Victor Godinez: Fired up about a firing
Seeing red over pink-slipping of reviewer
10:46 AM CST on Saturday, December 1, 2007
vgodinez@dallasnews.com A lot of people seem convinced that many game reviewers are corrupt shills or, at best, that their employers are corrupt shills for the companies that make games.
Events this week didn't do much to dispel that impression.
Thursday night and on into Friday this week, rumors and reports began to filter out that popular game news and reviews site Gamespot.com had fired one of its reviewers, Jeff Gerstmann, for an overly negative review of the Eidos-published game Kane & Lynch.
Reportedly, Eidos, which had already been paying for huge Kane & Lynch ads to be plastered all over Gamespot.com, threatened to withdraw future ad campaigns worth hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Gamespot, which is owned by the online conglomerate CNET Networks Inc., turned around and fired Mr. Gerstmann, allegedly not so much for the low-ish 6.0 score, but for the negative "tone" of the review.
Mr. Gerstmann did confirm publicly that he has been fired, but no one is talking on the record about what involvement Eidos had in the decision and why Gamespot ultimately cut its reviewer loose.
Plenty of anonymous commentary from insiders, none of it flattering to Eidos and Gamespot, is hitting the gaming blogs and Web sites, though.
On the other hand, Mr. Gerstmann's review is still up on Gamespot.com, so it's not like this thing is being flushed down the memory hole.
And frankly, the mediocre reviews the game has been getting on other sites and the scorchingly bad review score of 3.3 bestowed on the game by Gamespot readers make you wonder why Eidos would get so incensed by this one review.
I've always been a fan of Gamespot, and regard its reviews as some of the most thorough and intelligent on the Web.
But the deluge of anonymous commentary and the fact that Mr. Gerstmann was fired are substantial chunks of circumstantial evidence, and Gamespot has to offer a public account of what happened.
And it's not as if there isn't precedent for gaming companies retaliating against game reporters who get out of line.
A while back, popular gaming blog Kotaku earned hero status among the gamer crowd when it broke some news about Sony's online plans for the PS3 ahead of an official Sony press conference.
Sony then essentially blackballed Kotaku, claiming it would no longer grant interviews and other official access to the site.
Kotaku stood firm, and Sony quickly relented. But the damage to Sony's reputation was done, and the skirmish just fueled the popular theory that big game companies regularly exert this sort of pressure.
For the record, I've never been asked to change a review score or been criticized for a score after it ran.
But sites like Gamespot are exclusively dependent on that sort of advertising revenue, and so game publishers and hardware makers have vastly more leverage there.
Did they use that leverage unethically with Gamespot, and did Gamespot shamefully bow to that pressure?
I don't think there's enough evidence yet to render a verdict, but Gamespot and Eidos need to start making their case.
Victor Godinez covers technology for The Dallas Morning News. Read more of his video game coverage at punchbutton.beloblog.com.
Log in to comment