Gamespot nominated Kane and Lynch for Best of 2007, and left out GoW2

http://www.gamespot.com/best-of/?tag=topslot;title;1&om_act=convert&om_clk=topslot

Wow. Just wow. Corruptspot in action. :|

that's utterly ridiculous

You made a new account just to say that? Yeah, I think it's bull, but whadaya gonna do about it. Exeed_Orbit

I have to know -- What does someone have to write in his first posts to not count as someone who creates an account to... say something...?

HAHAHAHAHA

bravo Gamespot, you have no shame. ITT we should all vote for K&L as GOTY as a joke

It's not as bad as you make it sound, seeing that they even put the Simpson's game there. But honestly, what the hell are you smoking Gamespot?!taker42

Reading is fun,

The year 2007 is drawing to a close, and it's clear that this has been one of the best years in history for great video games on all platforms. Earlier this year, GameSpot released Game Watch '07 to help you keep track of all the highly anticipated game releases on the horizon. But now that the year is coming to an end, which of those games was really worth the wait? Cast your vote in the poll below for the Game Watch '07 game you think lived up to the hype--and which of them you think will have the strongest showing in our upcoming full awards. (Please note that this voting process is not GameSpot's full Readers' Choice voting, which will be made available with the full awards in the coming weeks.)

It is not the best game of the year.

You made a new account just to say that? Yeah, I think it's bull, but whadaya gonna do about it. Exeed_Orbit

It's obvious that Gamespot was threatened by Eidos which is why Jeff was fired, and it's obvious that they were also threatened by Eidos into putting Kane and Lynch on there. /Gasp

[QUOTE="Exeed_Orbit"]You made a new account just to say that? Yeah, I think it's bull, but whadaya gonna do about it. Uisdwhat

It's obvious that Gamespot was threatened by Eidos which is why Jeff was fired, and it's obvious that they were also threatened by Eidos into putting Kane and Lynch on there. /Gasp

BrownWalrus

[QUOTE="Exeed_Orbit"]You made a new account just to say that? Yeah, I think it's bull, but whadaya gonna do about it. Xolver

I have to know -- What does someone have to write in his first posts to not count as someone who creates an account to... say something...?

Well, the thing is, around SW, there are a lot of people who create new accounts simply to troll and because of that, a lot of people tend to pass offnew accountsas trolls.

Hey, Eidos paid good money for that nomination.

:lol:Gamespot :lol:DireToad

Yea this site has seriously been going downhill these past years. How idiotic of them to fire Jeff. They basically lost their best and original reviewers. It's pretty hard to take this site that seriously anymore, it really is.

Why Gamespot, Why? :?

The should have put Lair up for **** and giggles.Bromz

If Lair was on the Game Watch 07 list they would of but Lair wasn't so did not go on this list of what games lived up to their hype.

EDIT: people read the poll it is not the game of the year it is what game lived up to the hype form the Game Watch 07.

I think all those cames were released in the last four months.DaysAirlines

Pretty much. Games were released during the first half of the year too, actually. There's lot of games missing from that list I'd presume.

Please note that this voting process is not GameSpot's full Readers' Choice voting, which will be made available with the full awards in the coming weeks.)Gamespot

[conspiracy hat]
This is actually an ad campaign. Publishers can pay to have their games listed on this Game Watch 07 thing. Tony Hawk is on it, skate isn't, so it's obviously not Gamespot's picks. Or anyone interested in the quality of a game.

It is sponsored by Gamestop, that much we know.

The Witcher isn't there. Fail.Blommen

The Witcher wasn't on the Game Watch 07 list, so putting it on a list of games from the Game Watch 07 list where people vote on which lived up to the hype is kinda pointless.

Well U can't please your readers and please the publishers at the same time, U have to choose one. Or its a fine balancing act.

I find it hillarious tha you all think Kane and Lynch still had anything to do with Jeff Being fired. BTW: if you watch the original Video Review, it IS crap Quality like McDonald said it was, so I understand why he took it down. black_awpN1

O RLY? if the kane and lynch review had nothing to do with the firing then

• Why did they take all the kane and lynch ads down?
• Why did they edit the review DESPITE THE FACT that it was perfectly fine and had been checked over by the editorial team
• Why did they take down the video review then put it up without any changes once their lies and corruption became public?

[QUOTE="black_awpN1"]I find it hillarious tha you all think Kane and Lynch still had anything to do with Jeff Being fired. BTW: if you watch the original Video Review, it IS crap Quality like McDonald said it was, so I understand why he took it down. the_h_bomb

O RLY? if the kane and lynch review had nothing to do with the firing then

• Why did they take all the kane and lynch ads down?
• Why did they edit the review DESPITE THE FACT that it was perfectly fine and had been checked over by the editorial team
• Why did they take down the video review then put it up without any changes once their lies and corruption became public?

1. Eidos Advertisement Time was all used up. They paid for so many days, then nthe ads went down on the last day.

2. THey added the differences between the PS3 and 360 version, which they should have had in the first place.

3. IF you watched the original Video Review, it was very bad Quality. They only showed the first level and the Microphone was pretty messed up.

Got any more?

The should have put Lair up for **** and giggles.Bromz

"KANE AND LYNCH 2007 GAME OF THE YEAR NOMINEE" - Gamspot

I just see the ads now......

1. Eidos Advertisement Time was all used up. They paid for so many days, then nthe ads went down on the last day.

2. THey added the differences between the PS3 and 360 version, which they should have had in the first place.

3. IF you watched the original Video Review, it was very bad Quality. They only showed the first level and the Microphone was pretty messed up.

Got any more?

black_awpN1

The review has not just been altered to include ps3/360 differences they've made it read more like a press release (which you'd realise if you read it). and if the video review was so bad why has it been put back up again?

also lol at the notion that the k&l ads being pulled is "coincidence". For your next trick i'd like you to explain how K&L got a GOTY nomination.

