I haven't been totally keeping up with the thread of late, so apologies if this has already been brought up, but Jeff has started his own site and blog at:
I haven't been totally keeping up with the thread of late, so apologies if this has already been brought up, but Jeff has started his own site and blog at:
I haven't been totally keeping up with the thread of late, so apologies if this has already been brought up, but Jeff has started his own site and blog at:
There was opposing opinions on this matter but I was banned. On this forum like-mentality is enforced. No conspiracy about it. Ask CT about it and CT will ban you. Some one mentioned how there wasn't any one sticking up for Gamespot. I did just for the same of coming at it from a different angle. I do this all the time because homogeneity is death to me. This kind of behavior is called trolling. Unless you are opposing some one whose opinions are unpopular. In which case it's all in good fun. Probably wont get jailed or banned and if you do it wont be for very long.
Rey Del Aguila on
Because you know who SAID you know what with you know who, let's keep that between me and you.
There was opposing opinions on this matter but I was banned. On this forum like-mentality is enforced. No conspiracy about it. Ask CT about it and CT will ban you. Some one mentioned how there wasn't any one sticking up for Gamespot. I did just for the same of coming at it from a different angle. I do this all the time because homogeneity is death to me. This kind of behavior is called trolling. Unless you are opposing some one whose opinions are unpopular. In which case it's all in good fun. Probably wont get jailed or banned and if you do it wont be for very long.
Maybe you were missing the several people who were disagreeing.
Maybe you should think about the "like-mentality".
Maybe people were just disagreeing with you in turn.
Maybe you should realize that you're just a paranoid asshole.
There was opposing opinions on this matter but I was banned. On this forum like-mentality is enforced. No conspiracy about it. Ask CT about it and CT will ban you. Some one mentioned how there wasn't any one sticking up for Gamespot. I did just that for the sake of being a jackass. I do this all the time because I'm a homo. This kind of behavior is called gay. Unless you are opposing some one whose opinions are wrong. In which case it's all in good fun. Probably wont get jailed or banned and if you do it wont be for very long.
Listen dude, if you side with Gamespot on this one, then no one here can fuck with that. You may be in the wrong, and people will sure as hell point that out, but you're entitled to your opinion. But if you do it for the sake of going against everyone else because you're some kind of internet rebel, then fuck you.
That's trolling.
And don't come here and bitch about getting banned.
That's annoying.
"I believe CNet management let Jeff go for all the wrong reasons. I believe CNet intends to soften the site's tone and push for higher scores to make advertisers happy.
I won't lie to people and tell them a game is good when it isn't. I won't downplay negatives that readers have a right to know about."
From the way I understand it they basically sign you with short contracts with little job security to do the shitty games that no one will play anyway (i.e. elf bowling)
From the way I understand it they basically sign you with short contracts with little job security to do the shitty games that no one will play anyway (i.e. elf bowling)
From the way I understand it they basically sign you with short contracts with little job security to do the shitty games that no one will play anyway (i.e. elf bowling)
A drastic blow for gamespot!
To be fair, the article mentions that this particular freelancer had been working for Gamespot for 7 years and had written hundreds of reviews. Some people freelance because they prefer it.
SwashbucklerXX on
Want to find me on a gaming service? I'm SwashbucklerXX everywhere.
GS is, like many other websites, on a 7-9.5 scale already. What difference would it make if that scale suddenly became a 7.5-10 scale?
Everyone acts like the alleged "softening" of reviews (which we are either already seeing or will begin to see in 2008) is a big deal when really it isn't.
ldraw on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
AKA: mdraw, dux, milkman
0
Options
KageraImitating the worst people. Since 2004Registered Userregular
GS is, like many other websites, on a 7-9.5 scale already. What difference would it make if that scale suddenly became a 7.5-10 scale?
Everyone acts like the alleged "softening" of reviews (which we are either already seeing or will begin to see in 2008) is a big deal when really it isn't.
