Greg Kasavin sparks heated debate on violence in Bioshock: Infinite when he guests this week's Gameplay podcast.

Posted by Tiberius Jonez
email tiberiusjonez@gmail.com



Greg Kasavin, former Gamespot Editor and one of my favorite game reviewers of all time, stopped by for a visit with Kevin VanOrd in this week's Gamespot Gameplay podcast; which includes quite a heated debate on the occasionally shocking violence and controversial themes featured in Bioshock: Infinite. (beware spoilers from 00:49:00 to 01:05:00)

Among other things, the show includes a very interesting discussion on the birth and maturation of the modern shooter genre, the Metal Gear Solid series, Dark Souls II and a career retrospective on Kasavin's time at Gamespot, highlighting some of his very best game reviews.

Personally, it was great to hear Kasavin's thoughts on the industry again. Back in the day, he and Jeff Gerstmann were the go-to guys for quality game reviews. They were both major influences on me and it's safe to say that without them, GameJonez would not exist.

Gamespot veterans Carolyn Petit, Tyler Winegarner and Tom McShea all contribute to this spirited discussion. The show runs nearly 2 hours in its entirety and is interesting throughout, but if you're cramped for time you can skip around at will.

Greg Kasavin now works for Supergiant Games, the creators of Bastion. They recently revealed that they are working on their next release, titled "Transistor". Which platforms "Transistor" will be released on is yet to be determined, as is the release date. Stay tuned.

Penny Arcade authors publicly comment on Gerstmann firing from Gamespot

Penny Arcade was one of the first sites on the internet (along with us and Primotech) to react to the Jeff Gerstmann incident -- making it the subject of today's PA strip. Later in the day, the authors made their first public comment on the situation. An excerpt from their statement follows with the complete version available after the break.

From Penny Arcade:

I will tell you the Gerstmann Story as we heard it. Management claimed to have spoken to Jeff about his "tone" before, and no doubt it was this tone that created tensions between their editorial content, the direction of the site, and the carefully crafted relationships that allowed Gamespot to act as an engine of revenue creation. After Gerstmann's savage flogging of Kane & Lynch, a game whose marketing investment on Gamespot alone reached into the hundreds of thousands, Eidos (we are told) pulled hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of future advertising from the site.

Management has another story, of course: management always has another story. But it's the firm belief internally that Jeff was sacrificed. And it had to be Jeff, at least, we believe, precisely because of his stature and longevity. It made for a dramatic public execution that left the editorial staff in disarray. Would that it were only about the 6.0 - at least then you'd know how to score something if you wanted to keep your Goddamned job. No, this was worse: the more nebulous "tone" would be the guide. I assume it was designed to terrify them.

At this point, I can only assume that Jeff Gerstmann is somewhere, sitting at his computer in bemused wonderment at the public outcry over this entire situation. Honestly, he's probably happy as a clam since this whole thing is very likely increasing his value for whatever company hires him next.

Read the complete statement after the break.

Complete statement From Penny Arcade:

It's been a couple weeks discussing reviews and reviewers around here, but somewhere along the way I neglected to mention that their job is essentially impossible. The 7-9 scale they toil under is largely the result of an uneasy peace between the business and editorial wings of the venue. No matter what score they give it, high or low, they're reviled equally by the online chorus. Apparently, even when they do it right they're doing it wrong.

Jeff Gerstmann is no stranger to controversy. In general terms, Gamespot can be relied upon to give high-profile games scores which are slightly lower than their counterparts elsewhere. It's almost as though there is an algorithm in place there to correct the heady rush associated with cracking open an anticipated new title. Gerstmann's review of Twilight Princess cemented his reputation as a criminal renegade with no law but his own, even though he gave the game an 8.9 - a nine, essentially - out of ten.

I will tell you the Gerstmann Story as we heard it. Management claimed to have spoken to Jeff about his "tone" before, and no doubt it was this tone that created tensions between their editorial content, the direction of the site, and the carefully crafted relationships that allowed Gamespot to act as an engine of revenue creation. After Gerstmann's savage flogging of Kane & Lynch, a game whose marketing investment on Gamespot alone reached into the hundreds of thousands, Eidos (we are told) pulled hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of future advertising from the site.

Management has another story, of course: management always has another story. But it's the firm belief internally that Jeff was sacrificed. And it had to be Jeff, at least, we believe, precisely because of his stature and longevity. It made for a dramatic public execution that left the editorial staff in disarray. Would that it were only about the 6.0 - at least then you'd know how to score something if you wanted to keep your Goddamned job. No, this was worse: the more nebulous "tone" would be the guide. I assume it was designed to terrify them.

