Thanks -Official Guide to the Post-Jeff System Wars (Mod Approved)

Thanks

Thanks to everyone who participated in Blackout Monday. It made quite a bit of stir in the gaming press, and shows our solidarity and commitment to the truth. The next step in the protest to GameSpot will be one that directly targets the management at CNET responsible for their poor decision to force the editors to work in an environment of fear.

More details will be forthcoming two days from now - we want to give CNET the opportunity to come genuinely clean and admit their wrong doing. Though we fully believe they will continue to deny allegations, and never truly address why the Kane & Lynch video review was pulled (other than vaguely saying things about "tone") or why the written review was rewritten. Suffice it to say, changing a review who's only "controversial" side was that Eidos didn't like it requires more than legalese, it requires a genuine confession.

See you all as soon as the next step is ready to go - I want us to have as professional and organized a next step as we can, something that the mainstream press can get behind, and help the story get out.

Update - Blackout Monday

Attention.

Please do not go on GameSpot, GameFAQs, CNET, Download.com, TV.com, et cetera... do not go on ANY CNET site. Logout and DO NOT GO ON AT ALL from 12am EST on Monday (that's midnight tonight) until 12am EST on Tuesday. Don't come on the site, don't Google the site, don't click on a link to the site - don't do ANYTHING that generates a page view, search engine hit, or *anything*

A lot of Gamespotter's more prominant posters will be taking this action to show solidarity with the staff (and Jeff) who have to fear their jobs being lost if they speak their mind. So for their inability to speak on this issue *we'll show CNET our silence*.

This issue is bigger than you, it's bigger than me - it's bigger than GameSpot. This is about big business being able to use *buy* public opinion. Rather than live in a world where the media is controlled entirely by those with the most money, I want to live in a world where gamers who are living for their hobby (these guys truly work because of their passion for gaming, not the paycheck) can say what they truly feel about a game.

So let's do the right thing and show solidarity with Jeff Gerstmann - if he can't go to work on Monday at GameSpot then neither will we.

For the Greater Good - Not the Greater Stupidity

I'll volunteer some wisdom on this, and it's worth noting. First - let's keep the "Jeff Talk" over in the appropriate thread. The reason for this is two-fold. First, it collects together the concerns, complaints, information and good-byes into one large lump sum that has a far greater impact than any splattered grouping of dozens of other postings could. And secondly, it reduced the moderation load (locking) that has to occur, leaving the mods free to discuss the incident.

Now on to the issues:

1. The Credibility of GS Scores

GS Scores, regardless of the validity of the Kane & Lynch claims, are being called into question. Rather than go through a laundry list of scores, or whining, I think we simply need to have some patience, and (going forward) find out as much as we can. We need to figure out what ulterior motives might have played into things like the review score overhaul. But, more importantly, we need *facts* not speculation, not cross-site comparison, not "well I feel". Remember, a review score is just a reviewer's opinion. Until we know if opinions were bought, we need to move forward calmly.

We've got a lot of titles and games for all systems to address - and of course there is the grander question of CNET. This will be something we need as much information as possible one. Above all us, we must promote quality information - as individuals outside of the company we are at an information deficit - one we must correct.

2. Handling AAAs

Whether or not the incident is true, the faith in GS scores, and AAAs by GS rule has been shaken. I propose we wait one week and then hold an official vote on what (if any) we will use for this determinant. It may be best, for the time being, to simply let scores go.

3. Moving Forward

Finally, we need a moratorium on fakeboys, idiocy, and general infighting in System Wars. This is a time for us to unite and move forward, to say "there's a bigger issue going on with GS and our systems". If this is a wake-up call in gaming journalism, so be it, but I propose we take a few days from thinking about the war, and start taking a serious look at where PR, Journalism, and hype has gotten us, and how it is *infecting System Wars*.

4. This is Partially Our Fault

System Wars (not just on this site) is why Eidos would want to buy reviews in the first place (if they did such a thing). Publishers tie salaries for some game developers to review scores. Why? Because review scores have been shown to directly impact sales. We need to address how our *own focus* on "official review scores" may be corrupting the industry, and journalism. This is something system wars will have to address in the future.

We need to address how we are buying into PR, Marketing, and Sales Data - how (by tying our a part of our identity to a companies success) we have allowed ourselves to be targeted. Our eagerness for "ownage" creates a market ripe for deceit - how can we prevent companies from believing the media can be used in this way? How do we punish unethical businesses practices - not just with Kane & Lynch, but also with games we might personally enjoy?

