It had been a little bit since we got any more details about the latest version of the Playola scandal, involving Jeff Gerstmann and Gamespot. None of the parties are really discussing the issues involved. Gerstmann is apparently moving on to a new project with the original founder of Gamespot, Vince Broady (who had left years ago). Eidos is sticking to their guns in saying that the game is great and that they haven't ever threatened to yank advertising dollars over the issue. And Gamespot is just shutting up and praying, desperately, that this all goes away. Even as two writers, Alex Navarro and Frank Provo, have left and made strong indications that Gerstmann's treatment was the impetus for their departure. Theoretically, we're all moving along, right?
Yeah, we are. And at the current rate, the only ones who are suffering are going to be reviewers that just want to put out their personal opinions on games. Thanks to a recent editorial on 1-Up, we're able to get a better view of what's going on. Myself, I've only heard from "friend of a friend" sources about conditions at Gamespot now, and admittedly they weren't pretty. They also aren't enough to really write on. However, when a 1-Up staffer talks about how they've been getting a flood of resumes from folks currently at Gamespot, it's rather telling. When two prominent writers are leaving their jobs with no new job lined up immediately, something serious is going on. I know it's not wise to follow rumor blindly. But when all the facts add up to the rumor being true, and more corroborating facts come out, it's hard to call it simply a rumor. An informed suspicion is probably a better term for it now.
Anyhow, informed suspicion now says that Gerstmann was fired over giving a bad review of a game being hyped by advertising. We've got evidence that shows that advertisers could pay Gamespot to push up the prominence of pieces that talked about a company's games. We have a guy in charge of selling sponsorships of editorials in charge of editorials. These and other similar bombs are in the 1-Up editorial which show, pretty effectively, that Gamespot is for sale, and we're only a couple more dots to officially connect before we can stop calling it "informed suspicion" and just note it as fact.
But here's the thing – it actually doesn't matter to Gamespot. Seriously, it doesn't at all. To be honest, I expect at this point they see their entire editorial section (which would be both game reviews and their analogues to this column) as a giant money sinkhole. It probably was even before they became vilified as whores for advertising dollars. Because quite simply, reviews don't really drive in the hits. Really, editorials don't truly pack them in either (which is why, if you ever ask anyone outside of Netjak if they regularly read Beyond the D-Pad, your likely response is "What's that?"). Nope, for the business side, only one thing matters, and that's something that tons of people will constantly load and reload. For a video game site, that comes down to forums and FAQ sections, if available. While it might cause massive brain hemorrhaging, the biggest moneymaker for Gamespot is actually GameFAQs. Between its forums (which I will not touch with a ten-foot pole), and people constantly checking its guides, they get enough hits that we could all follow through with our promise to never read their reviews forever and they'd still be doing healthy.
I don't know why this hasn't been suggested before, but if people really want Gamespot to learn its lesson, you're going to have to boycott all their properties. This means you're going to have to forego GameFAQs, GameRankings, Metacritic, and basically anything else that CNet handles. Now, I know this isn't as simple as telling people to stop buying EA games (I might be finally lifting this one soon). I mean, the sheer number of people that jump to those sites is staggering, and even I tend to forget how extensive CNet's empire is at this point (seriously, despite the link at the bottom of Gamespot, I didn't know they were affiliated with Metacritic until now). But to make yourself noticed against such an empire, you have to make a drastic move.
To some extent, this isn't going to solve all the problems. Video game companies are still looking to lure gamers into buying their games in all sorts of sneaky fashions (my favorite is a tip I got from former Wal-Mart employees – Electronic Arts actually bribes Wal-Mart and its employees to push EA games harder – morally bankrupt but legal). And even if Gerstmann and Broady launch a new site tomorrow with their first article being the whole story of the event, it's not enough to just hit Gamespot. If you want to make an impact, make all of CNet's numbers go down the drain. I'm not saying you have to take your traffic here in response (though we'd greatly appreciate it). Just that if you keep visiting Gamespot's sister sites, they'll get just as much of the advertising dollars they crave – and reviewers will continue to be shafted.
