Weird to be back on this account. Jeff and the team are back, and that's kind of weird. Hopefully there will still be a fairly stirct division between the two sites.

I doubt any of the people I used to know on this site are still kicking around. Almost none of the editorial team is left (Kevin is around, but he was the new guy back then anyway).

It'll be cool to see Jeff on On the Spot again. Maybe Rich and Greg will swing by the old office during E3.

Otherwise known as "beating a dead horse".

My promised blog never came together, due to the fact that working on it caused me anxiety and mild depression. Not kidding.

So instead of bludgeoning you over the head with rhetoric about the state of the industry and yada yada yada, I'll just say that... it's been emotional.

Goodbye Jeff, goodbye Alex, and now, goodbye Ryan.

To the beleaguered crew still here, I wish you nothing but the best.

It's partly in response to that excellent Newsweek article a couple of people have posted about, tossed together with other ruminations on the situation and the state of gaming and media critique in general. Unfortunately, "Gerstmanngate" broke at the totally wrong time for me, as I'm in finals week at college, so it'll have to wait a bit. Right now it's a couple pages of randomly connected paragraphs with half finised thoughts. I'm sure you know the type of document I'm talking about.

Like most gamers, I started following the industry through gaming mags. For me, it was predominantly Electronic Gaming Monthly. Even though over the years the limitations of a monthly publication got really tiresome, I sitll have fond memories of feeling a connection to their staff, namely their Editor-in-Chief, Dan "Shoe" Hsu. Here's a blog post he wrote two years ago about the reaction to one of his editorials he wrote for EGM concerning journalistic integrity in this industry. I thought it merited some attention in the wake of this terrible event. Here's the link:

http://www.1up.com/do/blogEntry?bId=6228583&publicUserId=5379799

This still seems like a bad dream.

So, all this business about Jeff getiting let go over the Kane and Lynch review... yeah, that couldn't have happened. No, I take that back. It could... but that would be the worst decision CNet ever made. It would destroy gamespot. Not to mention the fact that Jeff would have a very excllent case against CNet in a wrongful dismissal suit.

So, I'm going with a big fat "bogus" on this story. Even if it were temporarily true, the fact that the news got outof the real reason for his dismissalwould most definitely factor into CNet's decisions. Do you really think they can fire the editroial director of one of their most popular sites over an editorial decision that upset one of their freaking advertisers and get away with it? Yeah right. The community wouldn't allow it. Their entire editorial staff would have a decision. Either stay, and be afraid to lose their job over a controversial review (Kevin, quake in your boots, lol), or do the honorable thing and quit in protest.

So, in the highly doubtful event that this story is true and Jeff is gone (seems insane just to write that), then the entire editorial staff should leave tomorrow.

*Update: Gabe from PA posted in a thread claiming that the news is true. Either some serious miscommunication has gone down or the world has just been turned on it's ear. If it turns out to be true, I will never visit Gamespot again. Here's hoping I wake up and find out this is all a big april fool's joke a few months early...

*Up-freaking-date: Jeff's picture was removed from the Xbox Newsletter. This is absolutely insane... This is so wrong... And to think I ever wanted to work for this site after college. Please... let this be a joke. Cnet is getting a really nasty letter next week. The **** is about to hit the fan...

*Up- HOLY F***ING ****-date: A post by one "mosaic" confirms the fact that Jeff has been let go. For those not in the know, "mosaic" is, in fact, Frank Provo, a freelance reviewer for gamespot. He does a lot of the mobile game reviews and about half of the Wii VC reviews. So, against all logic, Jeff Gerstmann no longer works at gamespot. WHAT. THE. ****?

**** YOU CNET!

*Final update: I got confirmation from the man himself. I wrote him on myspace a couple of hours ago, and he actually took the time to write me back tonight. He said he couldn't talk about his time with gamespot other than it's over. His exact words were "**** happens, my man". Classic Jeff. I'd say he'll be missed, but that would make it sound like I'm still going to come here for any sort of editorial coverage. I love keeping up with community blogs, but who knows what the fallout from this debacle is gonna be. It will seem strange to my friends that I'm going to be depressed all day tomorrow, but they just can't understand. This sucks. I don't think any of us on here are ashamed to say that gamespot is an important part of our lives, so for this to happen... Wow.

Here's a screen cap(Warning: Mild Language):

http://img144.imageshack.us/img144/9716/asdye2.jpg

First, a few words of introduction. This paper was written for my freshmanhonors English Composition course. In the course, we are using video games as the medium in which to practice different types of analysis. Ifinished this paper several weeks ago, and am in the middle of writing another paper, which I will post here as well.The writing is rather dry for a blog post, but it'll have to do.

