Jeff Gerstmann canned from Gamespot for K&L review?

[wco81]

Doesn't EA cultivate the people it makes a part of their Community Leaders program?

And then these Community Leaders will either review or tout the EA games on various forums.

Anyways, I downloaded some gaming podcasts for the first time. A lot of end of the year stuff mostly.

One of them was Gamespot's Hotspot and they repeated the company line. Not wholly convincing and they all yukked it up -- in fact the 1up one and the Gamespot one sounded too much like they wanted to convey they're having a keg party.

[sdrotar]

Ok but the Nhl08 reviews from his site 5wg and any others i might add who were invited to EA were fluffed up a bit . Caught up in the excitement perhaps or told not to say anything negative its still all too similar to what the original post is about.

That's your opinion, of course, and you're certainly entitled to it. In contrast, however, I don't believe it was "fluffed up" one bit.

I feel that "MLB 07: The Show", "Skate" and "NHL 08" are the best sports games I've played this year terms of innovation and "feel", the translation of the sport's nuance into game-form.

I was never told to say anything negative, nor would I ever agree to do so. I keep my own counsel when it comes to my opinion.

[sdrotar]

Did I miss the lefty bug? Yes, I did. But please keep in mind that it became visible and famous only after tons of people in OS' forums started to sim thousands upon thousands of man-hours' worth of seasons before it became visib

Well missing it is one thing, you failed to rectify it. Whether it was a small blurb at the end of your review stating the correction or on the forums acknowledging it at the time.

I did indeed mention and discuss it further in the forum after it was validated by the MVP team as a physics/calculation error. I remember it quite clearly.

I remember how stubborn you were to even acknowledge a problem like that in the forums. That's the issue. I would say even the most hardened sports gamers know that the Bill Abner's of the review business will miss something. It's the fact that you were so reluctant to acknowledge an issue that severe, when all the facts were pointing in that direction, is what made me question your credibility.

I'm afraid we don't agree on those points, but I'm sorry that one event - which was missed by every release-day reviewer on the planet nearly four years ago - has apparently caused you to evaluate my entire body of work and my character. I personally believe that's neither realistic nor fair, though I certainly respect you right to hold whatever opinion you so choose.

However, it's important to note that opinion is very different than fact.

As for the Xbox.com stuff, it's pure fluff but then again no one expects that there will be hard-hitting exposes on xbox.com.

But I never get a the sense that journalistic integrity is coming through in your stuff (I don't believe video game reporting is journalism but that's the word I'm going to use). And that's mostly because of your posts on the OS forums. I don't have a litany of posts to quote that show where I think your off but the tone and writing doesn't appeal to me for the reason I stated above.

Well, to this day, I still haven't even reached 8,000 posts at OS, and I'm shocked I have that many; even after working there for more than five years. That's a very low number for a regular, let alone the guy in charge of the site's content.

Off-the-cuff forum posts aren't indicative of formal content, however - not even close.

As for my tone, that's fine... I never liked Hemingway, and he was a literary genius. Everyone has personal tastes - and all of them are valid.

To me it's a lot like pastapadre.com to a much lesser extent. I visit the site to get first looks at screens and movies but I know he's nothing more the an EA mouthpiece after coming over from a madden fan site. Then up until recently he's was taking every opportunity to slag off non-EA games while propagandizing games like EA Live.

Well, I know Bryan "Pastapadre" pretty well, and I like him. He's an authentic person, who's really doing things for the love of it. That said, yes - he gets hits - he knows what sells... screenshots. And EA gives him more of them.

Let's be honest here; in the sports games community, nothing's more important. So he capitalizes on that. I don't mess with another man's business. It is what it is and it works for him. So be it.

But if you find out what company I'm a "mouthpiece" for, let me know - I've heard it about every developer under the sun for almost seven years now, including when you were on OS' staff with me.

The funny thing about that was I was always a "mouthpiece" for whomever I gave a good review to. So if I liked an EA game, I was an EA schill... until I lauded a 2K game; then I was purportedly on their payroll. After a while, I learned that it was simply the reflexive ranting of fanboys slavering over their "precious", and I learned to ignore them - because it's never been true anyway; and the beauty of it is that, unlike them, I can prove it - it's all on the (web-)printed page.

But people see what they want to see, and I can't stop that. C'est la vie.

Finally people understand that the web review business is all about site hits and no one can fault you for that. But it seems writing fluff pieces for xbox.com, doesn't seem to add to the portfolio of journalistic integrity.

With your choices to write for xbox.com and EA, along with your posts on the OS forums and 5w-g, I just never get the feeling that it's genuine. I'm sure it is but the perception from your pass gaffs makes it difficult for me to take your stuff seriously.

