Kane & Lynch: admittedly not delivering 'the whole online package'
by Ludwig Kietzmann 
{ Oct 9th 2007 at 10:30PM }
As that's not a sentiment likely to be shared by those enjoying the online co-op of a little game called Halo 3, Kurup places a divide between the two titles. "They are not only selling Halo," he said, "they are selling technology, they are selling consoles, they are selling Microsoft, the whole online package. That's not what we're doing." He's right on two counts! They are selling (by the boatloads) and IO Interactive isn't selling the whole online package. Instead of applause, let's offer some commentary.
Regardless of Microsoft's intentions for its platform, Halo 3 is still a video game competing for the time and attention of gamers, as is EA's cooperatively themed Army of Two. With Gears of War well behind us and Perfect Dark Zero (thankfully) even further back, we're of the belief that online co-op is (or should be), where appropriate, a standard "next-gen" offering by now. Kurup made a valid point about increased development time when he said gamers "also want the game at some point," but when some point happens to be November, you'd best give your game a full pair of water wings before tossing it into that shark-infested maelstrom.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
KaiserW @ Oct 9th 2007 10:40PM
Online Co-op is a must in this generation of games, this is a huge mistake. I was really hoping this game would have it. This game just changed from a buy to a rental in my mind
horngreen @ Oct 9th 2007 10:47PM
Dropping $60 on a game demands replay value of all kinds and single player or split screen co-op doesn't cut it.
phattie @ Oct 9th 2007 10:48PM
Except if its on the Wii.. then its A-OK!
Taco_Hell @ Oct 9th 2007 11:11PM
phattie, wtf does Kane and Lynch have ANYTHING to do with the Wii? Also, he said $60 dollar games, the Wii are $50 dollar games. Anyhow, this is sad news to me, who has friends all over the country that I constantly play Co-Op on Gears and Halo 3 with. Heres hoping down the road they will put up a patch which would enable Co-Op but I'm not holding my breath.
BPM (FDF - Hypno-Toad) @ Oct 9th 2007 11:28PM
Phatass, why haven't your arteries completely clogged up yet?
Seriously, you're one of the most annoying trolls to visit Joystiq. I'm surprised you haven't been banned weeks ago...
phattie @ Oct 9th 2007 11:55PM
Just illustrating the double standard that is so prevalent on this board. You know if this was a Wii game with some Nintendo mascot, there would be no issue at all.. its Nintendo.
Word of the street(IDF-Digital Ruler). @ Oct 10th 2007 1:55AM
Actually Phattie is right,co-op (if there is a Wii game with actual co-op because really I don't know) doesn't extends to online co-op in wii games and it doesn't seems to be a big deal.
IMO that's too bad but seriously anyone uses the online co-op?, I played Gears of war co-op offline I tried to play it online but the lag of the other dude was screwing the game and in the case of crackdown was even worst,really Real-time worlds you add online co-op but not offline co-op?, What the **** is that?
It was effing lame when I got home with crackdown and I find out I couldn’t play it split-screen.
Word of the street(IDF-Digital Ruler). @ Oct 10th 2007 2:04AM
OH F*CKING GREAT,NINTENDO JUST ANNOUNCED BRAWL WILL HAVE ONLINE CO-OP.
Well and that was announced 5 minutes after my post,well phattie WOULD YOU KINDLY eat my words?
Matt B @ Oct 9th 2007 10:50PM
If they provide a unique and enjoyable single player experience, than who cares. It still has local co-op. If we hold every game to the "Halo standard" than we will all lose out.
ukickmydog (NDF - Earth) @ Oct 10th 2007 12:09AM
*bioshock
blooh (CDF - Ass Ring) @ Oct 9th 2007 10:55PM
i don't think i'll ever use halo's online coop...
baby sea tuna @ Oct 10th 2007 7:30AM
You're really missing out.
todd @ Oct 9th 2007 10:58PM
I thought going back to E3 (and a GI article I think) this was a online co-op game? I'm not buying it now, in fact I'm pulling my reserve for something else, it won't be missed there are plenty of other games out that month. Co-op seems like the obvious for this game since there are two characters, like Gears, Army of Two, H3... disappointed.
Ritz @ Oct 9th 2007 11:02PM
Online co-op really should be standard fair. There isn't much more to say.
blooh (CDF - Ass Ring) @ Oct 10th 2007 12:25AM
it's "fare" in that usage, fyi :)
Ritz @ Oct 10th 2007 12:45AM
Thanks!