No other franchise in the video game industry is as divisive or as influential as Grand Theft Auto. A simple Google search for news or scholarly articles related to the series returns thousands of articles discussing the effects of these video games. The most recent iteration, Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas (hereafter referred to as GTA: SA), came out to much fanfare on October 26, 2004. It was substantially more ambitious than its predecessors; thousands of man hours went into creating one of the largest game worlds ever conceived, with three unique cities, countryside in between, over one hundred different vehicles, and a radio with eleven distinct radio stations. The player was free to roam anywhere they pleased, be it by car, boat, or airplane, and cause as much destruction and mayhem as they saw fit. GTA: SA was well received critically and commercially, and was ripped apart by various pundits for its overt violence and explicit sexuality. Despite being rated "M" for mature (defined as 17 years and up), many public figures decried the game's vicious tendencies as deeply influential to the corruption of our nation's youth. Few video games have ever received this amount of critical attention.

Little consideration was given, however, to a large component of how the game speaks to its players, the soundtrack. GTA: SA's soundtrack is a far cry from the norm. Created as more than mere background noise to the player's destruction and mayhem; the radio stations become part of the living game world that GTA: SA's designers crafted so carefully. It is integral to the overall tone of the game, and is an interesting component to the influences that this game exerts over the millions of individuals who have listened to it. What is most intriguing about the soundtrack are the contrasts between what the game encourages the player to do and the various social messages it sends through the radio stations, particularly in its mock advertisements and news spots.

The game's, and by extension the soundtrack's, primary audience is 16 to 35 year old males; essentially the main demographic of video game players in the United States. Though much of the game's underlying messages about life in the U.S. would not be lost on a woman, the radio has much more impact when listened to by a male. The game's soundtrack resonates especially with men who listened to popular music in the late 80's and early 90's. Also, a player under the age 15 would have difficulty understanding many of the jokes and references made in many of the advertisements and other segments on the radio.

For instance, a 16 to 35 year old male would be much more likely to find the irony in a mock advertisement for "DeKoch Diamonds", where, the advertisement claims "passion... can be purchased". The advertisement promises that a diamond or "ice" will not only assuage a whiny female (who, interestingly enough, has just discovered her boyfriend cheating on her with her sister), but will also predispose her to give you sexual favors. Many of the false advertisements are in this vein, designed to speak to the over-sexed male consumer in the United States.

Depending on ****of play, the player can spend upwards of 50% of their time with the game listening to the radio. There are eleven radio stations, all with unique DJs and playlists. As the game is set in the early 1990's, the playlists are generally composed of hits from that era, along with older songs on several of the stations specializing in ****c rock and hip hop. The song choice on almost all of the radio stations is targeted towards men, with many misogynistic hip hop songs and blaring rock tunes. Interspersed among the DJs banter and songs are over 50 advertisements for fictional products and services, all of which are humorous. Also of note is the talk radio station with different "programs", ranging from a political debate show to a relationship advice program. All of these various parts add up to a highly realistic experience for the player. They feel as though they are actually listening to a radio. This realism, however, stands in stark contrast to the surrealism of the gameplay, which encourages the player to maim and kill for pleasure and profit.

A game's soundtrack is almost never listened to on its own. GTA: SA's gameplay must be taken into account. Perhaps if it were listened to separately from the play experience, then the game maker's overt politicizing and more subtle social commentary would add up to an effective medium in which to challenge traditional U.S. concepts of society and gender. However, messages concerning gun control and consumerism ring hollow when listened to as you seek to gun down police men and civilians for your character's personal gain and your own entertainment. In fact, the only truly effective message the game manages to convey through its soundtrack concerns distrust of public figures and traditional forms of media, as these sentiments are reinforced through your play and other components of the game. It seems as though the only thing the game maker's could wholly agree upon is anti-establishment sentiments.

While many game designers choose to play music in the background of their games to set the mood, GTA: SA's creators restricted access to the radio solely to when the player is in a vehicle, where it is logical that the player would be able to actually listen to the radio in the real world. These realistic restrictions lend a sense of credibility to the soundtrack. The game creates a sense of anticipation for the player every time they get into a vehicle and hear the radio. The various stations, all with critically acclaimed songs and realistic sounding (at least superficially) DJs lend credence to the illusion that the player is, in fact, tuning in to real FM radio broadcasts. The radio becomes such a fixture of the game's structure that the player becomes hardly conscious of it when he has to gun down a rival gang or flee from the police.

The song choice is geared to register with the player's emotions, be it to evoke a time and place or to excite the player into causing more destruction. The presence of easily recognizable hits from across the decades does create the illusory effect of a real radio dial, and it also evokes strong nostalgic emotions from many of the game's older players. Adult players will be taken back when they hear "White Room" by Cream or "Barracuda" by Heart, and the younger generation will be fired up to carjack, thieve, maim, and destroy by the rocking tunes and hard beats served up on this game's soundtrack.

