News Rumour: Gamespot Editor fired over review

If this is a sign of the amount of power held by the advertisers on such sites then in 6 months time the only reviews you will see will actually be written by the publishers own team and you would be better off going to somewhere like youtube for an unbiased review.

 

reviews need to be spot on and honest, at the end of the end its the gamer that gonna get the rough deal. Also i hope this reviewer gets another job quickly and has other like minded people working with him.

and finally, there has to be some poor quality games out there, so we can enjoy the good ones when they come along!

 

i think an average game should get 7.5 or so. the all "passing" games would get something from 5-10, i.e. these games are worth buying, depending on whether you like the genre or have spare money/time. all games below 5 are "failed", meaning you should actively avoid them, and hopefully prevent others from buying them as well.

 

The entire concept of rating a game on a score point based system is ludicrous; it is an attempt to quantify a subjective experience. The enjoyment to be wrought from a game is completely dependent on the end user. Tacking numbers to the game's quality just cheapens the opinion of the writer - compounded further when people can just take a glance at the numbers and decide off the bat that "ok, these guys gave it a decent rating, and so did these guys" while totally missing the boat about what might actually take place in the game. Not everybody who reads these things are the type of people who have done prior research into the content of the game they're about to get (as demonstrated by the number of 10 year olds with Grand Theft Auto 3 in their PS2s).

Hardware review scores work because they have something that exists in a distinctly numerical state; frame rates, or the amount of time it takes to perform a specific set of actions. Games don't really have that sort of thing to work with except at the technical level - but quantifying the technical merits, without scoring the rest of the game, would likely serve to pollute the overall review. Concrete information does not typically mesh with subjective information.

Honestly, I think we can get the point about what game journalists do and do not like about a game if they just write about it and let the readers actually examine the text of the review. Scores are just a cop-out for people with short attention spans who otherwise type TL;DR.

 

Goodbye Gamespot.com, you get no more visits from me. It's too bad because I really like their site. Another pc mag, I think it was PC World, did something similiar so I don't visit their site anymore. Power to the people!

 

If the advertisers don't like the scores given in reviews then they shouldn't advertise for bad games and in turn the developers shouldn't write bad games! Oh wait, its all money driven...... go figure......

 

Iv personally disagreed with many if Bit-techs reviews in the past but in the last 8 or so months, iv found myself agreeing pretty much to most of them.

My main gripe recently was with Gears Of Wars, had anyone mentioned it was plagued with issues and installation problems, i would have prepared myself for what was about to happen!
Never the less it is an amazing game, just abit buggy.

Nevertheless, everything eles on bit-tech has been spot on, the hardware mainly and i love the indepth reviews given. I look at Gamespots reviews with a pinch of salt but when i look here on the reviews for games or hardware i think...hmm...looks promising!

 

Theres a single player???? I had this game from launch and never noticed

 

Well... Hopefully you guys have your head on your shoulders. Advertisers shouldnt have a say in sh!t about your reviews.

Places that (possibly) do this kinda of thing just lose the consumers trust as this just leads to distrust that the readers will start to think on other reviews. A rep of high scores because of advertiser comment/influence will just deter people from taking the comment/review as genuine.

Pitiful really....

 

Money seems to be more important than integrity.

I cancelled my subscription on Friday when I found out about that. I have lost faith in Gamespot. Nothing they say on the site can be trusted now.

 

sucks to be that writer and Gamespot, they lost all respect in my book

 

Against bots.

 

as far as a review score, I think it's a lot like a grade in school. with A being 100% and D being 60% anything below that isn't really extremely playable and a failed game. I don't think an average game like say timeshift should always be a 50% it should be an average class grade of C which is 70%

does that make sense? anything below a 60% in school is failling and the same goes for games, that's why I think most games hit in the 7's to 8's if the developers do their homework and polish the game, get rid of the majority of bugs etc even if it's a rather bland game it will still be playable. There has to be a big failure on the developers part , rushed, untested, understaffed, small budget etc for a game to score below 60%

 

has this interview been linked?
http://www.joystiq.com/2007/12/03/exclusive-gertsmann-speaks-about-kandl-review-future/