The last time GameSpot handed out a 10 was for The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time last 1998. To give you an idea how hard it is to make just one terrific game, it took a decade before the next perfect score was awarded (which was GTA IV). Now, barely two months later, another game is deemed “perfect.”

Could it just be dumb luck that two games released in a span of several weeks earned perfect scores? Admittedly, I’m a fan of the Metal Gear and GTA series. However, I wholeheartedly disagree that both deserve a 10. If GameSpot is set on earning back its credibility, its staff would have to do a better job in making reviews and handing out numerical ratings.

Update: A friend of mine corrected me about the history of perfect scores given in GameSpot. Ocarina of Time was given the first 10, followed by Tony Hawk’s Pro Skater 3, then GTA IV and MGS4. This however doesn’t change the fact that there’s something dubious about handing over a couple of perfect scores in a span of several weeks. Even Famitsu took more time to churn out “perfect” scores.

Do you hear that sound? Thought I heard a loud ka-ching all the way from San Francisco.

Post from: EveryJoe

Crap-Detector: GameSpot gives two perfect scores in a span of seven weeks

Kane & Lynch: Dead Men is no stranger to controversy. Perhaps what would be remembered most about the third-person shooter is the chaos that it caused at GameSpot late last year. Then-executive editor Jeff Gerstmann came out with a very negative review of the game, which ended up being edited and its video review pulled out.

That’s not the worst part. Gerstmann was terminated from the popular video game site, causing rumors of pressure from Eidos, Kane & Lynch’s publisher, to have the journalist terminated. If that wasn’t enough, GameSpot’s reputation was tarnished, employee morale hit rock bottom, and several editors resigned from their posts.

Everything that happened would always be remembered as ‘Gerstmanngate.’ All that caused by one game.

Whether the speculations were true or not, one thing is for certain: Kane & Lynch is really a bad game. It’s so bad that there are only a couple of good things going for it, while the rest is a laundry list of negatives.

Bright spots
Multiplayer is one of the bright spots that keep Kane & Lynch from slipping into firewood material. You and seven other players team up for a heist and fight AI-controlled cops. The loot is normally divided equally among players but if one suddenly decides to keep it all himself and shoots a teammate, things start getting really interesting.

Like any good thing in Kane & Lynch, there’s always a hitch: you always get to see the names of other players and cops. It means there’s no such thing as surprise when playing multiplayer, so the fun goes down the drain fairly quickly.

There have been complaints regarding the game’s shooting mechanics, but it’s really just a matter of getting used to each firearm’s nuances. In fact, it’s possible to gun down distant opponents with unwieldy rifles if one knows how to take advantage of a weapon’s quirks. The favorable aspect of Kane & Lynch’s gunplay is its smoothness when aiming, even with the sensitivity turned all the way up. This sensitivity issue becomes a problem with other games because their targeting cursor starts skipping all over the place. Not so with Kane & Lynch.

The third and last strong point: The levels are quite inventive in their own right. One takes place in a Tokyo nightclub full of people, the other pits players against a huge truck, another is an escort mission where a character must be provided with sniper cover, and perhaps the grandest is a full-scale war in Havana, Cuba. There are a good variety of levels in Kane & Lynch that could keep players from quitting altogether, at least until another irritation would cause people to think twice.

How not to design games
Beyond these benefits, everything else is a lesson in “how not to design games”: the characters are despicable; the cover mechanics kick in automatically but is very erratic; the camera has a tendency to act up; story sequences can’t always be skipped; teammates and enemies are downright stupid; visuals are inexplicably choppy at certain points, among others.

Parts of Kane & Lynch may keep you hanging on but in the end, the bad would eventually outweigh the flashes of brilliance. There’s also an awful aftertaste thrown in so it’s best that people stay away from the game altogether (you’ll understand this when you finish the game). There’s nothing here that would keep you from playing Call of Duty 4 or smack your lips in anticipation of Grand Theft Auto IV. Rent Kane & Lynch at your own risk.

Image of Kane & Lynch: Dead Men is courtesy of Eidos, IO Interactive, and Kazoo.

Post from: EveryJoe

Kane & Lynch leaves a bad aftertaste

In his original video review, Gerstmann called Kane & Lynch “an ugly, ugly game.” It seems that the game is ugly not only in a visual sense, but in several other departments as well. The veteran reviewer didn’t like the storyline, the characters, and certain gameplay flaws.

I wouldn’t call Kane & Lynch “an ugly, ugly game.” I’d say it’s worth one “ugly” modifier and that’s it. The game isn’t exactly a lost cause because multiplayer is rather entertaining since it keeps you guessing who would double-cross your group.

Granted that I’ve yet to care for the characters, but after spending time with the duo, there were some scenarios that are indeed worth playing, especially in the co-op mode. It’s a shame though that there isn’t any cooperative play online.

Perhaps the most frustrating part about this game is its bad AI. Enemies stand still and wait for bullets to snuff their virtual lives. The game feels like a shooting gallery at times because foes line up one after the other for you to shoot them.

Kane & Lynch isn’t worth the purchase but it can be a useful distraction while waiting for June 12 to roll by. Just don’t expect it to keep your attention for long.

Post from: EveryJoe

Now Playing: Kane & Lynch are dead to me