but that took a while.) The place drove newbies away like buffalo off the cliff. It was ugly.
The forum you see today bears little resemblance to what the forum used to be, in my opinion. Far different place now; great discussion, a better overall tone, strong community. Excellent forum. I can only assume Gabe was turned off early on and never returned.
Maybe so, but the forums are kind of dead these days. I think a forum needs some conflict to stay interesting, and groupthink makes for really boring discussions.
For example, almost no one in this thread is defending CNet's decision to fire Gerstmann. Maybe that's because people here have been trained to fit in and go with the status quo.
I said that he should have been let go for other reasons.
Yeah, I remember looking at here a long time ago when I first started to read PA and I had no interest in signing up. It's much nicer now. Although I signed up to get involved in a religious argument, so maybe not all that much has changed.
I think nobody is defending the supposed story because the supposed story is indefensible. Some people have said he should be fired for other reasons though.
I think the circumstances surrounding his firing are rife with implication about CNet's general practices, GameSpot's credibility, and are a statement on the industry in general. For those reasons, this firing is highly questionable.
That being said...I'm glad Jeff's gone. I didn't like the smarmy bastard.
FireWeasel on
AC:CL Wii -- 3824-2125-9336 City: Felinito Me: Nick
I think by referring to the PA forums as bad, Gabe meant pretentious. Let's face it; a lot of us are pretentious douchebags.
You know, quite a few years back this forum was pretty bad. I mean, just nasty as all hell. I read it from time to time but had zero inclination to sign up. (I finally did a few years back, but that took a while.) The place drove newbies away like buffalo off the cliff. It was ugly.
The forum you see today bears little resemblance to what the forum used to be, in my opinion. Far different place now; great discussion, a better overall tone, strong community. Excellent forum. I can only assume Gabe was turned off early on and never returned.
Maybe so, but the forums are kind of dead these days. I think a forum needs some conflict to stay interesting, and groupthink makes for really boring discussions.
For example, almost no one in this thread is defending CNet's decision to fire Gerstmann. Maybe that's because people here have been trained to fit in and go with the status quo.
I said that he should have been let go for other reasons.
Yeah, I remember looking at here a long time ago when I first started to read PA and I had no interest in signing up. It's much nicer now. Although I signed up to get involved in a religious argument, so maybe not all that much has changed.
I think nobody is defending the supposed story because the supposed story is indefensible. Some people have said he should be fired for other reasons though.
I think the circumstances surrounding his firing are rife with implication about CNet's general practices, GameSpot's credibility, and are a statement on the industry in general. For those reasons, this firing is highly questionable.
That being said...I'm glad Jeff's gone. I didn't like the smarmy bastard.
I think the only defense of it at the moment would be to say it didn't happen the way it looks like it did, which to be fair I think is a reasonable suggestion to make, clearly something fucking weird happened and the conclusions that the internet are coming to aren't unfounded, but it's still hazy.
Yeah, the Gamespot thing really was ridiculous. I watched the tribute thing. I just kept repeating, at my screen, "He's not dead guys, give me a break." Good Lord.
GS says that ALL the freakin' time. They could ditch the whole 1-10 thing and go to a "Buy, Rent, or Avoid" scale without flinching.
The whole point of review sites is to help inform consumers on where they would best be served spending their gaming dollar. Its the reviewers jobs to inform their readers if the game is purchase worhty. They actually say don't buy this game in a lot of ways like: this games probably better as a rental (usually reserved for games with little to no replay value), only fans of the genra/IP should get this game, and this game is a steaming pile of feces.
I think you may have stumbled upon the best review scoring system ever. I fully endorse the "Buy, Rent, or Avoid" scale!
It's kind of what the PA guys do, without directly saying it.
It has always been odd to me that most review systems try to place some kind of value on crap games. Do you really want to waste time playing through a 6.0 "fair" game when there are plenty of other must-buy games around? I sure don't. Just because it's sold at an EB Games and my 360 can read it (maybe) doesn't mean it's worth even a fraction of my time.
Bgrngod on
Less then 10 posts - Still a lurker!
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Posts
now ask me if that was sarcasm.
Previews are naturally more positive than reviews. I, myself, have written glowing previews and then bashed the game at review time. It just...happens, and quite innocently. I mean, if I notice something god-awful in a preview I might say "here's to hoping suchandsuch gets fixed before retail release" or if the entire game rubs me the wrong way I might say "well, they have a lot of work ahead of them," but the thing is, previews are generally positive and if it's a preview for a shitty game, one might not even bother previewing it anyway. I've passed on previewing garbage before. Why give it editorial space if it sucks? A preview isn't the same as a review, it's basically "hey, take a look at this and keep an eye out for it in the future."
Actually, according to the Gamespot podcast recently, it was pulled because the gaming editorial team wasn't happy with the quality of the video itself IE: sound quality was bad, they had only used footage from the first level so it was not as representative of the entire game as it should have been, and so on. They said it was just a really bad case of time that the video was pulled when it was.
Whether you believe them is another thing, but it's an alternative reasoning for the Video Review issue anyway.
I think it is more likely that he had an issue with the direction management was going and his review of K&L was the "last straw". I suspect he wasn't fired over the review per se, but rather because the review was an indication (can you say "fuck you") to management that he wasn't going to (as Bill Hicks would say) suckle Satan's pecker.
