PDA

View Full Version : Kane and lynch co-op plz read!



Heartless1192
3rd Sep 2006, 18:33
well..i was at gamespot.com and i saw a picture of a guy putting a knife to sum1 forhead......and i said COOL..........i clicked to read sum previews and news and i said to myself WOW this game is amazing as i read on, it said that this game supported co-op and i was excited UNTIL i saw that co-op does not support online play...and i was like :mad2:................b4 i made this account.................i went to ur forums seeing SOOOO much people Complain ..... Just saying if u dont want that to happen to kane and lynch please state that if u r putting online co-op or if not ............plz!!!!!!!!!! think it into putting an online co-op

-Heartless

P.S. i know i may be complaining to;)

Halfpastdead
4th Sep 2006, 00:14
Personally I don't mind, I'm in it for the gritty role playing single player.

Lan's nice if you got a buddy to play with. :)

Dimhenion
5th Sep 2006, 23:51
The last thing I need is my partner lagging out when I need him most...

When does this game come out, again?

Heartless1192
6th Sep 2006, 01:54
who cares...it would be so much better to have an online co-op game then bring friends over ur house it would be so much better online.............and there could be a couple of achievements in there to...

Dimhenion
6th Sep 2006, 03:42
Just because the feature you personally want isn't in the game, doesn't mean you should start throwing a fit...

Heartless1192
8th Sep 2006, 01:36
im not the throwing a fit.......im throwing a complaint...just because sum of u dont have xbl doesnt mean they have to punish other ppl

CatSuit&Ponytail
3rd Nov 2006, 11:31
I would prefer all games with the potential to have both LAN and online Co-op. I have often in the past few years wished for a good LAN co-op, and had to resort to MMORPGs to be able to play the same game with my Husband when we are sitting right next to each other. So I welcome all the different ways to game together, but prefer LAN. :)

Jeron
6th Jul 2007, 22:04
think it into putting an online co-op

Oh they thought of it.
But if they did put an online mode in the game, it wouldn't make much difference. The game needs to calculate all the AI of the dozen characters in the game (you can get to 20 teammates in this game) + the AI of all the enemies, + everything is destructable, the panicing crowds, the cars (which has a large part in this game) ...
Point is, there is too much to synchronize that even with a quadcore cpu it would lag so much it'd be like a screenshot gallery.

The good news is that if you play co-op the game is much more difficult, more enemies etc. And you can play co-op alone too, so a buddy can join or leave at any time.

emma peal
14th Jul 2007, 17:53
I would just love an online co-op game - they did it with GoW? I know GoW isn't the same open world so that would prove difficult. Unfortunately for me the only people I know that like Hitman/Kane & Lynch kind of stuff are on my friends list spread out over the globe. No one I know locally in "real life" likes these kinds of games. :(

emma

The Hessian Horseman
25th Jul 2007, 04:16
I don't get, why someone would speak out *against* co-op/multiplayer ... as long as it's not a must-play, where's the problem, implementing the option? More options, more fun, ain't that right ;) ?

Xcom
3rd Aug 2007, 16:54
as long as it's not a must-play, where's the problem, implementing the option? More options, more fun, ain't that right ;) ?

Not necessarily. I assume you don't want just a co-op MP, you want well-designed, fun, bug free, cheat free online multiplayer, right? If so, then it will most likely cost a lot of effort to create and implement. The effort which otherwise can be spent on something else (like polishing singleplayer gameplay).

The Hessian Horseman
4th Aug 2007, 20:46
Aye ... you're right on that one. Well, I *do* realize, that it's not a one-day-job, programming multiplayer gaming. The "not problem", I was speaking of, was why anyone should NOT want the option - since the mates over at IO Interactive are going for multiplayer and co-op anyways ;)

Only wondered, who'd be troubled by the OPTION to choose two or more player mode ;)

Whatever the case, I'm really looking forward to MP on Kane & Lynch. Sitting side by side with a friend, one controlling Kane the other one going berserk trying to control Lynch ... oughta be fun, right :D ?!