Well, again, that's your opinion. But when other noted game writers write gaming blurbs for Playboy, Time or other outlets, they aren't perceived as less authentic.

I'm trying to climb the ladder, certainly - but I'm always doing it with heart and a dedication to my readers. I value their trust, first and foremost, and I have no intention of betraying it.

That's as genuine as I can be.

[sdrotar]

Doesn't EA cultivate the people it makes a part of their Community Leaders program?

I suppose they do. They do seem to look for the MaddenMania-types; preaching to the converted. I'm not converted.

And then these Community Leaders will either review or tout the EA games on various forums.

They do. And it's one of the things that drive me nuts. I'm sure you've noticed that "Community Leader" sites, as well as larger ones, simply reprint a press release and toss it up as news.

No, thank you. I get those press releases, too - but I've told all of those companies (and they all do it) that I appreciate the information, but I'm not in PR, and I don't get paid to to their work for them.

I may comment on something interesting within a release - after all, we all like to speculate - but, to me, a press release, in and of itself, isn't "news".

[sdrotar]

Shawn:

Appreciate the clarification, and it's interesting that you're not being paid for your services by Microsoft or EA.

Still, have you written reviews for sites owned by Microsoft and EA of titles developed and/or produced by those respective companies? And if you have, can you claim complete, unvarnished objectivity when reviewing for those sites?

No, I have not. My Xbox.com articles are "tips and tricks"-type pieces; strategies to play better or hints on things like recruiting in college games. Basically, it's "sports games for newbies". It's kindergarten compared to the stuff discussed by hardcore sports gamers, so I'm not surprised that many (or most) of you haven't read them... they're basically remedial.

My EASports.com coverage is limited to one thing - previewing an NBA Game of the Week like this.
You'll note that it doesn't (and never has - all four of them! ) referred to any specific product - and it won't. Quite frankly, I think that NBA Live has been awful for years, and I told them that I would not endorse the product. If they wanted my NBA content, it would only be about the real-life NBA itself, and would not tie into NBA Live at all. The weeklies are written for hoops fans, not gamers.

Finally, have you ever ripped an MS or EA title in a review for one of those sites?

I'm curious, not accusatory.

As you can see after I've explained the types of columns I write at those places, I don't do any review-type pieces, so I haven't "ripped" them.
But if you've read me for long, you should instantly be able to recall literally dozens of EA and Microsoft titles that I've panned, including the entire "March Madness" line, the last few years of "NBA Live" and "Madden" (I called it an empty basement being sold as a full house two years back) and the putrid XSN Sports line, save "Links".
I think my body of work is quite clear in this regard - while I applaud attempts at innovation, I don't play favorites.
I don't have stock in Microsoft, EA or anyone else, and I don't see it as my job to make their lives easier.
I calls 'em as I sees 'em, and that's it.

But the bottom line is that both Microsoft's Xbox site and EA Sports World are nothing more than house organs, PR gaming megasites for the respective companies. So it's only natural for me to question your objectivity when you write about those companies' games at 5WG considering that you've written shiny, happy editorial for their house organ Web sites, paid or unpaid. You've admitted that your motive is to increase exposure for 5WG, and the only way you can do that is to write copy that pleases the masters of the MS and EA sites. They're not going to retain you -- providing exposure for 5WG -- if you shred their games.

Questioning my objectivity is entirely fair.
But with all due respect, claiming that I'm on their payroll with no evidence whatsoever to support that and saying it is fact in order to defame me is most definitely not, and it's frankly offensive and inflammatory.

Moreover, you'd be surprised how much control I have over the process. If I feel a game doesn't deserve coverage on Xbox.com, I don't cover it, and that's completely at my discretion per my agreement with Microsoft. In EA's case, I don't even address video games at all.

It's hard to be pressured by someone who doesn't compensate you - and that's exactly why I don't accept any.

I was a professional journalist for 5 1/2 years and have been a PR professional for the last 14 years. While in print journalism, there's no way my paper would have let me write racing PR for a fluff motorsports weekly, paid or unpaid, while I was employed by my paper.

Indeed. The print world is quite different; and were I employed by say, Newsweek, I'm sure the same rules would apply. But I'm not, and the life of a freelance writer is very different than a contract writer like it sounds like you were at your paper - and this doesn't even take into account what we're discussing: online, not print, which is often a different animal entirely. As I see it, I'm not writing PR for Microsoft; I'm helping their existing customers; ones that aren't savvy enough to enjoy the benefit of communities like DSP. It's a very different thing. The devil's in the details.

