Are our standards too high for Duke Nukem ?

[krazykidd]

After reading reviews and playing Duke nukem Forever , I wonder if out standars are too high for Duke nukem. I'll explain what i mean . Everything about the game IS Duke nukem , this is what a Duke nukem game is supposed to be like , it's the same things we knew and loved about the game, but it gets so much criticism. Why is that ? the game is average / good on it's own merits , but i think that a mix of expectations and the evolution of gaming makes Duke Nukem Forever less that par. The Bar is so high for new video games, that this one didn't stand a chance, because our standards for a game made 10 years ago, and our standards for games made today are different , they are higher now . That is why many people cannot enjoy duke nukem forever, in my opinion.

So my question is : Do you think are standars are too high for a game like Duke Nukem ? or is the game really as bad as everyone says?

 

[hazabaza1]

As someone who never played Duke 3D, I just tried out the demo, and even with no standards before entering it, yeah, it was still pretty crappy.
It just seems to be a bad game, not much we can do about that.

 

[Hungry Donner]

After reading reviews and playing Duke nukem Forever , I wonder if out standars are too high for Duke nukem. I'll explain what i mean . Everything about the game IS Duke nukem , this is what a Duke nukem game is supposed to be like , it's the same things we knew and loved about the game, but it gets so much criticism.

Duke Nukem 3D had some fantastic level design, and yet with DNF I'm hearing many complains about level design.

At least some of DNF's problems stem from poor game design.

 

[Cosplay Horatio]

No our standards are not too high. It's a really bad game and make sure that if you do play it it's borrowed from a friend or rent it for a day.

 

[Instant K4rma]

Are our standards too high? Well, I'll take a direct quote from Duke himself:

"Yea, but after 12 fuckin' years they should be."

For a game that jokes at how long it took to make said game, it should at least be up to snuff (gameplay and graphics wise) to games that have been released in the last decade.

 

[Zhukov]

My standard was, "have some fun."

The game did not meet it.

I don't think I was asking too much.

 

[Sickly_Gazelle]

It probably wouldn't have been so harshly received if the game wasn't so proud of itself.

 

[direkiller]

After reading reviews and playing Duke nukem Forever , I wonder if out standars are too high for Duke nukem. I'll explain what i mean . Everything about the game IS Duke nukem , this is what a Duke nukem game is supposed to be like , it's the same things we knew and loved about the game, but it gets so much criticism. Why is that ? the game is average / good on it's own merits , but i think that a mix of expectations and the evolution of gaming makes Duke Nukem Forever less that par. The Bar is so high for new video games, that this one didn't stand a chance, because our standards for a game made 10 years ago, and our standards for games made today are different , they are higher now . That is why many people cannot enjoy duke nukem forever, in my opinion.

So my question is : Do you think are standars are too high for a game like Duke Nukem ? or is the game really as bad as everyone says?

it has way to many grapical gliches even for a game of 10 years ago
the mini games are sub par even for 10 years ago

so yes comparing it to 10 years ago the game is still only ok

 

[Wing Dairu]

Play Duke Nukem 3D, then play Duke Nukem Forever. You will FEEL the difference.
The writing was more clever, the combat more engaging, and the babes more...interactive.

 

[Twilight_guy]

If our standards have changed over time then the game they were developing should have changed over time. You cant say that they developed it starting a long time ago and give it a free pass to use standards from that time. A game can't be a time capsule and must meet current standards. DNF was doomed anyways. The development failed to actually produce a game and the whole thing was almost scrapped. There was just too much junk going on to get the thing going and not enough consistency.

 

[owen4evr]

Well if it takes 12 years to make we can't set our expectations high enough.

 

[omega 616]

I think it just takes all of the things wrong with today's FPS games and blends them all into one.

Why can't we have 8 guns (don't you dare say it's not realistic!), why do we melee exactly the same as Halo (seriously, is that the same animation?), why when I watch the first one it is like we are constantly sprinting everywhere but in this it's more of a brisk walk? There are the vehicle sections that I have seen games being torn apart for, it has set pieces (such as kill 50 enemies before your allowed to move on), there is no exploration to be had, you know what coming up by the guns on the floor (theirs an RPG? Boss incoming!).

