Duke Nukem Forever review
Duke Nukem Forever has released at long last, and it's more of a whimper than a bang. The game shows its age and fails to live up to its own legacy.
Duke Nukem Forever opens with a throwback, then carries that idea throughout the adventure.
-
Shacknews
replySteve Watts posted a new article, Duke Nukem Forever review.
Duke Nukem Forever has released at long last, and it's more of a whimper than a bang. The game shows its age and fails to live up to its own legacy.-
-
I don't think that will happen unless this sells extremely well by some stroke of luck.
-
-
Yowtch. And from the bastion of Duke fandom too...
-
-
They should have Xav review the PC version (where it's really suppoesed to be played). I have a PC I built for $700 over a year ago and I haven't seen any texture pop-in and load times are shorter than Portal 2. I've only played about an hour (and a large chunk of that is just introductory silliness) but so far it's what I expected.
-
-
-
Actually no, but nice assumption.
Xav always has the PC gamer view on things. So does the vast majority of the shack community.
Xav also interacts with the community more than any other editor.
DNF obviously has a lot of ties to shacknews. Hence it being listed in the credits.
I just think it would be more interesting to have an editor more in touch with his community give his opinion on a game that so much of the community is interested in.
-
-
Well, I don't post here much because of all the elitist PC b.s. They're certainly the most vocal on this site. See the numerous posts in this thread about how it's stupid to review the 360 version of the game because it was clearly "meant" to be played on PC as an example.
Xav's review wouldn't be more significant. It would be more relevant. This review is no more relevant to the majority of this community than IGN's or Destructoid's or Giant Bomb's. Having a freelancer who doesn't participate in the community do a review for DNF is the exact reason you have a splintered community of "shackers" (who only past in Chatty), "front pagers" and "evil Gamefly overlords."
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
only it didn't even do that properly, what with recharging health and two weapons at a time. The problem with the game is that it didn't know WHAT it wanted to be..a throwback or something modern.
-
It isn't really a throwback to what FPS's once were... it straight up IS an example of what FPS once were. This isn't like watching That 80's show and thinking about how funny the 80's were... it's like finding lost episodes of the friggin A-Team and throwing it up on TV. I know the game was released now so it has to be reviewed as a modern game... but I think a lot of reviewers are missing the point. This is not really a modern game. Yeah, a lot of things have happened in the industry in the past 12 years or so... a lot of lessons have been learned. Huge chunks of this game ARE from the past.. and was not able to benefit from the lessons learned in the past decade of gaming. Even though the game is coming out this week... it almost has to be reviewed like a lost archive piece from the past.
-
-
Not a very well done review. Over a decade later, we're merely given our old toys back. While there's some fun to be had in using the Shrink Ray or HoloDuke again, I'd rather have new, creative weapons In this day and age of modern war shooters being so popular, those kinds of weapons are almost new/reborn since they've not been used in a game in probably a decade+.
-
-
And yet the majority of people bashed 2K Games when they told 3DR to take a hike. Can you imagine being the people at 2K Games when 3DR asked for more money 2-3 years ago? I'm going to take a guess that 3DR showed 2K some of the game that they had developed and immediately though "No more"
-
Why on earth was this reviewed on the 360? this is a PC game first and foremost and most reviews reflect that.
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
And because the project was only limping along prior to that, it makes sense that they went with a single, console focused multiplatform design a while ago. Less work for everyone if the PC version is more or less ready to be ported as is with minimal design changes. Which is why you get stuck with stuff the 2 weapon limit and a game that feels like it was ported from the 360 instead. Plus a shitty fov, which could actually be tweaked until Gearbox locked it down.
-
You talk as if PC never had weapon limits.
Hell, take Wolfenstein 3D.
4 weapons. It's really two. 1 melee weapon, and then the rest are just different ROFs for the same damage. DNF has 2 primary weapons, pipebombs, tripmines, and melee. That's 5.-
You do realize this is Duke Nukem we are talking about right? Regardless of what other game did what Duke should be able to carry any and all weapons, isn't that the point of being Duke to feel like the ultimate badass? I played the demo and I can tell you that I did not want to get rid of any of the weapons I had come across and having to choose which ones I wanted to carry really sucked ass.
-
It's okay for DNF to do something folks, because we can pick and choose a past game to compare it to!
Give me a break, modern day weapon limits are a product of console-first mentality. Unless of course it's a tactical game and the limit is a big gameplay element (Crysis, Rainbow Six)
-
-
-
-
No it didn't, avatar.
And even then, since you shit on the game so much, why did you buy it on Steam?