Appreciate your candor, man. I applaud your efforts at 5WG, as it fills an underserved niche in the marketplace -- intelligent writing about games.

Take care,
PK

I appreciate that. I've always felt that kind of discussion was lacking within the industry, and wanted to attempt to bridge that gap between developers and consumers. Certainly, that will be hit-and-miss at times, but the goal remains the same.

[pk500]

As I see it, I'm not writing PR for Microsoft; I'm helping their existing customers; ones that aren't savvy enough to enjoy the benefit of communities like DSP. It's a very different thing. The devil's in the details.

That is ethical slicing and self-justification of the highest order, Shawn. You're not writing PR for MS, you're just helping the little customer?

Come on.

You can spin it all you want, that you're not directly reviewing or pimping their games, that you're not compensated by them. But when you write a tips-and-tricks piece -- paid or unpaid -- for the PR machine of the current gaming colossus of the universe, you become a small cog in that machine.

That's even more true now since MS and so many large firms are using their community-based sites as part of their marketing strategy. The viral nature of these sites and the frequency of users' responses can help MS communicate its gaming message unfiltered to its customers in a more direct, rapid fashion than ever.

And for some of us, that cog doesn't mesh very neatly into the gearbox of another site that prides itself on objective gaming journalism.

The detail upon which Lucifer can chew is this: I don't think you can straddle the fence of PR and news -- no matter how long your legs stretch to each side -- and be considered completely transparent.

The type of piece shouldn't matter. If you're writing brownie recipes for the Web site of a gaming company -- which is most definitely part of that company's PR operation -- then you shouldn't depict yourself as a serious, ethical commentator on the same industry at a different location. Especially when you've admitted that the reason you do some of these unpaid, high-profile gigs is to gain exposure for 5WG. Almost sounds like a trade-out to me, even if that's not negotiated.

I feel a bit less strident about your EA work because it doesn't pertain to gaming. But your MS work most certainly does, even if you're not critiquing individual games for xbox.com.

Even if you claim you're just "helping customers," then don't you become a de facto member of Microsoft's customer service teams, whose job is to provide solutions to customers, which keeps them happy, generates return business and inflates revenues for Microsoft? That's just a very small part of the complete flow chart, but it does insert you into the MS flow chart.

To me, ethics aren't flexible, malleable to the situation. It doesn't matter what kind of piece. You either apply them all of the time or don't gain my complete trust as a reader.

I must be old school.

Take care,
PK

[sdrotar]

As I see it, I'm not writing PR for Microsoft; I'm helping their existing customers; ones that aren't savvy enough to enjoy the benefit of communities like DSP. It's a very different thing. The devil's in the details.

That is ethical slicing and self-justification of the highest order, Shawn. You're not writing PR for MS, you're just helping the little customer?

Come on.

You can spin it all you want, that you're not directly reviewing or pimping their games, that you're not compensated by them. But when you write a tips-and-tricks piece -- paid or unpaid -- for the PR machine of the current gaming colossus of the universe, you become a small cog in that machine.

That's even more true now since MS and so many large firms are using their community-based sites as part of their marketing strategy. The viral nature of these sites and the frequency of users' responses can help MS communicate its gaming message unfiltered to its customers in a more direct, rapid fashion than ever.

And for some of us, that cog doesn't mesh very neatly into the gearbox of another site that prides itself on objective gaming journalism.

The detail upon which Lucifer can chew is this: I don't think you can straddle the fence of PR and news -- no matter how long your legs stretch to each side -- and be considered completely transparent.

The type of piece shouldn't matter. If you're writing brownie recipes for the Web site of a gaming company -- which is most definitely part of that company's PR operation -- then you shouldn't depict yourself as a serious, ethical commentator on the same industry at a different location. Especially when you've admitted that the reason you do some of these unpaid, high-profile gigs is to gain exposure for 5WG. Almost sounds like a trade-out to me, even if that's not negotiated.

I feel a bit less strident about your EA work because it doesn't pertain to gaming. But your MS work most certainly does, even if you're not critiquing individual games for xbox.com.

Even if you claim you're just "helping customers," then don't you become a de facto member of Microsoft's customer service teams, whose job is to provide solutions to customers, which keeps them happy, generates return business and inflates revenues for Microsoft? That's just a very small part of the complete flow chart, but it does insert you into the MS flow chart.

To me, ethics aren't flexible, malleable to the situation. It doesn't matter what kind of piece. You either apply them all of the time or don't gain my complete trust as a reader.

I must be old school.