For Gabriel, this tale proves out his darkest suspicions. People believe things like this anyway, but they don't know it, and the shift from intuitive to objective knowledge is startling. I think it rarely gets to this point. The apparatus is very tight: there are layers of editorial control that can massage the score, even when the text tells a different tale. A more junior reviewer might have seen their Kane & Lynch review streamlined by this process, divested of its worrisome angles and overall troubling shape. It was Jeff Gerstmann's role high in the site's infrastructure that allowed his raw editorial content to pierce the core of the business.

(CW)TB out.

Gerstmann controversy update - forums on fire

Posted by Tiberius Jonez
email tiberiusjonez@gmail.com

The 'Gerstmann incident' isn't going away for Gamespot or Eidos any time soon. Both company's forums have been flooded by angry posters voicing their displeasure with a situation they appear to perceive as two money-hungry companies scapegoating an ethical journalist. Whether or not that is actually the case, no one knows since those directly involved in the mess are not commenting publicly beyond short, pat press releases.

The latest development in the ongoing saga is that Gamespot has removed the video review of Kane and Lynch that was the alleged cause of Gerstmann's firing in the first place. The text version of the review has been amended with a note stating that "this review has been updated to include differences between the Xbox 360 and PS3 versions and a clarification on the game's multiplayer mode."

For those of you that never saw the original video review, you can watch it after the break.




It's difficult to believe that Gamespot didn't know this would blow up in their face, which makes me wonder if there isn't more to the story than is being told. The obvious answer is, of course there is more to the story, but until either side talks, this isn't going away!

Gamespot releases very brief statement on Gerstmann firing

In response to the storm of attention swirling around the firing of Jeff Gerstmann from Gamespot, the site's parent company, CNET Networks, released a very brief statement on the situation today.

"GameSpot takes its editorial integrity extremely seriously," the statement reads. "For over a decade, Gamespot and the many members of its editorial team have produced thousands of unbiased reviews that have been a valuable resource for the gaming community. At CNET Networks, we stand behind the editorial content that our teams produce on a daily basis."

As for Gerstmann specifically, CNET was less forthcoming, saying only that "it is CNET Networks' policy not to comment on the status of its employees, current or former."

If this is CNET's idea of damage control, it strikes me as pretty hollow. They seem to want everyone to respect their 'editorial integrity', but they say nothing in response to allegations they allowed an advertiser to dictate editorial content. A statement like this may have an effect opposite the one CNET intended. They may have been better off simply remaining mute on the subject, in essence taking the stance that they are above suspicion. Instead, they only further confirmed that their integrity is in question.

I suspect we'll hear more about this next week.

Gamespot fires reviewer Jeff Gerstmann to appease Eidos

Today is a sad day for gaming journalism. Game sites and magazines struggle daily to gain acceptance from the general public as legitimate sources of journalism, and this one is no exception. While GameJonez is a small fish (at present) swimming in a very large pond, we always strive to bring you news from the gaming industry in an honest and ethical manner. Unfortunately, it seems Gamespot does not share these values.

According to a report from Primotech, Gamespot fired Editorial Director Jeff Gerstmann, one of their best game reviewers, after he wrote a negative review of the game Kane and Lynch: Dead Men. Kane and Lynch is the latest release from game developer Eidos, who also happens to be a huge source of advertising revenue for Gamespot. Primotech alleges that Gerstmann was fired as a direct result of pressure from Eidos after he gave the game a 6.0 out of 10. In comparison, Metacritic gives the game an average score of 68 out of 100. Our metareview of the game suggested it should have been given more time in the oven before being served to the gaming public.

Eidos is heavily advertising Kane and Lynch this week on Gamespot, including interactive flash banners.

The latest Penny-Arcade comic features a brief overview of this controversy. However, because the comic isn’t scheduled to ‘go live’ until tomorrow, commentary from either Gabe or Tycho is currently unavailable.

Gerstmann was with Gamespot since 1996 and was largely responsible for their success. As Primotech points out in their story, it is possible that other factors contributed to his dismissal in addition to the review, although this is completely unsubstantiated at the present. While they stand behind their information and their source, no official announcement has been made by Gerstmann or Gamespot. We trust they wouldn't run with this story without solid information. Expect more details to emerge online in the next 24 hours.

In the meantime, if this all holds up as true, it is a chilling turn of events that could have far-reaching effects across the business of game journalism. How credible do gaming outlets appear if the opinions expressed in 'reviews' of games are dictated by advertisers who also make the games?