Either way, this story is going to #1 on Digg.

Bad publicty for Eidos and Cnet.

thank god I prefer IGN.. so much more professional.. this crap will never happen.

Wow.

Maybe I should start posting more on the GS side of GameFAQs and dig a little more into this.

EDIT: Does Eidos NOT have any active moderators on its forums? The board's almost been ravaged by angry GSpotters. If this was anywhere near the scale of the Ebaum's world invasion, that board would have slipped through the space-time continuum from all the pwnage and have been effectively erased from history.

I for one am glad the guy got fired for this reason, it further justifies the belief that any website that relies solely on ad revenue to stay afloat, cannot be trusted to give unbiased reviews.

Looks like I'm sticking with IGN, and paper publications.

Because the gaming media exists in backwards land. Where people where hats in their feet and swim in business suits! 

EDIT: In response to does even the content of the review have value? Here's my advice, focus on the negative. Sounds like a dickish thing to do, but typically critics are suppose to be critical. Paragraphs on how beautiful a game looks, or how rich the story is aren’t as helpful is reading a well written paragraph on why a particular combat system is broken, or how many different ways you accidentally get the game to crash.

Lot of reviewers in my experience tend to downplay potential issues because they either love the game so much they don’t notice, they’re not objective enough to realize what might not be an issue for them could be an issue for others (and vice versa actually), or they’re flat out paid off too. (Madden 08 comes to mind.) Bias, Incompetent, or Paid for. Take you’re pick.

Pay close attention to what’s not praised in a review and ask yourself is that something you can deal with or not? Like a reviewer slipping in a game only has a 6 hour campaign. That a red flag for you, or are you interested in it’s online component?

http://www.gamespot.com/users/TimT/show_blog_entry.php?topic_id=m-100-25233420

Looks like the beginning of a GameSpot staff walk out!

Totally agree, but would add that they have a clear anti-Nintendo bias.  Also their articles are horribly written and their news half the time stale.

Wow, how unethical. I can't say I'm surprised though, I always thought something seemed fishy over at gamespot. Guess I was right.

I really don't know who to trust anymore. I used to put a lot of faith in EGM/1up reviews, but lately they seem way biased toward Microsoft. I guess Game Informer's still pretty good if you knock about a point off of all their scores. They really haven't let me down yet.

Hahaha, 7.5-10 review scale is professional, right? Not to mention the obscene amount of grammatical and spelling errors I've read in all sorts of IGN articles. Its as though they don't bother sending things to the editor. Oh, and you frequently see all sorts of BS with reviews and news too.

IGN is awful 

That's crazy talk!

As incompetent as most people think Gamespot is, they aren't dumb enough to fire someone over a single negative review on a heavily advertised game. As overreactions like the PA comic shows, they would be in for a world of hurt.

What likely happened is that he just wasn't that good or any number of other reasons someone could get fired. Wait until you get actual reasons before make insane overreactions people. Frankly, I'm more upset at PA for reacting so quickly on nothing concrete.

-edit-
Note that him get fired (confirmed) and him getting fired over a single bad review of a heavily advertised game (not confirmed) are two*very* different things.