Christina @ Oct 9th 2007 11:05PM
Sorry, but online co-op or an online multiplayer mode is NOT a "must" these days. If the focus is on making a great single-player title, and that is what happens, than that is more than enough.
Offline co-op is a bonus here and should be quite fun. Why not have a friend over and play together?
In many cases, developers believe they need some sort of online MP and tack it on. There's also the risk of shortchanging the single player experience. Most games are still single-player, so I don't know where you get this "must" notion. Social gaming is on the rise but games are still, for the most part, very skewed toward single-player.
todd @ Oct 9th 2007 11:15PM
Some of us don't have friends close, also if I did I can't imagine inviting anyone over to play K&L when I typically play which is at 9-10pm when the wife and kid are in bed. Plenty of games out in the next month, I'll wait for this cheap cheap and grab one of the better titles coming out instead.
jorojoserojas @ Oct 9th 2007 11:22PM
I'm in total agreement. Bioshock and Metroid Prime 3 were the two best game experiences I've had all year, and BOTH of them exist without any multiplayer.
It all boils down to the game itself. Some are just better for the isolated experience, and you'll always have games that are very multiplayer-centric...Halo 3 and Call Of Duty 4 come to mind.
Strike Man @ Oct 9th 2007 11:50PM
"Most games are still single-player, so I don't know where you get this "must" notion."
The "must" idea comes from the fact that this title is centered around cooperative gameplay, be it with an AI character or someone sitting next to you. It isn't tacked onto a single player game where a lone character (such as Jack in Bioshock or Samus in Metroid) is battling...whatever. It's a game that was, from the start, designed with cooperative gameplay in mind.
The _only_ area I can think of where a second human player may take away from the story here is the general idea that your friend or online buddy has the same objective as you, to accomplish your goals while keeping the two of you alive. However, within the context of the game, you may never really now what's going on in Lynch's head (as he is the so-called "medicated psychopath"), and you just have to hope that he won't do something crazy that'll get you both (and your family) killed.
Is it the end of the world? Of course not. Is the lack of online co-op it disappointing (especially after being spoiled by other 360 games that executed it, no pun intended, so well)? Yes.
qlock @ Nov 4th 2007 3:15PM
That wasnt their focus to start with though!!! That's the whole reason that everyone is upset. They billed it as a Co-Op game, and now probably arent able to get that part finished or working correctly so they turn it around by saying that their main focus was on Single player Campaign. I call B.S.! When it was announced it was touted as a 2 player Online Co-Op and now it's not. They can hide behind "artistic vision" as there scape goat, but I, and many others aren't buying it. It's sad to see developers of a game with such great potential making possible job threatening decisions like this. Hope they are still around after the dust settles.
Pika132 @ Oct 9th 2007 11:13PM
Hitman has never had online beyond a statistic upload feature in Blood Money. I say that if they want to focus on making the single-player kick ass, by all means, let them do so.
Having said that, Kane and Lynch is certainly a different game from Hitman. A case could be made for online multiplayer in a faster-paced game like this--but there's the thing; it could be too frantic to balance effectively. Max Payne 2 did quite well with its "Dead Man Walking" mode for modders to use. Adding a split-screen mode is a great concession, very much like Goldeneye.
Pika132 @ Oct 9th 2007 11:14PM
Er, online co-op. Yeah, if I was paying attention I'd know what the article was about; still, most of my points were valid regardless, no?
Ska Oreo @ Oct 9th 2007 11:25PM
no online co-op. um so?
Maurice M @ Oct 9th 2007 11:40PM
For *this* game it seems like a huge omission. I wasn't too interested in it anyway, but real (as in full single player) online co-op is something that usually gets me aboard.
Frank @ Oct 9th 2007 11:53PM
Yup, I agree with Maurice. For *THIS* game it's a huge smack in the face. It's like Army of Two not having online coop. For a game like Call of Duty, you don't really expect it to be there. But this game has always seemed to be advertised as being heavy on cooperative play.
fulci zombi @ Oct 9th 2007 11:59PM
the online play it does have is mostly cooperative though, it just isnt the main storyline from SP.
Arsh @ Oct 10th 2007 12:08AM
I honestly don't care about the lack of online co-op. I'm more interested in the single player (which is looking good), and maybe on occasion the MP. Besides, there's a chance that future titles in the series may have online co-op.
Just because a game doesn't have online co-op (which isn't really a 'must'), doesn't mean the single player game is gonna suck. Maybe it'll still be great.