And with that defeatist attitude I KNOW we can change things for the better.
According to Hsu, Midway’s Mortal Kombat development team, Sony’s sports game division, and Ubisoft have all allegedly banned EGM from further coverage of their products. The reason: Apparently, they didn’t take too kindly to EGM’s review coverage of their games. Still, Hsu maintains that EGM “won’t treat these products or companies any differently.” We have yet to confirm these allegations with the publishers mentioned.
It is just alleged, but I doubt he would outright lie.
Couscous on
0
Options
Zen VulgarityWhat a lovely day for teaSecret British ThreadRegistered Userregular
According to Hsu, Midway’s Mortal Kombat development team, Sony’s sports game division, and Ubisoft have all allegedly banned EGM from further coverage of their products. The reason: Apparently, they didn’t take too kindly to EGM’s review coverage of their games. Still, Hsu maintains that EGM “won’t treat these products or companies any differently.” We have yet to confirm these allegations with the publishers mentioned.
It is just alleged, but I doubt he would outright lie.
Already alot of gamers are just using forums to get their opinions ... certainly hardcore gamers are. Stuff like what happened with Gamespot is just going to continue to push people away from bothering to read professional reviews.
I may have give EGM another shot. It sorta does seem like they are really trying to put integrity back in the industry and that does mean something.
According to Hsu, Midway’s Mortal Kombat development team, Sony’s sports game division, and Ubisoft have all allegedly banned EGM from further coverage of their products. The reason: Apparently, they didn’t take too kindly to EGM’s review coverage of their games. Still, Hsu maintains that EGM “won’t treat these products or companies any differently.†We have yet to confirm these allegations with the publishers mentioned.
It is just alleged, but I doubt he would outright lie.
Can a company really ban you from covering their product?
According to Hsu, Midway’s Mortal Kombat development team, Sony’s sports game division, and Ubisoft have all allegedly banned EGM from further coverage of their products. The reason: Apparently, they didn’t take too kindly to EGM’s review coverage of their games. Still, Hsu maintains that EGM “won’t treat these products or companies any differently.†We have yet to confirm these allegations with the publishers mentioned.
It is just alleged, but I doubt he would outright lie.
Already alot of gamers are just using forums to get their opinions ... certainly hardcore gamers are. Stuff like what happened with Gamespot is just going to continue to push people away from bothering to read professional reviews.
I may have give EGM another shot. It sorta does seem like they are really trying to put integrity back in the industry and that does mean something.
I got the street fighter 4 issue. It was my first print gaming mag in prolly 5 years. It was a little surprising just how good it was and how much enjoyment I got out of reading it. I am strongly thinking of picking up a sub.
According to Hsu, Midway’s Mortal Kombat development team, Sony’s sports game division, and Ubisoft have all allegedly banned EGM from further coverage of their products. The reason: Apparently, they didn’t take too kindly to EGM’s review coverage of their games. Still, Hsu maintains that EGM “won’t treat these products or companies any differently.†We have yet to confirm these allegations with the publishers mentioned.
It is just alleged, but I doubt he would outright lie.
Can a company really ban you from covering their product?
Don't the companies send press stuff out? Maybe they just mean not doing that.
According to Hsu, Midway’s Mortal Kombat development team, Sony’s sports game division, and Ubisoft have all allegedly banned EGM from further coverage of their products. The reason: Apparently, they didn’t take too kindly to EGM’s review coverage of their games. Still, Hsu maintains that EGM “won’t treat these products or companies any differently.†We have yet to confirm these allegations with the publishers mentioned.
It is just alleged, but I doubt he would outright lie.
Can a company really ban you from covering their product?
Don't the companies send press stuff out? Maybe they just mean not doing that.
the way it was worded made it sound like they were forbidden to cover it at all... which doesn't seem constitutional. Maybe I'm reading too much into the phrase "banned from further coverage."
the way it was worded made it sound like they were forbidden to cover it at all... which doesn't seem constitutional. Maybe I'm reading too much into the phrase "banned from further coverage."