Dimhenion
5th Aug 2007, 16:54
If you want to play it online, welcome to the world of Hamachi (www.hamachi.cc/)!

kdef
28th Aug 2007, 18:37
Oh they thought of it.
But if they did put an online mode in the game, it wouldn't make much difference. The game needs to calculate all the AI of the dozen characters in the game (you can get to 20 teammates in this game) + the AI of all the enemies, + everything is destructable, the panicing crowds, the cars (which has a large part in this game) ...
Point is, there is too much to synchronize that even with a quadcore cpu it would lag so much it'd be like a screenshot gallery.


You do know that they have offline coop implemented, right? Offline coop is *more* processor intensive than online coop. You have one system handling both players simultaneously after all.

Online coop should've been implemented in Kane & Lynch and should've been accounted for from day one. This game is built around coop and the 360 has made online coop play and online buddies a staple of console gaming. To ignore that leaves this game in the also ran pile.

And don't tell me online coop is missing due to network lag (which doesn't have anything to do with processing power btw). If everything from Rainbox 6 to Gears to Virtua Fighter 5 can do it, then Kane & Lynch should be able to do it.

The lack of online coop play moves Kane & Lynch from an opening day buy to a "I'll get it when I'm finished everything else and this game is in the bargain bin" buy. I'd rather they delayed it and implemented online coop than release it as is. Army of Two is going to steal its thunder.

Jazi
29th Aug 2007, 23:44
Wow some of you don't understand :mad2: . Online co-op doesn't obligate you to play with a real partner online, you could still play your single player campaign, use your brain, besides, the majority of people enjoy cooperative play. Stop speaking for everyone when you're the minority. Loners.

Johnny Neat
4th Oct 2007, 21:20
Kdef has a serious point...

Regardless though, for a game (IP) of this kind to not have an online co-op campaign is a bit surprising to say the least in this day and age. For now I'll hold off on using the word incompetence till I see if the game is not brokena s I fear Army of Two might be. But back to this game it's like hyping up a sports car and leaving out the speed. If other games, like Kdef mentions for examples, can pull it off there are no more excuses.

Multiplayer in a game like this feels forced, reminds me of cough... "Stranglehold". See on a game like Bioshock to not get multiplayer of any kind was right on the money, but far too many games have the worst choices done to them. This is a solo at the least end and online co-op at the best end.

Now listen, I appreciate off line co-op but who really does that as much anymore? Are we back to old school gaming already? I know people do it on occasion, as would I at times because options are good, but in general we have online via LIVE and Sony's service. I don't even bring lag into this discussion because I don't logically plan on playing with a friend with a bad connection. Now on the other hand according to defenders of the oversight, Multiplayer with random strangers will bring the headaches of lag, quiting and the possible cheating.

Jeron
5th Oct 2007, 08:11
Hamachi

Johnny Neat
5th Oct 2007, 12:42
Hamachi

??

Who is an Amberjack, King Amberjack, Buri, Racing Tuna, Seriora quinqueradiata, Yellowtail, Mojyako, Yazu, and/or a Tsubasu?

Or are you calling someone a "cute little hamster" in Japanese?:confused:

chip5541
5th Oct 2007, 13:01
No, it is a program that allows you to play games online using LAN.

Johnny Neat
5th Oct 2007, 13:31
No, it is a program that allows you to play games online using LAN.

Gotcha. Plus I wonder.

Hamachi is a centrally-managed zero-configuration virtual private network (VPN) freeware application capable of establishing direct links between computers that are behind NAT firewalls without requiring reconfiguration (in most cases); in other words, it establishes a connection over the Internet, to create conditions very similar to that as if the computers were physically connected.

chip5541
7th Oct 2007, 10:35
I have used it for Nexus: the Jupiter Incident and it worked well. I have read that some others that used it had issues so be careful either way.

