Dev admits DNF was dumbed down for consoles.

[Killclaw Kilrathi]

Also this is fucking retarded, the real reason they dumbed it down? Cause gamers these days don't know what's good anymore, they all want their games to be 'realistic" fucking ass fucks.

This. The FPS games went downhill after Halo became such a massive cash cow and developers realized they could make a lot more money pandering to the much larger demographic who preferred dumbed down "realism" games over games that had actual fun in them.

Oh yeah, Halo was only a negative on the industry. Thats why it has a higher Gamesrankings score than Half Life 2.

You're allowed to have your own opinion of the Halo francbhise, but don't act like Halo wasn't welcomed as one of the best things to happen to the FPS in years.

Perhaps you should read my post again, the entire point of it was that Halo was too popular. It WAS welcomed as "one of the best things to happen to the FPS in years", it was that very fact that caused the genre to go into a decline.

 

[Moriarty]

how the hell is the restriction to two weapons "dumbed down"? If anything it's the other way around because you don't have to make decisions which guns are worth keeping.


That's not to say I prefer limited weapons, it's stupid as hell, but "dumbed down" is just completely wrong.

 

[DustyDrB]

Fallout 3 and New Vegas
Oblivion
Mass Effect 1 and 2
Grand Theft Auto IV
Borderlands (what developer made this one, again?)
Timesplitters
Mafia 2
Bully
Turok 2
Goldeneye
Ratchet and Clank
Half-Life 2
Any Zelda game (the 3D ones even let you have four mapped to keys at a time if you include the sword).
Duke Nukem 3D
Perfect Dark

A small sample of games on consoles that let you have more than two weapons. I'm not even interested in Duke Nukem Forever, but I'm finding this blame being put on consoles nothing more than scapegoating tactics.

Anyone want to add to this list? Make it massive.

 

[Rad Party God]

Heck, even Bulletstorm had a "mighty boot" of sorts and you could carry 4 weapons at a time.

I think that Bulletstorm was a better Duke Nukem than Duke Nukem Forever itself. And that isn't saying much.

Glad I didn't bought it. I'm a dissapoint.

 

[kayisking]

Alright, not that I'm hating on the Duke or anything but how could Duke Nukem possibly get any dumber? That's not to say they're great games, but they've never been about complicated tactics or anything.

 

[Sonic Doctor]

And before anyone says "consoles are where the sales are", most console players own PCs, ...

Thats actually exactly what the dev said.(that consoles are where the money is at)
yeah you could have made a better version on both platforms if they allowed multiple weapons and duke mnukem style gameplay. But gearbox apparantly believes the core console audience can't handle anything but a direct halo clone :_D Nothing against halo but it gets boring if so many games copy it.

Considering that a large majority of the people wanting get the game, that were looking forward to it were people that remember playing it on the computer, I don't see how they could think that a console audience couldn't handle it.

The reason I say this is because back when Duke Nukem 3D was out, most gamers had both a console and a PC. The majority of the people I grew up with had both and played both. There is no reason why console players couldn't handle it, even Halo players. Also as people are pointing out, there have been plenty of games in the last few years on the consoles that have had large arsenals and the player could use a button or pad to bring up a wheel and select a weapon.

The Mass Effect games had such wheels. As a soldier in ME2, I was carrying 5 weapons on my back.

But still looking at the my 360 controller, it has 20 buttons: A,B,X,Y,LT,RT,LB,RB,L-Stick press down, R-Stick PD, start, select, and the 8 direction presses of the D-pad.

Now with two weapon holding systems a button like Y is used to swap and/pick up weapons. I don't see the reason why they couldn't have a button press like that bring up a wheel load out menu for the player to choose the weapon they want. With a load out screen like the MEs, fifteen guns could easily be labeled on the screen.

I think Gearbox was just lazy with DNF. They wanted to rush it out because they didn't want the development joke thing to continue.

I willing to bet that a lot of people are canceling their pre-orders after the demo. Gearbox really screwed themselves over because they were lazy, and their "two weapon standard these days, and multiple weapons on consoles can't work" excuses show that they were lazy because they are flimsy and false excuses.

 

[k-ossuburb]

Don't worry guys, we've still got Serious Sam to look forward to.

 

[Killclaw Kilrathi]

how the hell is the restriction to two weapons "dumbed down"? If anything it's the other way around because you don't have to make decisions which guns are worth keeping.


That's not to say I prefer limited weapons, it's stupid as hell, but "dumbed down" is just completely wrong.

That's a good point, I think in this particular context the phrase "dumbed down" is referring to restricting Duke's character into the role of a generic, wimpy Modern Warfare/Call of Duty character, rather than referring to the game's actual difficulty.

 

[scorptatious]

That sounds like a lame excuse. I mean the console versions of Half Life 2 still allowed you to use more than two weapons. And that game came out a very long time ago. I don't see any reason why GearBox can't do the same thing with the console version of DNF.

 

[Eveonline100]

Most people dissappointed with the DNF demo complained about some very odd design desicions.
First of all you can only have 2 weapons and switch them in a copy of the halo 1 system. this doesn't really work as 3d realms level design requires you to rapidly change qwickly between multiple weapons.
Also the "mighty boot" was replaced by halos melee system.

