A little video game review website named Gamespot gave the game a pretty bad score (5.5/10) so the community did some digging into the matter....
 
LINK

People still check out Gamespot?

" People still check out Gamespot? "

What I got from the QuickLook on GiantBomb is that the game is bad so...

Oh shit..Justin Calverts getting fired

It'd be pretty funny if the newly assigned reviewer gave it en even lower score.

Reviewing an MMO in 6 hours is better than not reviewing it at all :-/

Gamespot?  You mean Gamestop?  Haven't been there in a while.

oh no,  gamespot has always had such a clean reputation, how could they?

While im not sure who reviewed it for Gamespot, although I do check Gamespot not that often or closely, they do seem to have done the right thing and removed the review with a short message as to why it was reviewed. While people attack Gamespot all the time there are a few people there who I think are great reviewers, for example Justin Calvert and Kevin Van'ord, and from what I have seen of there actions (for example this situation) show that they actually care about what they are doing and want to provide honest and legitimate reviews and criticisms of games.

Ugh. If this all turns out to be true. it's pretty indefensible.  
 
I like Justin, a lot more than I do Guy "the blathering cock" Cocker. 

While I think Global Agenda is pretty shitty, he should have spent 10+ hours on it. I wouldn't say 30 hours or more, since GA really isn't an MMO in the traditional sense. Or maybe it is, I don't know. Who the fuck cares? It's shitty. 
 
No, YOU shut up

From what I saw in the giantbomb quicklook, that game looked like garbage. It's not the kind of mmo you need to play 50 hours to figure out all there is to it. If you can play a game for 6 hours and not enjoy it, it fails! mmo or not.

does anyone know who the reviewer was?
 
just putting it out there, Tom McShea (spelling?) writes similar to the line on metacritic.
nothing besides that makes me believe its McShea (sp?)

Not very surprising coming from them in all honesty. However, I did expect better from Justin, one of the people I always kinda liked at Gamespot.

Gamespot has turned into corrupt shit. It's truly embarrassing.

I actually like Global agenda and I am glad that they did this.

I still think that game is mostly shit.

" Gamespot has turned into corrupt shit. It's truly embarrassing. "

Good thing I never was interested in GameSpot, their content is really boring. Never read any of their reviews.

THEY FIRED JEFF!???1

I don't see it as being a huge deal.  If the reviewer thought it was bad after 6 hours of gameplay, do you really think the game will suddenly become awesome to him after another whole 24 hours of the same old thing?

That reviewer must feel so small right now. His credibility has taken a massive hit and I wonder if he'll ever be able to recover from it.

" People still check out Gamespot? "

While the review may be accurate after this amount of time, the part that makes this a bigger deal is the 
"GameSpot's internal policy is to spend 30 hours on an MMO before publishing a review."
Only playing 20% of the required amount is a big deal, though who knows if he had alts or what-not.

"While the review may be accurate after this amount of time, the part that makes this a bigger deal is the  "GameSpot's internal policy is to spend 30 hours on an MMO before publishing a review." Only playing 20% of the required amount is a big deal, though who knows if he had alts or what-not. "

It was by Brett Todd who I think is a freelancer anyway, so it's not really their fault. A case of misplaced trust perhaps and I suppose they should have checked, but it didn't seem that much of an MMO anyway. Hold your horses before you get the pitchforks out.

Have any of the people bashing this game for being bad actually played it? If not you're even worse than the reviewer.
And no a quick look were the guys didn't even know the controls and played with medium to low graphics doesn't count.

if their policy says 30+ hours, then it's inexcusable. 
Just being devils advocate here, but it's possible that he didn't have 30 hours to put into it because of the deadline.

They give a shitty game a shitty review.  They only pulled the review because they didnt spend the alotted time on it.  BUt seriously, 30 hours on an MMO to give it a score.  The site says the reviewer played it for 6 hours.  Damn, if you fucking hate a game after playing for 6 hours, i dont think the problem is with the reviewer.  You just made a shitty game.  Your lucky if someone gives you 30 minutes.  Dont expect someone to stick it out after spending 6 hours on it and it hasnt made the experience better.
Remember guys, people go fucking nuts over games they love and would stick their dick through the CD hole if they could. (most can).  Also, these types are the same ones who threatened to kill the Jeff because he gave Twilight Princess an 8.8.

Well the game DOES suck, so who cares?

I'm of the opinion "who gives a shit".

And no a quick look were the guys didn't even know the controls and played with medium to low graphics doesn't count. "

Don't forget the Shenmue score!!

" if their policy says 30+ hours, then it's inexcusable.  Just being devils advocate here, but it's possible that he didn't have 30 hours to put into it because of the deadline. "

"i think it was brett todd who did the review..."

Even if the game sucks, he should still spend a significant amount of time with it. I know being a game reviewer seems like a dream job, but in order to get to play that one good game, you're gonna have to review 5 crappy games. Global Agenda being one of them. If the reviewer couldn't take the time to review a game, then he shouldn't be a game reviewer.

Well considering it's the site's policy to play at least 30 hours when reviewing an MMO and the reviewer only played 5, I think that's fair, whether the game is good or not.

" @gike987 said:

And no a quick look were the guys didn't even know the controls and played with medium to low graphics doesn't count. "

I'm guessing you don't really understand the concept of a "quick look?" ;)  Anyway, this is such non-news. This isn't dirty journalism, just lazy journalism. The game has a 68 average on Metacritic and considering Gamespot's reviews are almost always lower than average, I wouldn't be surprised if they gave it a 5.5 or a 6 after it gets reviewed again. "

Spending 30 hours in Global Agenda seems pretty torturous but if he was aware of the policy and accepted the review he should have stuck it out.
 
Must be kinda nice to work at a place like GB where they don't force anyone to review drech like this.

"Dont expect someone to stick it out after spending 6 hours on it and it hasnt made the experience better."

Of course i understand the concept, but you can't say if the game is bad after watching people play a MMO for 30 minutes. "

" @gike987 said:

Of course i understand the concept, but you can't say if the game is bad after watching people play a MMO for 30 minutes. "

My point was that quick looks aren't meant to be taken that seriously. Which is why you rarely see the guys playing the game seriously as they would for review purposes. "

Hopefully the person that ends up doing the second review doesn't feel obligated to give it a higher score.  What's up with the 30 hour requirement anyway?  If a game takes 30 hours to get good then I don't wan to play it. 

" Gamespot has turned into corrupt shit. It's truly embarrassing. "