According to Hsu, Midway’s Mortal Kombat development team, Sony’s sports game division, and Ubisoft have all allegedly banned EGM from further coverage of their products. The reason: Apparently, they didn’t take too kindly to EGM’s review coverage of their games. Still, Hsu maintains that EGM “won’t treat these products or companies any differently.†We have yet to confirm these allegations with the publishers mentioned.
It is just alleged, but I doubt he would outright lie.
Can a company really ban you from covering their product?
Don't the companies send press stuff out? Maybe they just mean not doing that.
the way it was worded made it sound like they were forbidden to cover it at all... which doesn't seem constitutional. Maybe I'm reading too much into the phrase "banned from further coverage."
Disney and Lucas send out Cease & Desists for unauthorized use of trademarked characters. Couldn't Midway or Ubisoft do the same for EGM using images of Sub-Zero or Sam Fisher without permission?
I bet it is more like how Sony told kotaku that they wouldnt be allowed to preview titles after they posted about something that was supposed to be secret. By not being allowed to review they probably mean not being allowed to recieve the game for free and before the official release.
Godspeed on
0
Options
ShadowfireVermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered Userregular
According to Hsu, Midway’s Mortal Kombat development team, Sony’s sports game division, and Ubisoft have all allegedly banned EGM from further coverage of their products. The reason: Apparently, they didn’t take too kindly to EGM’s review coverage of their games. Still, Hsu maintains that EGM “won’t treat these products or companies any differently.†We have yet to confirm these allegations with the publishers mentioned.
It is just alleged, but I doubt he would outright lie.
Can a company really ban you from covering their product?
Don't the companies send press stuff out? Maybe they just mean not doing that.
the way it was worded made it sound like they were forbidden to cover it at all... which doesn't seem constitutional. Maybe I'm reading too much into the phrase "banned from further coverage."
Disney and Lucas send out Cease & Desists for unauthorized use of trademarked characters. Couldn't Midway or Ubisoft do the same for EGM using images of Sub-Zero or Sam Fisher without permission?
Depends on how it's used. If the images are being used for reporting purposes, or parody, there's really not a thing the parent companies can do about it...
According to Hsu, Midway’s Mortal Kombat development team, Sony’s sports game division, and Ubisoft have all allegedly banned EGM from further coverage of their products. The reason: Apparently, they didn’t take too kindly to EGM’s review coverage of their games. Still, Hsu maintains that EGM “won’t treat these products or companies any differently.†We have yet to confirm these allegations with the publishers mentioned.
It is just alleged, but I doubt he would outright lie.
Can a company really ban you from covering their product?
Don't the companies send press stuff out? Maybe they just mean not doing that.
the way it was worded made it sound like they were forbidden to cover it at all... which doesn't seem constitutional. Maybe I'm reading too much into the phrase "banned from further coverage."
Disney and Lucas send out Cease & Desists for unauthorized use of trademarked characters. Couldn't Midway or Ubisoft do the same for EGM using images of Sub-Zero or Sam Fisher without permission?
Depends on how it's used. If the images are being used for reporting purposes, or parody, there's really not a thing the parent companies can do about it...
Well, the thing with print - especially within an industry as fast-paced as games - is that a "ban" by someone like Ubisoft would been that EGM would not receive reviewable copies of their games in advance of their release. EGM can still review the game, but that would be after waiting for the retail release date, reviewing said game and THEN getting it in a magazine. Given a magazine's necessary lead time, this really hurts EGM's chances of putting out a timely, relevant Ubisoft games review.
