Gerstmann is a corporate cocksucker. Let's get that out of the way immediately.

"Why?", you ask?

Some of you may view Gertsmann's "departure" from a liberal standpoint whereby this poor $100,000-year-plus-benefits schmuck will suddenly lose his ability to review mediocre games on a mediocre site while his house and estate fall into receivership. If you thought that, you're a fucking retard. Hit Alt+F4 (or OS equivalent) now and save yourself the limited brain nuclei you have left.

Every site you love specifically exists in large part to advertisers. If a high-profile and award-winning company such as Eidos want (needs?) to push some tilt for themselves, what is the fucking problem? Your favorite herd-leading front has been exposed as...a profitable business! Oh no!

The situation here seems to question accountability and trust for the subscriber and general public that relies on the precise opinions of a bunch of fuckjobs who's sole purpose in life is to grade others hard work.

GameSpot got tired of overpaying a dickface to do an asshole's job. Eidos wanted their appliances included when they bought the house. Big fucking deal.

Several days too late, Gamespot finally releases a Special Report to directly address the growing ill-will of the gaming community. Platitudes were dispensed with a kind of desperate earnestness to a mostly unmoved audience.

Gamespot too slow: damage now irreparable. The crowd has made up its mind.

Gamespot's PR disaster is a direct result of its clumsy corporate culture of policies, procedures and protocols which proved wholly inadequate at keeping up with the online community's propensity for mood-swings and snap-judgments.

Bound and gagged and stumbling over its own red tape, time and inaction cost Gamespot its reputation. There's almost nothing they can say now to please the crowd, which has long-since made up its mind on what it wants to believe:

That game review champion, Gerstmann, was wrongfully dismissed for expressing honest reviews and opinions about an arguably mediocre game whose publisher had paid hundreds of thousands to advertise on the reviewing site.

Gerstmann needs to speak because nothing Gamespot or CNet says will have any credibility with the community.

Nothing – short of Gerstmann himself coming out to speak on Gamespot's behalf – will salvage the once-venerable game review site's crumbling reputation.

Still, twenty-two pages (as of this posting) reveals very little support or understanding from the gaming community.

Comments range in tone from stiff cynicism:

"Nice try... but this is just blatant propaganda. The video being pulled due to "a faulty mic" is a laughable excuse at best. "

"BS on this one. Reads like a standard HR cover-your-butt release (I've seen a few working in the financial industry.) Eidos had two fake 5 star reviews on their site, and pulled "hundreds of thousands of dollars" in future advertising. If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck..."

"Some of the portions of these answers are insulting. For example, this quote below. You can't honestly say that you took this video down due to poor mic quality. You guys have a multitude of video reviews, both current and archived that didn't sound any worse than this one did. Stop making excuses, you already look like a bunch of cowardly asses. Don't make it worse."

Dissatisfaction:

"Still feels like they're dodging the questions. This would make a good resume for a potential White House press secretary."

Outright mockery:

"Wow... they asked themselves questions and answered them. I have an instant depth of trust and faith I never knew I had!"

Staunch disbelieve:

"Its too late gamespot. You can't un-ring the bell. Lift the gag order so Jeff can tell us himself why he was fired. Until then, I don't believe a single thing."

"Does anyone believe a single bit of this crap. There is excuse after excuse. Everything here mentioned changes to Kane and Lynch that are just too uncommon to have nothing to do with the firing. I started to get a sick feeling before I got down to the 5th question. I have reconfirmed my decision to cancel my membership. Farewell Gamespot."

Cautious resignation:

"Whilst I kind of believe the article, I have to admit my confidence in them is still shaken."

"I want to believe you, GS, I really do. But, staging a phony interview where you answer your own questions isn't really the best strategy. Nevertheless, the explanation seems plausible. Gerstmann could have been fired for any number of reasons."

Even some conspiratorial undertones:

"To all gamers: This goes beyond Jeff Gerstmann's firing. Gamespot will be partnering with the Academy of Interactive Arts and Sciences as well as hosting and webcasting the awards ceremony for 2007. The AIAS is the organization that chooses the GOTY. This scandal calls into question GS's involvement in the AIAS ceremony. What we need immediately is a statement from Jeff regarding his dismissal. Otherwise, I feel we have no choice but to boycott the AIAS awards ceremony due to Gamespot's participation."

Ungag Gerstmann!

Amidst the clamour, the recurring sentiment from the mob is this: "We want to hear from Gerstmann".

And why not, they reason, if everything is as Gamespot claims, why is Gerstmann prohibited from speaking about the circumstances surrounding his sudden departure? Why was it necessary to lock him out of his office? Why did his video review get pulled down immediately? Why did his close childhood friend Tim Tracy suddenly decide to resign on the same day? Why did Kane & Lynch advertisement suddenly disappear at precisely the same time?

Is it all really just unfortunate timing?

To quote a commenter, "Wow, a lot of coincidences there..."