[BlueFlames]

A brief refresher:

• Gamespot contributor
• Kane and Lynch review
• Conflicting ad campaign
• Fired.

Jeff and several other former-Gamespot contributers re-emerged last year, with a Wiki-inspired gaming site, Giant Bomb.  It's actually a pretty cool design, that has much more material than other gaming sites can pack in, simply because of all of the user-generated content.  Of course, they've not kicked back to let the users do all the work, keeping a robust (for a relatively young site, anyway) collection of reviews, previews, and other gaming content.  It was quite pleasing to get content and consumer advice from a team that was willing to give up their employment to preserve their integrity.

(Screenshot of GB, as of 9-20-09)

Oh!  Terribly sorry, ODST!  I didn't see you or your four-star review over there.  I was having a hard time wading through the mire of ODST advertising.

Of course, I don't know if advertising dollars necessarily affected ODST's review on Giant Bomb.  It's higher than what I'd have given such a derivative product, but it wouldn't be the first time I've had a difference of opinion with a GB review.  It's just that it's a little easier to mark it down to differing tastes in games, when the website hasn't been wallpapered with advertisements for the reviewed product.  This is what gaming journalism seems to be.  It's not enough to know how well your proclivities sync up with those of the writer.  You have to try to determine how much influence publishers can buy and from whom they can buy it.

I'll grant this has been status quo for gaming journalism for a long while now.  I'll grant that GB's ODST review could have been marginally rosier.  I had rather hoped, though, that Jeff Gerstmann's rebellion had accomplished something toward putting a stop to this guessing game over journalistic integrity in gaming.  Still, here I am, wondering if he honestly thought half a game, given a full game's price, with decidedly formulaic gameplay (based on an aging formula, at that) and a mediocre story was genuinely worth four stars.

[Ransom]

The game isn't even out yet. Have you played it somehow, or are you just questioning someone's journalistic integrity based on assumptions?

[General Battuta]

You don't sound like you've played it.

I'm willing to wager ODST will be one of the best games of the year.

[Liberator]

They said that about Cloverfield, Transformers 2 and X-Men 3 also...

[Ransom]

Anybody who was willing to wager on those being some of the best games of their years probably wasn't paying attention since they are all movies

[General Battuta]

 

[Liberator]

True, but what I was commenting on was that like most of the "best game of the year" or "movie" or whatever, they were big, not because they of any inherent quality of craftsmanship or solid entertainment value, but instead they were big because they were hyped up into orbit by viral campaigns and aggressive dumbass fans.

My vote for GOTY, barring accident, injury or FS3 is Batman: Arkham Asylum.  It has the look of Batman, the feel of Batman and it has Kevin Conroy and Mark Hamil.  The controls are solid.  The graphics are near perfect, of which my only real complaint is that when Bats isn't fighting he's a little stiff.  Did I mention it has Kevin Conroy and Mark Hamil?  It's the certainly the best Batman game ever and is a good contender for the best game of this year.

[General Battuta]

Arkham Asylum is a great game, but it has no cooperative or multiplayer features. 'Solid entertainment value' is basically the definition of Halo.

Already got eight or nine people coming over with a couple TVs to play Firefight on launch day.

[NGTM-1R]

Talking talking talking, but all I hear is nonsense since you don't actually know what you're talking about.

Fixed.

[Vidmaster]

I thought is Kane&Lynch review was WWWWWAAAAYYYYY off.
I generally like the guy and his reviews but that one just wasn't correct, or at least I feel that way.

[Ransom]

It wasn't that unfair. It's a very flawed title. The only area I disagreed with was his comments on the unlikeable characters, because I actually found that part of the game to be its saving grace - purposefully unlikeable protagonists are a rarity, especially in games, and I thought they pulled it off fairly well.

[Vidmaster]

I really enjoyed the game on all fronts plus it sold pretty well too. Most other reviews gave higher scores.
While I of course oppose such thoughts of comparing scores, I thought he was desperatly trying to complain about everything that the game did wrong instead of what was good. The Gametrailers review did Kane&Lynch more justice.

[Ransom]

Gerstmann gave it a 6, which I think is very reasonable. That's only slightly less than the average score it received according to review aggregate sites. I'm glad you enjoyed the game, but I think you're reaching.

[NGTM-1R]

I thought he was desperatly trying to complain about everything that the game did wrong instead of what was good. The Gametrailers review did Kane&Lynch more justice.

This is not an invalid form of reviewing. If you're not pointing out everything that went wrong, people ought to be suspicious of you.

[Vidmaster]

You got a point.
Still, I couldn't shake the feeling during the video review that he tried to give the publisher a bloody nose more hardly than reviewing the game in an honest way.