PDA

View Full Version : All I have to Say Is I TOLD YOU SO !!!



Fully
15th Nov 2007, 00:41
Look at the reviews !!
Gamepot 6.0
Ign kindly gave it a 7.0
gamepro still pending.

Im not trying to bash this game, developers and distributors. Im just proving a point that we live in the next generation.This is an online world and the people deserve and expect nothing but the newest technology and no backdoor compromises. What makes a game great is first graphics with steady framerate, gameplay and of most of all a great story. This games concept had potential of being one of the greatest games of all time but blew it. Sorry guys I warned you to start over and re write the code for better options and online co-op.


This is next generation and without online co-op well ... Ill I have to say is I told you so. My next point I have to prove is the online numbers for fragile alliance. Ill post how many people logged on in the next 24 hours and then repost for next week.

So everyone on this forum who dissagreed with me and said this game was going to be great and online co-op didnt really matter well it does and a great story would of helped. If Edios and IO Interactive need help with story telling please let me know I can help refer you to some of the greatest American writers here in the U.S (since most of them are on strike still :lol: ).

Fully
15th Nov 2007, 02:28
Im looking for feedback from people that said they are going to buy this game and play fragile alliance no matter what. Calling out User names eDome, MaggieChow, Arsh, Fleur de Lys, Kostchtchie, WildDog9, And a sepcial attention to Jeron, Stoned Raider and chip5541 !! ?

Are you truly happy with this game? Was it everything you expected ? Or was it dissapointing ?

Again not knocking or flaming people just looking for an opinion and will respect it !!

Arsh
15th Nov 2007, 03:00
I'm picking up the game tomorrow.

Satchel13
15th Nov 2007, 03:21
I'm picking up the game tomorrow.

Save your money..

Arsh
15th Nov 2007, 03:24
Save your money..

I did. I saved it for this.

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/27909.html

Don't try to persuade me against getting KL. I've been waiting for a long time, and I've made up my mind.

Templar895
15th Nov 2007, 04:34
Reviews are just other people's paid opinions.

QED.

chip5541
15th Nov 2007, 05:57
Im looking for feedback from people that said they are going to buy this game and play fragile alliance no matter what. Calling out User names eDome, MaggieChow, Arsh, Fleur de Lys, Kostchtchie, WildDog9, And a sepcial attention to Jeron, Stoned Raider and chip5541 !! ?

Are you truly happy with this game? Was it everything you expected ? Or was it dissapointing ?

Again not knocking or flaming people just looking for an opinion and will respect it !!

I never said I would be playing any portion of the MP in the game. I look forward to the SP portion of the game and have every intention of getting it but having 4 small children I just don't have the ability to play MP games as much as I would like although MP on the same system would be better in my case because you could always pause the game to make a bottle or change a diaper unlike being online in which case you would have to ask not to be shot while you go make a bottle or other.

From Gamerankings

http://www.gamerankings.com/Charts/934403.png

sleeper707
15th Nov 2007, 07:36
I'm getting it as well.

I'm interested in the characters and the story and for me its a nice change from your standard masked super human, young and handsome invincible killing machine of a protagonist. Kane & Lynch are flawed, they're not perfect, they have personality, they have a history and the writers and designers are not afraid to show it in a video game. Its been a very long time since I actually bought game primarily for its story and characters. To me that is another element of Next Gen gaming that I hope to see. To present new types models/representatives of a protagonist.

Tystick357
15th Nov 2007, 09:28
It's a good game. Although I am a bit worried that it is short short. I was playing coop with a friend and we stopped at a certain level, it seems like it would be an ending level in a game. But that would make the game only like 5 hours so I hope I'm wrong.

Started playing it on the hardest mode of course.

