What Were You Expecting? A Duke Nukem Game With A Deep Story And Complex Mechanics??

[Luthir Fontaine]

1. Regen health is dumb for a duke game
2. 2 weapon bull shit
3. Maps which basically boil down to square room monster attack
4. Graphics were balls
5. Humor that was funny back in 05
6. Weapons just not feeling powerful
7. Spirt features a bane of FPS
8. People looked and talked like their were suffering a mental illness
9. Online-o lord online I want to play normal TDM not look at all the people who are hosting games hit right trigger find some one with people playing then pray its not something dumb like railgun only. Compared to cod, bf, halo...Hit TDM bam your playing fucking team death match.
10. Online- DM = I got rocket laucher so i win!
11. online- Punching people is akward
12. PUNCING PEOPLE IN A DUKE GAME he kicks its his thing!
13. You die way to quick
14. The vechile sections handle like shopping cart
15. Hidding behind cover to get health is very unduke like
List goes on and on why this is a piece of shit game.

 

[MiracleOfSound]

I don't think you caught the sarcasm in this....... Go back and play Duke Nukem 3D. Compare it to today's standards and what you expect out of a shooter. a $70 shooter. Tell me how you like it. If you are being honest you will loathe it. You will like it becuase it is Duke Nukem, and that is what I am saying.

I'd disagree quite strongly with that... I still find Duke 3D and Doom great fun.

 

[loc978]

Like many here, I was hoping for something retro. Big maps with multiple paths through them, a health system with lasting consequences for screwing up, the ability to run 60mph and carry an obscene number of weapons... y'know, the other things that made Duke 3D great.

That said, Duke Forever is still an improvement on your usual FPS gaming experience these days... at least in my eyes.

**edit** also...
*looks up one post*
I'm with MiracleOfSound on this one. I played through Duke 3D less than a year ago, and it was still great. Modern shooter mechanics tend to reflect horribly lazy rushed design.

 

[Schadrach]

Personally, I feel sorry for whoever is making that new Serious Sam (BFE) game. Their game is going to cause people to freak out and commit suicide if it doesn't have medkits in it.

Serious Sam changed into a cover-based shooter with no more than 2-3 enemies at a time, CoD-style health regen, levels that are indistinguishable from hallways with cutscenes, and a 2 weapon limit wouldn't be a Serious Sam game. Let alone the fact that "Here's a powerup, dare to take it and we'll swarm you with nasties" pattern that is such a major part of the first two doesn't make sense without, y'know, something to pick up.

Ooh, ooh, I know the next way to modernize shooters -- let's remove ammo as a resource! Instead your guns heat up, so you can only fire a few shots in a burst and then need to go back to hiding behind the conveniently placed chest high walls! Now all we need is one otherwise decent shooter to incorporate this concept, and it can be the new "thing" that all shooters need to have forever more! I mean, don't *you* hate when you run out of ammo at an inconvenient time?

 

[loc978]

Captcha?

Context?

...seriously, you may want to edit in who you're asking and why. Low-content posts are frowned upon here.

 

[DarkhoIlow]

I was expecting a Duke 3D game with 2011 graphics,without importing any "modern shooting system" a la CoD.

Guess it was too much to ask for,you know,after 14 years in development...

 

[Katana314]

I don't think you caught the sarcasm in this....... Go back and play Duke Nukem 3D. Compare it to today's standards and what you expect out of a shooter. a $70 shooter. Tell me how you like it. If you are being honest you will loathe it. You will like it becuase it is Duke Nukem, and that is what I am saying.

I'd disagree quite strongly with that... I still find Duke 3D and Doom great fun.

+1. I played Doom and Doom 2 relatively recently (as well as Duke 3D). Minus one or two moments where I didn't know where to go, they were pretty fun.

 

[CrazyCapnMorgan]

No one remembers that Duke Nukem 3D, at the time, was just a generic FPS incorporating most of the modern FPS mechanics of that era - except with gratuitous sophomoric "humor".

And so, they complain when Duke Nukem Forever is just a generic FPS incorporating most of the modern FPS mechanics of this era - except with gratuitous sophomoric "humor".

That is exactly the feeling I'm getting as I play DN:F. Finally got my copy, and having played both 3D and Time To Kill, I think Forever is right along the same path as the games before it. It's nothing ground-breaking, but it's Duke.

Also, I'm having fun (only 2 hours into it), which to me is a very important aspect of a game.

 

[Nieroshai]

People were expecting a Duke Nukem game that actually played like Duke Nukem.