Take care,
PK

You're distorting things dramatically, but that's your prerogative, I suppose. Have you even read the Xbox.com content?

I've obviously wasted everyone's time here, as I was judged and convicted by this kangaroo court before anyone ever saw the evidence.

It's a shame that none of you know me, have met me, spoken to me, or ever tried to gain a measure of who I am as a person. But who cares, right? That doesn't matter - forums like this are better served by pontificating, so why let the facts get in the way of our chest-thumping?

So be it. As I said before, opinions aren't facts, and if, PK, you hadn't been spreading falsehoods about me - of which you knew nothing and no evidence - I wouldn't have come here and discuss this at all. I noticed you've glossed over that, however.

Where's the ethics in spreading lies, PK? Inventing stories about someone else to make you appear to be "in the know"? That's hardly ethical, or "old school". You've taken residence in a glass house here; so please keep the stones in your pocket.

I have worked my tail off to improve sports gaming and the sports gaming community at large (by giving years of my own time freely), and whether you or anyone here chooses to admit that is fine. If I'm really what you believe is wrong with this medium, then you're in for some serious disappointment down the road.

I'm stunned that I take the time to explain everything, only for this. I have to come on here to address a defamation of my character and I did my best to handle it with patience and grace, despite what's been said of me. Did I have to? No - but I did so because it's important to me to show people that I'm a consumer advocate - which I am and have always been - no matter how you, PK, choose to slice it.

I hope that others on this site can see past the petty posturing and do what so few people in the internet age do anymore - read first, and then make up their mind second. If not, then I fear that concerns about anyone's objectivity will one day become the very least of every gaming web site's problems. Disgraceful.

[Danimal]

Shawn -

Visited your site maybe once or twice in my life and really had no idea who you were before this (or even it was your site) and I have to say I agree with your last post here.

You certainly handled it well and explained yourself. Don't worry some of us can figure it out.

[JRod]

Well, I know Bryan "Pastapadre" pretty well, and I like him. He's an authentic person, who's really doing things for the love of it. That said, yes - he gets hits - he knows what sells... screenshots. And EA gives him more of them.

Let's be honest here; in the sports games community, nothing's more important. So he capitalizes on that. I don't mess with another man's business. It is what it is and it works for him. So be it.

But if you find out what company I'm a "mouthpiece" for, let me know - I've heard it about every developer under the sun for almost seven years now, including when you were on OS' staff with me.

The funny thing about that was I was always a "mouthpiece" for whomever I gave a good review to. So if I liked an EA game, I was an EA schill... until I lauded a 2K game; then I was purportedly on their payroll. After a while, I learned that it was simply the reflexive ranting of fanboys slavering over their "precious", and I learned to ignore them - because it's never been true anyway; and the beauty of it is that, unlike them, I can prove it - it's all on the (web-)printed page.

But people see what they want to see, and I can't stop that. C'est la vie.

I never said you where a mouthpeice. I just don't find you to be credible because the attitude you display here makes me wonder what you will you do just to get exposure. Pasta up until recently was an EA mouthpiece not because he was posting screens or hyping EA games, but rarely said anything good about other games either at OS or his site. When you are that vehemently for something, it should be a little suspicious.

His site and what he does has nothing to do this argument, but I used it just an example why I don't find your writings to be credible because to a lesser extent you are a pastapadre even though you don't see it.


Plus I think what you have written here spoken volumes on your attitude towards gaming and the reason and logic you use to drive your points home at 5w-g.

It's something that I don't find appealing to me.

I wanted to comment quote by quote, but I don't want to give this any more of my time. Instead, I'll finish the post by saying quoting this...

I'm trying to climb the ladder, certainly - but I'm always doing it with heart and a dedication to my readers. I value their trust, first and foremost, and I have no intention of betraying it.

Real journalism isn't dedicated to its readers. That sentiment real journalism justifies to cover frivolous things to get ratings and say well it's what our readers want. If you call yourself a journalist and are doing this to be for profit, then you need readers to make living, but it comes with a price. Your failure to understand that being popular to enhance readership and being "journalistic" are contradictory, is why I find your writing unappealing to me.

Hopefully 5w-g will take off for you and I will probably read what you write once in a while because I'm not a snob that can't consume something or someone's work because I disagree with it. But right now, I just don't find you to be credible. Maybe that will change, and if it does then I'll be a daily visitor to 5w-g.

[JRod]

You choose to post here. By doing anything public, you are opening yourself to criticism. Guess what the entire world is one big kangaroo court. (My profession is probably the biggest -- politics. And everyday is a kangaroo court mixed in with high school popularity contests and playground drama.) You are judged fairly and wrongly in everything you do.