Dimhenion
7th Oct 2007, 16:14
If you want to play it online, welcome to the world of Hamachi (www.hamachi.cc/)!

It helps if you read the thread, too. :rasp:

I've used it for tons of games where I wanted to play online with a friend, but didn't want to forward a port for a one-time thing, so we just used Hamachi. Works great.

Johnny Neat
8th Oct 2007, 13:16
I wanted to share a quote from Jens-Peter Kurup from April's Issue of Gameinformer on Kane & Lynch and co-op.


Kurup - "Kane & Lynch differs from most single-player and co-op games in the way that the game is 'born' as co-op."

So what happened? Besides having led us to believe that the game would have shipped in June of this year, now apparently the main focus of co-op as well, which should and would normally and typically mean online with optional, if extra lucky, offline co-op. I don't know or believe in any multiplayer for this IP. Although if done right, it could become a realistic gears of war type game, which I doubt. online Co-op is the way to go, PERIOD. Now let me see if this Hamachi thingy works for xbox 360. Although I have a terribly sad itch that that is only for PC gaming.



I've used it for tons of games where I wanted to play online with a friend, but didn't want to forward a port for a one-time thing, so we just used Hamachi. Works great.

How/Where do I go to get it and how would/does it work for Xbox 360?

Jeron
8th Oct 2007, 13:34
PC - the way it's meant to be gamed.

Johnny Neat
8th Oct 2007, 15:23
PC - the way it's meant to be gamed.

I'm going to take that comment with a grain of salt.

Bottomline: :(

Tystick357
28th Oct 2007, 23:14
Now listen, I appreciate off line co-op but who really does that as much anymore? Are we back to old school gaming already?

To get a connection good enough to play online it would cost me $50 a month, so I usually stick old school unless I go to someone's house.

I'm sure in the midwest, especially since there are a lot of dead spots out there still, plenty of people still do offline coop.

ChinaWhite
29th Oct 2007, 04:51
I don't buy the excuse it cannot be done, because of the AI. The Fragile Alliance mode has 8 players going against alot of AI, which is connection and cpu intensive. The coding is already implemented for online Fragile Alliance, it's a case of implementing it so it will work in Singleplayer mode, the whole thing cries lazy.

Games such as GRAW which had 16 players going against 70 AI, in the co-op compaign, and kept it's own, it goes to show it can be done. I feel that it;s ironic that they say, it's a co-op game, but you must play offline, thats a nice way of alienating your friends abroad, who you would love to play with.

Gears of War comes out for the PC soon, that has co-op and very CPU and GPU intensive, likewise Crysis which tortures most pc's, yet a 64 versus mode is there. Could you imagine if they said it was offline only?! I don't know 64 people who wants crysis let alone people with a capable pc. point is, I don't know more then a cpuple of people who are buying Kane and Lynch, andI don't think any of them are going to go through the trouble of lugging their 15kg monitor and their 30kg Pc down the street to my house.

MaggieChow
29th Oct 2007, 19:32
How is a buddy supposed to "jump in" when you're using a PC?

It'll still be a good game without co-op but its a seriously wasted opportunity.

Johnny Neat
30th Oct 2007, 13:23
To get a connection good enough to play online it would cost me $50 a month, so I usually stick old school unless I go to someone's house. I'm sure in the midwest, especially since there are a lot of dead spots out there still, plenty of people still do offline coop.

I hear what you are saying and that sucks to be in an area unable to enjoy internet connections or be yound enough to not afford an internet connection or a year of LIVE, but let me tell you that the midwest is not a major concern for online profits, unfortunately, nor plays a huge part in such choices by developers. Look off-line is better than nothing, for sure... it just isn't good enough in today's gaming world. Will this game be garbage because of a lack of online co-op, no. But it could have had a better chance at attaining certified longevity and huge sales because of it.



I don't buy the excuse it cannot be done, because of the AI. The Fragile Alliance mode has 8 players going against alot of AI, which is connection and cpu intensive. The coding is already implemented for online Fragile Alliance, it's a case of...

