This is why I disregard Jeff Gerstmann's ...

Ok, people here on GameSpot seem to routinely hate Jeff Gerstmann. There are also, however, people that seem to stick up for him and say that his opinion is his own and it should be respected. Often when there is rebuttal from the opposing side, the Jeff Gerstmann-fans respond with ''Oh, you're a fanboy'', or ''Sheep are still stingy about the Zelda review''. I'm here today to say that his journalism is God-Awful. This isn't because I hate him for giving Zelda: Twilight Princess a bad score, or because I'm just a Wii-owner. The man just doesn't give solid reasons on why he gave games less-than phenomenal reviews. He is extremely nit-picky and often at times he gives games less-than favorable reviews just because of such tiny things like ''the music is too dated'' or ''this game is short''. Let me bring you up to speed here: In 1998, Mr. Gerstmann reviewed Metal Gear Solid for the Playstation. Metal Gear Solid was considered by critics and fans alike as the greatest PS1 game of all time, if not one of the best games ever. When Jeff reviewed it, he gave the game the score of an 8.5. Now, this isn't bad at all, but why didn't Jeff give the game a 9.0 at least? ''Oh, it's too short'' he says. ''Once you skip the cutscenes and know exactly what to do, you can run through the game in three hours or less'', the front-page review comment says. Note that he says ''Once you know exactly what to do''. This implies you have played the game before; ''Once you skip the cutscenes'', he says, and the cutscenes are major part of the game (as with all Metal Gear titles). If you're playing through the game once, cutscenes and all, you're going to be looking at more than twelve hours of game time. This is how long it took me to beat the game, even on Normal mode. Instead of praising what the game is, Jeff bashes it because a pro can run through it in a short amount of time. Later, in 2001, Mr. Gerstmann reviews Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 3 for the Playstation 2. All-around, it was a pretty solid PS2 title in the always-good Tony Hawk series. When Jeff reviewed it, he gave the game a perfect 10. This was the last game in GameSpot history to recieve a perfect score. When Jeff cited that Metal Gear Solid was a game that was short in length, he gives a Tony Hawk game, which is fairly short with repetitive objectives such as ''collect all the letters'' or the like, a gleaming review for being a game that will last you forever. It is utterly ridiculous that Mr. Gerstmann thinks that a next-generation offering of the PS1 Hawks is of more quality than Metal Gear Solid, a game that was favored for blending cinematic quality with great gameplay. It's easy to sum up Jeff's opinion on Hawk as ''ridiculous''.Fast-forward five years to the launch of the Wii. One title stood out as being a must-have (and possibly one of the best launch titles ever): The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess. Since its inital revealing in 2005, the gaming world was full of excitement when they learned that the game would feature a darker, more edgy feel and an Ocarina of Time-style adult Link. Better yet, the game would take full advantage of the Wii's motion sensing controls, so for the first time ever, you really could slay moblins with your controller. When Jeff picked up the game, he instead talked about how the game's presentation felt ''stuck in the past'', where the music is too nostalgic, to the point of being ''dated''. Did he ever feel that Tony Hawk Pro Skater 3's presentation felt ''stuck in the past'', that it was simply a retread of the past Hawk franchises? Nope. He even mentions that the motion controls are innacurate, whereas critic and player testimonies can confirm that this isn't so. I own a Wii and Twilight Princess, and I for one can assure you that the motion controls work well, and are used more often in games like Super Mario Galaxy. Jeff also complains about how the game has no voice acting, but instead text-based dialogue. I will get back to this point later. The end-result was an 8.8, which was considered the most massive flop of this generation of gaming.When Mr. Gerstmann reviewed Warioware: Smooth Moves, he gave it a glowing review, citing how it utilizes the Wii Remote's motion sensing abilites in fun and wacky ways. The score he awarded the game was a 9.1, and considering that essentially the Warioware series is comprised of small little mini-games, it's extremely embarrassing that he would think that mini-games are more impressive than full-fledged adventure titles. Not only that, but there is no solid voice-acting in Warioware. He whines about how Zelda has no voice acting, but here in Warioware, it's ok because these games are full of whimsy? Talk about unfair.Soon after, Jeff left GameSpot for good. Some say it was because of his review of Kane and Lynch: Dead Men for the PS3 and Xbox 360, in which he gave the game a very poor score. GameSpot assures us that it had nothing to do with the review. Whatever the case may be, I for one am glad that Jeff Gerstmann is gone. He simply was an incompetent reviewer that focused more on what game could have been instead of what it is. His nitpicking tendencies have now headed to his new site, Giant Bomb, where he and Ryan Davis review games alone. I'm not a Sheep that hates him for giving a Zelda game a bad review. I simply disregard his opinion because it is often nonsensical and nitpicky to an unfair extreme. His journalistic integrity is brought into question when he chooses to award skating games perfect scores, and decides that mini-games are more important than epic action-adventure titles. Jeff Gerstmann's dismissal was the best thing that happened to GameSpot in a long time.Sorry about this wall of text rant, and if you read this whole thing, well, thanks, I guess. Any thoughts or comments?This is why I disregard Jeff Gerstmann's ...
disregard a review? a.k.a. opinion?
Well I disregard your post, it's utter rubbish.
This is why I disregard Jeff Gerstmann's ...
1. This should be in a blog

