|
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: Seperate the online modes from the campaign , and make Two Games instead of One ... | |||
| Marvelous , i support this idea ... |
   
|
7 | 38.89% |
| Madness , i say you're nuts ! ... |
  
|
3 | 16.67% |
| I'm Hungry ... |
  
|
1 | 5.56% |
| What ? you mean there's still chance for a Kane & Lynch 3 !!?! ... |
  
|
0 | 0% |
| Fragile Alliance ? Oh , you mean Booster Alliance ? ... |
  
|
1 | 5.56% |
| *clapping sound* ... |
  
|
1 | 5.56% |
| I don't get it , what's the thing about Four and Seven ? ... |
|
0 | 0% |
| Sounds nice and all ... but i prefer that idea where IO and Rockstar games should work together ... |
|
1 | 5.56% |
| Grievous ... learn to do polls properly damn it ! ... |
|
4 | 22.22% |
| Tacos ... Tacos ? ... Tacos ! ... |
|
3 | 16.67% |
| Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 18. You may not vote on this poll | |||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
09-12-2010, 11:05 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Seperating "Fragile Alliance" from "Kane & Lynch" ...
On one hand i see reviewers saying that the only reason worth buying Dead Men / Dog Days is to experience the multiplayer aspect of it ...
On the other hand i see people complaining about the campaigns always been between four and seven hours long ... Wait what ? four and seven ? ... Nevermind ... So ... yeah , where was i ... Ah yes , if we ever see another entry to the Kane & Lynch franchise , do you think it's a good idea to seperate the online portion from the campaign mode ? ... Alright , let me put at it this way ... Dead Men had a seven hour campaign with a multiplayer mode , Fragile Alliance ... Dog Days got a four hour campaign , while Fragile Alliance gets a couple of variation modes ... In nearly all reviews , the online portion gets nothing but praises (or at least , No Big Criticism) ... Now some people , after playing Dog Days , have this feeling that the 'bigger' the online mode becomes , the smaller content there is for the story mode ... it would seem that it isn't quite possible to see both a lengthy campaign and a solid multiplayer mode at the same time ... so wouldn't it be better if they just seperate the two ? ... I mean when ... or maybe should i say , IF another sequel is announced , what would you rather see ? Kane & Lynch III ? or Fragile Alliance III ? ... Wouldn't it be better if Fragile Alliance was a online game of its own ? ... What if IO made it a standalone game ? with around forty seven maps , at least five different game modes , lots of customisations and whatnots , and even a short four hour campaign that acts as a 'tutorial' ? ... And then , they can work on a Kane & Lynch III , will no pressure on the multiplayer business , they make game with nothing but a sixteen hour campaign mode , a sixteen hour linear shooter , it's unheard of these days ... What if IO Interactive can pull it off if they didn't need to keep watching out for Fragile Alliance ? ... Wouldn't it be better that the time and ressources be used for each of the two gaming aspects individually , instead of having the developpers working on both functions at the same time ? ... Wouldn't it be better if both the online and campaign mode 'shine' on their own , without needing each other to back it up ? ...
__________________
YOU THINK YOU CAN KILL ME ?!! YOU HAVE TO DO BETTER THAN THAT YOU LITTLE  ! ~ you all know who said it , right ? ...
|
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Threaded Mode