The Coop

A bit late, but...

You're not retarded, Mustin. There is no PM button. If you want to send a PM to someone, you have to click on their name, scroll down a bit, and click the "Send a private message to _____" line in the "Contact Info" box. Not particularly streamlined, huh?

If she's in this game, and you follow the scale from II, to III:TS, each of her thighs should be about three feet across.

The yard sales have you!

It does if you believe in reincarnation

XZero + sephfire- That was a joke. That's why I put ";-)" there You speak as if it's a fact. But right now, it's not. The only facts that can be said to be true of this situation are 1) Jeff was fired from Gamespot. That's it. All the drama surrounding why and how that departure came about is complete speculation at the moment, based off of coincidences and the unknown people who want to be quoted, and not identified. But all the coincidences in the world don't make something true, and I'm not one to take the words of mystery posters as truths, and it's been surprising to me just how many people have done exactly that. I'm currently not on either side in this War of the Webs. I won't defend or bash Gamespot, nor will I defend or bash Jeff... beyond questioning the quality of a number of his reviews. There's no prise for being right the fastest in this, so why rush to a conclusion with so little info?

Actually, it was Sega that caused 9-11 with Propeller Arena. Why do you think it was "canceled", hmmm? They didn't want the US government to get a hold of the evidence.

Writing things that aren't or can't (currently) be proven as if they're facts is worse though, and it's that very thing that's running rampant.

You sure about that? How else would you explain That's So Raven, and That's So Raven 2 on the GBA? Hmmmmmmmmm?

Think he's laughing most at all the posters on Gamespot's forums that are striking for 24 hours on his behalf?

Ah. Gotcha

The TP 8.8 got so much attention because the Nintendo-fan masses thought it was a low score. They raised a big stink about it, and the drama is still going on today. And I never suggested he should have been fired for the K&L review/score, or that he did the wrong thing in stating his opinion. I was merely bringing up a business model that's been around for a long time, and how it would apply to all of this. Companies cut out things that are costing them money... that includes devisions, products, and people. It's quite possible, that Jeff was seen as something to be cut after Eidos pulled their financing, and what's going on is the end result. It doesn't make it right, it doesn't make it fair. But it does happen regularly, and it may very well have happened here. That's all I'm suggesting.

As has been shown over the decades, when an employee winds up costing their employer a lot (and I mean A LOT) of cash, they get the boot more often than not. It usually doesn't matter if it was an honest mistake, or if it was a huge blunder on their part either. The company wants to stop the money loss at its source... and if this scenario is indeed what happened, that's Jeff. If the numbers being thrown out at the moment are true, then we're talking about hundreds of thousands of dollars. That's a big hit for many companies to take, and most times someone involved in that money loss becomes the fall guy for it. It sucks, it's often very unfair, and it usually results in people getting the ax for dubious reasons ("He opted for an early retirement", "He wanted to spend more time with his family", etc.), but that's how it generally works (been the victim of it myself on a smaller scale). And no matter how hard we try to ignore it, on-line magazines and game review sites the size of IGN and Gamespot are still a business at the end of the working day. Again, this is running with the assumption that all this is what actually took place with Jeff and Gamespot.

Oh, I didn't say you suggested it, zircon. But last night, there was a "EIDOS GOT JEFF FIRED! FUCK THEM!" sentiment floating around with some people as they posted, blogged, and responded to those things. I can't remember the names of the sites and blogs I read last night (links all over the damn place now), but early on I read a few blurbs about how Eidos possibly demanded Jeff be fired because of his review. It makes no sense to me either, but somehow that notion caught on for a while.

That's what I've been noticing as well, as this hoopla has played out more. It's starting to look more like rather than demanding Jeff be fired, Eidos simply pulled back advertising funds after a low scoring review (like so many other companies have done over the last couple decades with game sites and game magazines). Then, that loss of cash for Gamespot was placed squarely on Jeff's head in a "You just cost us big bucks! Here's your Whammy... YOU'RE FIRED!" fashion. Guess we'll see if that's how it went down.

And here I thought you'd saved a bunch of money by switching to Geico.