I'm with you! Tell it like it is so I don't sound like a spoiled old school gamer looking too forward and not so much back. Online is a huge part of next gen gaming on consoles. Fragile Alliance is something this IP shouldn't have been implemented over co-op. I mean wasn't this game hyped as a co-op franchise IP? Not by me, but the developer...?


It'll still be a good game without co-op but its a seriously wasted opportunity.

Seriously! Wasted too the MAX!

ChinaWhite
30th Oct 2007, 18:49
Online co-op has been around since the days of 1996, Duke Nukem had it, Doom the first shooter had it. I mostly saw it in the first ever Rainbow Six on the Pc and Ghost Recon hosting with 56k!! Those games pushed co-op gaming because from then on many more games became co-op especially PC, thats more then a decade ago. Generally speaking it's an expected requirement these days, why? Because developers know that there is another area where they can appeal to gamers, Ghost Recon AW 1+2, GoW, Vegas, Halo series, Crackdown and many others have co-op.

While it is true that some of those games listed above don't all have cutscenes in their SP co-op, a couple of them do GoW and Halo for example.

To not include co-op will be a detriment to this developer it's turned off many gamers who where interested. You just got to Gametrailers. kotaku or even gamespot, there is lots and lots of comments who say where interested, the no online co-op turns this game from a must buy to 0 purchase.

Can you blame them really? You got this game thats coming out soon called Army of Two, unless you've had a bag over the head and don't know what that game is. Everyone knows it's a co-op based game. Many who where interested in K&L co-op will simply buy this game to get the co-op experience that gamers want, and play with their friends across the globe. I hate to say it, but as much as I loathe EA from the experience I've had with them from the 90's till now, they done a better overall job then Io Interactive on that part and that is sad.

Tystick357
30th Oct 2007, 23:58
I hear what you are saying and that sucks to be in an area unable to enjoy internet connections or be yound enough to not afford an internet connection or a year of LIVE, but let me tell you that the midwest is not a major concern for online profits, unfortunately, nor plays a huge part in such choices by developers. Look off-line is better than nothing, for sure... it just isn't good enough in today's gaming world. Will this game be garbage because of a lack of online co-op, no. But it could have had a better chance at attaining certified longevity and huge sales because of it.


First off, I can get it, I just don't want to pay $50 a month in internet. I'm 18 and finishing my associates in arts next semester, I can easily afford it. Hell I wasn't even talking against online coop, I was just telling you there is still a market that does play that a lot.

Hell if I could get better internet cheaper I'd be on the band wagon too, but I wouldn't be *****ing about it. I'd just take the best out of the game I could and try to make a change for the sequel, but complaining about this one game's coop is a little late for change now.

I haven't even made the jump to next gen consoles because IMO (I am sure plenty will disagree) there are still no games that interest me enough to buy my own instead of playing at my friends place. (GTA 4, Alan Wake, & UFC 2009 have changed that though so I am going to buy one soon. K&L looks great too.)

Johnny Neat
31st Oct 2007, 13:30
First off, I can get it, I just don't want to pay $50 a month in internet. I'm 18 and finishing my associates in arts next semester, I can easily afford it. Hell I wasn't even talking against online coop, I was just telling you there is still a market that does play that a lot.

Hell if I could get better internet cheaper I'd be on the band wagon too, but I wouldn't be *****ing about it. I'd just take the best out of the game I could and try to make a change for the sequel, but complaining about this one game's coop is a little late for change now.

I haven't even made the jump to next gen consoles because IMO (I am sure plenty will disagree) there are still no games that interest me enough to buy my own instead of playing at my friends place. (GTA 4, Alan Wake, & UFC 2009 have changed that though so I am going to buy one soon. K&L looks great too.)