-
-
Though PC is my obvious preference for multiplatform reviews, we were only provided advanced access to the Xbox version. Had we waited for the PC version, we would have a Duke review until a week after launch. A late Duke review on Shack? Unacceptable!
-
Xav, please do the PC review. We'll happily wait.
-
-
We're late to the party when it makes sense. Like Brink where the core of the game is online or The Witcher 2 where the game warrants an extended look. As for this game, we had a review copy in time and the publisher decided it wanted its reviews based on the Xbox 360 version--as that is the version it provided to outlets. This is what our review is based on.
-
Fair enough. Just seems that it would make sense to review the PC version considering the fan base here on the Shack is going to care about the PC version. Who's to say that it might have reviewed better, and all the kiddies coming in from Gamefly would see, a hopefully more positive review, and want to rent the game from Gamefly then.
$$$$
-
Tinfoil hat alert. Our job isn't to make the game rent or sell better.
-
-
-
-
-
I'll save you the time: same game, better textures and loading times.
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
Publishers don't provide early PC review copies of multiplatform games. They just don't. The risk of piracy is too great, and 9 times out of 10 the console version was the lead platform in development anyway.
It's up to the publisher to put their best foot forward and send out the best version of the game, so don't fault reviewers for evaluating the material they're given. It's not within the purview of the review process to somehow intuit which version of the game will be the best, and wait for that one. That sort of information usually isn't even available prior to a game's release.
-
-
Reviews across the board (the ones I've read, that is, at destructoid, eurogamer, and shacknews) have panned it. Time to accept that Duke fails to live up to expectations (the fault of a 14(?) year development cycle) and move on.
Grab it during a sale if you must, but all signs point to it not being worth the full price. -
Here's my review of this review
Blow It out your ass -
-
I think today's CAD says it all
http://v.cdn.cad-comic.com/comics/cad-20110613-2a6e0.png-
-
I don't get it. Help me.
-
-
Oh god I actually smiled
-
Occasionally even CAD gets it right.
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
Lots of things come to mind when I read all the reviews lately. The reviewers are kind of shackpiling, just like we would on someone who has said something stupid.
Duke was great in its time. That time has passed. The people who loved it in its heyday have moved on. We have families, kids, jobs. The toilet humor and half assed attempts at boobies just don't tickle us like they used to.
Combine that with an old engine, shitty outdoor textures, and a lot of unpolished gameplay (tons of mini games, none of which do anything well) and it just becomes a waste of time and money to a lot of people.
I'm glad the reviewers are blasting it. Because marketing is touting it like it's the next best thing since sliced bread and a lot of people are going to be disappointed. There are people who work hard in the industry to make great games. And then there's this. Make no mistake, monumental effort was put into this game, but it was all done in the wrong places at the wrong time. I think a lot of people in the industry probably feel pretty angry that someone can go this long with a game in development, completely fail, get bailed out by a large company and then expect to walk away rich.
I know I would.
Duke was great when it was great. Hail to the king that once was. Duke has no place in this decade.-
I don't think there's room for many clones of Duke but Duke Forever itself definitely does have a place in this decade, for people who still love the decade it came from. I've quite enjoyed the game - I don't think they need to make much more of it but I've been pleasantly surprised at just how good it is.
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
If you have to ask, you aren't one of them.
-
-
Except that's the exact problem. Here we are, over a decade later, and Gearbox is marketing it to the world like it's an amazing AAA game. Everyone involved wants to make bank off it, and their real target market is people who want to play a nostalgic game. That's why I'm glad reviewers are bashing it. Maybe it will keep the people who "It wasn't made for" away.
-
I think you're seeing things which aren't even there. Even without nostalgia, it's fun and DOES surprisingly have the mechanics of many modern games - maybe it's no Heavy Rain for production or GOW3 or MW2 but it's got many modern day concessions.
If you don't like it, fine :/ I've enjoyed it regardless. Fuck I wish I could have said the same for Crysis 2 with my 50$ (Verbatim ! >:( )-
I guess I'm not being clear. My beef is not with the fact that DNF exists. I think it's great that it's seeing the light of day. It will give those of us who have waited on bated breath for so long a chance to play it. For what ever that's worth.
My beef is that Pitchford and Gearbox are out there throwing a ton of money into marketing this thing as a AAA game. Touting it as the second coming of Jesus. Saying it can hang with and supersede some of todays top franchises. In the open market, not the niche of nostalgia gamers. That is my problem.
I will buy and play DNF because I've followed it as long as anyone else around here has. I'm just not willing to hand over $60 for a little nostalgia. I'll wait until it's $20 or less.
