Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I know this already had a mention in the General forum but I believe the game is so bad it deserves another special mention.

It truly is awful. I can easily look past the implied sexual content and crude humour, but the actual gameplay and graphics are just junk.

Use the controller to walk slowly towards a mirror and you appear to hover towards it, obviously no animations are set for pressing the controller slightly to move.

The textures and rendering of NPCs are awful too. I would say graphically on par or slightly better than the original Half Life (which was about 1998?).

Scripted animations look extremely jerky....just after you take control in the hotel room and the two ladies who had "pleasured" you walk off, their walk is looped to the point you see them stop before the next loop starts, and it appears very jerky.

In another point women are banging onto a door to get your attention. If you move closer they continue staring blankly ahead with the same stock phrases playing.

I know it's a little thing, but surely these interactions are what make the difference in games. Don't give me the opportunity to go over to these characters if they will just stop all animation and not interact.

 

I'll probably still end up playing through it (out of respect for DN3D) but I can tell already I'm going to be shouting at the TV!! :p

 

It's a shame Gearbox have wasted time with this when they could have worked on a new Brothers in Arms game!

Posted
I, like you will probably play it from a nostalgic point of view. But anything that takes up to a 15 year gap will be so anticipated its really hard to live up to the past and as much as i want to love this game watching some demo gameplay footage i was disheartened by it. Duke Nukem is a icon to the past and if this is how games from the past get portrayed in the present maybe its best if they leave it in the past :( when we can look back and say its time to kickass and chew bubblegum with a smile on our faces :D.
Posted

It started development back in about 1997, it's had so many re-workings and re-designs it's no surprise it's buggy and fairly bad!

 

It's a shame, DN3D and DN Zero Hour were brilliant.

Posted
Like all modern games they will probably push it out bugged and barely playable before patching the game to make it a finished product. Some games take years to do this though and it's all too common place. But because people insist on buying an unfinished product just for the name, it rewards idiot publishers to keep doing it.
Posted
Like all modern games they will probably push it out bugged and barely playable before patching the game to make it a finished product. Some games take years to do this though and it's all too common place. But because people insist on buying an unfinished product just for the name, it rewards idiot publishers to keep doing it.

 

trust me the only way this will be made playable and bug free is if the patch is called uninstall.

 

these aren't bugs in the game its inherently a bad system. things like the gameplay and graphics aren't really going to be sorted with patches. you need at least a solid foundation before patching up the cracking walls

Posted

I'm sure I read somewhere that that was the intention with this. It was made to be slightly crude and dated, almost as a nod toward when it should have been released?

 

I spent many a midnight hour, camped in my mates hall corridor with my 17" CRT and DX2 66 with a massive coax network cable (WHO'S GOT A TERMINATOR?!) running from my computer to another 2-3, throwing dollar bills at dancing women and hopping around to avoid getting shot on the original. I'll definitely be giving it a go!

Posted
I'm sure I read somewhere that that was the intention with this. It was made to be slightly crude and dated, almost as a nod toward when it should have been released?

 

as i said, crude i can deal with, but dated? if this was their intention then it fails miserably on that part.

people have come to expect a lot from games, especially FPS. so if they intentionally created a game with the idea they will use technology last used in unreal and half life nearly 15 years ago, that just plain sucks.

 

why not release a new grand theft auto but make it a text based adventure

 

You are on a street. A scantily clad woman beckons you. Cars drive by and a police siren can be heard. What would you like to do?

Go north

You can't go north, a gang of muscular youths carrying weapons blocks your way

Fight youths

You brandish your fists and begin combat with the youths

Punch crotch

I cannot see the crotch

Punch balls

There are no balls in this area

Roll over and play dead

You feign death and the youths pass by you laughing. Mission 1 complete - $500. Would you like to enable auto-save

  • Thanks 1
Posted
lol! I played the demo and it would have been impressive... in 2004. It's a joke that this game will retail on STeam for £39.99. It is a shallow game and if the humor doesn't work for you then it gets quickly annoying. Thumbs down.
Posted

The Duke has had his day, someone please give him some gum.