And a Fallout 3 to play like Fallout? Doom 3 to play like Doom? Wolfenstein to play like Wolfenstein 3D(probably a bad example)? LOZ Twilight Princess to play like NES Legend of Zelda? And God forbid, Jedi Knight 2: Jedi Outcast to play like Star Wars: Dark Forces? When 14 years pass between installments, things tend to get updated. I've played Duke Nukem 3D. The controls are awful and the graphics are ancient, ESPECIALLY on the console port which was nightmarishly unplayable. It was good for its time, but should games stay with obsolescence just because they're in the same series or franchise? I've yet to get my hands on a copy or the demo of DNF so I don't know if the gameplay sucks, but demanding nostalgia as the sole factor of judgment is pointless. Duke Nukem isn't about nonlinearity and 80s-90s shooting mechanics, remember when he used to star in side-scrolling platformers? Duke Nukem is, and always has been, a game series about the over-the-top exploits of Duke himself. And IF it lives up to that, Gearbox succeeded. Too bad my PS3 is halfway across the country.

 

[GeorgW]

And to all the young people reviewing the game exactly the same way the pros do it just becuase they hate it, have some integrity and ask yourself if you had fun. Just becuase you parrot a review does not mean some mystical force will have someone give you a job on the escapist.

Good day!

This more to your liking? [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/326.291283-Hypnotic-reviews-Duke-Nukem-Forever#11569732]

I think people are a bit hard on it, but they have their reasons. I wouldn't write off dozens of reviewers' and thousands of gamers' opinions purely on nostalgia and expectations.

EDIT:

The bottom line is that older games did plenty of things right. They wouldn't have been released and we wouldn't remember them so fondly if they didn't. I don't understand why it's so hard for developers to recognize that all they need to do to create universal acclaim for their games is take the best of the old and mix it with the best of the new. Seems a simple concept. I suppose they're just afraid that it won't sell. But until somebody just takes that one single risk, I guess we'll never know.

Ever played Painkiller? It's basically what you requested, and it didn't sell well. Not that bad though, and much is to blame marketing, but still.

 

[Morbissus]

Well i play it on xbla along with Doom 1,2 & I still prefer that game play. The only standards they need are graffical & controller wise. The point is I still have fun with them... because they're, how should I put this, fun.

 

[Kevlar Eater]

Ooh, ooh, I know the next way to modernize shooters -- let's remove ammo as a resource! Instead your guns heat up, so you can only fire a few shots in a burst and then need to go back to hiding behind the conveniently placed chest high walls! Now all we need is one otherwise decent shooter to incorporate this concept, and it can be the new "thing" that all shooters need to have forever more! I mean, don't *you* hate when you run out of ammo at an inconvenient time?

It was done in Mass Effect 1, and taken out in the sequel.

 

[jpoon]

The original Duke handled a fuckload better, 14 years and they still couldn't accomplish decent control? That's just bad development at it's finest. Given 14 years I could lead a group of devs to a better game, and I'm no game producer or director.

 

[Fudj]

So i played it a little, fun i suppose, but for me the only thing that DNF stands for is: Did Not Finish, i can play most games through to the end but there was nothing that made it worthwhile for me to do so, i doubt that it suddenly becomes a Glorious golden game after the first few levels.

Oh also i suppose the abbreviation could also be a message to gearbox when they picked up the IP: Do not Finish! should have been left as a fond memory rather then the sad state it is. Hell even duke says "after 12 fucking years it should be" should being the operative word there.

 

[Levethian]

Good that Duke Nukem Forever is finally finished, like a massively constipated turd that just needed to get out of 3D Realm's system. Now they, led by Gearbox, have a fresh start.

I found DNF to be fun, the Duke I remember pretty much. People keep bashing the bad 'mechanics' without saying what that means. It plays like most shooters as far as I can tell. Duke moved where I told him to, shot where I told him to, and threw shit where I told him to... I had tried to play through Crysis 2 previously, but it didn't hold my interest :/

 

[AyaReiko]

No. But we weren't expecting a Duke Nukem game with dated graphics and broken gameplay mechanics either.

 

[Schadrach]

Ooh, ooh, I know the next way to modernize shooters -- let's remove ammo as a resource! Instead your guns heat up, so you can only fire a few shots in a burst and then need to go back to hiding behind the conveniently placed chest high walls! Now all we need is one otherwise decent shooter to incorporate this concept, and it can be the new "thing" that all shooters need to have forever more! I mean, don't *you* hate when you run out of ammo at an inconvenient time?

It was done in Mass Effect 1, and taken out in the sequel.

Yeah, but ME wasn't really an FPS. At least not a game that people look at for an example of an FPS.