-
-
-
-
-
-
I can't say anything to your points about the quality of this Duke game, because I haven't played it and haven't been able to get my hands on the demo even. But you are wrong to say "Duke has no place in this decade."
That's just pure bullshit. Just because gamers have gotten older and had families, doesn't mean we don't still like the occasional toilet humor filled game. There's nothing wrong with a game that tries to live up to (or down to, depending on your perspective) the style and feeling of some of those older, more "immature" games.
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
Well the only thing that determines whether a game gets a sequel or not is if it sells well.
Right now DNF is the top of the Steam charts, but Steam's userbase is - as of right now - fairly aligned with the type of gamer who would buy DNF. So we'll see.
The thing about the Call of Duty series is that they can sell on momentum alone. I'm not saying they don't deserve it, but the game series could stink really bad and they'll still sell for some number of years before the client base gets burned out (see: Guitar Hero)
But once again DNF is an anomaly - they don't have a game out every year, or even every 2-3 years. So will it sell well enough to overcome bad reviews? Who knows.
-
-
-
looks like the xbox 360 load time is fucking horrendous
-
-
-
Coming out of my self-imposed exile to comment...
Disclaimer: I was a huge Duke3D fan. I still have my Atomic Edition/Duke Caribbean/Duke it Out in DC (one of my favorite expansions to date) disks, XBLA port, etc. The 2001 E3 trailer still gives me goosebumps. And while not of dognoseian proportions, I've been eagerly awaiting and looking forward to DNF since those first PC Gamer screenies back in 1997, and unlike most people I know, I never gave up hope.
That said, I've got DNF and while I've only played it for an hour and a half, I'm really enjoying it. It's feels like being brought be back to the 1990s and the fun I had while playing Duke3D. It's enjoyable, Duke's..well...Duke..and so far it is exactly what I thought it would be and hoped that it would be, which is a nice throwback to the 90s style of gameplay with some new stuff added in here and there. Is it perfect? No, and frankly I don't think anyone seriously thought that it would be.
Does it have flaws? Sure, but what game doesn't? Like it's been said a thousand times, the graphics are a bit dated (but still enjoyable, to me anyway), some of Duke's mannerisms (really, just the gratuitous use of fuck just doesn't sit right with me), the two weapon limit, the regenerating health...mostly stuff I already knew about, but it still doesn't make it any easier to swallow. But it is what it is, and I accept the game even with these flaws.
I think part of the backlash is multifaceted: It's been 14 years from announcement to release..it's been a joke in the industry, and that colors people's perceptions. I also think that the TF2 helped fuel the fire, in as much as it was nearly as long in development..and when it came out, it was (and still is) fantastic. Also has been noted, the audience has changed..this is a game designed for those of us who played Duke3D when it was new, not those who first played it as an XBLA port. And because it's been so long in development (half my life!), some of those gamers tastes have changed. Since it's kinda relying on the "It's Duke Nukem/it's a retro thing", that is kind of a niche audience in many respects...but it's still an enjoyable game to those of us who were looking forward to such content.
There's also the "Everyone loves to shit on something" aspect to things. And not to fall into that trap myself, but I don't like a lot of modern FPSes. I cannot play them on a console due to the control scheme, and I was never a fan of the Call of Duty/Battlefield style of FPS. It actually kinda surprises me that those games (which were, in my opinion, second tier FPSes originally) have gotten to be so popular. But that's neither here or there.
Duke Nukem Forever is definitely a throwback to the more "original" style of FPS with some of the modern trappings. Is it for everyone? Prolly not. But I am enjoying it, so far I consider it enjoyable and rewarding for the amount of time I've waited. It is what it is: A sequel to Duke Nukem 3D that continues, for good or bad, that same style of gameplay. And that's all I was expecting and looking forward to playing. And I thank Georgeb3DR, Gearbox, and everyone else involved who help bring me that experience.-
-
The two weapon limit really wasn't as annoying as I expected it to be. With weapon placement/drops in game it really wan't a problem.
After playing though the game twice I haven't had any major issues. I really don't understand the FOV bitching. No problems with it here.
-
-
-
During the course of the game, DNF also cracks wise at shooter royalty like Halo, Gears of War, and Portal, among others. The problem, of course, is that these are all much better games. A quality Duke Nukem would have been able to nail the joke, but coming from such a remarkably average shooter, the tone is seriously off.
This statement is - as it was in the review I've read elsewhere where you probably have this from - utter bullshit. What does the quality of the parody have to do with the quality of the games it's trying to make fun of? Zero. -
-
-
-
The only real diffference I've seen shown is lower quality graphics and much longer load times on the 360 version.