I have been putting two and two together. - On the one hand, there are some people telling variations of the same general story. Jeff wrote a potentially crass review, was told to tone it down, did, still pissed off Eidos either because of the low score or the way the review (video review) was written, and got fired for it. - On the other hand, there are lots of anonymous sources, unknown posters "coming forward" that want to be quoted, mysterious phone calls, and some questionable jumps in logic (see above comment on the 1UP article). If this thing was being reported on the local news, reporters would be all over the story questioning it's validity before going public with it, because of there being so many unknown sources. As such, I don't think I'm in the wrong by saying it's easy to still be a bit skeptical and not jump on the bandwagon of "EIDOS IZ EVAL AND GOT JEF FRIED!" when looking at everything. Edit: Interesting article, Specter. Even they said the review was a little mean (this coming from GR ). It's starting to look more like several reasons were behind Jeff's canning, and not Eidos demanding Jeff be fired. Also, remember Howard Stern's movie, "Private Parts"? Remember the scenes where the radio management was ready to fire Stern because of sponsors dropping out due to his crass nature on the air? Anyone else think that some of that may be in play here?

I have to bring up an interesting part of the 1UP article... Somehow, whoever this mystery person was, took "He also implied that 'AAA' titles deserved more attention when they were being reviewed", and went straight to, "which sounded to all of us that he was implying that they should get higher scores, especially since those titles are usually more highly advertised on our site." Mighty big assumption. The recently deceased Evel Knievel would have a hard time with that jump. I have to wonder why that statement didn't also come off as meaning that high profile games deserve more than a single page review... kind of like what Jeff did with Halo 3 and the OMG CONTROVERSIAL "Twilight Princess" review. Maybe they expected him to raise the rating, maybe they expected him to go into more detail as to why the game deserved a 6.0. Who knows. We don't, but a lot of people sure are acting like they do without much in the way of facts out there at the moment. Again, until someone comes forth with proof that Jeff was canned for giving the game a 6.0, and not because of some other reason(s) (questionable review quality, being too crass in stating his opinions, etc.), it's rumors, conjecture and back alley whispering right now. Perhaps this makes me a bit of a hard ass on this subject, but real life and watching things unfold on the Internet have shown me not to buy into the hoopla and conspiracy proclamations when drama arises. So, I'll wait for the information to come out (and it will, one way or another). If he got fired for scoring K&L a 6.0 and pissing off Eidos and their site investment, that sucks. If he got fired for writing reviews that weren't very in-depth or professional, well...

So many people are talking like that review is what got him fired. I don't believe anyone has given concrete proof of anything beyond "He was let go". Right now, it's simply a bunch of people claiming he was fired to make Eidos happy. No evidence, no comments from other people who work for Gamespot to back it up with proof... just rampant rumors being clung to as truth. If I'm wrong, please point to where it's been proven that review rating is the cause. As I said. He's written piss-poor quality reviews before. If you want proof, go and read his "review" of Taito Legends 2 for the PS2. If he's handed in that kind of thing once, he's likely done it before over a ten year span. I personally think there's a better chance that those horrid quality reviews caught up with him, than there is of the "K&L getting a 6"-thing being the cause of his departure. In short, if he was fired because a company advertising on Gamespot had their game rated as average, I will truly be surprised.

Yeah. There's two versions of him, right? Three actually...

Bah. Difficult without being cheap is half the fun. Besides, I don't think there are too many casual gamers in this thread. And if there are, they need to sharpen their teeth on some games that are harder than Bowling Bigfoot- You mean this guy?

Nah. I was just joking. The game is punishment from beginning to end, and will fight you're claiming victory every step of the way.

Shhhhhhh... We're sitting right here. No need to shout. Bigfoot- You cheater. All you have to do to get to the final level on the second loop is play for five hours without pausing. Then the game feels sorry for you, and moves you to it

Meh. After his horrid Taito Legends 2 review that was almost insultingly bad and devoid of info, I'd been questioning every review I read from him since. If he called that a review for TL2, I wouldn't be surprised if he'd done similarly lacking reviews before. I also wouldn't be surprised if this firing was the end result of too many questionable reviews on his part.