[QUOTE="the_h_bomb"]

[QUOTE="black_awpN1"]I find it hillarious tha you all think Kane and Lynch still had anything to do with Jeff Being fired. BTW: if you watch the original Video Review, it IS crap Quality like McDonald said it was, so I understand why he took it down. black_awpN1

O RLY? if the kane and lynch review had nothing to do with the firing then

• Why did they take all the kane and lynch ads down?
• Why did they edit the review DESPITE THE FACT that it was perfectly fine and had been checked over by the editorial team
• Why did they take down the video review then put it up without any changes once their lies and corruption became public?

1. Eidos Advertisement Time was all used up. They paid for so many days, then nthe ads went down on the last day.

2. THey added the differences between the PS3 and 360 version, which they should have had in the first place.

3. IF you watched the original Video Review, it was very bad Quality. They only showed the first level and the Microphone was pretty messed up.

Got any more?

You're right. It's all internal issues and had absolutely nothing to do with K & L. Some "internal issues" caused one of the best and most original members (who wasn't afraid to speak his mind) and who has contributed so much over the past 11 years to be fired. Whatever, it's all stupid. Why not reveal the reason for him being fired? That's right. They won't. All they will do is lie or spin it in someway. If it was only some internal issues, they would have already revealed it, or have they already and i've just been sleeping (mind you i have been on vacation for the past week or so overseas).

I posted this question in the "Ask Gamespot" forum and this is the response I got from KevinV.

"This is a revisiting of a feature we posted in early October that outlined the fourth quarter's most anticipated games. God of War 2 had already been released by that point. But of course, I am confident you read the paragraph at the top of the feature, which plainly states how these games were chosen."

I could not respond since Kevin locked my thread but if this is only fourth quarter like he stated then why is a BioShock (Q3) in that list?

[QUOTE="black_awpN1"][QUOTE="the_h_bomb"]

[QUOTE="black_awpN1"]I find it hillarious tha you all think Kane and Lynch still had anything to do with Jeff Being fired. BTW: if you watch the original Video Review, it IS crap Quality like McDonald said it was, so I understand why he took it down. BrownWalrus

O RLY? if the kane and lynch review had nothing to do with the firing then

• Why did they take all the kane and lynch ads down?
• Why did they edit the review DESPITE THE FACT that it was perfectly fine and had been checked over by the editorial team
• Why did they take down the video review then put it up without any changes once their lies and corruption became public?

1. Eidos Advertisement Time was all used up. They paid for so many days, then nthe ads went down on the last day.

2. THey added the differences between the PS3 and 360 version, which they should have had in the first place.

3. IF you watched the original Video Review, it was very bad Quality. They only showed the first level and the Microphone was pretty messed up.

Got any more?

You're right. It's all internal issues and had absolutely nothing to do with K & L. Some "internal issues" caused one of the best and most original members (who wasn't afraid to speak his mind) and who has contributed so much over the past 11 years to be fired. Whatever, it's all stupid. Why not reveal the reason for him being fired? That's right. They won't. All they will do is lie or spin it in someway. If it was only some internal issues, they would have already revealed it, or have they already and i've just been sleeping (mind you i have been on vacation for the past week or so overseas).

Im not Condoning what they did. I think it sucks. Im just saying we shouldnt rub GS's good name in the mud for it. Do you think Vinny or anyone else wanted him fired? NO. It was CNET who did it, not the GS Employees who make this site what it is. But hey, like Alex already said on the podcast, you already made up your minds about this and wont listen to facts.

I posted this question in the "Ask Gamespot" forum and this is the response I got from KevinV.

"This is a revisiting of a feature we posted in early October that outlined the fourth quarter's most anticipated games. God of War 2 had already been released by that point. But of course, I am confident you read the paragraph at the top of the feature, which plainly states how these games were chosen."

I could not respond since Kevin locked my thread but if this is only fourth quarter like he stated then why is a BioShock (Q3) in that list?

gmastersexay

Madden08 is also on that list too. :shock:

Im not Condoning what they did. I think it sucks. Im just saying we shouldnt rub GS's good name in the mud for it. Do you think Vinny or anyone else wanted him fired? NO. It was CNET who did it, not the GS Employees who make this site what it is. But hey, like Alex already said on the podcast, you already made up your minds about this and wont listen to facts.

black_awpN1

I listened to the HotSpot yesterday and it sounded like the guys at CNet spent a few days reading the forums & blogs to figure out exactly what to say to cast doubt on the whole situation. The podcast sounded like the fluff PR pieces CNet sent out last week.

IMO, the guys sounded scared. Firing Jeff G was a sign that no one is safe

[QUOTE="black_awpN1"]

Im not Condoning what they did. I think it sucks. Im just saying we shouldnt rub GS's good name in the mud for it. Do you think Vinny or anyone else wanted him fired? NO. It was CNET who did it, not the GS Employees who make this site what it is. But hey, like Alex already said on the podcast, you already made up your minds about this and wont listen to facts.

LosDaddie

I listened to the HotSpot yesterday and it sounded like the guys at CNet spent a few days reading the forums & blogs to figure out exactly what to say to cast doubt on the whole situation. The podcast sounded like the fluff PR pieces CNet sent out last week.

IMO, the guys sounded scared. Firing Jeff G was a sign that no one is safe

CNET honestly couldnt afford to fire any other Key Employees. THis JEff thing has produced to much Backlash. Next I suppose your going to say a CNET guy was in the same room as them when they recorded the podcast to make sure they said the right tings? Take off your Tin Foil hats people.

I like Kane and Lynch. So I support this decision.Pariah_001