Here's a Devs response to the topic:
http://www.shacknews.com/chatty?id=26031903#itemanchor_26031903

They dumbed the amount of weapons down because of a lack of buttons on controllers and while they where alright with doing tweaks for the consoles they where to lazy to fix DNF for keyboard and mouse and allow the cut features on pc.

DNF was really damaged by the multiplatform release, a selection wheel for consoles would have worked in my opinion but hey now the design is bad on both platforms for blandness sake.
Avoid, get Alice or Deus ex. the deus ex team apparantly gave a shit.

Why is gear box being soooooooooooooo stupied just about everything that went wrong another game either did it or did it bettter. What is gear box just being lazy i but do look forward to yaztheee ripping it a new one come its release

 

[Stavros Dimou]

Consoles are not the problem.
It's imitation that is a problem.
Because the 2 weapons limit isn't the only thing dnf borrowed from other games that came out later that aren't Dukish.

Level design is so no-Duke.
Where are the huge complex levels you could be exploring for an hour each and get lost in,with numerous secret areas ? The exploration factor which was one of DUKE3D's basic characteristics isn't here. Too linear level design. I tried to explore around the desert level for secret areas and I only found invisible walls every 10 meters not letting me to go around.

Movement is not Dukish.
Move slower,jump lower,reach less,get tired after some seconds of sprinting..
Duke was one of the fastest,most agile and nimble characters of the videogames industry beaten only by Sonic the Hedgehog.He was so fast he would circle strafe around enemies faster than the enemies rotate around themselves,dodging all the bullets. In DNF Duke seems like he became a 70 year old or something..

Enemy balance is non Dukish.
In Duke 3d there where many enemies in each level,but you died slower.
In DNF you die quick,but there far less enemies around.


Call me a Duke Nukem 3d fanboy,but what I expected from DNF was a game that would play as DN3D but with a bigger number of new levels,more secrets,and better graphics,nothing more nothing less.

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

Remember Borderlands everyone?
How many weapons could you have at once?

Something like 42 and could switch between 4 at ease. And that was for consoles as well.

This saddens me, really.

 

[Aphantas]

Right. Thought. Sure.
Thoughts like "why would I ever want to carry the rocketlauncher/shrink ray/whatever exotic, situational weapon there is if the assault rifle/shotgun, sniper rifle/pistol, whatever the hell kind of combo it will be can deal with anything at any range?" perhaps.
Not limiting at all, it's "intelligent decision making".

As for "u so blind from them nostalgias", I have not played the old duke games and I find that decision awful for what is supposedly just about some dude who shoots stuff.

You would want to carry those rocket launchers or shrink rays or whatever if you think you might need it, maybe against an bigger enemy or a vehicle that can't be brought down easily by other means. This is the choice and consequence part of it, you might come against an enemy that requires extra fire-power or a long-range weapon, meaning that assault rifle/shotgun (if that combo is possible) could still not effectively hit target from long-range (something that could be vital) OR deal enough damage against an bigger enemy. Its not enough to be able to hit everyone from any range (a combo that's often impossible to pull off efficiently), you have to think of damage output and the utility of each weapon.

Being able to carry every weapon eliminates ANY thought there is to be had when it comes to combat (and any need to use those exotic weapons you mentioned), which means that even the worst possible outcome (what you mentioned) of this two-weapon system is still better than being able to carry EVERY weapon there is.

But as i have seen from many a discussions, people's problem with regenerative health, two-weapon limit and other modern systems is not one of whether its the right choice (design-wise), but whether its "old-school" enough.

The problem with the 2 weapon capacity in games is that the developer effectively chooses the weapons for you for a given situation because the weapons that are dropping (or found) at any time can tell the player what is coming next.
whenever a shrink ray is found in a level, the designer is telling the player that that would be the best weapon for whatever lies ahead since it cannot be expected that the player has kept the shrink ray from last time.
however with the ability to have all guns on standby the player must make a choice. Do I use my shrink ray now and possibly not have enough ammo later on in the game, or use more bullets and health, while risking a game over screen in the hopes of alleviating a tough situation later? every time they fight.
Sure the first time a weapon is found it is expected to be used, but after the initial tutorial encounter for the weapon, it becomes difficult to predict when it will be needed again. In this way it is possible for a shortsighted player to use up all of his shrink ray ammo mid game, and be powerless or disadvantaged against a very large enemy later on.
That is why i find limited weapon capacity in a FPS game irritating.

 

[SageRuffin]

Yay... another thread indirectly attacking console players.

No it isn't. Its about control schemes, not players. Don't be so sensitive, and read the OP.

I did read the OP, thank you. Hence me saying it's an indirect attack on console players if for no other reason than a controller obviously not having as many buttons/keys than a keyboard.

I'm not a PC gamer, so I fail to see how big a deal this truly is, for better or for worse. Though I do admit the devs probably could've had something akin to a 4-way d-pad switch system a la Metal Arms or Serious Sam or something.