Much of the soundtrack's most effective content is designed to resonate with the player's logical reasoning, and it is here that the soundtrack makes its most compelling arguments, some of which are truly effective. In one of the many fabricated news stories, a reporter introduces her segment with this, "Here's everything that matters, in simple terms, so you can understand." Many players of the game perhaps never would have thought of the overly simplistic manner in which much of the news is told in today's society. This small, not tremendously subtle witticism from the game designers causes the player to see the world around them in a different light. Indeed, almost every single one of the newscasts subtly challenges cultural perceptions the average U.S. male may have concerning public figures and the nature of traditional media. It is in this logical yet extremely humorous manner that the game designers make their most compelling appeals to the player's awareness of numerous traditions and beliefs that underpin their identities as a male in the U.S. and how they relate to figures of authority. These appeals, largely made through the false newscasts, are the sole examples of truly effective rhetoric within the soundtrack, because the gameplay reinforces these anti-establishment, anti-media sentiments.

While the newscasts tend to speak to political issues or serve to lampoon mass media, the majority of the false advertisements address issues of consumerism and gender. In an advertisement for a cologne, the player is told that "Life isn't about money... it's about having... nice friends and nailing as many women as possible." This obvious logical fallacy causes the player to consider blind consumerism and sexism in their own lives, but this message is undercut when the game encourages you to purchase clothing and houses, and date women solely for the purpose of being invited over to stay the night. While the denouncement of abject consumerism and sexism is fairly obvious and straightforward, the player is left confused as to the game maker's true feelings on these subjects. Perhaps the creators of the radio ads were trying to be ironic in the face of the game's content, but the lack of a cohesive message throughout the game on these subjects greatly hinders its ability to effectively convey meaning to its players.

Also in stark contrast to the gameplay are the anti-gun messages throughout the radio broadcasts. The player of the game is predisposed to be sympathetic to their characters way of life, a life dominated by weaponry and violence. So when the game attempts to tell the player through its usual brand of subversive humor that gun ownership is dangerous, it is hard for the player to sympathize with this sentiment because the player does not relate to the little polygonal people they kill, but instead bonds with their character, and will even come to favor certain weapons over others. If a game's primary play mechanic is to kill thousands of other characters with one's favorite weaponry the player is hardly likely to consider anti-gun sentiments when they have been conditioned to favor weaponry through their play. Whether the game predisposes its player to actually use or purchase weaponry is a related subject on which there is much debate, however this game's soundtrack can hardly be seen as an effective medium in which to promote awareness of gun ownership.

The designers of the soundtrack had any one overarching intention for influencing those who listen to it. To challenge the way the player views fundamental concepts of traditional life in the United States. These challenges, however, were undercut almost every step of the way by the game's play mechanics, and indeed, the game seems unified only in its messages concerning distrust of public figures and conventional media. Because the wholly one-sided manner in which the radio presents its political and social commentary, coupled with the ambiguous, jumbled messages sent through the gameplay, the player is largely left confused as to what the game maker's really meant to convey concerning gender roles and social issues in the U.S.

While my intial impression of Halo 3 still stands, I have to admit I found myself having a hell of a time with Forge mode. I really want to play that with some friends going at the same time. Also, for some reason, I've found the stupid quotient somewhat reduced on average in my Live matches. Maybe 'cause I always make sure to set the tone at the beginning, but I have yet to run into a truly annoying person. Well, there's always the stoner/drunkards who are invariably annoying, but more in an amusing way. And when they're on your team, they think you're a god if you can actually play the game. Happy playing.

Yep, sure is Halo.

I haven't touched Forge yet, and I have yet to play with my friends, so we'll see if this iteration of the biggest franchise on the block can become something truly special. 'Cause so far, well, it's pretty much the exact same game as Halo 2, just with bigger tectures and prettier water. That sounds disparaging, and well, it is. Forge may prove to be extremely entertaining though.

Anyone else notice Alex referred to as "Abe" at the beggining of his demo on the latest episode of On the Spot. Is that an inside joke?

I've been meaning to call attention to this sooner, but it's always fallen to the wayside.

On June 29, 2007, IGN.com released a feature titled "Ten Venerable Villains in Movies", it's here: http://games.ign.com/articles/800/800715p1.html?RSSwhen2007-06-29_140000&RSSid=800715

So, other than the rather boring nature of the article itself, I want to call attention to the last paragraph. Yes, that's right, IGN published an article with an advertisement embedded within it. CAN YOU BELIEVE THAT ****? I haven't visited IGN ever since. If you don't understand why I'm so incensed, understand that I've been reading gaming journalism for years. It's one of my possible career choices. So when I see one of the most visited gaming sites on the 'net subverting their journalistic standards by promoting a game and disguise it as editorial content... Well, it rubs me in a very wrong way. What do you think?