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
It's possible they already had a review copy from the publisher at that time. Also if that's the version the publisher wants you to review I think the assumption is that it is the 'best' version available (they're generally not going to intentionally give you an inferior product to review).
-
[deleted]
-
Well I don't think they usually do that and yeah, it's a safe bet that when you're handed a copy of the game then the developer/publisher has their best foot forward.
We may not like the results or agree with what the developer/publisher did in this case, but Shacknews is in the right here (in that they reviewed what they were handed)-
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Well, cut him some slack, he was probably raging too hard from hunching his back while sitting on his milk crate instead of his gaming required comfy couch.
-
-
-
-
It's not a very good game. I played the first 3 hours of it last night and had 2 crash-to-desktops and finally gave up. I tried multiplayer and I played the classic map with the movie theater and it looks like they reused the textures from the original map on top of the 3d models for everything. The weapons are pretty powerful in multiplayer but it feels really clunky when you play it. I get it that its Duke Nukem all over again but a lot of games have come out since Duke 3D, and they did take a lot from other games when they made this one, but they didn't seem to apply what made those games fun or innovative, they just aped some features like the 2 weapon limit, or the loose driving, or whatever. It's a mishmash and its generally bad but I will play it through to the end. I just wish I had bought the game for $10-15 on a steam sale.
Blasting pig cops with the shotgun is still fun though! -
Anyone check in with Dognose yet? I'm afraid he might've hanged himself by now.
-
-
I really like sprinkling a bit of salt on my food once in a while, but I wouldn't want to chug directly from the shaker.
-
-
[deleted]
-
I believe he said he wouldnt be able to play til the 18th!
-
-
you get a free duke figurine with purchase @ Toys R Us.
-
-
lol yeah wife and I were laughing about that last night.
-
-
-
-
you can't do either of those things on shacknews
-
Huh, so you reviewed a bad console port of a PC-focused game and it had problems? Shocking.
-
Gearbox gives the most flawed version of a terrible game to critics to review. I wonder who the dumbass is in this equation?
-
The developer does not distribute the review copies.
-
-
It's always the publisher that handles review copies. Someone at 2K in this case, not necessarily (in fact, probably not) dahanese.
-
-
-
-
no worries the PC version is not a different game, still full of mediocrity
-
-
[deleted]
-
In some cases, yes. When a game is developed for a specific platform and then ported to others, I feel that the game should be reviewed on the lead platform. I understand from Xav's post that the 360 version was the only one Gearbox provided, but I'd definitely be interested in seeing them review the PC version when they have their hands on it.
-
[deleted]
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
Game Informer used to that back when i had a subscription for them. Don't know if they still do it or not.
-
What kind of manpower do you think outlets have to dedicate to one game?
-
I can definitely understand doing a review for all 3 SKUs on games, but it seems like fewer and fewer sites are doing separate reviews for console and PC titles these days. Makes it hard sometimes to find out whether or not the PC version of a particular game is worth getting on PC or not. Although, with a game like DNF, it sounds like the only significant difference between the console and PC SKUs are load times, texture resolution, etc.
-
not doing a review for all 3 SKUS, that is
-
-
Oh I understand you can't take forever to review every version of every game. I wish there was some way each version could be touched upon, since some games aren't uniform across the platforms. The only way I find feedback like that is from aggregating player reviews, though most aren't as "unbiased" as game reviews try to be.
-
[deleted]
-
-
Super NES Mortal Kombat v Genesis Mortal Kombat. There can be differneces amongst them. This may be an extereme, but control-wise and loading wise DNF on PC plays great to me.
-
[deleted]
-
Yes.
-
Yes and IMHO multiple reviewers should be involved. I LOVED Electronic Gaming Monthly's review system. They'd have 3 reviewers on most games and 4-5 reviewers give their opinions on AAA titles. This was back in the 90's.
They'd have one longer review then 3 short and to the point reviews, all with a 1-10 scale. And they'd review for separate consoles.
-
-
-
Well-observed, good sir! The controls worked fine on a 360 pad, and points like texture pop-in and load times were minor gripes at most. The more serious issues aren't really platform-specific.
-
-
Maybe Duke's balls rubbed off on me.
... wait that came out wrong.
-
-
-
-
looking good !! http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/duke-nukem-forever
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
So it's kinda like they should have just remastered it. Or have they already done that by releasing it on xbox live arcade?
-
-
-
-
huh? you're weird.