ChinaWhite
15th Nov 2007, 12:25
Well we had been saying this for a while, online co-op in this game was a direct contradiction, you can play co-op... but not online. It's raised eyebrows because hardly anyone will get to play with their friends around the world without them being next to them, the short sightedness have left their game with a low score. Pretty much every reviwer has mentioned this fact and it's bemusing to hear, it has co-op, but not online. I do think the most rounded review has been Gametrailer with an 8, though Gamespot based the game rather then giving a neutral review, that being said. The flaws are still there to see which they mention.


Their excuses where very poor, first saying they rather not have co-op online because they rather have your friend next to you playing. Then in a podcast say they didn't want to do it because it would do a half-assed job, the irony is the gameplay as it stands by many people is half-assed.

It's really sad considering that when you take Hitman a great game and you cannot make a new IP and create it as strong, in polish and gameplay then what hope have you got for the future?

cptalbertwesker
15th Nov 2007, 12:50
:/ way I see it, I believe in IO and everything they've made, who cares what a bunch of websites say, there'll always be games that get low scores but in my own personal opinion rock

Deviancy
15th Nov 2007, 12:55
I like online games at times, more of a single player type though. However, I don't think a game should be judged so harshly because its online mode sucks. That is unless the game is being marketed primarily to online gamers. I understood why so many kids were upset about Hellgate having a limited online mode unless one paid type of thing. That game was marketed more for its online capabilities than its SP. But K and L seems to be marketed more as a game with Michael Mann influences. So I'm more geared up to play the SP side of it. Sadly, I can't take many of the reviews posted seriously because the reviewers seem pissy about the lacking of proper co-op and in their pissyness they seem to be scoring the game more based on that than anything else.

Another flaw the reviews have is this graphics thing. Some of the best games in the last few years have had ugly graphics. I mean GTA characters always look like ass, but damn those games are fun to play.

MaggieChow
15th Nov 2007, 18:07
When did I say I would buy it no matter what?

Kostchtchie
16th Nov 2007, 03:58
Im looking for feedback from people that said they are going to buy this game and play fragile alliance no matter what. Calling out User names eDome, MaggieChow, Arsh, Fleur de Lys, Kostchtchie, WildDog9, And a sepcial attention to Jeron, Stoned Raider and chip5541 !! ?

Are you truly happy with this game? Was it everything you expected ? Or was it dissapointing ?

Again not knocking or flaming people just looking for an opinion and will respect it !!

dosent come out uk till 23rd mate soon as its in shop ill give feedback...

Fully
16th Nov 2007, 05:48
Well we had been saying this for a while, online co-op in this game was a direct contradiction, you can play co-op... but not online. It's raised eyebrows because hardly anyone will get to play with their friends around the world without them being next to them, the short sightedness have left their game with a low score. Pretty much every reviwer has mentioned this fact and it's bemusing to hear, it has co-op, but not online. I do think the most rounded review has been Gametrailer with an 8, though Gamespot based the game rather then giving a neutral review, that being said. The flaws are still there to see which they mention.


Their excuses where very poor, first saying they rather not have co-op online because they rather have your friend next to you playing. Then in a podcast say they didn't want to do it because it would do a half-assed job, the irony is the gameplay as it stands by many people is half-assed.

It's really sad considering that when you take Hitman a great game and you cannot make a new IP and create it as strong, in polish and gameplay then what hope have you got for the future?

Well put China White !! I remember in an interview their response was that "online co-op wasnt going to be a big factor of the overall game". Well that didnt last long b/c we the people demanded answers. Then they went on with the other excuses of why they didnt have online co-op.


Off subject ....
Crazy how this game was developed in the UK am I correct ? then why the hell is it coming out later than the U.S. ? I could be wrong so dont kill me ........:whistle:

Fully
23rd Nov 2007, 07:52
After all the complaining about no online co-op and getting an early hands on with the game knowing this could be much better ! I still gave it a chance and rented it and of course its what I thought it would be.