5. Maturity

This is our time to decide how we approach things, and it may be time to do the mature thing, act like adults, and start thinking. Many of you are younger, this might be the first time you've been *bluntly asked* to do the right thing. So do it. GameSpot and its credibility may never recover from the events of the past twenth-four hours... but as a community, as posters, we are greater than any one site, any one event. We are ultimately the driving force of this industry - and we need to show it where to go.

-

I have a great faith in each of you, let's plan how we move forward, what we address, and where we go from here as a community.

Good points, but I don't know about #4.

What I do know is that if the story is true, then Gamespot's reviews are obviously not as credible as they used to be. Having said that, I still think these forums are by far the best gaming forums on the net, so I wouldn't migrate elsewhere.

But judging by the unofficial voting thread as to which scores we should use, it seems GS can't recover from this and GR would be SW's next determinant for hype and what not.

Disappointing stuff though.

Good points, but I don't know about #4.

What I do know is that if the story is true, then Gamespot's reviews are obviously not as credible as they used to be. Having said that, I still think these forums are by far the best gaming forums on the net, so I wouldn't migrate elsewhere.

But judging by the unofficial voting thread as to which scores we should use, it seems GS can't recover from this and GR would be SW's next determinant for hype and what not.

Disappointing stuff though.

the-very-best

I also disagree with #4. greed and possibly lazyness are the cause for this. Greed on the publishers part, and laziness on the developers part if they didnt make a good game, but that also might be the publisher rushing the development to have it out by christmas so instead of putting the money into making the game better they put the money into advertising so that they might get better sales around christmas time.

but Dreams-Vision in the other thread has a point. game rankings has some serious fundamnetal flaws in its score compiling process.

[QUOTE="the-very-best"]

Good points, but I don't know about #4.

What I do know is that if the story is true, then Gamespot's reviews are obviously not as credible as they used to be. Having said that, I still think these forums are by far the best gaming forums on the net, so I wouldn't migrate elsewhere.

But judging by the unofficial voting thread as to which scores we should use, it seems GS can't recover from this and GR would be SW's next determinant for hype and what not.

Disappointing stuff though.

laughingman42

I also disagree with #4. greed and possibly lazyness are the cause for this. Greed on the publishers part, and laziness on the developers part if they didnt make a good game, but that also might be the publisher rushing the development to have it out by christmas so instead of putting the money into making the game better they put the money into advertising so that they might get better sales around christmas time.

Perhaps not you individually, but the masses, and not just on GameSpot, other sites as well. As a community we have to look at how we reward PR, I'm not saying we justify their actions, but we need to make sure we don't let ourselves be manipulated. For example, if Microsoft says "the xbox 360 > PS3" there will be dozens of posts on it - is that a credible source? Why did we reward that viral marketing with our attention? How have we cheapened ourselves?

We need to address what we consider acceptable advertising and what crosses the line (for us).

but Dreams-Vision in the other thread has a point. game rankings has some serious fundamnetal flaws in its score compiling process.

laughingman42

I'm opposed to a site that uses some secret formula to calculate an average. How do we know their weighting system isn't being bought out, how do we know it's the same for each game? In this new age of skepticism, I agree, we need to trust ourselves and not people we've granted with a false weight simply because they're the "professional" gamer.

[QUOTE="the-very-best"]

Good points, but I don't know about #4.

What I do know is that if the story is true, then Gamespot's reviews are obviously not as credible as they used to be. Having said that, I still think these forums are by far the best gaming forums on the net, so I wouldn't migrate elsewhere.

But judging by the unofficial voting thread as to which scores we should use, it seems GS can't recover from this and GR would be SW's next determinant for hype and what not.

Disappointing stuff though.

laughingman42

I also disagree with #4. greed and possibly lazyness are the cause for this. Greed on the publishers part, and laziness on the developers part if they didnt make a good game, but that also might be the publisher rushing the development to have it out by christmas so instead of putting the money into making the game better they put the money into advertising so that they might get better sales around christmas time.

but Dreams-Vision in the other thread has a point. game rankings has some serious fundamnetal flaws in its score compiling process.

I'd rather have Metacritic over GR, personally.

[QUOTE="laughingman42"][QUOTE="the-very-best"]

Good points, but I don't know about #4.

What I do know is that if the story is true, then Gamespot's reviews are obviously not as credible as they used to be. Having said that, I still think these forums are by far the best gaming forums on the net, so I wouldn't migrate elsewhere.

But judging by the unofficial voting thread as to which scores we should use, it seems GS can't recover from this and GR would be SW's next determinant for hype and what not.