Long time video game reviewer Alex Navarro, a frequent contributor to GameSpot's podcast The HotSpot and go-to video review narrator, will be leaving the site, according to the site's Editorial Director Ricardo Torres. We learned in a phone call with Torres earlier today that Navarro, who many will remember from his infamous (and hilarious) video review of Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing, had given his notice yesterday, with the rest of staff told his last day of GameSpot editorial duties would occur on January 24th.
We haven't been in touch with Navarro yet to learn more about his decision to leave GameSpot or if the termination of Jeff Gerstmann played a role in his departure. Navarro has made appearances on Jeff Gerstmann's personal blog and Points! webcast over the past month, so it's possible the two may work together in some capacity in the future.
Following Gerstmann's removal and the decision of reviews freelancer Frank Provo to end his relationship with Gamespot, the review staff at the site appears to be woefully understaffed. When I asked Torres about the holes in the reviewer line up, he told me "We're going to be realistic about our output" and that the outlet would be looking to fill open positions as quickly as possible.
Asked about the general mood of the remaining editorial staffers at GameSpot, Torres said that "We know we lost fans, but we're still getting e-mails of support from folks who say 'We still love the site and won't give up on it'." He reiterated multiple times that GameSpot is trying to "move forward", stressing "We owe it to the site and our readers who support it."
Can anyone link me to a good synopsis of this whole story, it kinda sort skippe me by, I only got some snippets of it.
Uh, gamespot advertised the hell out of Kane and Lynch, or whatever the hell it's called, and Gertsman gave it a bad review. He should have, it was a bad game. Then he was fired.
Algertman on
0
Options
KageraImitating the worst people. Since 2004Registered Userregular
Can anyone link me to a good synopsis of this whole story, it kinda sort skippe me by, I only got some snippets of it.
Uh, gamespot advertised the hell out of Kane and Lynch, or whatever the hell it's called, and Gertsman gave it a bad review. He should have, it was a bad game. Then he was fired.
And then Kane & Lynch went on to sell a million copies.
Can anyone link me to a good synopsis of this whole story, it kinda sort skippe me by, I only got some snippets of it.
Uh, gamespot advertised the hell out of Kane and Lynch, or whatever the hell it's called, and Gertsman gave it a bad review. He should have, it was a bad game. Then he was fired.
And then Kane & Lynch went on to sell a million copies.
It's not a bad game. It's a 6-7/10. I think the problem is more the Gertsmann just hates the mature tone of the game. His video review endlessly complained about the swearing, and the ugliness of the game, and it's kinda the whole point to the game. It's like complaining about Madden just being a repetative rush to get an oval from one side of the field to the other, over and over and over.
Can anyone link me to a good synopsis of this whole story, it kinda sort skippe me by, I only got some snippets of it.
Uh, gamespot advertised the hell out of Kane and Lynch, or whatever the hell it's called, and Gertsman gave it a bad review. He should have, it was a bad game. Then he was fired.
And then Kane & Lynch went on to sell a million copies.
To tell you the trust Gertsman should have been fired a long time ago
It's not a bad game. It's a 6-7/10. I think the problem is more the Gertsmann just hates the mature tone of the game. His video review endlessly complained about the swearing, and the ugliness of the game, and it's kinda the whole point to the game. It's like complaining about Madden just being a repetative rush to get an oval from one side of the field to the other, over and over and over.
I think it's a valid complaint if it is just being "mature" for the sake of it.
If I was watching a movie where the characters swore incessantly for no particular reason, and were generally unlikeable characters who alienated the viewer, then I'd give it a lower rating too.
It's not a bad game. It's a 6-7/10. I think the problem is more the Gertsmann just hates the mature tone of the game. His video review endlessly complained about the swearing, and the ugliness of the game, and it's kinda the whole point to the game. It's like complaining about Madden just being a repetative rush to get an oval from one side of the field to the other, over and over and over.
I think it's a valid complaint if it is just being "mature" for the sake of it.
If I was watching a movie where the characters swore incessantly for no particular reason, and were generally unlikeable characters who alienated the viewer, then I'd give it a lower rating too.
