Duke Nukem Forever demo impressions

[CaptHawkeye]

Yeah I sincerely doubt Gearbox cared about, much less wanted to deal with this project. It's not like they didn't have other things they were working on or could have worked on. Colonial Marines would probably be coming out this year if it wasn't for DNF.

Whatever. DNF has finally been passed through gaming's intestinal tract like a bad gallstone. Will the industry finally be able to move on from literally the most inconsequential project in its history?

[DaveJB]

Well, as predicted, the game was a hit over here, topping the Xbox 360 and PC sales charts and being beaten only by inFamous 2 on the PS3 charts. Critically, though... well, let's just say that this is the week that Daikatana finally got to step down from its position as the posterboy for FPS flops. Even the PC version's getting some pretty bad scores, and things are just plain ugly on the console front.

I suppose there's probably going to be a Duke Nukem 5 unless DNF crashes and burns really badly in the U.S., so let's just hope that with Gearbox (or whoever) doing it from scratch, it might actually be somewhat decent.

[Stark]

You're right - there has been YET ANOTHER massive post-release collapse of review scores. When I posted last, metacritic for DNF on 360 was 80. Today, it's 48.

Turns out EVERY SINGLE REVIEW WAS TOTAL BULLSHIT! What's sad is that the 'negative' reviews that are coming now are clearly just 'kick them while they're down' reviews, with ridiculous hyperbole and bashing now that it's 'okay' to say it's rubbish. A week ago? It was a good game, because reviewers just parrot whatever nerds want to hear.

And seriously, Gearbox has WAAAAAAY better things to do than make DN5... like follow up on their own, massively successful (and actually good) IPs.

[weemadando]

You're right - there has been YET ANOTHER massive post-release collapse of review scores. When I posted last, metacritic for DNF on 360 was 80. Today, it's 48.

Turns out EVERY SINGLE REVIEW WAS TOTAL BULLSHIT! What's sad is that the 'negative' reviews that are coming now are clearly just 'kick them while they're down' reviews, with ridiculous hyperbole and bashing now that it's 'okay' to say it's rubbish. A week ago? It was a good game, because reviewers just parrot whatever nerds want to hear.

And seriously, Gearbox has WAAAAAAY better things to do than make DN5... like follow up on their own, massively successful (and actually good) IPs.

I'm excited for BIA:F4. Why? Because it's Inglourious BLands according to E3 demos. That sounds great.

[DaveJB]

You're right - there has been YET ANOTHER massive post-release collapse of review scores. When I posted last, metacritic for DNF on 360 was 80. Today, it's 48.

Are you sure you weren't looking at the page for the PC version? The best score for the 360 version on Metacritic is 77%, so I don't see how it could ever have had a score of 80.

Turns out EVERY SINGLE REVIEW WAS TOTAL BULLSHIT! What's sad is that the 'negative' reviews that are coming now are clearly just 'kick them while they're down' reviews, with ridiculous hyperbole and bashing now that it's 'okay' to say it's rubbish. A week ago? It was a good game, because reviewers just parrot whatever nerds want to hear.

What's really striking me about the reviews is the number of them which are basically gigantic rants about how the game's disrespectful to women, with a sentence or two saying "oh, by the way, the graphics and controls suck, and it plays like a game from 1998" tacked on at the end. Leaving aside the whole thing about using reviews as soapboxes (something I personally hate), it quite honestly comes across like the kind of stuff you'd expect to hear from some lovesick geek who's trying way too hard to get laid.

And seriously, Gearbox has WAAAAAAY better things to do than make DN5... like follow up on their own, massively successful (and actually good) IPs.

True, I can see them outsourcing DN5 to another studio if it ever does happen.

[Agent Sorchus]

The most ridiculous complaint I have heard about it is that it is 17 hours long. Why should length be a bad thing in a fps when being too short is most definitely a bad thing? (ie ODST) The complaint was clarified a little bit by saying that the good things were too spread out and pacing sucked on the large levels and puzzle sections, but even then how can a larger game be worse just because it is large?

(Not saying it is good, but the play through of it I have seen isn't too bad.)

[Stark]

Are you sure you weren't looking at the page for the PC version? The best score for the 360 version on Metacritic is 77%, so I don't see how it could ever have had a score of 80.

Yeah, I remember there being a 100% review from some no-name website last week; it's either been pulled or removed.

What's really striking me about the reviews is the number of them which are basically gigantic rants about how the game's disrespectful to women, with a sentence or two saying "oh, by the way, the graphics and controls suck, and it plays like a game from 1998" tacked on at the end. Leaving aside the whole thing about using reviews as soapboxes (something I personally hate), it quite honestly comes across like the kind of stuff you'd expect to hear from some lovesick geek who's trying way too hard to get laid.

The content of the reviews is really disappointing. Talking about the shit guns, the horrible art, the terrible load times, the clumsy puzzles, the overdone gimmick sections that aren't any fun... that's easy. But I guess it's not nerd-chic enough; and my theory is that reviewers just write what they think will make them 'cool'.

The most depressing thing about the women in DNF is frankly that they're textured so poorly.

True, I can see them outsourcing DN5 to another studio if it ever does happen.