Well I'm not the usual suspect of complaining about games or even options in a game on a forum, unless they were over hyped (Gears of War) or had an option used to sell the specific IP which was then suddenly taken out for no logical reason (Kane & Lynch & now Black Site: Area 51), but anyhow in this case here, this is the case. So yeah I want to be heard. Co-op was a major selling point and this game, no matter how cool, has more than likely lost major potential and sales. Will it make it? It has a chance, just not the one it had.

Regardless this gen of gaming has brought me back. Games are now something I can get into and not feel like "same ol same ol". Last gen was the best of the earlier gens, this gen is the beginning of something... something we shall see and have fun doing so.

Johnny Neat
14th Nov 2007, 18:09
I guess the reviews are in... and Kane & Lynch is/are D.O.A..

I'm sure that bug free solo player PR smoke screen of an excuse for no online co-op didn't hold up for a second. Nice try... next time just admit the game was too much to handle and avoid adding insult to injury with see through excuses as to why you couldn't drop the game you flirted around to us.
No Online co-op for the campaign was the first torpedo to hit. Now with AI issues and weak cover system problems being reported, along with other things, the ship has officially sunk a cool posibility. :mad2:

Maybe next time guys... maybe next time. ****

Crosiss
14th Nov 2007, 23:51
Oh they thought of it.
But if they did put an online mode in the game, it wouldn't make much difference. The game needs to calculate all the AI of the dozen characters in the game (you can get to 20 teammates in this game) + the AI of all the enemies, + everything is destructable, the panicing crowds, the cars (which has a large part in this game) ...
Point is, there is too much to synchronize that even with a quadcore cpu it would lag so much it'd be like a screenshot gallery.

The good news is that if you play co-op the game is much more difficult, more enemies etc. And you can play co-op alone too, so a buddy can join or leave at any time.
this is the most idiotic reason for not implmenting an online feature

Johnny Neat
15th Nov 2007, 14:02
One of many idiotic smokes screens as to why this game did not get online co-op. Bottomline: it got what it deserved in the end. One more good concept dropped at the goal line even when the touchdown plays were for the taking.

Templar895
15th Nov 2007, 18:41
Haha, a huag argument over online co-op.

It's not like it's that big of a deal.

Johnny Neat
15th Nov 2007, 23:45
You know what? Even if you were right and it's not a big deal, we have spotty AI across the board, bad hit detection and a blan script to go with the lack of online co-op. But hey, we have that weak, no matter how interesting on paper, multiplayer, right?

Look I played Ageis Wing for xbox live's arcade and it was basically a weak side scroll shooter that belonged on Super Nintendo, but I, along with my friends, loved it. Why?! Cuss it had four player online co-op. So yeah, in this day an age and in this "NEXT GEN gaming" online is important. Online Co-op just seals deals on even bad or over hyped games more than not. They will at the worse, be given a chance. This game's concept deserved and actually insisted on it and we got it removed at the last minute and for no good reason. All we got was a spotty programmed game, wasted IP and a lot of PR smoke.

So here's to hoping for an updated patch for the games programming mess over LIVE and a possible online co-op being added in the super near future.

Templar895
16th Nov 2007, 00:12
It's humorous.

OMG THIS GAME SUXORZ WITH NO ONLILNE COOP

Johnny Neat
16th Nov 2007, 15:13
It's humorous.

OMG THIS GAME SUXORZ WITH NO ONLILNE COOP

Dude, you make no sense. Plus we, those hoping this game would rock, aren't laughing.
I think you are in the wrong forums page, you want the Halo or Gears of War forums if you want a laugh.

Scruffy
16th Nov 2007, 18:35
As the online or LAN coop has not been implented will there be the possibility to at least use a second set of mouse and keyboard?
I think I could live with the splitscreen, but neither me nor my friends want to play a shooter with gamepad, and as far as I know at least one player has to use it on the PC. :(

PieceOfJunk
17th Nov 2007, 02:15
I wish I read this thread before I wasted $100 on two copies of this junk. Now I have to contact the publisher and trying to get my $$ back.

