Metareview: Kane & Lynch: Dead Men (Xbox 360, PS3, PC)
by Alexander Sliwinski 
{ Nov 14th 2007 at 4:55PM }
- 1UP (75/100): "So there are problems that prevent Kane & Lynch from fully realizing its potential, but its concept and execution are strong enough to survive them. We rarely see scenarios and story structure this good in a game, and that makes it easier to forgive some of the more hardcore technical game-design issues. It's definitely more of a popcorn game for the action-movie crowd than a hardcore shooter, but there's nothing wrong with that."
- IGN (70/100): "As well constructed as the plot is, one would assume the game would play smoothly. Unfortunately, it does not. Instead, it plays like a game that lacks focus and needs a few more months of polish. But then, most of the gameplay feels like it was pulled directly out of a game from the last generation, so perhaps more time wouldn't have done any good."
- GameSpot (60/100): "Kane & Lynch: Dead Men is a premise with promise, but the gameplay isn't sound while the story and characters go nowhere. And it's got enough random AI-based glitches to make you want to scream. Considering the nearly ridiculous number of extremely high-quality shooters available recently, there's not much room for something like Kane & Lynch. But the multiplayer is a really great idea that's worth seeing, even if playing it makes you wish that it was used in another, better game."
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Supino @ Nov 14th 2007 4:59PM
I just hope Uwe B. makes a movie out of this.
NaeemTHM @ Nov 14th 2007 5:09PM
I'm going to sound like a dick, but I'm actually glad this game isn't good.
I have enough shit to play this year already. And with Assassin's Creed out this week and Mass Effect out the next, I really dont have the time or money to invest in another game.
rom @ Nov 14th 2007 5:33PM
Couldn't agree with you more. I find myself wishing that all these new games suck. I know it's selfish, but I can't help it.
Sockninja @ Nov 14th 2007 6:05PM
Woot JTHM avatar :D
Foggy Bottoms @ Nov 14th 2007 9:49PM
agreed but it looked like it would be so good. i'm gonna play it anyway.
Edog Lost @ Nov 14th 2007 5:09PM
Damn.. This isn't going to help their lack of co-op
Count Noobula @ Nov 14th 2007 5:10PM
I was never interested in this game. Though Eidos has stayed with their fine tradition of promising so much, and delivering so little. I have no faith in any Eidos game ever since they butchered the Legacy of Kain series.
NaeemTHM @ Nov 14th 2007 5:19PM
OMG! SO true, they deliver the beyond epic Soul Reaver 1 and 2 and then...nothing.
Shit after shit sequel.
Kassu @ Nov 14th 2007 5:14PM
The whole Gamespot staff = Idiots...
They have been hyping the game like it's a gift from the 7th heaven, and now they give it a 6.
This is like the 4th f*****g time i have seen this happen.
Don't really care about the game - just wanted to rant on Gamespot.
Vegeta (aka Ska Oreo) @ Nov 14th 2007 6:09PM
you know maybe the reason why they hype it is.....
Most of the previews are either non-playable or demos that are 10min long that don't really show where the game fails.
Einhanderkiller @ Nov 14th 2007 6:26PM
So they suck because they were excited for it but disliked it when they finally played the full version of it?
Um, ok.
Kassu @ Nov 15th 2007 5:02AM
to Einhanderkiller..
Mh, they released like 4 articles and a developer interview and hands on video with some Wii title...Dragon whatever. Well, it was shitty, you could see it from their look. Gave it a 6 or smth too...Yeah, the hype was totally needed. Tenkaichi 2. Released like 3 articles worth of character profiles and a shitload of videos. Then reviewed the game, gave it a 6.5 and said that there isn't much variety in the character selection. From the gameplay vids, you could see they sucked balls at the game, my 11 year old sister plays the game better than they do...
I could keep on going all day long with this....
Ransom @ Nov 15th 2007 6:19AM
I stopped reading Gamespot when they gave Metroid Prime 3 a lower score than Warioware.
Preston @ Nov 14th 2007 5:23PM
I'm actually suprised that 1up gave it a higher rating than the other reviewers, especially with their latest reviews taking a crap on COD4 and Halo 3.
LaughingTarget @ Nov 14th 2007 5:36PM
Don't get too surprised, they've behaved in their usual manner. They seem to be positive about it in the write-up but managed to give it a lower score than Crysis, which they weren't exactly pleased with.
gonk @ Nov 14th 2007 5:25PM
they should've used the system from r6v, just take out the room breaching stuff but keep the cover and squad system in, it would've been great
lawlersauce @ Nov 14th 2007 5:57PM
and called it
"Rainbow 4: Reno"
rikimaru @ Nov 14th 2007 5:35PM
Lots of mixed reviews on these largely hyped games lately.
I was really interested in this game when it was announced based only on the co-op features, which don't look like they turned out to be that great. I like the concept though.