And I wouldn't be so up in arms about all this if not for the fact that the common connotation behind the term is "console gamers are too stupid too grasp complex controls like a 4-way d-pad switch system; let's tone it down for the drooling idiot masses". Come on... "dumbed down for consoles"? Why not just say "simplified"? It's a more neutral term and, as such, could be good or bad depending on the situation itself.

But hey, I'm just an idiot console player, right? What the hell do I know...

 

[Sonic Doctor]

Alright, not that I'm hating on the Duke or anything but how could Duke Nukem possibly get any dumber? That's not to say they're great games, but they've never been about complicated tactics or anything.

As people have been saying, in Duke Nukem 3D, players had a ten gun arsenal at all times, well, once a player picked up a gun, the player had it for the rest of the game, all one had to do was find ammo for each gun.

Gearbox's stupid claim that "they had to dumb it down for the consoles because a multiple gun inventory wouldn't work" is bullshit.

Heck, Duke Nukem 3D was ported to consoles and it works with the 10 gun system. Gearbox was lazy and didn't want to do the work.

Because it is lacking the robust gun inventory that the player could keep all guns on them at all times, that is how the game has been dumbed down. Plus, the old Duke's melee attack was a boot kick, but for some reason they removed that and put in a normal punch attack(I'm guessing, since I haven't played the demo).

 

[Jabberwock xeno]

As I stated in another thread:

I thought I was playing Halo with pigs.

I mean, I liked the demo, I wanted to play more, but seriously, the auto regen health and 2 weapon limit needs to go.


This isn't the Duke I remembered.

Why is it every fps developer these days feels the need to incorporate self-regenerating health and the 2 weapon arsenal. Why won't these mechanics die? What the hell was wrong with health packs? Why do they feel to the need to force me to carry only 2 weapons at a time? What's the point of this mechanic, and don't tell me realism.

I assumed Duke Nukem Forever would pay homage to the forgotten, arcadey, over-the-top first person shooters of the past. I was looking forward to climbing up a ladder backwards, holding an rpg, kicking with both legs at the same time. I was looking forward to experimenting with cool weapons on my own terms. But no, it's just another generic, brown, halo clone with a shrink ray. Thanks gearbox.

Ugh.

Halo didn't even have regen health:

YOUR SHIELDS REGENARTED, BUT YOU STILL HAD A SET HEALTH LIMIT THAT DID NOT REGENERATE.

And Halo is the furtherest FPS from "brown".

You fight in Purple alien ships, green meadows and canyans, cities, deserts, jungles, etc.

And as I stated here:

Blame 3D Realms, not Gearbox. Gearbox have had Duke for a few months, 3D Realms have been working on it for 14 years.

This.

Borderlands let you carry over 42 guns at once, this is NOT gearboxs fault.

 

[Rad Party God]

Fallout 3 and New Vegas
Oblivion
Mass Effect 1 and 2
Grand Theft Auto IV
Borderlands (what developer made this one, again?)
Timesplitters
Mafia 2
Bully
Turok 2
Goldeneye
Ratchet and Clank
Half-Life 2
Any Zelda game (the 3D ones even let you have four mapped to keys at a time if you include the sword).
Duke Nukem 3D
Perfect Dark

A small sample of games on consoles that let you have more than two weapons. I'm not even interested in Duke Nukem Forever, but I'm finding this blame being put on consoles nothing more than scapegoating tactics.

Anyone want to add to this list? Make it massive.

Doom 1, 2 & 3
Painkiller
Serious Sam
Half-Life (for the PS2)
Manhunt
Max Payne 1 & 2
MDK 1 & 2
God of War series (not an FPS, but still a console exclusive with lots of weapons)
Stranger's Wrath
Devil May Cry series
Metal Gear series
Silent Hill series (heck, not even an action game and it let you carry more than 10 weapons)
Shadow Man 2 (I remember having more than 30 weapons, I loved that Nail Gun)
Crysis 1, Warhead & 2 (it has a weapon limit itself, but not blatantly 2 weapons)
Far Cry series
BioShock (one of the most important games on this generation and it certainly had more than 2 weapons)
Ninja Gaiden 1 & 2
Bulletstorm (it even had a mighty boot for God's sake!)
Resident Evil series (ANY Resident Evil game)

And those are the ones I can come up with right now.

 

[Stavros Dimou]

Alright, not that I'm hating on the Duke or anything but how could Duke Nukem possibly get any dumber? That's not to say they're great games, but they've never been about complicated tactics or anything.

As people have been saying, in Duke Nukem 3D, players had a ten gun arsenal at all times, well, once a player picked up a gun, the player had it for the rest of the game, all one had to do was find ammo for each gun.

Gearbox's stupid claim that "they had to dumb it down for the consoles because a multiple gun inventory wouldn't work" is bullshit.

Heck, Duke Nukem 3D was ported to consoles and it works with the 10 gun system. Gearbox was lazy and didn't want to do the work.

Because it is lacking the robust gun inventory that the player could keep all guns on them at all times, that is how the game has been dumbed down. Plus, the old Duke's melee attack was a boot kick, but for some reason they removed that and put in a normal punch attack(I'm guessing, since I haven't played the demo).

It's not Gearbox's claim,it's 3D Realms's claim.