I think it was a horrible, horrible decision to break from the 'pc coop norm' and have this crazy split-screen mode.

Templar895
17th Nov 2007, 02:25
Dude, you make no sense. Plus we, those hoping this game would rock, aren't laughing.
I think you are in the wrong forums page, you want the Halo or Gears of War forums if you want a laugh.

I do make sense.

And I don't see how online coop is suddenly a required feature to be a good game.

The people giving it poo for not including a feature they don't have to include is hee-larious.

PieceOfJunk
17th Nov 2007, 03:20
Of course a game doesn't need networked coop to be good.

But if you claim to have a great feature, you should at least meet the bar that's been set by dozens of games before you (in this case - networked coop).

The PC standard of 'coop' for the last decade or so has been networked coop. This game doesn't even try to meet that standard.

The whole 'split-screen, plug your xbox controllers into your pc, cozy up to your buddy while you enjoy your half of a 22" screen' thing is just a little too 1990s for me, and not what I expected when I bought 2 copies.

tNok85
17th Nov 2007, 04:31
Hell if I could get better internet cheaper I'd be on the band wagon too, but I wouldn't be *****ing about it. I'd just take the best out of the game I could and try to make a change for the sequel, but complaining about this one game's coop is a little late for change now.

Actually, think of it like this:

You've been waiting for K&L for a long time. They've announced co-op, although no further details. The day of launch, you find out that you can ONLY play co-op on the internet (with an X-Box) or the net/LAN (with a PC). No split screen!

You bet your ass you'd be *****ing. Why? Because the feature that you expected to be STANDARD in modern console games is not there, and you didn't find out until the last minute.

sleeper707
17th Nov 2007, 04:34
Wouldn't having lan or online co-op help with sales? I mean if you wanted to play co-op you'd only need one copy of the game to play because of split screen. But if it had online or lan co-op then in order to play co-op another copy of the game is needed to be purchased. :scratch:

I don't know whatever. lol

tNok85
17th Nov 2007, 05:06
Wouldn't having lan or online co-op help with sales? I mean if you wanted to play co-op you'd only need one copy of the game to play because of split screen. But if it had online or lan co-op then in order to play co-op another copy of the game is needed to be purchased. :scratch:

I don't know whatever. lol

It would. Also, it'd help their profits just because I won't be buying this thing until it's so cheap the stores are in 'get rid of excess crap mode' for the game - ie. bargain bin.

Which I predict to be not too far away.

Johnny Neat
20th Nov 2007, 16:12
I do make sense.

And I don't see how online coop is suddenly a required feature to be a good game.

The people giving it poo for not including a feature they don't have to include is hee-larious.

Ok... I guess you are making some kind of sense.

It's a not a required feature, you're right there, but in this case it was the selling point. If you look at the achievements it was at main point and if anything should have been followed through or scratched completely.
They should have taken out any co-op achievements because now it's just retarded.

But again, you're right, online co-op was not needed to make this a good game but competent AI and accurate hit detection are do help to make a better game than this WASTE. Not to mention, graphics that are so LAST gen that people who do not play games think it's weak.

I rented the game to witness what has been trashed by reviewers and my common sense, and the game I played is a freaking rushed amateur hour of a MESS. One more cool IP lost to crappy lazy programming & last minute choices for the bad. Now that's "hee-larious"

NovaBlack
23rd Nov 2007, 16:18
all i want to know though is WHY IT DOESNT SAY CLEARLY that for co-op i need ONE copy and a 360 controller instead.

doesnt tell me that anywhere, i mean thats ridiculous. Im not Psychic.

I just find it bad taste to sell games to consumers and then let them find our randomly actually no.. wits been decided that you need to purchase a 360 controller, a ps2 guitar controller a dance mat, some wooly gloves and a purple shirt in order to play. Its not the norm, so why not just say 'REQUIRES 360 controller for co-op'? or MINIMUM 4 players multiplayer.