Due to the linearity the "find item X before you can move on" things are so easy to do, hell a game called loaded (and it's sequel reloaded) had the same thing but it could take about 20 minutes to find them.

I think if they would have remade Duke 3D with modern, change the level lay outs (keep the same designs, like a maze rather than a corridor) and just added more lines of "duke"-isims the game would have been loved.

What I want to know is, why the fuck did the devs delay it? What did they change during the last delay? Any other dev team could have shat that out in a year from what I have seen of it.

 

[The Apothecarry]

I think that our standards have grown too high for Duke Nukem. I have not played any of the DN games, Forever included, and from what I see it's a game that isn't supposed to be taken too seriously. Yes, it was developed by a Triple-A studio but so much of is a parody that I can't compare it to Call of Duty or Halo. The game doesn't even take itself seriously.

Does look worth a $60 price tag? No. But as far as comedic games go (and I haven't seen or played many) it looks pretty good. I don't understand all the little mini-games or Easter Eggs that I've seen in videos, but it has a lot more interactivity than any other game I've played.

 

[FalloutJack]

So my question is : Do you think are standars are too high for a game like Duke Nukem ? or is the game really as bad as everyone says?

I think people don't know WHAT they want. My opinion of other games that others love but I don't care about would leave you wondering what standards people actually HAVE. So, I think it all boils down to the Unpleasable Fanbase, nobody ever being satisfied even when they get what's expected. This is not MY problem, though. I'm perfectly fine with the game.

 

[HobbyJim]

Well, Duke Nukem 3-D when it came out was a HUGE step forward in FPS gaming in terms of level design, weapon design, combat, among other things. I knew exactly what i was getting into when I saw the trailer for DNF (funny aside, DNF is also the NASCAR statistical abbreviation for Did Not Finish. Hehe. See what I did there? Ironic, right? Well, it WAS until it actually got released).

DNF is simply a love letter to Duke 3-D. It's a nostalgia trip better left suited to just downloading the damn game from XBLA. In the trailer, I saw the same enemies, same weapons, same kind of Duke humor and attitude. Gearbox simply just tried to make a Duke Nukem game that made us want to go back and play the old one, which I CAN DO ON MY XBOX ALREADY. So, I wouldn't say our standards are too high. Duke Nukem was a one-dimensional-misogynistic-walking-cliche in the mid 90's, but he still was in a good game. Now he's the same one-dimensional-misogynistic-walking-cliche but in a game hampered by the developers need to "make us feel like we're playing the old one". All you needed to accomplish that was keeping Duke the way he is. Why not fight aliens on other planets? Why not do something awesome with it, like Duke Nukem 3-D did? They could have done so much more with this game and they didn't. And that makes me sad.

 

[Kukakkau]

Probably because it took 13 years to make and there's a bunch of useless crap put into the game from what I've seen (spinning toilet rolls and chairs etc) that doesn't even need to be there.

Massive hype and constantly dangling it in front of fans eyes has just led to massive letdowns for the diehard duke fans. And from what people are saying the only value to keep you playing is nostalgia.

 

[Kahunaburger]

Duke Nukem 3-D holds up pretty well considering the technological limitations of its time. A game like that, but with modern technology would be pretty well received, if still a little dated content-wise. The problem really is that Duke Nukem forever isn't old-school enough.

 

[Phlakes]

Nope.

Everything about the game IS Duke nukem , this is what a Duke nukem game is supposed to be like , it's the same things we knew and loved about the game

So you're saying Duke should have to hide behind a wall every time he takes more than half a dozen hits? And can only carry two weapons? And a point that Angry Joe made that I almost forgot about, because bosses are only damaged by explosives, you'll probably have one slot taken up by a rocket launcher, leaving you only one. And every gun sucks balls except the shotgun.

Just because the game is supposed to be like DN 3D doesn't mean it's not a modern game. With all the modern touches, it's a helluva lot closer to one than you're saying, and it should be judged as a modern game.

Plus, the game is just terrible.