Finished this recently, fun co-op title. I still have it but I think I'll trade it before the DLC.

and yeah this game got a bad rap, what were its sales like?

I bet the DLC involves a guy called Gerstman that you have to rub out.

@Cruithne:

LOL, I would play that!

@MyLittlePwny:

From what I know, it sold quite decent enough. Especially considering the controversy it got itself into.

I played half-way through this. Even without all the brouhaha, this wasn't the best in its genre. The aiming was wonky and some stages were a bit cumbersome to navigate around in.

The presentation was nice though. It was very Michael Mann-ish (yes I know everyone already said that).

Commendable. Pity that the game is utter tosh.

european release date for rock band and EA giving something away for free. in the space of a couple of hours.
*looks for flying pigs*

FREE DLC is great, battlefield bad company is going to charge for guns! Keep DLC free!

This game is actually quite enjoyable in co-op, I started playing it the other day and I've been having a blast. It's a shame there is no online co-op though, what were they thinking? What was Gerstmann thinking as well? I have never agreed with that guys reviews, we are on completely different wavelengths.

Yawn

I don't have the game, but all DLC add-on content should be free in my opinion.

How are hate campaigns directed against Kane & Lynch baseless? While it wasn't terrible, it was a pretty crappy game, and received poor and mediocre reviews for a reason. Additionally, while the game might not have been directly responsible for Gerstmann's firing, Eidos and their dissatisfaction with Gerstmann's review ARE directly related. They felt their game should get a better review since they were paying C|Net a heap of cash to emblazon GameSpot with awful K&L art. Their complaint both devalued Gerstmann's journalistic integrity and set in motion what happened next. If they'd have sucked it up, accepted the honest review and simply discontinued their add-campaign without making a fuss, Gerstmann-gate probably wouldn't have occurred.

Edit ^: That goes for all games. I'm lookin' at you CoD4.

nolifedopestar - "EA giving something away for free....*looks for flying pigs*"
Naah, EA would never do that. This game was made by Io Interactive and published by Eidos Interactive. You can also tell it's not an EA game because the instruction book is more than four pages long ;)

I have mixed feelings about this game (and it has nothing to do with Gerstman) The clunky xbox 1 like controlls and the way the game wasn't always clear about where you needed to go or what you needed to do next was frustrating. But the story and look of the game were great. That part in the construction yard was pretty gritty. it's nice to play an M rated game that has a mature story line and not a pg-13 storyline with some M rated blood effects thrown on top of it.
But over all I do think this game was rushed to get it out for the holidays.

Kane and Lynch was a pretty fun game! Not perfect, but still fun.

I have to confess that I've never played the game myself, it's just that I can't ever see a mob of people with torches and pitchforks without joining in.

@Atheist Jew: "Eidos and their dissatisfaction with Gerstmann's review ARE directly related."

Well I put more of the blame on Gamespot and the guy that fired Gerstman rather than Eidos. Every time GS previewed the game they talked about it like it was great. So Eidos buys $40,000 of adds and when the review comes out it's a crap score. All the review scores for the game were in the same ballpark so I think Eidos might not have thought or even cared about Gerstman and complained to GS because they felt misled by how GS talked about the game before it came out vs after it came out.

@Sam_Lowry: Keep on thinking that. Ignorance is bliss.

@nolifedopestar (PSN: noliferuin): soooo true

To Luke, I'm glad to see someone finally say that. And to the rest of you who are missing the point, Eidos did not develop Kayne and Lynch, IO Interactive did. I'm a huge fan of their stuff and I'm sure we can agree they make quality games (Hitman and Freedom Fighters).

That being said, I will put blame on Eidos, partially for the mess but also because K&L was clearly put out without the polish it was supposed to have. Anyone who saw the shoddy ending sequence has to know that.

Mostly though, the whole thing was C|Net, people need to remember that. They don't have to bow to publisher pressure, we saw EGM won't even be getting copies of Mortal Kombat games anymore. People need to have the balls to maintain some sort of integrity.

I will be downloading this. I don't own the game but I try to always download free DLC, especially map packs. I think all DLC maps should be free and this is my way of telling the companies so.

i love the game, but honestly havent tried out the multiplayer.