It's just poor writing.
If I was watching a film about a merc who'd abandoned his wife and family and just escaped from deathrow along with a wife murdering schizophrenic with anger management issues that didn't swear, that would be poor writing. If I was watching a gritty realistic modern day crime thriller with 5 middle age guys that didn't swear, that would be poor writing.
It's not a bad game. It's a 6-7/10. I think the problem is more the Gertsmann just hates the mature tone of the game. His video review endlessly complained about the swearing, and the ugliness of the game, and it's kinda the whole point to the game. It's like complaining about Madden just being a repetative rush to get an oval from one side of the field to the other, over and over and over.
I think it's a valid complaint if it is just being "mature" for the sake of it.
If I was watching a movie where the characters swore incessantly for no particular reason, and were generally unlikeable characters who alienated the viewer, then I'd give it a lower rating too.
It's just poor writing.
If I was watching a film about a merc who'd abandoned his wife and family and just escaped from deathrow along with a wife murdering schizophrenic with anger management issues that didn't swear, that would be poor writing. If I was watching a gritty realistic modern day crime thriller with 5 middle age guys that didn't swear, that would be poor writing.
... it's a good story that's a lot more interesting than your average cliché ridden shooter.
One of the main things most reviewers have said is that they are unlikeable characters who are hard to sympathise with. Even movies which feature an anti-hero give you some reason to engage with the characters.
One of the main things most reviewers have said is that they are unlikeable characters who are hard to sympathise with. Even movies which feature an anti-hero give you some reason to engage with the characters.
I went down the list of reviews on Metacritic and the vast majority of reviews say the complete opposite of what you're suggesting. And many of them specifically single out that they've done a good job of making you sympathise with the characters and I agree, having played the game.
The only thing I really note is that american sites generally complain about the swearing, whereas european sites almost never complain.
I went down the list of reviews on Metacritic and the vast majority of reviews say the complete opposite of what you're suggesting. And many of them specifically single out that they've done a good job of making you sympathise with the characters and I agree, having played the game.
Many reviews seem to have said that the dialog was weak or that the characters are dull.
For example:
GameSpot: "Circumstances change over time and the back half plays out like a revenge tale, but it's a revenge tale where you don't actually care if anyone actually gets their revenge. Every single person you play as or encounter is despicable and wholly abrasive; thus, it'll probably be tough for you to find anyone to latch onto and care about, even if you typically go for this sort of crime drama on TV or in movies."
1UP: "It's disappointing that the story focuses so much on Kane and leaves Lynch's medical issues in the background, since Kane is such a straightforward character."
WorthPlaying: "While it's not uncommon for crime stories to feature not-so-nice people, they're usually characters who you can sympathize with instead of being eager to see them die. In Kane & Lynch, your success in the game simply serves to extend the lives of absolutely unlikable characters."
GameZone: "Even considering Kane’s delicate situation, it’s hard to rally behind him when every other thing to come out of his mouth is “I don’t give a f*** about anyone else, I only care about my daughter,†which gets old very quickly. And don’t get me started on Lynch, easily one of the most unlikable jerks ever to be a titular protagonist in a game.".
However, some reviews have said that they really liked the story. I guess this is a game that polarises people, so if you like over-the-top-badass-action style games and characterisation, then you love the story. If you prefer a bit more depth and subtlety, then you hate it.
Personally don't like over-the-top dialogue, because it just gets tedious. After a while, I just think: "Yeah, we know these characters are badass. There's no need to keep rubbing it in our faces". That applies to movies and games.
1up "We rarely see scenarios and story structure this good in a game"
IGN "It's no easy task to create such despicable characters and then give them motivations and situations that allow even the holiest of us to relate to their situation and feel for them."