― Marcus Aurelius
Path of Exile: themightypuck
Like I said, it's what I believe, of course not all those things could have happened, I was just giving EXAMPLES, it also entirely depends on how (in)tolerant the management is too....
Also he could have worked his ass off for the first 5-6 years, then as he became more well known, started to slack off a bit, and as the years go on get worse and worse.
I have a few employees like that too.. 2 of them come in late EVERY day, but when they are here they work their ass off, and do exceptional work, so I can easily turn a blind eye to it. Every once in a while I send out an email stating that coming in late and leaving early DIRECTLY effects their raises at annual review time, and it does a bit, but I guess to them it is worth it.
But now if they started coming in an hour late every day, leaving an hour early, taking 2 hour lunches, and pissing off clients, yes I would tell them they either have to change RIGHT AWAY or have the risk of being terminated.
I miss my job where nobody gave a fuck when you came in and left so long as you got your shit done. The downside was that sometimes getting your shit done meant conference calls at 10pm. Or 6am.
― Marcus Aurelius
Path of Exile: themightypuck
Why didn't the team catch this before they put it up?
aka, bullshit excuse.
You just have to sift through many, many tangents on random subjects to get to that stuff.
The gamasutra article they mention in the podcast is worth read as well here
I don't mind positive style previews though, my experience from playing betas of games is that it really doesn't take a lot to turn a game from being 'off' into being awesome.
I call BS on this. I watched this review a few weeks before this all began and the review was fine audio and video.
Gamespot always has repeating video on all its video reviews check out for yourself, I dont know what they are talking about.
Why did they not take it down 1-2 weeks before all shit hit the fan? It just does not make any sense to me.
It's cognitive dissonance, in my opinion. They've invested a lot into the company, and aren't yet willing to let that investment become a waste -- so they have to convince themselves it's okay and rebuild. It's a good thing, probably, but not the best way to get to the truth of things.
Steam BoardGameGeek Twitter
Yea... Lost Odyssey in particular was a shock to me, simply because of the studio involved. I mean, I'm not a huge fan of EGM, but their previews lately has been a refreshing sight.
Issues like this are something you're supposed to catch during editing. Anyone who believes the excuse they came up with is pretty ignorant.
Its pretty much the same thing as the difference between ignorance and stupidity. Ignorance is forgivable... stupidity is not.
Im just as intolerant of both. Ignorance isnt an excuse in my book. If anything, its worse than stupidity. Because you can do something about being ignorant, but chose not to. Stupidity isnt something you can easily rectify.
I'm not sure about that. When people are ignorant about things that should come down to common sense, that's when it falls under the line of stupidity. I'm ignorant about, say, car engines (how to build, repair, what the parts are, etc). That just means I don't know, but it isn't exactly necessary to know (aside from how to check your oil and other basic maintenance). Stupidity, aside from shit like not touching the stove top after it is or has been on, is mostly a social based thing.
Ehhh ignorance is forgiveable. I don't know how many people live in Alaska. I'm ignorant of this fact. Now if someone told me how many people lived in Alaska and presented solid proof and I choose to ignore it, now Im being stupid.
EDIT: Beaten by Henroid.
But if your job was that you worked for the US census board, then ignorance would not be a valid excuse for not knowing how many people livei n Alaska.
Ignorance is not an excuse when it is your job to know the stuff you are ignorant about.
That was really my main point. I dont mind if you dont know how many people live in Alaska, as long as you dont try to tell me you do and dont earn money from doing so.
I forgot how shitty Gamepro is.
Just to chime in on this, I neither know nor actually care about the population of Alaska. Does anyone really care? Do Alaskans even care?
I care only for the reason that once the zombie plague hits and the undead start decimating the world I would like to know the least populated areas that are habitable to escape to.
8-)
The Internet is your friend: 670,053 in 2006
So, since we've been reduced to discussing the population of states, does that mean we've run out of Gerstmann-related things to talk about?
- Don't add me, I'm at/near the friend limit
Steam: JC_Rooks
Twitter: http://twitter.com/JiunweiC
I work on this: http://www.xbox.com
I said that he should have been let go for other reasons.
I think nobody is defending the supposed story because the supposed story is indefensible. Some people have said he should be fired for other reasons though.
I think the circumstances surrounding his firing are rife with implication about CNet's general practices, GameSpot's credibility, and are a statement on the industry in general. For those reasons, this firing is highly questionable.
That being said...I'm glad Jeff's gone. I didn't like the smarmy bastard.
Azulan Saul Tigh
You're fired!
---
I've got a spare copy of Portal, if anyone wants it message me.
I think the only defense of it at the moment would be to say it didn't happen the way it looks like it did, which to be fair I think is a reasonable suggestion to make, clearly something fucking weird happened and the conclusions that the internet are coming to aren't unfounded, but it's still hazy.
Oh lord this is hilarious
It's like he died or something
It's literal when they say you're terminated from cnet/gamespot.
---
I've got a spare copy of Portal, if anyone wants it message me.
Which would explain the lack of comment from Jeff on this whole debacle.
Steam ID: slashx000______Twitter: @bill_at_zeboyd______ Facebook: Zeboyd Games
It's kind of what the PA guys do, without directly saying it.
It has always been odd to me that most review systems try to place some kind of value on crap games. Do you really want to waste time playing through a 6.0 "fair" game when there are plenty of other must-buy games around? I sure don't. Just because it's sold at an EB Games and my 360 can read it (maybe) doesn't mean it's worth even a fraction of my time.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]