But to throw a tantrum because someone doesn't agree with you isn't the DSP way. DSP has been one of the last bastions in the sports gaming scene to talk about your issues and know that while many will disagree with you and some strong words my be exchanged, you can come back tomorrow and talk about something else as friends.

f***, everyone on this board has strong opinions. Next July during football season, I will get beat up in almost every post because I'll post something that someone will disagree with. Yet, I know that by making the post, there's the chance someone will vehemently disagree with me.

If you can't take it, why post here? Did you expect to come on here and have everyone to say, oh well that explains it. I guess I'll add 5w-g to my RSS feed now.

The discussion was civil and no one called you names. They questioned your integrity and you responded. Some of us also read your xbox articles, some posts at 5w-g and your OS posts. But I guess that doesn't count.

There's not posturing, it was a discussion and you have every right to defend yourself. Don't those that disagree with you have a right to post their thoughts?

Danimal agrees with what you said, and I'm not sure he's not alone and maybe they will post. I don't agree with you and I've posted.

Guess what that's a discussion. You just didn't like it because PK and some others have a different opinion. You are upset over that? What if we read your writings and still find your stuff questionable? Is that allowed?

[Jimmydeicide]

I hope that others on this site can see past the petty posturing and do what so few people in the internet age do anymore - read first, and then make up their mind second. If not, then I fear that concerns about anyone's objectivity will one day become the very least of every gaming web site's problems. Disgraceful.

Shawn i have nothing against you at all and i liked what ive read at your site and the fact that you show up on some sites i like to read would make me believe something you wrote over most others as you seem to be one of us, but as i quoted what you said above unless im mis understanding you thats the reason we are so defensive now about reviews, because games cost more now, because there is so much crap weve been wading thru to get to the good ones we do read first and buy later but if what were reading isnt true then we may as well just buy the game blindy and then get pissed its a pos like most of us used to do.

The point of this thread was dont believe what you read so were no better off by reading first if what were reading is biased.

[pk500]

Shawn:

Defamation of character?

The only factual falsehood that I incorrectly assumed, and wrote, here was that you were being paid by MS and EA, hence the original comments about being "on the dole." You have corrected that; I acknowledged and apologized for my error.

Otherwise, questions of objectivity when you're writing for the PR Web organ of two major gaming companies -- paid or unpaid -- while also serving as the executive editor of a gaming Web site that prides itself on honest journalism are entirely within the boundaries of opinion.

And I still have questions about that objectivity and the ethics of that practice, and I also have questions about why the practice is tolerable in gaming journalism but untenable in "regular" journalism. You're entirely right and justified to buttress your objectivity and ethics -- I would be stunned if you didn't. Yet I'm just as much within my bounds to question them due to the seemingly incongruent practice of writing for a journalistic gaming site and a PR gaming site simultaneously.

You are not paid by EA and MS; I was very incorrect to assume and write that. Again, apologies.

But that was the only question of fact in the original post. Questions about objectivity and ethics, ironically enough, are subjective in this blurred world of gaming PR and gaming journalism.

You stand by your work, which you should. Other than the factual error of your compensation, I also stand by everything I wrote.

You are a smart guy, and it's reflected in your writing, both here and at 5WG. You are not what is wrong with this medium. In fact, your successful effort to insert some editorial intelligence, style and class through 5WG into a hobby that still is incorrectly perceived too much as a "kid's game" is what's RIGHT with this medium.

But the rise of "citizen journalists" also raises serious questions about objectivity and ethics by the "new media" across all topical spectrums, not just gaming. We have bloggers in NHL press boxes wearing team jerseys. We have Wal-Mart employees disguising themselves on company blogs as customers, pimping the company. It's getting harder and harder to sift through the PR to find the truth.

You clearly are dedicated to sports gaming and have devoted years to it, and I applaud you sincerely for that. But you know what? There are plenty of guys here who have been avid sports gamers for 15, 20 years or more. This is not a Johnny-come-lately, "ROXXORS" "What's a Dreamcast?" community.

We're still entitled to our opinion on subjective matters, like objectivity and ethics, even though our platform may be smaller, less official and reach fewer readers. Errors must be corrected, and I'm glad that you have set me straight about your compensation. But opinion still should flourish.

I wish you and 5WG continued success.

Take care,
PK

[Leebo33]

No, thank you. I get those press releases, too - but I've told all of those companies (and they all do it) that I appreciate the information, but I'm not in PR, and I don't get paid to to their work for them.

Maybe you should consider a PR job. The last paragraph from your College Hoops 2K7 preview on Xbox.com should have been quoted on the game box it's so good.