-
-
Our review stands; however, I'll install the PC version now and maybe I'll do some comparisons to it along with a look at how the game performs in 3D (mixing the past with the FUTURE of gaming) and see if that turns into anything worth writing about.
I do this for you... All of you complaining MOFOs.-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
hmmm sounds like we got a hater here
-
Xav, you've made peace with the fact that regarding anything notable on the Shack, 5-15% of the audience will _always_ disagree with you, yeah?
I mean the PC vs console comparison might be fun (and worth the hits) but yeah... Anytime we do moderation changes, we know that a certain number of people will always hate whatever the change is no matter what. No. Matter. What.-
-
I disagree with this post!
-
-
I want you to play it on the PC but with the 360 controller. Anything less is unethical journalism and you should be deported.
-
-
This is a serious matter and your so called "jokes" are ill timed.
-
You can play Atari games with a Genesis controller.
ALso, i almost typed commercial. I was like what that doesn't make sense!-
[deleted]
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
until then: rockpapershotgun pc review http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/06/13/wot-i-think-duke-nukem-forever/
and eurogamer made a more in depth comparison of all 3 versions on the technical side http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-duke-nukem-forever-face-off
if you had german in college try http://www.gamestar.de/spiele/duke-nukem-forever/artikel/technik_check_duke_nukem_forever,43239,2323553.html and the other articles and review -
-
there are very good parts in the game. for example the bossfights are awesome. very challenging (in terms of skill). it's an oldschool game - it's just as much fun as you are. you need the be creative - try shit out and be curious - the game rewards that :)
also, there is a great variety of environments .. casino and vegas (worst levels right at the start, especially outside vegas - clearly night level by design but somebody turned the lights on there), a cave, a dam, desert and more. i had a fun time playing it - this was a refreshing old school shooter with its flaws.
i said the review was weak, because it doesn't highlight that. it just bashes the game, which is bad and doesn't reflect the game i played.
but yes, a lot have made up their opinions - i don't try to be a fanboy here, i'm just trying to explain why i said this review was weak.
it highlight only one side of the coin.
-
-
Thank you for humoring us curmudgeons. :)
-
Besides graphics and obviously controls is this realy going to matter? It's not a different game with different levels and gameplay on PC.
-
-
Must be the Xbox version then, I barely have time to read the actually quite amusing loading screen tips on PC, and I don't even have an SSD.
-
You really think those points would take a 6/10 game and make it 8/10?
-
-
-
If you haven't played yet you might be pleasntly suprised.
I really liked the game flaws and all. There is fun to be had, really! -
You can't give in! You can't give in!!! /Dent
-
Oh, I won't. A bad game is a bad game. It doesn't matter what platform it's on.
-
Note: This is a general statement. I have not made it through enough of Duke Nukem Forever to have a definitive opinion on the game.
-
-
-
The biggest tragedy is that Gearbox now owns the IP. They are one of the most average developers out there. Every single game they put out has glimmers of greatness but overshadowed by bugs, incompetent design and downright shoddy support.
Of all the developers to get the Duke IP, one of the worst choices would have to be Gearbox.-
[deleted]
-
-
-
I seriously doubt DNF was a highly sought after IP despite what it seems a majority of the shack thinks. Certainly not important enough for some AAAAA studio to drop whatever it's doing and start work on finishing DNF. Back in 1990 the IP was hot shit but they haven't had a major release in almost 20 years. There are plenty of much more popular, modern IPs laying around that no one is using.
-
-
-
-
people can fly, croteam, starbreeze, visceral games
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
Zynga
-
ea sports
-
Humor me, who would you like to have it?
-
And who stepped up?
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
that's the key phrase: "grew up".
you succeeded where Duke did not. -
You're calling it a bad game but you haven't played it because you're balking at $60, correct?
Are you judging this based off of reviews or the demo?
Honest question - if you don't want to pay $60 based off of the demo that's a valid stance (i.e., the demo should have been better or - if it couldn't represent the game in a demo - not existed. Especially with the wonky way they released it.-
Every one is entitled to their own opinions and some reviews are worth taking into account. Especially when taking into consideration that most games are rated a fair bit higher than they should be, (at least from my observation. If numerous reviewers all seem to have a shared consensus on what they think of the game and have gone through the effort of explaining WHY they dislike or like a game, why not take that seriously as a consumer? As human beings with minds of our own we are perfectly capable of reading a review and deciding whether or not to believe in the points being brought up by the writer(s).
-
-
-
-
Haha.
-
[deleted]
-
I always forget about that part!
-
-
-
-
Oh look, another console review. GTFO.
-
Because they have different gameplay for the console version because that seems to be a lot of what he's talking about.