Actiontrip "With such intriguing and powerful characters it's easy to get swept in by Kane & Lynch: Dead Men"
Gaming Excellence "Characters are deep and involved, evolving as the game progresses to show various sides of themselves. It’s not easy to pull off, but you begin to feel an attachment to Kane"
Gamespy "There's no dispute that the story driving Kane & Lynch is one of the best you'll play this year"
Eurogamer "There's more personality in the opening cut-scene than most games manage over their entire length, so hats off for that (unless underneath that hat is a balding mullet, of course)."
PC Zone "Kane & Lynch is still well worth a play, even if it's just for the cinematic feel of the levels, the refreshingly different characters and the excellent multiplayer. "
Really it's the othe way around. Kane and Lynch has a lot of depth to it, especially with the ending. Gears of War is over the top badass and personally I find it a joke. But K&L manages to pull off the story it wants to very well.
Posts
www.jeffgerstmann.net
It's nice to see his rambling thoughts once again, and he's updating pretty regularly.
PSN ID : Xander51 Steam ID : Xander51
That's neat, I hope he starts making money off it at some point. Or also starts writing elsewhere too.
Yes me too, I'm glad to see that he's still interested in doing game journalism.
PSN ID : Xander51 Steam ID : Xander51
Maybe you were missing the several people who were disagreeing.
Maybe you should think about the "like-mentality".
Maybe people were just disagreeing with you in turn.
Maybe you should realize that you're just a paranoid asshole.
Listen dude, if you side with Gamespot on this one, then no one here can fuck with that. You may be in the wrong, and people will sure as hell point that out, but you're entitled to your opinion. But if you do it for the sake of going against everyone else because you're some kind of internet rebel, then fuck you.
That's trolling.
And don't come here and bitch about getting banned.
That's annoying.
http://www.gamespot.com/users/mosaic/show_blog_entry.php?topic_id=m-100-25273350
A freelancer quit over the firing.
'Quit'
Does not compute.
From the way I understand it they basically sign you with short contracts with little job security to do the shitty games that no one will play anyway (i.e. elf bowling)
A drastic blow for gamespot!
To be fair, the article mentions that this particular freelancer had been working for Gamespot for 7 years and had written hundreds of reviews. Some people freelance because they prefer it.
Everyone acts like the alleged "softening" of reviews (which we are either already seeing or will begin to see in 2008) is a big deal when really it isn't.
AKA: mdraw, dux, milkman
And with that defeatist attitude I KNOW we can change things for the better.
Already alot of gamers are just using forums to get their opinions ... certainly hardcore gamers are. Stuff like what happened with Gamespot is just going to continue to push people away from bothering to read professional reviews.
I may have give EGM another shot. It sorta does seem like they are really trying to put integrity back in the industry and that does mean something.
Can a company really ban you from covering their product?
I got the street fighter 4 issue. It was my first print gaming mag in prolly 5 years. It was a little surprising just how good it was and how much enjoyment I got out of reading it. I am strongly thinking of picking up a sub.
Don't the companies send press stuff out? Maybe they just mean not doing that.
the way it was worded made it sound like they were forbidden to cover it at all... which doesn't seem constitutional. Maybe I'm reading too much into the phrase "banned from further coverage."
Yeah, the wording certainly is odd.
Disney and Lucas send out Cease & Desists for unauthorized use of trademarked characters. Couldn't Midway or Ubisoft do the same for EGM using images of Sub-Zero or Sam Fisher without permission?
Depends on how it's used. If the images are being used for reporting purposes, or parody, there's really not a thing the parent companies can do about it...
Well, the thing with print - especially within an industry as fast-paced as games - is that a "ban" by someone like Ubisoft would been that EGM would not receive reviewable copies of their games in advance of their release. EGM can still review the game, but that would be after waiting for the retail release date, reviewing said game and THEN getting it in a magazine. Given a magazine's necessary lead time, this really hurts EGM's chances of putting out a timely, relevant Ubisoft games review.
http://www.gamespot.com/video/919220/6086530/big-rigs-over-the-road-racing-video-review
Is there any possible way that the recent quits are in no way related to the Gerstmann affair?
uh, sort of
gamespot probably went through a major overhaul on how reviews have to be from here on out due to GertsmanGate
Uh, gamespot advertised the hell out of Kane and Lynch, or whatever the hell it's called, and Gertsman gave it a bad review. He should have, it was a bad game. Then he was fired.
