You don't seem to be paying attention, at all.  He copied several lines, word for word. He changed the words for most of the rest of the review and followed the same style. 

The dude didn't play the game.  Instead, he tried to steal money from Gamepro and was fired for it.

He got fired for a review of a game that no one will ever play let alone read the review.

At least it was not a Petz game.

It seems that all of you people screaming "Coincidence!1" didn't actually read the article, which highlighted blatant similarities alongside the several WORD FOR WORD quotes (this does not happen by coincidence) AND the fact the the guy ADMITTED TO THE PLAGIARISM. Seriously, read more than the title before you post and defend the guy.

Pretty standard response for plagiarism.  I guess they take it far more seriously than you do.

It is hard that he lost his job in the economic climate, but this is unacceptable.

Gamepro has 2 LARGE Xs on their name from the Conduit debacle and know this plagiaristic act. He got fired over Water Warfare. Water Warfare?? lol

Now, this calls into question whether these people review games fairly at all, rather than "join the club". Why would he need to look at the IGN review for reference? The review should be HIS own experience. These reviewers probably don't even play the games............terrible.

Gamepro is completely illegitimate, as if the last incident wasn't proof enough. Completely illegitimate.

I admit I didn't read the last quote saying he admitted to it, but I don't see the big deal to the part he copied.  Both of those pieces could have been copied straight from a manual they are so generic (I know there isn't a manual, just saying it's incredibly straightforward explanation). 

If the actual creative parts of the review had been copied, yes, there is a reason to be angry, but the he copied the most straightforward part that even if he had written himself it probably would have ended up sounding almost exactly the same.  It's not a big deal.

If it hadn't been for this "fiasco" maybe 20 people would have read both of those reviews anyways.  Would you really want to spend all your time on a review that isn't going to get read by many people or get that review finished and move on to the bigger ones that make the site more money?

Again, if he had actually copied the creative parts of the review, yes, that would be inexcusable, but those parts that are the same, who cares?  There are only so many ways you can say those things.  I bet if you asked 100 people to play most any simple game to the point they could review it and then ask them to explain the mechanics you would see results pretty close to the one above.

Just as a note, while this certainly is grounds for dismissal just on its own, for all we know, there could already have been problems between him and GamePro, and this was just the anvil that broke the camel's back.

I don't see the big deal about the part he copied.  Both of those pieces could have been copied straight from a manual they are so generic (I know there isn't a manual, just saying it's incredibly straightforward explanation).

If the actual creative parts of the review had been copied, there is a reason to be angry, but the he copied the most straightforward part that even if he had written himself it probably would have ended up sounding almost exactly the same.  It's not a big deal.

If it hadn't been for this "fiasco" maybe 30 people would have read both of those reviews anyways.  Would you really want to spend all your time on a review that isn't going to get read by many people or get that review finished and move on to the bigger ones that make the site more money?

If he had actually copied the creative parts of the review, yes, that would be inexcusable, but those parts that are the same, who cares?  There are only so many ways you can say those things.  I bet if you asked 100 people to play most any simple game to the point they could review it and then ask them to explain the mechanics you would see results pretty close to the one above.

This just in, twesterm only cares about intellectual property if it's games, not words, being stolen. 

Holy lord. I mean if you plagiarize in University, you are fired. If you do it in Journalism, you are fired.

Twesterm, it is not about the three lines. It is about the WHOLE review. Using slightly different words will still make it a copy. And people will see it.

Get over it.