Hobo Joe @ Oct 10th 2007 12:42AM
I really don't know why everyone's got such a hard-on (for lack of a more appropriate and less graphic phrase) over online co-op. Maybe it's just because I hate everyone, especially people online, but if a game can't stand on its single player merits- or, at the very least, its offline multiplayer (Perfect Dark for the N64?)- then I'm not even going to give it a second look. I frequently play video games by myself, or in the company of people who just want to watch, and I either want to keep it that way, or can't afford/don't want to pay for playing online. That, or I just hate people too much, which is likely.
I play video games either for the story or for really good gameplay, not to make myself look good, or even just to be social. For me, it's find people near me who want to play too, or enjoy single player. Maybe that's why I'm aggravated at Halo 3- because single player is pretty okay, but then the Flood show up and it gets boring and repetitive... but then, that's another rant for another time. I digress.
I've played these things since the Super NES, and I've played them because there's a good story and/or it stands on its own mechanics by itself. Multiplayer should compliment a game, not drive it, unless it's got some good bots built in.
Yes, online co-op is cool, but it's not the essential feature that everyone's making it out to be, nor is multiplayer in general. Just because something has multiplayer doesn't mean it NEEDS to be online, especially if it's just co-op (also, don't get me started on games where multiplayer is online/system link ONLY). I'm often in places where I don't have friends near me, and I get along just fine.
Now, before the flames begin, I'd like to again point out that I'm not against online multiplayer, or online co-op, I just think it's not as game-breakingly vital as everyone seems to think it is (again, go play Perfect Dark on the N64.) I dunno, maybe I'm just an angry old man. Metaphorically of course, I'm not even twenty yet.
Okay, now that we're clear, get flaming, kiddies.
ill trooper @ Oct 10th 2007 3:43AM
Flaming? Who's gonna flame after that torrential downpour of type?
I'm just kidding, I do it all the time myself...
Vidikron (FU) @ Oct 10th 2007 1:44AM
I think the main issue here is that game already has co-op as a feature. This isn't like BioShock where the game has one main character and no co-op at all... hell, it doesn't even have multiplayer. This game already has offline co-op (and online MP!), so why not go all the way with it and give us online co-op? Doesn't seem to make much sense.
Of course, perhaps they'll pull a Bungie. Remember when Bungie said Halo 3 was only going to have 2-player offline co-op and the internet exploded? Then just a week or so later they came out and said, "Surprise, bitches! We actually have 4-player online co-op". Wishful thinking, I know, but one can only hope.
bounchfx @ Oct 10th 2007 1:54AM
purchase = lost
Steve @ Oct 10th 2007 8:34AM
I second that. With games like Halo 3, Army of Two, and Gears there is no compelling reason for me to buy this game. I played through Gears with my cousin, 1000 miles away, and now days online co-op is a main thing I look for in a game. I don't have a lot of free time so I have to buy games that give me what I want. It is a shame they couldn't have extended the co-op online. If it wasn't there to begin with I could understand more but it is already in the game just teasing us.
Craig Ravitch @ Oct 10th 2007 7:36AM
As a person who used to shy away from playing on-line, Co-op gaming is where it's at and should stay!!! Not until halo 2 did I jump into the On-Line/Co-op gaming scene and never looked back!!
I can't stress how awesome it is to be playing with my brother and friends in Halo 3 co-op!! Every game developer should take note from Epic and Bungie and try and make it better! This needs to be an option in every game because it makes playing a companies title more intresting and adds a longer play life the game!!
Zombie # 23,433 @ Oct 10th 2007 9:04AM
I dont mind not having co op in a good single player game. But since the beginning this game has been screaming out Co op...The story is about 2 "criminals" and their exploits. Bioshock and metroid make sense to be single player games because they are about ONE SINGLE person. To use a cliffy b reference this is like making a peanut butter and jelly sandwich without the chocolate...Wait, is that right??
yojimb0 @ Oct 10th 2007 2:40PM
That's really, really dumb. This game went from being highest on my watch list to being something I'm merely interested in. They bothered to implement split screen coop, but no online co op? Get your net code together guys! Jesus... The game is centered around TWO guys, TWO characters with interesting interplay between them. This is not hitman. I'd gladly wait another 6 months for this game (I'm interested in it, but I'm not exactly aching for it) if it had online coop. This was a huge mistake for them and will really drastically impact the game's sales.