-
Oh look, someone that acts like a frontpage baby.
-
The game is pretty terrible. My fanboy lust for D3D is the only thing keeping me playing it.
-
I may have to buy this purely as a museum piece. I was going to make my own "collector's edition" with a pair of size 13 boots and a pair of chromium steel pinballs.
-
Give it a month or two, should be on sale cheap.
-
-
-
-
This shit works a lot like weather predictions and what people want to accept.
When the weathermen predict the weather is going to be nice, everyone assumes they are correct. When the weathermen predict it will be bad, people will be like FUCK WEATHERMEN DON'T KNOW SHIT.
It really depends on the persons point of view and what they want to believe.
-
-
I'm looking forward to this weeks Weekend Confirmed.
They usually give a pretty honest and sometimes brutal idea of how good/bad they think the game is. They generally don't worry about upsetting anyone.
There is usually someone on the opposing side who will defend the game and let me know the redeeming qualities, however in this games case perhaps there won't be. -
After watching giantbombs quicklook and just listening to Jeff's exasperation of playing through it I'm convinced that other than wanting to see this game finally published there is no reason to play it. It reeks of either hoping people will buy it because its been a joke for so long or they hope that people aren't smart enough to leave it alone.
-
Giant Bomb review has been posted:
http://www.giantbomb.com/duke-nukem-forever/61-20721/reviews/
-
-
I thought it was Brad for about five minutes into the video.
-
-
(((if you're the sort of person who followed 3D Realms all the way down and you're feeling like you need to know how this crazy tale ends, you should play Duke Nukem Forever)))) --- This is what i did....... I bought it, full price - like a fool. What a turd. From the 2 hours I played - it is clear that Half Life set the bar that killed 3Drealms.
-
Were you expecting Shakespeare? The first game had no narrative, no dialog. All it had was quips and a bunch of visual gags. This game is the same thing. It's a throwback, an homage to a relic.
Just enjoy it for what it is or come to the realization that your tastes have changed over the years. That's fine, people grow. Duke didn't.-
but it's not a throw back when they shoe horn in modern elements like regenerating health and two gun limits. Stop saying it's a throw back! a throw back would have health packs and all the weapons you can carry.
-
-
but hold up, DNF was developed with the PC in mind, according to the man himself GeorgeB. so i mean you can keep rationalizing away the bad stuff away, but in the end you have to take it for what it's worth.
-
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
This is true, but they were well written dick jokes.
http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-reasons-shakespeare-would-write-for-cracked-if-he-were-alive-today/ -
-
-
-
-
-
Just played a few hours of it.
It's Duke. That's both good and bad. Had this come out a long time ago, even on an earlier engine, I think people would be happier. It feels just like the first game, except this time the NPCs talk (and curse WAY too much, IMO). That really is the only difference in the presentation, as far as I can tell thus far.
The problem is that people compare it to modern games. I don't know if that is fair or not. Duke is what he his. The original game wasn't exactly King Lear and this isn't either. The first game had one liners, it didn't have a story. This game, coming in the age of some pretty epic stories in games, is a total throwback to an old style of playing.
I am enjoying it. I am taking it for what it is: a view back to an old style of gaming that doesn't really exist anymore. Maybe it is nostalgia, but that's not a bad thing.-
that's a bullshit way of looking at it though. HL2 was made to surpass HL1 and it did. You shouldn't excuse a shitty sequel because it's like the original. Look at the 2d version of duke and duke 3d. There is always room for improvement and "making it like the original" shouldn't be an excuse for shitty modern gameplay.
-
HL1 had a helluva story. HL2 took it a step further and had a better story and prettier graphics.
Duke Nukem 3D, as fun as it was, had almost no story. Duke Nukem has a bit more narrative and prettier graphics.
DN4 is true to the original. A mindless shooter that has some funny shit in it and a lot of Junior High School humor.
-
-
-
-
-
george has been answering questions as recently as yesterday to his credit. Randy is cowardly and won't bother unless he can throw someone under the bus to take the blame, ala the art director and FOV.
-
-
[deleted]
-
That's a good question, actually. And I am not really sure how to answer this....
Does George, Scott, Randy or anyone involved in the DNF creation process owe me or any fan an explanation? Heaven's, no!
I often think about the actions of my employees (in no way am I implying 3drealms owes me anything - just as frame of reference) and some decisions that they make. Sometimes I am just bewildered by their thought process that all I am looking for is ... some kind of explanation.