Disappointing stuff though.

mjarantilla

I also disagree with #4. greed and possibly lazyness are the cause for this. Greed on the publishers part, and laziness on the developers part if they didnt make a good game, but that also might be the publisher rushing the development to have it out by christmas so instead of putting the money into making the game better they put the money into advertising so that they might get better sales around christmas time.

but Dreams-Vision in the other thread has a point. game rankings has some serious fundamnetal flaws in its score compiling process.

I'd rather have Metacritic over GR, personally.

MetaCritic is a CNET owned site...

Again, this is not a debate over what site we're going to use, that should not occur *just yet* we need time to assess the criteria of such a site, and how we feel about CNET's credibility. This is a discussion on what steps we need to take to move forward, and an agreement to work as a community. Social pressure will deal with the few who do not wish to worker for the greater good of System Wars.

System Wars depends heavily on the credibility of the industry and quality of information, unless such things are found and restored by us ( the community ) what little intelligence is in System Wars will die.

MetaCritic is a CNET owned site...

Cook66

So is GR

MetaCritic is a CNET owned site...

Cook66

That's deeply concerning. Would it be possible for us to trace other review sites back to their parent companies? I think we need to take a serious look at how man interconnected sites are in existance, and their communications with publishers. We also need to look at the job security offered journalists. For example, is their job dependant on game sales, or the success of the console they've been assigned to?

[QUOTE="Cook66"]

MetaCritic is a CNET owned site...

cakeorrdeath

So is GR

Doesn't Microsoft own CNET?

Doesn't Microsoft own CNET?

subrosian

I believe they have a non controlling stake.

But no direct influence.

[QUOTE="Cook66"]

MetaCritic is a CNET owned site...

cakeorrdeath

So is GR

They decide who gets to be featured on their site, and that alone is enought to raise questionsregarding bias.

We need an independant, non profit site to have a database of Game reviews, not that I can see that ever happening.

As long as we don't use Gamerankings, I'll be happy.

I'm more interested than concerned, I've never seen anything like this on this board before (and, admittedly on the Edios board). All I know is, I'll reserve my judgement until more information is released.

4. This is Partially Our Fault

Although I agree with your other points, I just can not support this claim. Ok, I can see why developers and publishers would want to buy scores, but y'know if I want to buy favours for my business of the govenment, should I do it? i mean its the peoples fault they support capatilism. If I want to bribe a judge to say out of jail, is there anything wrong with tha (?) because sociaty tells me that I have a right to freedom?

Y'know corruption and crime can always come up with excuses and blame others and we, as people have fallen for this stuff hook line and sinker.. Its never the persons fault, it's those other peoples fault or it's that things fault.

End of the day if (IF) Jeff did this he did it for himself and Eidos did it for the money (sales) as well.

well i always knew anyway!!Oblivion's rating says it all!!Lets all hail Fallout 3 Perfect 10 from gamespot and all the other sites that are brided with games/system or exclusive interviews and content!

Bastards!

[QUOTE="Cook66"]

MetaCritic is a CNET owned site...

subrosian

That's deeply concerning. Would it be possible for us to trace other review sites back to their parent companies? I think we need to take a serious look at how man interconnected sites are in existance, and their communications with publishers. We also need to look at the job security offered journalists. For example, is their job dependant on game sales, or the success of the console they've been assigned to?

They also dont include all of the same reveiw sources every time. I cant remeber the game I really wish I could, but once I saw a really low score on GR for a game that was like 2 points lower than everything else (a 6 I think) and then the next day it was gone.

I say we pick 5 different reviewers and average up their scores. It would save us from vapourware sites that give everything a 10.Eponique

Personally, I want to have only 2 sites, no complication, Eurogamer and Gametrailers. I want System War scores to retain their aura of anxiety. This would emulate the old GS scores imo.

Or we could still stick with GS, this still may not be true, let's not jump to conclusions here.

Im 100% behind this. To be honest, SW could do with a week of fanboys shutting up anyway, might give some people a different perspective :p.

I agree with going on Eurogamer/gametrailers. I also think that we should include 1up and IGN, as both seem to balance each other out.

gamespot has been going downhill even before thise mass affect zelda tp r a c bioshock should have been higher. farsendor

I dont understand whats so bad about the review.. i agree with everything jeff said in the video review. I actually thougt Jeff gave the game to high of a score, as the game really isnt very good at all.

[QUOTE="farsendor"]gamespot has been going downhill even before thise mass affect zelda tp r a c bioshock should have been higher. kozzy1234

I dont understand whats so bad about the review.. i agree with everything jeff said in the video review. I actually thougt Jeff gave the game to high of a score, as the game really isnt very good at all.