"College Hoops 2K7 was already the best in the biz, but with this year's clever additions, the game is bigger, faster, and even more realistic—without sacrificing the fun, excitement, and challenge that makes college basketball so much fun in the first place. Get your dancing shoes on and hit the court!"

Reading it makes me want to run out and buy 2K7 and I even own 2K8

I'm glad you posted here to clear things up and I can certainly understand your situation. I'm a cynic and former auditor. In that profession you should be independent in appearance and fact. It sounds like you are independent in fact, but by the very nature of the business and the conflicts that exist it is impossible for you to be independent in appearance. Not that you have to be as it isn't a requirement for your hobby, but it may help explain why skeptics like us are out there who believe it is impossible for you to be as independent as someone with no conflicts.

I wish you luck with the site. I read it occassionally and enjoy it when I visit.

[pk500]

I'm glad you posted here to clear things up and I can certainly understand your situation. I'm a cynic and former auditor. In that profession you should be independent in appearance and fact. It sounds like you are independent in fact, but by the very nature of the business and the conflicts that exist it is impossible for you to be independent in appearance. Not that you have to be as it isn't a requirement for your hobby, but it may help explain why skeptics like us are out there who believe it is impossible for you to be as independent as someone with no conflicts.

As usual, Leebo posted in one graph the sentiments that I have fumbled along trying to make in three full follow-up posts. Good job, as always, Lee!

Shawn, I know you work your ass off at gaming journalism and make every attempt to be objective. But appearances also are part of the equation, and my questions about objectivity are based on the appearance of the fact that you have written for the PR Web site of two gaming companies while also serving as the executive editor of a gaming Web site that prides itself on serious gaming journalism and commentary.

Since this entire thread started about Jeff Gerstmann and Gamespot, I ask this: Wouldn't readers be entitled to question the objectivity of Jeff Gerstmann if he wrote a tips piece or a College Hoops preview for xbox.com while serving as editor of Gamespot, even if he didn't review the game about which he wrote the tips piece or College Hoops for Gamespot? I would think, and hope, they would.

Again, I wish you and 5WG continued success.

Take care,
PK

[DivotMaker]

Caught up in the excitement perhaps or told not to say anything negative its still all too similar to what the original post is about.

I have only been to the inaugural Tiger Woods Community Day this past August, so my reference is only this one event as far as pre-release junkets. I do know for a fact that we were asked to be completely objective about our experiences with TW08 when posting information about the game before release. However, this is a double edged sword. For this particular event, we only had about 6 hours of actual gameplay time during the day and a half visit. Six hours is certainly nowhere near a representative amount of time to judge how good a game is or how many bugs it might contain. TW08 for 360 played really well during the event in the time we had to play it, but since release, the game has had two patches released over XBox Live to address freezing issues and to this day the 4 player online play is hampered by connection stability issues. I did not get to see or play the PC nor PS3 versions during the event and I crushed the PC version on the EA forums when I got my copy of it after the event. Ironically, I have since upgraded my PC and TW08 plays and looks much better than my initial 30 minutes with the game with which I blasted EA for on the EA forums and even here. In fact, other than the lack of ability out of the box to add user-created courses which was in previous versions (now rectified by the user community with various registry edits), the PC version is my favorite version of TW08 when the exact opposite was the case right after launch.

The point I am attempting to make here is that I have never heard or been asked by EA to sugar coat any of their products. What I post is what I see and how I perceive it. The other point is that Community Day events typically do not allow guests enough time with the games before they are released, therefore issues will likely always pop up once thousands of users are exposed to the same game. EA needs to improve their Community Day events to give their guests enough time with the games to get a true feel for the gameplay as well as enough time to get through enough of the game to uncover any bugs that EA CQC missed. That and hire competent CQC folks who know something about the topic of the game they are testing.

[RobVarak]

It's threads like this that remind me why I stay the hell away from OS

[ScoopBrady]

I find it hard to believe that anybody leveling criticisms in this thread would not contribute to Xbox.com or EA in order to gain exposure for a website you were trying to get going on your own. Have we all become so bitter that a fan of the medium cannot try and cut out his own little piece of the videogaming pie without being accused of being on the take or taking it easy on his reviews in order to get supersecret exclusive content for his website?

If anything an article such as the holiday guide for Xbox.com is a risky endeavor because he runs the risk of pissing off EA or 2k by overlooking them in one of the categories. If he was on the take he would have suggested Live and March Madness for basketball fans. He didn't. He didn't mention 2k8 for hockey titles either. I wouldn't have either. His name along with the name of his website are right at the bottom of the article and EA can be offended that he didn't mention their hoops titles and 2k Sports can be offended that he didn't mention their NHL or All Pro Football titles.