 

It should have been resigned to vaporware history and unfortunately has been completed ruining a good old school character.

Posted
I didn't mean crude as in nude and rude, I meant crude as in thrown together!

 

true, but if you built a crude level using half life 2 or such level tools, the rendering and graphics will still look decent, while the level itself might not. with duke the graphics look dated as well as the level design

Posted
Well its on it way to me via Lovefilm so at least im not paying for it.

 

played a bit more last night and even my wife (who plays no games but has seen me playing some) said "that looks a bit old, is it an old game?"

 

it plays just like the original dn3d (not sure if its a good thing), and the dodgy animation/characters still bug me. in one scene you are shrunk down in a casino and have to work your way through. as you get to the exit there are two women, one who looks down at you to make a rude comment......but she looks down as you enter the room, and shes looking at her feet. so unless you are right beneath her, it makes no sense for her to look straight down. i know its nitpicking but other games spend time on these things!

Posted
I'm guessing that the game has been continually been built on from the version they had 10 years ago?!

 

 

They should have just wiped what they had and started fresh with a new game engine rather then try ad bring 10 year old technology up to today's standards!

 

it says its built using unreal engine, but it looks like the original unreal engine!!

Posted
|The Unreal 3 Engine? The same engine they are using now to develop games for the iPhone?! Hahahahaha!!!!

 

perhaps thats the point so they can flog ti to gullible iphone owners?

  • Thanks 1
Posted

I'm kinda liking it so far, I get the impression they've intentionally created a dated game - it almost has the feel of the originals which is the whole reason any of us are playing it I suppose

 

It is a tad too easy... just got to this bit and lol'd -

New Duke Nukem Forever Gameplay - Halo Easter Egg (Master Chief Armor)&#x202c‏[/url] (NSFW - as you'd expect from duke!)
Posted (edited)

I'm glad I didn't buy this "new" Duke game. Looking at the playthrough videos on Youtube, it looks really dated, consolefied and boring. :(

 

Joystiq Review: http://www.joystiq.com/2011/06/10/duke-nukem-forever-review-fail-to-the-king-baby/

 

Want to play the true successor to Duke Nukem 3D? It's called Bulletstorm.

 

The game looks like it's been steadily bumped up to HD resolution over the past decade or so, and had modern effects sparingly applied to its overly brown visuals. The whole thing is lousy with screen tearing and what can only be unintentional slowdown. NPCs even lack shadows. Things get worse in multiplayer, which almost looks like it runs on an even more basic engine than the single-player campaign -- and fittingly features about as basic a list of multiplayer modes as you could imagine. It's also about as lag-filled as they come, too, with all but the widest-spraying weapons rendered useless as clunky Dukes judder around the wholly unimpressive multiplayer maps.

 

Guardian Review: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/gamesblog/2011/jun/10/duke-nukem-forever-game-review

 

If this was 15 years in the making, it makes you wonder what they did for the other 14 years and 10 months.

 

Neowin Review: http://www.neowin.net/news/review-duke-nukem-forever

 

So overall it isn’t really worth your money, at least not until it drastically drops in price. We found it generally unfunny, irritating in places, and sadly not all that much fun to play. Duke Nukem Forever can also be buggy on occasions and graphical performance on both the consoles and on PC is not what you would hope from a game that looks so dated. It has its moments, but they are few and far between. Hardcore Duke Nukem fans may find something to love here, but in the end, you can only live on rude jokes alone for a short time when there is very little in the terms of decent gameplay on show. Gaming history can only take you so far.
Edited by Arthur
Posted

I'm going to go against the tide here and say actually, I liked it.

 

No it wasnt worth the 14 year wait, but taken on its own its a decent enough game, best enjoyed after a beer or two though.

Posted

I saw it for £29.99 in Best Buy, but couldn't bring myself to buy it.

 

It just feels wrong being able to buy it after all these years :p

Posted
£39.99 in Game, £30is at most online retailers (Xbox360) they are having a laff! Ill pick this up in a couple of months for £10!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...