The game hasnt even made it a week yet and look at all the complaints and bugs. The xbox360 version has ghosting on my hdtv which looks similiar to playstion 1/2and old xbox games. Your fellow teamates will completley dissapear if the camera moves in certain direction. Fraglie Alliance is even worse than I thought it would be. The whole team squad command thing going on with this game doesnt fit the stlye of game. It should of been more 3rd person shooter instead of a half ass co-op, 3rd person shooting squad command game .. ? Why did certain mission feel like they had better quality visuals to them than other missions ???

Again the concept and certain missions were great ideas but never put them into play. Hopefully someone can remake this game and steel all of these good ideas and put it in HD with controlls and gameplay that actually works. Horrible graphics, sloppy camera , gun control doesnt feel right no matter what , no online co-op which wouldnt make a difference since the game isnt up to par with next gen gaming (and you would need people to actually play this game online). At least you always knew where to at anytime which is helpfull and about the only good thing that worked well the entire game. So if for some reason your curious and still wanna play should only take you about 4 - 5 hours on the hardest setting to finish the game.

Psykopig
23rd Nov 2007, 21:03
I think you might have to look at it differently.

This is a SP game with a SIDE option for MP.

The single player story line is awesome....game is fun as hell!

I just wish it wouldn't crash on my pc all the time...

Takai29
26th Nov 2007, 18:13
Look at the reviews !!
Gamepot 6.0
Ign kindly gave it a 7.0
gamepro still pending.

Im not trying to bash this game, developers and distributors. Im just proving a point that we live in the next generation.This is an online world and the people deserve and expect nothing but the newest technology and no backdoor compromises. What makes a game great is first graphics with steady framerate, gameplay and of most of all a great story. This games concept had potential of being one of the greatest games of all time but blew it. Sorry guys I warned you to start over and re write the code for better options and online co-op.


This isn't at all about living in the next generation. What makes a game great is very much personal choice. I know folks who will not touch a game unless it has rock solid graphics and really could care less about story or gameplay. I know others who don't even pay attention to all the detail in a game and only focus exclusively on the story-arc and how well it all flows.

I offer an example; from the scene where Kane takes down the driver of the dump truck. They took all my weapons, and left with only a few peons remaining behind to finish off Lynch, myself and Kane's daughter. Yet when I get into the jailbreak scene, I've now got the same gun I had from the start of the game. Doesn't exactly add up to me, and I noticed that before I noticed much else wrong -- short of the unimaginably major bug with framerates dropping to 1 frame per 5 seconds that apparently is plaguing a huge number of players.



This is next generation and without online co-op well ... Ill I have to say is I told you so. My next point I have to prove is the online numbers for fragile alliance. Ill post how many people logged on in the next 24 hours and then repost for next week.


Online co-op does not make, or break a game. If you really care that much about multiplayer, go buy an MMORPG, go buy Halo. Kane & Lynch was misrepresented to the 'hardcore' gamers, but as far as the general consumer goes (who by the way makes up the majority of the market), well they dont really care and generally just want to blow **** up. I never saw any ads that blatently played this game off as the be-all-end-all of multiplayer games. The commercials, leaderboards, skyscrapers, media-med-rects, etc all pitched this game as have a great story (which it does), exciting gameplay (which it does), and carries the Eidos brand which lends a great deal of weight considering their other franchise titles.



So everyone on this forum who dissagreed with me and said this game was going to be great and online co-op didnt really matter well it does and a great story would of helped. If Edios and IO Interactive need help with story telling please let me know I can help refer you to some of the greatest American writers here in the U.S (since most of them are on strike still :lol: ).


I don't really find anything wrong with the story (there's your proof that what is appealing in a game is at best, subjective to the individual). The online co-op, the average gamer doesn't really care. Walk into an ebgames or a toysrus. Pick 10 random customers buying an FPS game, and ask them whether co-op mode is a make it or break it decision for them as to whether or not they purchase a game, I promise you -- less than 4/10 will say yes.