Let's just hope it doesn't.

[Chardok]

Maybe....maybe Randy Pitchford is actually a genius and we just don't "Get it"; maybe it's supposed to be this way to remind us how far we've come. A lesson, if you will, to not repeat the mistakes of the past, to not be so nostaglic and to, well, just be careful what you wish for. Duke is a throwback to a bygone era, I think Randy Pitchford is clever enough to know that, and perhaps he brought him back from the dead as a tiny slap in the face to fatties the world over. "Thanks for the 60 bucks, fatties, now STFU."



tl;dr - Randy Pitchford is the greatest troll ever.

[Stark]

I hear games that are really amazingly bad are actually satrical works of art, if enough nerds talk about it on the internet. Maybe that'll happen to Duke?

[Chardok]

I hear games that are really amazingly bad are actually satrical works of art, if enough nerds talk about it on the internet. Maybe that'll happen to Duke?

Didn't happen with Alpha Protocol (which wasn't....acutally....bad?)

[Stark]

Nerds didn't talk about it, so how is it supposed to become INTERNET FAMOUS?

[CaptHawkeye]

I'm just happy that Daikatana has been brought to a whole new generation of gamers.

[Starglider]

I feel sorry for the devs. Daikatana was one failed project, but DN3D ran for a huge chunk of someone's career, having that failure and industry laughing stock as your major accomplishment is probably even worse than it never coming out at all. Since the salaries were crap but there was a big cut of revenues promised, they probably felt trapped in a worthless project by an asshole project manager who wouldn't let them actually accomplish anything (since it always had to be redone).

[Stark]

Was there much staff continuity? I was under the impression Gearbox bought it and finished it 'in house'?

[Starglider]

Was there much staff continuity? I was under the impression Gearbox bought it and finished it 'in house'?

They did, I was referring to the original team who mostly left in 2008-2009; it's still a shitty project to have wasted over ten years on.

[Sidewinder]

I saw Duke Nukem Forever at a local store, and considered buying it, but decided to read some reviews first. According to Gamespot, it's a good thing I hesitated.

And Broussard wasted 12 fucking years of his life (and those of his programmers) on this train wreck? He might as well become a political activist- it's not like FPS fans can hate him any more than they already do.

[Stark]

Why did you even want to buy it? Did you expect it to NOT be a humiliated, backwards, hackneyed failure beset with legacy problems from 3 engines ago? That you single out gamespot is particularly amusing, but I honestly don't understand why anyone had any optimism about this game at all; the marketing certainly didn't provide any.

[weemadando]

It's almost like people forget that this is a game which was originally designed in 1997.

Fucking hell.

For a game made in 1997 it's awesome.

Sadly it's not 1997 anymore.

FPS platforming sequences are the hot new shit still right?

[Metahive]

I wouldn't compare it to Daikatana, I compare it to Blood II (anyone remember that one?). Great first game, then comes the follow-up and something's just amiss that spoils the enjoyment.

[Artemas]

no, because "something" is not amiss, everything is amiss

[Metahive]

O yeah, let's do the Comic Book Guy-thing, W O R S T. G A M E. E V E R ! Feel better now? I mean, I get like 2 cents for every bit of mindless hyperbole and unnuanced bashing so proceed, pal.

[Artemas]

lol okay sorry you are totally right

except for the obvious and identifiable parts of the game that are terrible and obsolete

that isnt quite "something amiss"

daikatana really is the better comparison

[Agent Sorchus]

Could you clarify, how can a game be obsolete? Aren't people still playing Half Life and Chess? I can understand it being full of aging concepts (except that many people actually hate on the two gun limit and some dislike the regenerating health, though not many dislike the second compared to the first), but how does that make it obsolete? Hell some people actually wanted a modern throwback to the old school game-play elements.

The Graphics and physics engines can easily be obsolete, yet other aging engines are still used (ie Source, though many are calling for it's retirement.)

THIS DOES NOT MEAN THE GAME IS GOOD. It still can be flawed because of it being put together from too many little concepts, but I don't understand how a game can be Obsolete. Please explain.

[Sidewinder]

Could you clarify, how can a game be obsolete?

Obvious answer: A game is designed for older computers and OS, and newer computers and OS aren't backwards compatable with it- a problem I faced myself, when I replaced a Windows Vista-running PC with a Windows 7-running one, and found I couldn't play Neverwinter Nights without resetting the computer to simulate a Windows XP-running environment. Not to mention games that simply refuse to run on my computer, such as Phantasy Star Universe.

[Stark]

Except he's talking about play elements that are obsolete. There's nothing technically obsolete about DNF (obviously, since it just came out). Its ugly as shit, but people are talking about dated concepts and gimmicks like zero excitement seesaw puzzles, walk-in-circles bosses, and all kinds of other things that went out of game designer fashion a decade ago. Whether you consider it successful homage or a legacy of a ludicrous development time, the game shares many characteristics with shooters from the 90s.

For instance, near the start you have to 'interact' with a statue display to create a pathway forward, and then carefully walk up it without falling off. In the 90s this would have been an amazing piece of scripting and interactivity, these days it just brings the game to a screaming halt and forces the player into a lame platforming section.