I agree with the length issue,but it seems different for some. IGN took 7 hours. The werid thing is arent games like AW,SC:C and MW2 SP really really short too yet they get no flack for it.
"Regardless of whether you play through the story mode solo or with a friend, you're in for an entertaining though short-lived and largely repetitive ride." Good enough for me. Loved the local co-op of the first one. Will buy. Not for the full price though.
I had some hope for this game, but it seems like I'm bound to be disappointed by it (in at least) one way or the other.
Also, this is pretty ****ty. The game is four hours long, there are six multiplayer maps. And they want me to buy three DLC packs? Why were these not included in your sparse ass game? Although in this case it feels like it doesn't even matter when the content was produced, it feels like you're getting ripped off no matter what.
6.5, repeat of before. Well, it got 0.5 higher. :P
angelkimne
No surprises there, I've always equated the K & L franchise to games like Rogue Warrior anyways. Total crap that tries to be over the top mature for sensationalism and not much more.
The first had awful map design that broke immersion all over the place (the first level looked like a 5 second custom map you would find on CSS), the trade system was broken half the time, the story, graphics, and gunfights were all terrible, and the only good part were the two main characters, and no one else. This seems to fix everything, the only problem is that it's lacking in content.
And seriously, the large battles were just awful if you're talking about Havana, it was just a bunch of NPCs who ran out into the middle of machinegun fire and died, at least in this one the firefights are super intense and in-your-face.
Wow at all the people saying that the guy who got fired for writing the Kane and Lynch 1 review was fired because of it when GS stated that was not the case. I mean if I had to guess it would be he was fired do to being maybe unproffesional.
And atleast it improved lol 3 could get a 7! and 4 get a 7.5!...
Wow at all the people saying that the guy who got fired for writing the Kane and Lynch 1 review was fired because of it when GS stated that was not the case. I mean if I had to guess it would be he was fired do to being maybe unproffesional.
Justin? Wasn't the guy that guy fired for the first game Jeff? Although I do have a horrible memory so excuse me if I'm wrong =P. Also, as dumb as this sounds I still believe that he was fired because of his review...
Anyway to get back on topic I'm not surprised by GS's score. Either way I might pick this up when it gets cheaper because the multiplayer demo was a lot of fun.
Wow at all the people saying that the guy who got fired for writing the Kane and Lynch 1 review was fired because of it when GS stated that was not the case. I mean if I had to guess it would be he was fired do to being maybe unproffesional.
He WAS fired for for the review. I don't know how pointing out flaws in a game is unprofessional.
Think this game is waaaay to underrated, i liked the first game game-play and this looks almost the same.
aroxx_ab
What was cool about it was the writing and IO's knack for setting up intriguing scenarios. The way the high rise level in particular flowed from one section to the next was really great. Felt like the game version of a long take a la Children of Men. From what I've heard so far it sounds like Dog Days doesn't feature too inventive levels or intricate compositions. The one thing it looks like it still has got going for it is the gritty tone and atmosphere. And the multiplayer will probably be fun for a while. So I think I'll find ways to get my £26 worth out of it, but at this point it sounds like a disappointment.
[QUOTE="angelkimne"]
6.5, repeat of before. Well, it got 0.5 higher. :P
Bigboi500
No surprises there, I've always equated the K & L franchise to games like Rogue Warrior anyways. Total crap that tries to be over the top mature for sensationalism and not much more. If you equate it to garbage like Rogue Warrior you ought to have been surprised it didn't receive a 2.0. And then maybe acknowledged that it's not total crap.
Calling it childish is pretty off the mark as well. Have you played the games?
The first had awful map design that broke immersion all over the place (the first level looked like a 5 second custom map you would find on CSS), the trade system was broken half the time, the story, graphics, and gunfights were all terrible, and the only good part were the two main characters, and no one else. This seems to fix everything, the only problem is that it's lacking in content.
BigDaddyPOLO
Its true, but when you took the scale of it all along with the squad commands somewhat intense firefights, it was still an enjoyable experience. The graphics were plain but the design of levels were pretty good, in fact there were a whole host of environments. Ill pick it up one day or another, but only at a bargain price, its such a shame that the game in its current form is a lot fun but is sorely lacking in content to hold it up.
The squad system in Kane & Lynch did not work very well at all. When it felt like you had to start utilizing your squad you'd just get pissed by them taking cover on the wrong side of things and getting themselves killed, forcing you to restart a checkpoint IIRC. Was a giant PITA when you got to Cuba. Had to order them to stand and wait at the beginning of the level as I took care of everything myself.
Maybe it could've been improved for Dog Days, but I don't view it being removed entirely as a loss really.
I actually just beat the game in splitscreen with my girlfriend. Thank God we rented it. It's fun but just more of the same. The bootleg video appeal sort of fades away later in the game and the combat is boring besides grabbing and executing people. Took us about three hours to beat it on Hard, dying here and there. The ending is eh, not horrible but just not very satisfying either.
Wow at all the people saying that the guy who got fired for writing the Kane and Lynch 1 review was fired because of it when GS stated that was not the case. I mean if I had to guess it would be he was fired do to being maybe unproffesional.
Obviously you weren't here when the review for K&L1 just came out, GS had massive amounts of ads for K&L1 and the deal was supposedly worth a undisclosed 6 figure number. But because of the review Eidos (or whoever owned the rights to the game at the time) withdrew all advertisement for it from GS, that's the real reason why Jeff was fired, not the reason GS gave. Why else would other reviewers like Alex Navarro leave GS in disgust over the incident? Anyway the 6.5 Kane and Lynch 2 is well deserved, 4 hour campaign = fail, not worth the money imo, this is bargin bin stuff.
Only 4 hours long? I thought this game was already short when IGN said it took 7 hours but being 3 more hours short is definitely a rent if I do ever intend to try this game out.
Log in to comment