I didn't like the initial digs on Shawn in this thread so I tried to add a little bit of humor while sticking up for him. The thread appeared to have died until Shawn responded, which is fine by me. I don't know why it was weeks later but I had expected it to happen. Now, I've paid close attention to this thread over the past couple of days to make sure that this didn't turn into more than it needed to. I'm glad all parties involved have been able to keep this thread civil. I know Jared doesn't want a site war on these forums so let's continue to keep this thread civil. If it starts veering towards a site war I will lock this thread.

And remember, when you start pointing your finger there's three more pointing right back at you.

[Leebo33]

Have we all become so bitter that a fan of the medium cannot try and cut out his own little piece of the videogaming pie without being accused of being on the take or taking it easy on his reviews in order to get supersecret exclusive content for his website?

I never felt the discussion was bitter, but then again maybe I live to close to Philadelphia and too far away from the midwestern view of things. I thought it sparked some interesting and thought-provoking discussion.

I'm actually glad it came up because it gives me a much more favorable opinion of Shawn and his site. I'm glad people weren't afraid to express their opinions because it gave him an opportunity to respond to claims that are indeed unfair.

[JRod]

How is it unfair to say that Shawn's writing doesn't appeal to me. If you Scoop or Leebo want to read his stuff, I can't stop you.


I've read his work and saw some of his posting at OS, at the end of the day I still think his stuff is questionable because of the reasoning and logic he displayed here in his responses.

For god's sake this is a discussion where people are going to have opposing view points. It's something that we constantly fail to grasp here.

This whole thing started with the Gamestop issue. Then someone posted they like to read 5w-g. I said that I don't like Shawn's stuff because it didn't feel genuine. And Shawn came on here to defend himself and threw a tantrum because he couldn't take criticism. Was it unfair?

And Scoop, no one is faulting him for writing for xbox.com to gain exposure for his site. The problem here is can someone write for EA and Xbox.com and still remain true to the idea of journalistic integrity. To me, the answer is no. To others they might not feel this is a conflict of interest.

And I'm the opposite of Leebo, before today I didn't have a problem with Shawn and just felt his writing was as genuine as it could be. His little farewell rant has really soured me on him.

DSP is a collection of opposing viewpoints. Sometimes we get personal but I don't any here did. No one said Shawn is a bad guy. If we can't have a discussion about Shawn's writing or Gamestop's corporate "shillism" then Jared just needs to save the money and shut down DSP.

Maybe we are cynical but isn't that what has come out of the Gamestop fiasco? Isn't the the result of reading over-hyped previews, biased reviews and PR material passed off as independent blog posts or real gaming journalism.

[ScoopBrady]

Have we all become so bitter that a fan of the medium cannot try and cut out his own little piece of the videogaming pie without being accused of being on the take or taking it easy on his reviews in order to get supersecret exclusive content for his website?

I never felt the discussion was bitter, but then again maybe I live to close to Philadelphia and too far away from the midwestern view of things. I thought it sparked some interesting and thought-provoking discussion.

I'm actually glad it came up because it gives me a much more favorable opinion of Shawn and his site. I'm glad people weren't afraid to express their opinions because it gave him an opportunity to respond to claims that are indeed unfair.

I guess bitter was a poor choice of words. What I really meant was cynical but when you think about it cynical and bitterness go hand in hand.

And for the record, I didn't have a problem with the comments that were made. I thought I made that perfectly clear. Apparently we spend more time reading and comprehending in the midwest (don't think your avatar and midwest comment have gone unnoticed Leebo). What I do mind is starting a site war on these forums. My post actually commended everyone involved for not turning it into that. When s*** goes down at OS we don't want it talked about here.

But feel free to keep taking potshots, I'm just here to keep the peace.

[ScoopBrady]

How is it unfair to say that Shawn's writing doesn't appeal to me. If you Scoop or Leebo want to read his stuff, I can't stop you.


I've read his work and saw some of his posting at OS, at the end of the day I still think his stuff is questionable because of the reasoning and logic he displayed here in his responses.

For god's sake this is a discussion where people are going to have opposing view points. It's something that we constantly fail to grasp here.

This whole thing started with the Gamestop issue. Then someone posted they like to read 5w-g. I said that I don't like Shawn's stuff because it didn't feel genuine. And Shawn came on here to defend himself and threw a tantrum because he couldn't take criticism. Was it unfair?