2. It Jeff's opinion about the games, and you dont have to believe him.

3. You really shouldnt judge a game by its numerical score but rather what the reviewer wrote about it. that has more value that the numerical rating.
So, bash on Jeff because he doesn't jump on the bandwagon and give a game a fantastic score like everyone else right?
This is why I disregard your opinion:I generally disregard all opinions that aren't my own.
Jeff lost his all of his credibility 6 years ago when he gave Majora's Mask an 8.3Does anyone here honestly agree with that review?
Twilight Princess was the worst zelda. Not counting the CDI games. It deserved a 9.0 tops. If anything he was the only one that gave a good review on it. It was the definition of rehahs. I usually defend Nintendo but come on TP was so dissappointing.
Well Jeff disregards your post because he doesn't even know you exist.
[QUOTE=''sexy_chimp''] Jeff lost his all of his credibility 6 years ago when he gave Majora's Mask an 8.3Does anyone here honestly agree with that review?[/QUOTE]Bitter much?
[QUOTE=''sexy_chimp''] Jeff lost his all of his credibility 6 years ago when he gave Majora's Mask an 8.3Does anyone here honestly agree with that review?[/QUOTE] What? that game was as good if not better than OOT. OOT seemed more polished though and was more jawdropping at the time.

ITs way better than TP.

GOd I want a proper Majoras Mask sequal.
[QUOTE=''Lionheart08'']So, bash on Jeff because he doesn't jump on the bandwagon and give a game a fantastic score like everyone else right?[/QUOTE]No, I tend to bash on him because his reviews are nonsensical, nitpicky, and ridiculous. I have read all of the reviews of the games I talked about, and all of them don't give a solid reason as to why the game recieved the score it recieved.
a game being to short is a completely valid point, what are you smoking?
[QUOTE=''sexy_chimp'']Jeff lost his all of his credibility 6 years ago when he gave Majora's Mask an 8.3Does anyone here honestly agree with that review?[/QUOTE]I, too, think that Majora's Mask is an underrated Zelda game and is a better Zelda than OoT.
[QUOTE=''warmaster670'']a game being to short is a completely valid point, what are you smoking?[/QUOTE]Metal Gear Solid isn't short at all on your first play-through.
[QUOTE=''7CloudStrife7'']Well Jeff disregards your post because he doesn't even know you exist.[/QUOTE]And because he is a famous gaming journalist doesn't mean I can't write this post? I have no right to openly disagree with his ridiculous reviews?
i think he's very reasonable in his OPINION.
[QUOTE=''Killer_Wuggles''] [QUOTE=''Lionheart08'']So, bash on Jeff because he doesn't jump on the bandwagon and give a game a fantastic score like everyone else right?[/QUOTE]No, I tend to bash on him because his reviews are nonsensical, nitpicky, and ridiculous. I have read all of the reviews of the games I talked about, and all of them don't give a solid reason as to why the game recieved the score it recieved.[/QUOTE]Why should one man's opinion bother you so much though? Yeah I agree, Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 3 getting a perfect score is laughable, but he does tend to give pretty accurate reviews. Personally, I prefer a more stricter reviewer, than a pushover who throws at AAA's just because it's a big name franchise.
And I disregard your opinion about Jeff's opinion, should I make a new topic about it?
[QUOTE=''Killer_Wuggles''] [QUOTE=''warmaster670'']a game being to short is a completely valid point, what are you smoking?[/QUOTE]Metal Gear Solid isn't short at all on your first play-through.[/QUOTE] Its not a hard game and is very linear. It takes 6-8 hours tops.
I agree, his reviews were awful. I think it's just that there was a large number of Gertsmann fans whom were in love with the 'character' he played on this site.