No no, you misunderstand. most people agree with Jeffs score, the problem is that it seems Cnet and eidos wanted it scored higher (an 8 or 9 maybe?) and thats why he was fired. Given what we know, it also brings into question a lot of the other scores that appear to be off the average (Ratchet, Mass Effect, Zelda, MP) as to whether or not they were influenced by a Cnet sponsor too.

Its all speculation right now though.

It's time to use GR scores. LINKloco

[QUOTE="kozzy1234"]

[QUOTE="farsendor"]gamespot has been going downhill even before thise mass affect zelda tp r a c bioshock should have been higher. nicenator

I dont understand whats so bad about the review.. i agree with everything jeff said in the video review. I actually thougt Jeff gave the game to high of a score, as the game really isnt very good at all.

No no, you misunderstand. most people agree with Jeffs score, the problem is that it seems Cnet and eidos wanted it scored higher (an 8 or 9 maybe?) and thats why he was fired. Given what we know, it also brings into question a lot of the other scores that appear to be off the average (Ratchet, Mass Effect, Zelda, MP) as to whether or not they were influenced by a Cnet sponsor too.

Its all speculation right now though.

That would be terrible

Gametrailers seems ok , but we still have to put up with PDZ getting AAA if we do. :? :P :roll: :shock:

yes, it is partially our fault.

we gamers are becoming more and more concerned with having the better game and better system. not just enjoying the games we like without having the need to rub other people's face with it.

another thing:

reviews affect sales.

so it's a smart thing to invest in your game to have the greatest reviews, right? you can invest in development, to build a great game, and/or you can pay some reviewers around the world to give your game some good scores.

i'm not saying the companies are doing it... but also, i'm not saying they aren't.

i don't know, it's been more than a year that i have a feeling the industry is getting dirty and dirtier by the moment.

[QUOTE="mjarantilla"][QUOTE="laughingman42"][QUOTE="the-very-best"]

Good points, but I don't know about #4.

What I do know is that if the story is true, then Gamespot's reviews are obviously not as credible as they used to be. Having said that, I still think these forums are by far the best gaming forums on the net, so I wouldn't migrate elsewhere.

But judging by the unofficial voting thread as to which scores we should use, it seems GS can't recover from this and GR would be SW's next determinant for hype and what not.

Disappointing stuff though.

Cook66

I also disagree with #4. greed and possibly lazyness are the cause for this. Greed on the publishers part, and laziness on the developers part if they didnt make a good game, but that also might be the publisher rushing the development to have it out by christmas so instead of putting the money into making the game better they put the money into advertising so that they might get better sales around christmas time.

but Dreams-Vision in the other thread has a point. game rankings has some serious fundamnetal flaws in its score compiling process.

I'd rather have Metacritic over GR, personally.

MetaCritic is a CNET owned site...

Gamerankings is a part of gamespot.

Honestly, I want to say Jeff getting fired was a compromise of journalistic integrity, but that Kane and Lynch review pissed me off too. I mean, I realize it was missing a lot, but it deserved AA at least!

Anyway, can we even be sure that Eidos actually pays attention to the jerks in System Wars? We're only infamous within the confines of GS. It's not like we're talked about at GR or 1Up.

Kane & Lynch is an absolutely awful game, and a complete waste of $60. Compare it to any other $60 shooter - Halo 3, Orange Box, Call of Duty 4. Now tell me it even deserves to exist, let alone get reviewed. It's a 6.0, and it barely deserves that. It's a cliched, crappy, poorly controlling shooter on a system with a *TON* of shooters, then they have the nerve to put it on PC, against games like Crysis.

It's a giant turd and if you like it you're no longer a gamer and might as well cut off your thumbs and donate them to someone who's going to make some decent use of them.

Jeff didn't deserve to be fired for saying that, and we need to figure out how System Wars is going to deal with all of its credibility going out the window.

Why can't you just play the games and not worry about the damn scores. Who cares what some person you don't know thinks of a game.

I couldn't care if all reviewers got fired, they have no idea how to rate games anyway, none of them.

And what's all this nonsense about Gamespot losing credibility, it lost it all after Greg left and they changed the review system, this is just the icing on the cake.

Honest to god man, its just the internet.

" We need to figure out what ulterior motives might have played into things like the review score overhaul." WTF man?

serious, THE INTERNET IS NOT SERIOUS BUSINESS. who cares if gamespot is biased? who cares if jeff is fired? who cares if the damned cooeration is really a secret agency killing the worlds population of bunnies? its just a damned website.

you people seriously take this stuff too seriously.

Kyne and lynch was average. Respect to jeff for telling it as it is. Gamespot and eidos, you arebunch of mot*********s