And Scoop, no one is faulting him for writing for xbox.com to gain exposure for his site. The problem here is can someone write for EA and Xbox.com and still remain true to the idea of journalistic integrity. To me, the answer is no. To others they might not feel this is a conflict of interest.

And I'm the opposite of Leebo, before today I didn't have a problem with Shawn and just felt his writing was as genuine as it could be. His little farewell rant has really soured me on him.

DSP is a collection of opposing viewpoints. Sometimes we get personal but I don't any here did. No one said Shawn is a bad guy. If we can't have a discussion about Shawn's writing or Gamestop's corporate "shillism" then Jared just needs to save the money and shut down DSP.

Maybe we are cynical but isn't that what has come out of the Gamestop fiasco? Isn't the the result of reading over-hyped previews, biased reviews and PR material passed off as independent blog posts or real gaming journalism.

See, that's the problem JRod. When did I say anything in my post about this conversation being bad or not allowed? As a moderator it is my job to keep things peaceful around here and not let things escalate. My post pointed out how everyone in the thread did a good job not letting it get out of hand. I pointed out how I didn't like the initial shots at Shawn because it is not out of the realm of possibility that the comments would not make their way to him. Taking pot shots at IGN editors is totally different since they don't even know what a DSP is. Taking shots at someone with close ties to our community has the potential to cause problems. In this case it didn't but I know Jared does his best to keep the peace between DSP and other sports videogame sites.

There was nothing negative about my post yet two of the most negative people on these forums tried making it out like there was. Reread my post and then tell me where I said this topic wasn't allowed.

[JRod]

Scoop,

Have we all become so bitter that a fan of the medium cannot try and cut out his own little piece of the videogaming pie without being accused of being on the take or taking it easy on his reviews in order to get supersecret exclusive content for his website?

That was what I was responding to in my post. You've missed my point here. My post wasn't entirely directed at you. Yes I could write things more concisely but my ability to proofread and to write clear concise posts are well known by now.

And then you make it personal by saying that we were making it negative and then saying two of the most negative people. That's a personal comment that shouldn't really be a part of the discussion. I hope you edit that out.

Again, some of it was directed as Shawn and some of it was direction at the comment mentioned above.

[Millennium]

How is it unfair to say that Shawn's writing doesn't appeal to me. If you Scoop or Leebo want to read his stuff, I can't stop you.

It's not unfair to say it doesn't appeal to you, but for anyone to accuse of him of being 'on the take' is completely asinine. Anyone making an accusation in a public forum like that should have some type of proof.

BTW - I think JRod works for Senator Joe Lieberman because he is openly negative about video games and is secretly trying to push as many people away from them as possible.

Come on, now. Can anyone honestly say they don't see the problem in calling out a writer whose site is based on video games on being paid or 'on the take' from game developers WITHOUT some type of proof?

[ScoopBrady]

Scoop,

Have we all become so bitter that a fan of the medium cannot try and cut out his own little piece of the videogaming pie without being accused of being on the take or taking it easy on his reviews in order to get supersecret exclusive content for his website?

That was what I was responding to in my post. You've missed my point here. My post wasn't entirely directed at you. Yes I could write things more concisely but my ability to proofread and to write clear concise posts are well known by now.

And then you make it personal by saying that we were making it negative and then saying two of the most negative people. That's a personal comment that shouldn't really be a part of the discussion. I hope you edit that out.

Again, some of it was directed as Shawn and some of it was direction at the comment mentioned above.

Sorry if you take offense to that comment JRod but I'm not going to edit my post. Even the part of my post that you quoted did not state that this conversation was not allowed here. It was a hypothetical question asking if it has come to this. Then in your response you write this:

DSP is a collection of opposing viewpoints. Sometimes we get personal but I don't any here did. No one said Shawn is a bad guy. If we can't have a discussion about Shawn's writing or Gamestop's corporate "shillism" then Jared just needs to save the money and shut down DSP.

How am I supposed to take that? That isn't accusing me of contradicting that? The intent of my initial post was to make everyone aware of the fact that everyone had handled the situation great and as long as it stayed that way everything was cool. Nothing more, nothing less. It seemed as if it was at a point in the conversation where it could escalate so I wanted to make sure it didn't. It's called preventative measures rather than just seeing what would happen. Yet Leebo points out that my midwestern brain sees things all screwed up and you throw the "If we can't talk about this Jared should close down the site" card down.

Keep in mind I have a social work background so if I see the pot coming close to boiling over I'm going to take it off the burner for a second.

[dbdynsty25]

Wow, this thread really took a turn. Who'd have thought that tiny little pot shots would spin it out of control, rather than the ethical consequences of being on the take. LOL.