The Coop mode was pretty fun even though the game lacked in certain areas. Even the director of Eidos Montreal studio admitted last week that the game was shipped too early. The story in the game was very much like Heat and the characters' voice acting was really entertaining. I think Gertsman rated it too low. Reviewers are not always right. After all should you really look at the price of a game when you review it? Not all games are rated with the same standards and this is a serious problem. I see classic remakes often getting better ratings than new games, why? Do you rate the enjoyment (Kane & Lynch), the length (Heavenly Sword), the enjoyment vs price (budget releases), the controls (Lair)... You would need an aggregate score: like 1 star for length, 1 star for fun, 1 for value, 1 for graphics, and 1 for controls.

I played the demo with my friend and had a blast just seeing who could shoot more innocent receptionists. Definitely gonna pick this up preowned someday.

Their time would've been much better spent patching the game to support online co-op. You know, the mode the entire game was based on to begin with?

Why is it that developers will always admit after the fact that the game really needed more time but publishers never deign to give them that time?

@FredQC: Couldn't agree more

Honestly I thought it was a great game that lacked polish(hence shipped early). The storyline was solid and it kept me completely entertained for a few hours. Just becuase the game didn't live up to all of the hype doesn't mean it was a bad game, just means it's not great. Unfortunately folks, not every game is going to be a Bioshock/Call of Duty 4/(insert favorite game here)... Screaming about decent games being horrible is like handing out jail sentences for jaywalking. Just my $0.02

I don't even own the game but i'll download them just to add another hit on the free download. Make em realize that it is best to make DLC free of charge.

@ Atheis Jew

They are baseless, the game didn't fire him did it? Just because your boss is a douchebag doesn't make you one by proxy.

By attempting to punish the publisher we punish the devoloper, and in turn... ourselves.

Sorry but I tend to get irritated when decent games get lambasted because they didn't deliver on all fronts. You can't buy a Pinto and expect it take you to the moon. Good is good, it's just not great...

@Re1gn: It wasnt a great game it was a half baked game that had 2 great characters who went to fucking waste due to the shit story and poor supporting cast of characters that were involved around the dynamic duo.

Im more pissed off about the fact Edios totally wasted two interesting / awesome characters with another half-baked game, rather than me having paid full price for it.

If they had just done the right thing and not blew their load early to meet the holiday rush Id like to hope the game would have turned out much better.

It was just lacking on so many different areas you could tell it wasnt "finished".

There was not nearly enough tension with any of the boss encounters either. Hell like most of the time you couldnt even tell you were having a proper encounter with a "boss" (well main plot character) just becuase how badly they wrote the events in the game.

Its a damned shame overall since I had high hopes for the team to have brought us all something special and wanted to believe the energy they had shown in the interview videos.
Now I know to pretty much stick to my general gut reaction that almost ALL eidos titles are not worth throwing down $$$ on. :/ Since its obvious they care more about $$$ than quality.

The MP mode I did applaud them for taking a different stance on "team deathmatch" though.

Boycott this game, show publishers we will not tolerate them trying to skew reviews.

@Jimbo4: A little late mate since the game sold a million copies.

You are suposed to boycot something when it comes out and not after the fact.

@Re1gn: Yes you are right. Great ideas shipped too early and too much hype was the cause of its downfall. And thanks to poor reviews you can now find it used for 35$. I think all games should get bad reviews so their prices drop under 40$ in a matter of weeks. ;-)

@Jimbo4: As far as boycotting Eidos or any publishers, well this is just a bad idea. Eidos are already one of the smallest publisher, and I am pretty sure they have learned their lesson since they have already cut 10 games from dev, there will never be a next gen Carmageddon because they probably lost money on Kane & Lynch, that's sad. I think an overzealous marketing guy at Eidos threatened to pull ads and then it spiralled into Gertsman getting fired. If the editor didn't like the Kane & Lynch review it had the power to veto it before it reached the public. Editors have a right to do that if they think the review was not properly researched or written if they allow it through they are ultimately the ones responsible. No one ever threatened Warner Bros because Siskel & Ebert poorly reviewed a movie.