Randy Pitchford talks about next Duke Nukem game.

[GoaThief]

Don't have time to sit through an hour long video, sadly. Could anyone do a decent summary, please? The only thing I've taken from that vid is that Randy has put on a bit of weight since our meeting last year, hope this means he's been chained to a desk hard at work.

Can't say I know anyone who would actually buy it anymore.

I'd buy it, and I was always a Quaker rather than Duker back in the day. I'm digging the oldschool vibe on The Escapist today.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

To be fair to them, they just picked up DN:F and finished it. They know what was wrong with it and they know how to make awesome games. There's no reason to think that they can't pull off an awesome Duke Nukem game from scratch.

 

[SajuukKhar]

Please snap back to the real world before making posts on internet forums. You know, the one most people reside in. The one where the Duke is and is supposed to be the exact oppossite of what you just listed.

OT: No thanks.

What game was Duke in where he wasn't a uber-macho, sexist, womanizer, that was as offensive as possible?

I mean that WAS his character in Duke 3D, time to kill, zero hour, land of the babes.

 

[SajuukKhar]

What game was Duke in in which he was intended to be a role model for men everywhere and succeeded in becoming one?

Ohh ok nvm then, I thought you were calling BS on the other part of the dudes post, not that one.

I agree with you there.

 

[MetalGenocide]

Duke Nukem: Space-time continuum, here we come!

 

[Lugbzurg]

I think you people that whine about Duke Nukem Forever being a Halo clone need to remember the fact that Duke Nukem 3D is a Doom clone. More importantly, there were several games in the series, and the genre was never consistent. However, in regards to the character and humor, Forever got them way off, as the "laughs" are played from abuse, rather than playfulness. In 3D, the references were homages to the original works. But in Forever, they were pretty much all putdowns. And the fact that Duke needs to hide behind walls 'till he feels good about himself renders the regenerating health concept even worse than Call of Duty in terms of context. There are plenty of other points I could make, but I think you should all take a look at this video to get a clearer picture.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jS7PCcvVoPI

 

[daveman247]

Yes. we are still lacking light hearted, over the top shooters. they just have to do it right this time ^_^

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

if they do it over-the-top and satirical it could be fine; that part in the hive was just REALLY misogynistic and creepy though Gearbox aren't the ones who put that in there. Gearbox have proven to be a good developer and if they can do a good Duke game more power to them.

 

[Callate]

*sigh*

I like Randy Pitchford. He talks in that interview about his "optimism", and that enthusiasm for what he's doing shines through in all the interviews and videos I've seen him do. And while I don't think Borderlands is exactly the Alpha and Omega of everything a game should be, I do think it's good fun. Similarly, I thought Gearbox's Opposing Force was a pretty good follow-up/expansion on the original Half-Life. Gearbox can clearly make good games.

So it really pains me to hear what sounds like denial coming out of Pitchford's mouth as far as Duke Nukem Forever is concerned, using words like "subjective" to dismiss criticism and vaguely implying that its critics were either a) offended by the content or b) expecting too much from the game because of its lengthy development cycle.

If DNF had only taken five years to come out, its graphics would have been far more impressive (at least compared to the games coming out around 2002 or so)- but it still would have paled in certain essential qualities even next to games like Half-Life.

The pacing was off. The progress-to-reward system was off. It interrupted its "puzzles" with gratuitous combat. The player had experienced 99% of what the game had to offer before it was two-thirds finished. Many of the "jokes" were just references. Its hero had an attitude that was utterly contrary to the way the game actually played. Any sense of verisimilitude created by interactive objects was quickly quashed by the linear pathways in nearly ever location (with glowing "go here next" points, no less.)

To call some of these things subjective is almost abusing the term. You have seen every weapon in the game long before you get to the end: this is not subjective. The "tough, macho action hero" is shuffled from level to level by being knocked cold on at least three separate occasions; again, this is not subjective.

The attitude that pervades the game ought to be fun, and it isn't. This may be subjective, but in my experience, it's also all but unanimous.

Oh, Randy. I hope someone can talk some sense into you, or the reception of DN5 is going to inflict a serious blow to that optimism.

 

[Nouw]

To be fair to them, they just picked up DN:F and finished it. They know what was wrong with it and they know how to make awesome games. There's no reason to think that they can't pull off an awesome Duke Nukem game from scratch.

Exactly. We don't know what GBX, and only GBX, can do with this franchise.