They're catering to the 6/10. At the end of the day, you live and die by the ability to get a product to market, and if you keep a game (that probably has a shelf life of MAYBE a year before its yesterdays news), in development too long; you lose momentum in the market, anticipation becomes frustration and you begin losing consumers. So when it comes time to decide what features will and won't get the axe, you look at your market and break it down into what features appeal to the greatest majority of the market. Those are the features you launch with.

The remaining features, you look at value and say if I add this functionality in a patch a month, six months, or a year down the road will I see that much more of a sales increase?

The question is cost over gain. Its a numbers game at the end of the day, developers don't come cheap, nor does platform licensing, and the more time a development team spends on one product, leaving another sitting the more that product ends up costing, the less a company ends up earning.

(I used to work in gaming media, so I'm very familiar with how this works) I offer you this bit of friendly advise;

Don't listen to what you hear in a dev chat, a web cast, a podcast or read in a magazine. Until a game has gone gold, nothing is set in stone. Features and functionality promised will most definitely change by the time the game goes gold. Take what you read worth a grain of salt, and if you're really hung up on a feature and that one feature of the game is a make it or break it item for you, then wait for others to purchase it, see what they have to say and make the decision yourself.

There are usually hundreds of thousands (if not millions in some cases) of dollars that go into developing, producing, publishing, marketing, and distributing video games today, and remember that at the end of the day while we can always hope companies will put out a good product (and usually Eidos does, and I'm quite happy with the game but am a bit put off by the clear lack of product testing), you can expect a company to say and do whatever is in its own best interest. :)

fourzerotwo
27th Nov 2007, 00:24
I've personally been addicted to this game since launch. I got it on launch day and played through the entire single player non-stop I was so into it.

As of right now, I've beat the entire game 4 times, twice in co-op and twice by myself.

Been playing loads of Fragile Alliance and I LOVE the mental aspect of it. Reviews aren't always accurate, it's just a matter of opinion, and my opinion is this is a solid game.

Komaru
27th Nov 2007, 04:29
no online co-op
I don't see why everyone is complaining about co-op. If its not working play the damn single player game.

Horrible graphics
What horrible graphics are you talking about? I've been playing it on 360 and the graphics look great to me.

sloppy camera
The sloppy camera angle? It never looked bad at any point in the game for me, always worked perfectly. And the gun control? Get used to it, most games have different gun controls so it would change from game to game.

put it in HD
Why does it need to be remade in HD? To make it look better? A game shouldn't be based on what it looks like, it should be based on the story and gameplay.
What makes a game great is first graphics with steady framerate, gameplay and of most of all a great story

ChinaWhite
27th Nov 2007, 07:13
I don't see why everyone is complaining about co-op. If its not working play the damn single player game.

What horrible graphics are you talking about? I've been playing it on 360 and the graphics look great to me.

The sloppy camera angle? It never looked bad at any point in the game for me, always worked perfectly. And the gun control? Get used to it, most games have different gun controls so it would change from game to game.

Why does it need to be remade in HD? To make it look better? A game shouldn't be based on what it looks like, it should be based on the story and gameplay.

I don't know if you tried playing the game on the PC, but trying to play co-op is near impossible without a game pad. So yes like you say play the single player, because I cannot play it. I did have fun despite many bugs stopping my progress.

If someone has a problem with the camera angle I put this down to their personal preference, and from their experience and opinion, why are you bashing it? You don't have to agree with it, but it should be respected.

Co-op as far as I'm concerned should of been online, it would of added to the longevity of the game for me and others, who play games mainly for single player. The Multi player aspect in Kane and Lynch is very flawed game play wise.

When i start a round all people do is start shooting each other, I have yet out of 30 games played a game where i can get a chance to get money/stash. It would be better in a 5 minute game for the forst 2 minutes to be co-op after 2 minutes remove friendly fire so it's everyone for themselves that would be more interesting. The 10 second cannot kill each other at the start doesn't really help, great concept BADLY executed. I would prefer if this mode could be turned into co-op adding the single player scripting.