When I access the review, I get a note that I should report the matter on this forum. Here is a link to the review that doesn't display for me:

https://www.gamespot.com/reviews/trioncube-review/1900-6166751/

I am currently using Microsoft Edge as my web browser. I encounter the issue whether signed into my Gamespot account or not.

I'm not big on 1up, since their reviews tend to leave me thoroughly unimpressed. Sometimes they'll post a really great review, but then they'll follow that up with 3 or 4 that make no sense at all. The site just feels like something the editors do in their spare time, without much interest in whether it really excels or just kind of... exists. I vastly prefer IGN.

Of course, I like MY site better than both of them! It doesn't have video reviews, but it has some of the finest reviews on the Internet. We've had gamers write to thank us for our reviews from all over the world. If you like video reviews, definitely check out sites like IGN, GameTrailers, 1up and so forth, but in my mind there's no better site around for written reviews than HonestGamers (http://www.honestgamers.com/). I hope those who are seriously looking for a quality site with honest reviews will at least check it out and do some reading before deciding on a new home post-GameSpot.

Even if you decide you don't like HonestGamers, keep looking before you settle. There are lots of great sites out there like Deeko, GamerNode, GameRevolution and more. They needa larger audience and are willing to work for it a lot harder than sites like 1up.

Just letting you guys know: Major gaming sites here in Germany had this in their news as well ... they really hit a nerve with that. Although I believe stuff like this is going on at most big game review sites.. it was just too damn obvious at gamespot now.bedlam83

This really bothers me, and here's why: any time I post a positive review on my site for a game some people don't like, people will talk about how I was paid by advertisers or whatever. Of course, I'm not. Games are rarely advertised on my site at all right now (it's too small to attract companies like Eidos), and when they are the staff don't even usually notice because that's handled separately. Half the time, when we're accused of it we bought the game ourselves and just happened to like it, or whatever.

So anyway, sites like mine will now have to pay for what CNet seems to have done. We'll post a review and we'll have people complaining that we're sell-outs or whatever, just because those individuals don't like the game as much as we do. This is going to happen to all sorts of sites, not just mine. It's completely unfair to the game critics out there who make sure that they write every review as fairly as possible.

From the look of things, this is a new policy at CNet, but already people are posting about which other reviews online were also financed by so-and-so. The downward spiral has already begun.

Yeah gang... 1up is looking better and better. I'm waiting for the official word from Cnet, and if it doesn't answer a lot of questions, I'll see you at the 1up boards. It's great... we can say **** and **** and other stuff we really say in real life.

donalbane

That's kind of stupid, actually. My site allows people to say those words, too, but that doesn't mean much of anything except thatI (like 1up)am notworried about offending the parents of 12-year-olds who might visit the site. You're not mature just because you know how to cuss. Generally, profanity has the opposite effect you seem to think it does when you're trying totalk abouta game. It just makes you look inept, especially compared to someone who takes the time to rant about a game intelligently.

This is an important issue that deserves thousands of posts' worth of discussion. That much is clear to anyone who has ever given the matter much thought. If asked a few days ago whether or not GameSpot received money for good review scores, most of us would have said "Absolutely not" and would have beleived it. Now, the answer isn't so clear.

The simple fact is that a site like GameSpot is run by a corporation that thirsts for ad revenue. That money is necessary to pay writers, to maintain servers, to expand the busines... It's what youmight call 'all-important.'

Sites like mine aren't able to pass up GameSpot and IGN because we don't have the revenue. We can't afford to advertise all over the place. We can't pay writers to work full-time. That puts us at a disadvantage. It means we can't build up enough traffic to attract game publishers who are willing to part with exclusives. They'd rather pay IGN and GameSpot for exclusives than take a chance with a site that can't even promise half the traffic of those bigger sites.

GameSpot can't afford to lose that edge, because if it does it will drop down a few pegs and a significant chunk of the investor money will disappear. We've always known that, but we thought that GameSpot would keep in mind one simple truth: if a news and reviews site loses its integrity, it loses the most critical portion of its audience.

I continue to believe that we're missing an important chunk of the story because as a person who runs my own site and who regularly reviews games, I can't imagine a corporation as huge as CNet doing something as stupid. In the long term, this could spell the end of GameSpot's dominance and if people want to fill up threads saying things to that effect, they have every right to do so without being told they're overreacting.

Speculation? If the facts were different, don't you think Gamespot would've made an official response by now? Don't you think PR would've done something by now cause the GS image is down the crapper now. The silence from Gamespot/CNET is so f**king damning.

icream

When an employer releases an employee, it's not at liberty to discuss the terms of that release with anyone, not even potential new employers that call for a reference. The most said employer can do is answer whether or not they'd hire that individual again. Otherwse, lawsuits will follow. GameSpot's silence in this matter tells us NOTHING. Notice that Jeff apparently isn't at liberty to discuss it, either. All we really know right now is that Jeff doesn't work for GameSpot anymore, that they parting apparently wasn't amicable, and that the timing was suspiciously close to GameSpot's removal of a Kane & Lynch review (that happened to be posted at the same time as a conspicuous ad set from the game's publisher).

GameSpot is visited by millions of people each month, so far as I know. If everyone who posted in this thread boycotted the site, it wouldn't even be a drop in the bucket. Trying to organize some sort of boycott is almost sure to be a useless endeavor and the effects wouldn't be felt by GameSpot for months, perhaps years.

If you decide to stop visiting the site, that's a personal decision and no one could blame you based on what we know so far, but it's not going to send a message the way you think it will. Ten new users will sign up in your place.