-
-
-
Say what you want about Duke Nukem Forever, but it really is the first game to come close to successfully bringing a 2D franchise into the 3D world. Doom 3 failed, in my opinion. Doom 3 was not Doom, by any stretch. And well before that, Blood 2 failed horribly.
I think the downsides of Duke Nukem Forever are all due to 3D Realms second-guessing themselves, and going back to the drawing board when modern games were coming out during the game's development. Ironically, all the things people dislike about DNF are things that were inspired by more modern games.
I beat the PC version of the game, and I enjoyed it a ton. Looks like a lot of the bad reviews are coming from people who foolishly played the XBOX 360 version.-
-
What? That's like every shackers main complaint about console games.
-
-
[deleted]
-
2D franchise into 3D world?
What do you mean? -
-
-
Metroid Prime is another huge example!
-
-
-
[deleted]
-
[deleted]
-
-
[deleted]
-
You mean the game built on the Quake 3 engine.
-
[deleted]
-
-
-
-
-
Or 1996.
-
-
I'm glad you enjoyed the game, but as others have said, 2D games have been successfully converted to 3D for years now. Not all of them, but more than a few.
-
-
If that's the case then Jedi Knight: Dark Forces 2 wants to have a word with him.
-
-
Whatever. You make a few good points but don't kid yourself; Doom 2 wasn't any less 3D in gameplay than Doom 3 was. Same with DN3D and Forever. These games did not have to change in gameplay because they took the step from projected billboards to 3D geometry, they changed because they were new games.
-
-
[deleted]
-
-
oh stop it. i've seen him on here answering questions recently. Randy on the other hand..
-
-
the terrible xbox port is, absolutely.
-
i mean im surprised we haven't gotten a 'well the load times are at the discretion of the designers. The lead designer wanted long load times to blahblahblah' post.
-
-
-
-
-
Well there are two facts here. One, I didn't release it, and two, I didn't work on it past mid 09. That said I do think the reviews are overly harsh and not in the realm of reality - at all. To me, it's hard to justify less than a base of 70 with +/- 10 pts based on bias, so basically, 60-80 range is reasonable, imo. But, it is what it is and all you can do it sit back and watch. I'm watching.
-
[deleted]
-
I enjoy the game, George. It is very fun and I don't feel like my money was poorly spent.
-
George, I don't know you and you don't owe me anything. I can't even begin to imagine how you must of felt during the legal matters of giving up not only your IP, but something you personally invested over a decade of hard work into.
However, the fact you made a post stating you didn't release or touch it for over 2 years is really just kind of pathetic. It's almost as if you're ashamed or embarrassed that it's even out. Mind you just short a year ago you posted pigs flying on your personal Twitter and for the most part seemed happy at it's current development and possible release.
Regardless of not touching it since 09, you had plenty of time and resources to complete it numerous times before 09. In my personal opinion, the 2001 footage was the best ever seen and I truly believe at that point is when DNF was at it's finest point. I think people are still taken back on why that version never saw the light of day... even now. Hell, I think most would rather play that, than what is currently available.
I won't disagree on the fact that some reviews are a bit over the top, but I think a lot of the positive views from the fan base are a bit too lax on the game as well. I don't believe DNF is terrible or un-playable, however, wielding a $50-60 pricetag is ludicrous for a game of this quality with what is currently available.
I mean, I get it. You didn't release it or touch it since 09. Obviously it wasn't ready. It never was. Gearbox grabbed it, added a few things and 2K forced it out the door.
It is what it is.-
[deleted]
-
Just my opinions on the matter and I was quite nice about it considering what I actually felt like posting otherwise. After all this is open discussion isn't it?
As for the 2001 DNF. I highly doubt they would of went through so much effort making the trailer and releasing it publicly at such a large event like E3 if they were not happy with that version of the game.
I think it was more so the fact new engines rolled out around that development cycle shortly afterwards and they simply wanted to make the game look better or possibly do more, rather than release a product that could very well of been finished as it was. -
-
-
-
Would you say you had a great deal of influence on what was released though? I can't imagine the game is that much different after Gearbox took over? Or would you say the majority of stuff you oversaw was cut from the game or changed dramatically after it left 3DR stopped working on it?
-
So what you're basically saying is that after 14 years you're a D to a B- game designer...awesome. You should be proud your hard work paid off so well. Keep it up dude :)
-
-
-
-
What the hell happen to Duke Nukem Forever game? I heard that game got many bad reviews. Please give me more details of it. =[
-
I have yet to play it myself, but having watched some extended PC gameplay it seems fun and funny. I'm not getting the hatred.
