Gamespot Review of Kane & Lynch Heavily Edited

[Andy Chalk]

Gamespot Review of Kane & Lynch Heavily Edited

Jeff Gerstmann's review of Kane & Lynch: Dead Men has been significantly edited to soften its highly-negative stance on the game, according to a post at Joystiq.

The editor's note at the bottom of the review says the review has been updated to note "differences between the Xbox 360 and PS3 versions and a clarification on the game's multiplayer mode." This statement is apparently true, but a comparison with the original review of the game, found in a Google cache of the EB Games site, shows the changes went considerably beyond that.

The opening paragraph of the review has removed references to the game as "ugly" and "clunky," saying instead that the game "squanders much of its potential and just doesn't come together as well as it probably should have." Other changes to the text point out more positive aspects of the game, or appear intended to soothe hurt feelings at Eidos.

It is unknown whether representatives from CNET or Eidos, or Gerstmann himself, had any hand in the edits, and at this point nobody has issued any comments. The full text of the review, including original content as well as all edits made, can be read at Joystiq [http://www.joystiq.com/2007/12/05/comparison-shows-significant-edits-to-gerstmanns-kane-and-lynch-r/].


Permalink

 

[dan_the_manatee]

Adds nothing new to the story really. The unedited version isn't exactly positive, and if I were Eidos, I certainly wouldn't be placated by a reference to some former glories. They're even more negative about the multiplayer mode in the edited version.

The edit isn't drastically different enough or positive enough to suggest any sort of corruption to me. Calling a turd "cappucino coloured" still means its brown, and that review still says Kane & Lynch is a very cappucino coloured game.

 

[YoungZer0]

Adds nothing new to the story really. The unedited version isn't exactly positive, and if I were Eidos, I certainly wouldn't be placated by a reference to some former glories. They're even more negative about the multiplayer mode in the edited version.

The edit isn't drastically different enough or positive enough to suggest any sort of corruption to me. Calling a turd "cappucino coloured" still means its brown, and that review still says Kane & Lynch is a very cappucino coloured game.

Well said.

 

[Halfang]

I wonder if gamespot know how deep they are in the pit of crap.

 

[SacrificiaLamb]

I wonder if they look back on this mess and say to themselves 'Was it really worth it?'

Firing Gerstmann cost them how many subscriptions?

 

[Arbre]

Adds nothing new to the story really. The unedited version isn't exactly positive, and if I were Eidos, I certainly wouldn't be placated by a reference to some former glories. They're even more negative about the multiplayer mode in the edited version.

The edit isn't drastically different enough or positive enough to suggest any sort of corruption to me. Calling a turd "cappucino coloured" still means its brown, and that review still says Kane & Lynch is a very cappucino coloured game.

Which begs the question: why bother then?