And then Kane & Lynch went on to sell a million copies.
It's not a bad game. It's a 6-7/10. I think the problem is more the Gertsmann just hates the mature tone of the game. His video review endlessly complained about the swearing, and the ugliness of the game, and it's kinda the whole point to the game. It's like complaining about Madden just being a repetative rush to get an oval from one side of the field to the other, over and over and over.
To tell you the trust Gertsman should have been fired a long time ago
I think it's a valid complaint if it is just being "mature" for the sake of it.
If I was watching a movie where the characters swore incessantly for no particular reason, and were generally unlikeable characters who alienated the viewer, then I'd give it a lower rating too.
It's just poor writing.
If I was watching a film about a merc who'd abandoned his wife and family and just escaped from deathrow along with a wife murdering schizophrenic with anger management issues that didn't swear, that would be poor writing. If I was watching a gritty realistic modern day crime thriller with 5 middle age guys that didn't swear, that would be poor writing.
It's clearly not being "mature" for the sake of it. It's mature because it is, and I mean that in more than the sense that K&L swear a lot, it's a good story that's a lot more interesting than your average cliché ridden shooter.
Wonder where he'll head next.
God of War manages to take a very unlikable character and make him likable in a tasteful way.
Lots of swearing is just lazy in my opinion. It's on the same level as killing off a character to get cheap sympathy points.
One of the main things most reviewers have said is that they are unlikeable characters who are hard to sympathise with. Even movies which feature an anti-hero give you some reason to engage with the characters.
I went down the list of reviews on Metacritic and the vast majority of reviews say the complete opposite of what you're suggesting. And many of them specifically single out that they've done a good job of making you sympathise with the characters and I agree, having played the game.
The only thing I really note is that american sites generally complain about the swearing, whereas european sites almost never complain.
Many reviews seem to have said that the dialog was weak or that the characters are dull.
For example:
GameSpot: "Circumstances change over time and the back half plays out like a revenge tale, but it's a revenge tale where you don't actually care if anyone actually gets their revenge. Every single person you play as or encounter is despicable and wholly abrasive; thus, it'll probably be tough for you to find anyone to latch onto and care about, even if you typically go for this sort of crime drama on TV or in movies."
1UP: "It's disappointing that the story focuses so much on Kane and leaves Lynch's medical issues in the background, since Kane is such a straightforward character."
WorthPlaying: "While it's not uncommon for crime stories to feature not-so-nice people, they're usually characters who you can sympathize with instead of being eager to see them die. In Kane & Lynch, your success in the game simply serves to extend the lives of absolutely unlikable characters."
GameZone: "Even considering Kane’s delicate situation, it’s hard to rally behind him when every other thing to come out of his mouth is “I don’t give a f*** about anyone else, I only care about my daughter,†which gets old very quickly. And don’t get me started on Lynch, easily one of the most unlikable jerks ever to be a titular protagonist in a game.".
However, some reviews have said that they really liked the story. I guess this is a game that polarises people, so if you like over-the-top-badass-action style games and characterisation, then you love the story. If you prefer a bit more depth and subtlety, then you hate it.
Personally don't like over-the-top dialogue, because it just gets tedious. After a while, I just think: "Yeah, we know these characters are badass. There's no need to keep rubbing it in our faces". That applies to movies and games.
Really it's the othe way around. Kane and Lynch has a lot of depth to it, especially with the ending. Gears of War is over the top badass and personally I find it a joke. But K&L manages to pull off the story it wants to very well.