-
I don't quite get why everyone is saying this game represents what FPS games used to be. If anything, it represents what FPS games are today. Regenerating health, 2 weapon limit, unlimited ammo crates, no pick up items scattered around the level, limited FOV, zooming down your weapon to make it more accurate, a sprint button which causes you to be unable to shoot or strafe, having to take cover rather than weaving all over the place steamrolling your enemies, vehicle sections, pressing a button to activate little cutscenes, on-rails sections, the list goes on and on. The last game I played that had all these elements in it was the critically acclaimed Killzone 3, released way back in the days of 4 months ago. And guess what? Modern Warefare 3 is going to have everything on that list, and people are still going to go apeshit for it. I get the impression that people saying this game represents the old style of FPS haven't actually played any old FPS games. Furthermore, I rarely ever hear critics give any examples of what they wanted in the game. RPG elements maybe? Open world gameplay? A gravity gun?
It also bothers me that people whine about Duke as a character. We live in an age where Kanyes and Grand Theft Autos and South Parks constantly win awards and define American pop culture, but yet Duke is bad because he's too politically incorrect? Am I missing something?
I'm not saying the game deserves a good review, but the reasons critics give for the game being bad just confuse the hell out of me. If I were reviewing the game, I'd probably give it a mediocre score because it is too much like a generic modern shooter.-
[deleted]
-
-
-
If video games were actors DNF wouldn't be Johnny Depp or Leo DiCaprio; no, DNF is more like Mickey Rourke: he disappeared for 15 years and came back ugly and broken, but with more character and heart than his preening peers combined. The impossible amount of man-hours put into creating Duke Nukem Forever, and the dogged determination of those who worked on it, seep from the game's pores to give it a kind of authenticity not seen in a big title since Diablo II.
Duke Nukem Forever could be a lot better--and with the IP in the hands of a monied studio the next Duke surely will be. -
I agree almost completely with this review and it's a hallmark of the latest generation of games for roughly the last six years.
While DNF might've started out as something amazing, perhaps with a vision, after changing hands so many times it ended up in those of your standard developer preying on the latest fads. It's no different then a CoD funnel with worse graphics, terrible wack-a-mole, and less fun.
Only thing that really breaks it up is you get to see boobies and aliens pop out of girls abdomens; depending on your preferences that might make or break what little there is to this game. -
I can't help but feel vindicated and justified about when I went on a total rant about this game when it was at the seven year mark with nothing was being said nor shown by the developers and the vast majority of Shackers at the time met my comments with ridiculous fanboisms and duke defense force excuses. Ultimately my account got nuked because I further commented on how these arguments and adoration for the character were ludicrous. It feels good after seven more years to find out I was right the whole time....But I didn't come here to gloat about it, I came here to say VALVE, NOW GOING INTO THE SEVENTH YEAR SINCE HL2...YOU'RE NEXT!
-
Why aren't you counting the episodes? Episode Two launched in 2007.
-
-
I kinda wish Valve would buy out the Black Mesa guys and finish it off (and put the Valve level of Quality into it).
I know they said they are going to let them build it and are happy for them to do so, and also the Black Mesa team have stated that they will never sell it. I kinda wish they did, I don't know any Single Player Mod's that have come out and have actually been great.
-
-
nope, those were just renamed expansion packs imo.
Hey Xav while I have your attention, why is it that journalists at least in America are afraid to press Valve on this? When it comes to HL , Valve's become wayyy too aloof and I don't see how the silence is helping them at all anymore, in fact after this e3 it's become deafening.-
I think no matter how many times they ask 'When is HL3 coming out?' Doug or whoever will just say with a smirk (we are not ready to reveal anything at this time).
Pick your battles.
-
-
-
Let's not forget that most of the real bad reviews came from the console ports of the game, according to what I've seen. Keep in mind, that it seemed like since the very beginning since I followed this game, the PC was going to be the preferred platform. I was prepared for this, and to me, I felt that paid off.
-
Then those sites should give separate scores for PC and Console. I personally am having fun with the PC version and I really don't understand the 2/10 and "F" $#it. I mean this game is not perfect, but it really doesn't deserve these half @$$ reviews from game sites. If you don't like the character or the jokes that's fine, but don't slam the game so hard that people who actually care about reviews think that it is an unplayable piece of garbage, because nothing could be further from the TRUTH..... the PC version is fun and that's all that matters: 7.8/10
-Chris P
-
-
-
Greatest comment ever.
-
here XAVdeMATOS, watch this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Th2z0xT-X5s this explains exactly why i disagree. Please, take it as a heads up and oh yes, i don't think you're a fucking idiot ;)
-
-