A 6 from Gamespot seems harsh, I can think of a lot worse games that deserve a 6. Which basicly translates to, "don't pay full price for this game, wait a few months until its cheaper and used"
Rob Accomando @ Nov 14th 2007 5:44PM
Kane and who?
Neebs @ Nov 14th 2007 5:45PM
More like Kane and 7ynch.
Arturo @ Nov 14th 2007 5:46PM
"The whole Gamespot staff = Idiots...
They have been hyping the game like it's a gift from the 7th heaven, and now they give it a 6.
This is like the 4th f*****g time i have seen this happen.
Don't really care about the game - just wanted to rant on Gamespot."
As if they could predict the future to tell whether a new IP would be good or not...if a concept seems cool, then it seems cool. It doesn't mean it will be.
In any event, I think I might still pick this up, I feel compelled to despite the meh reviews, I just can't put my finger on it...
Bluebrake @ Nov 14th 2007 7:08PM
"if a concept seems cool, then it seems cool. It doesn't mean it will be."
If they hyped it before release and then gave it a mediocre review, aren't they following your premise exactly?
I'd rather have them give an honest review that contradicts their early impressions than deal with a site who artificially inflates their final scores so they don't make themselves look stupid.
Zsavior @ Nov 14th 2007 5:50PM
It is sad really, because supposedly the plot is really good. It seems games with time dedicated to cinema quality plot and story, seem to always come up short in the game play department.
I wonder if maybe games that are plot heavy should start advertising as such, rather than just trying to be a next gen shooter. The real problem is, this is what makes the game industry problematic. The balance in gaming is skewed while you have to have story it really isn't that of big an importance. If the game looks good and plays nicely people will ignore the fact you developed absolutely no plot. While if you have a phenomenal story it will mean nothing if the game doesn't live up. Video games aren't movies, but you can see some game designers would like them to be, I think there is room for both as long as a game is expressed as being that.
Problem I have is these people never ever, advertise what a game is, instead they try to cater to the majority, then when the back lash hits they don't know where they went wrong. Personally I would like plot driven games I like cinematic cut scenes, followed by action, but no body likes to be lied to and I think that is what games like Kane & Lynch do way to much.
Count Noobula @ Nov 14th 2007 6:07PM
Its getting kind of crazy with games, hype, and low scores. I think it would be best if developers didn't actually start showing their games until they are nearly complete. That way we are pleasantly surprised when they do come out, rather than being disappointed. The media as a whole is responsible for this. They get all of us excited about every game like its going to be the best one ever, take for example Assassin's Creed. I think that the media such as IGN, who over-hypes games beyond belief did so with this game, and Jade Raymond (I guess there is no such thing as hype when it comes to her), that they get disappointed when they actually play the final version of the game. I have stopped reading reviews on upcoming games, and instead I will rent/demo them before making a judgment or purchase.
Vegeta (aka Ska Oreo) @ Nov 14th 2007 6:11PM
Blargh
I'm still going to play this game, only because the story seems pretty good. And I don't mind gameflying an average game. Who knows, maybe I'll enjoy it because these reviews are only THEIR OPINION and shouldn't be taken as fact.
ChekhovsGun @ Nov 14th 2007 6:52PM
I totally wasn't expecting this. It's like every game that was to make November "the month" for blockbuster titles has been branded a disappointment. Assassin's Creed, Crysis, K&L, UT3... Gamers must be a fickle bunch! Yeah, so the critics like Oblivion. Gamers hate it. The same happened with BioShock after release. As far as I know, CoD 4 and Mario the only games to have gotten broad acclaim and they're sequels.
Arturo @ Nov 14th 2007 6:58PM
ut3 already a disappointment?
ChekhovsGun @ Nov 14th 2007 7:05PM
If you believe what people have to say on the forums. They love it really, they just have to pass the time before release.
Arturo @ Nov 14th 2007 7:14PM
"I'd rather have them give an honest review that contradicts their early impressions than deal with a site who artificially inflates their final scores so they don't make themselves look stupid."
Only, I was referring to gamespot; in which, I would hardly consider a 6 an inflated score.
Tirisfal @ Nov 14th 2007 7:22PM
I'm still excited about the game even with the mediocre reviews. I am disappointed however that the pc version got delayed a week (or never pushed up to release early) for no reason whatsoever.
Blue_Falcon @ Nov 14th 2007 10:13PM
Gamespot's review shouldn't count, since it was done by Jeff, who is the single worst reviewer across all of the 'professional' gaming sites.
Arsh @ Nov 14th 2007 11:52PM
Gametrailers gave the game a very positive review:
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/27909.html
def PD @ Nov 14th 2007 11:01PM
This game really isn't that bad at all; the multiplayer is especially fun, but I was surprised that FA was the only multiplayer mode available. I'm only about 30 minutes in and feel this is a solid game. The graphics are a little disappointing, the hit detection is a bit off, but there's enough to the game right now where I'd enjoy it. Definitely a rental, worth it when the game drops to $40.
gonk @ Nov 15th 2007 2:46AM
maybe the movie will be better than the game? same story, no clunky controls or AI