Duke Nukem Forever - Just finished it

Terak

Terak

New member
So...

I don't even know what to say.

I have always been amped for the game, and I know that 14 years to wait for it obviously made it overhyped. I felt that no matter what, it would be a fun game regardless.

My word. I am pissed off. I cant believe how kak this game is. Gearbox said its roughly "15 hours" worth of single player, if you explore and bugger around and what not. I must have finished this game in about 7 hours. The gameplay was repetetive, the puzzles were stupid timefillers, and the ending was one of the worst I have ever experienced.

I cant believe this is what we were all waiting for.

And what rubs it in your face, is that once you finish the game, they show you all the gameplay videos up to the most recent. There are so many sections that were cut out of this game...

I feel that Duke ended up being "just another shooter". Bland weaponry, lame enemies, even stupider bosses.

That being said, the only part I enjoyed was most probably his cheesy one liners.

/rant over
 
And you seriously expected an AAA title out of a mindless shooter ? lol ?

All games are repetitive, all games repeat certain elements and gameplay.

Terak said:
So...

I don't even know what to say.

I have always been amped for the game, and I know that 14 years to wait for it obviously made it overhyped. I felt that no matter what, it would be a fun game regardless.

My word. I am pissed off. I cant believe how kak this game is. Gearbox said its roughly "15 hours" worth of single player, if you explore and bugger around and what not. I must have finished this game in about 7 hours. The gameplay was repetetive, the puzzles were stupid timefillers, and the ending was one of the worst I have ever experienced.

I cant believe this is what we were all waiting for.

And what rubs it in your face, is that once you finish the game, they show you all the gameplay videos up to the most recent. There are so many sections that were cut out of this game...

I feel that Duke ended up being "just another shooter". Bland weaponry, lame enemies, even stupider bosses.

That being said, the only part I enjoyed was most probably his cheesy one liners.

/rant over
Click to expand...
 
Pr⊕phet said:
And you seriously expected an AAA title out of a mindless shooter ? lol ?

All games are repetitive, all games repeat certain elements and gameplay.
Click to expand...

Yes I agree, to a certain extent all games are repetetive.

The main reason I am so pissed off is because I thought out of 14 years there would be some memorable moments, but alas, the boss fights never live up to their expectation. I didn't die once in any of them, the bosses were way too predictable.

If gearbox does a sequel I hope they do it properly.
 
Terak said:
Yes I agree, to a certain extent all games are repetetive.

The main reason I am so pissed off is because I thought out of 14 years there would be some memorable moments, but alas, the boss fights never live up to their expectation. I didn't die once in any of them, the bosses were way too predictable.

If gearbox does a sequel I hope they do it properly.
Click to expand...

Take-Two Interactive, which owns the publishing rights to the game, filed a lawsuit in 2009 against 3D Realms over their failure to finish development. 3D Realms retorted that Take-Two's legal interest in the game is limited to their publishing right. The case was settled with prejudice and details undisclosed in May 2010. On September 3, 2010, after 13 years, Duke Nukem Forever was officially reported by 2K Games to be in development at Gearbox Software [link]
Click to expand...

Hardly enough time to do it proper justice coming from May 2010 to June 2011 release.

No-one worked on the IP for 14 years strait and I doubt it that GB had the chance to do it from the ground up. More likely they got thrown something in the lap by 2K and had to make it work. One year is hardly enough to craft an AAA title...
 
Yeah was gonna say, it wasn't developed for 14 years, it was just in waiting for that long.

It is not meant to be a thriller either. Like proph said, it is a mindless shooter... and that is what makes it what it is. You probably had too high expectations for it.

Side note: did you play it on the most difficult?
 
Duke Nukem Forever, should've been the one title that was never made. Not because we don't like it, but because we LOVED Duke ... and materialising him would only eat away at his deity. Think about the name Chuck Norris - words cannot explain his awesomeness ... now think about an actual Chuck Norris movie - watching every scene with its B-grade acting ... the two simply don't match. Not even close.

Duke should've been the game we all WANTED to see, but never got to ... his existence in our mind simply cannot be put into code, boxed and sold in stores.

I'm hesitant to say this, but I'm expecting Diablo3 to suffer the same fate. :(
 
Voicy said:
Duke Nukem Forever, should've been the one title that was never made. Not because we don't like it, but because we LOVED Duke ... and materialising him would only eat away at his deity. Think about the name Chuck Norris - words cannot explain his awesomeness ... now think about an actual Chuck Norris movie - watching every scene with its B-grade acting ... the two simply don't match. Not even close.

Duke should've been the game we all WANTED to see, but never got to ... his existence in our mind simply cannot be put into code, boxed and sold in stores.

I'm hesitant to say this, but I'm expecting Diablo3 to suffer the same fate. :(
Click to expand...

Now we just need a DNF movie ;)
 
Voicy said:
I'm hesitant to say this, but I'm expecting Diablo3 to suffer the same fate. :(
Click to expand...

The difference is that Diablo 3 has the name "Blizzard" behind it. So far, the culture of Blizzard is one that prioritizes the production of quality games... believing that the money will naturally flow as a result of their efforts. Instead of rather focussing on how to get as much $ as soon as possible. The reason WoW and SC did so well financially is because Blizzard took it slow.

The case with DNF was like this: Gearbox GM: "Well, it's going to make money anyway... sooo... let's then just pump a large marketing budget into it. I suppose we 'should' make some sort of ok-ish game as well, so that there isn't too much negative word-of-mouth. In the meantime, don't forget to allocate resources into the production of as many other games as we can. We're making money here, people, not statements."

Whereas Blizzar would be: "The better the game is, the more positive word-of-mouth and goodwill it'll gather. This means more people will buy it. Full steam ahead on doing the best job we can."

Both companies want the same thing, just that so few few developers actually take the risk of putting additional time and resources into the game's development. Though DNF forever took 14 years, as several posters pointed out... it was only in development for a relatively short time. GB should have kept the project under wraps longer, and therefor worked on it much longer and produced a much more polished game. But I suppose they had production and sales targets to meet...

/rant
 
Voicy said:
Duke Nukem Forever, should've been the one title that was never made. Not because we don't like it, but because we LOVED Duke ... and materialising him would only eat away at his deity. Think about the name Chuck Norris - words cannot explain his awesomeness ... now think about an actual Chuck Norris movie - watching every scene with its B-grade acting ... the two simply don't match. Not even close.

Duke should've been the game we all WANTED to see, but never got to ... his existence in our mind simply cannot be put into code, boxed and sold in stores.

I'm hesitant to say this, but I'm expecting Diablo3 to suffer the same fate. :(
Click to expand...

+1. Actually, the only reason why I bought the game, is to see some tities. Haven't seen any yet. :(
 
DarthSWNT said:
Side note: did you play it on the most difficult?
Click to expand...

Not the hardest difficulty, by one below it.

There is no "skill" involved, you just have to run around and hope you don't get hit really.

Hahaha Sharkie there is a stage with a strip club, you'll see some boobies soon enough.
 
Terak said:
Yes I agree, to a certain extent all games are repetetive.

The main reason I am so pissed off is because I thought out of 14 years there would be some memorable moments
Click to expand...

You have to put yourself in a mindset of this game being released around 1997-1999. I thoroughly enjoyed it.
 
I'm really enjoying it so far, sure it doesn't look that great but it is insanely fun and funny.
 
Maplassie said:
You have to put yourself in a mindset of this game being released around 1997-1999. I thoroughly enjoyed it.
Click to expand...

I'm with Plassie on this. I'm currently still playing it and loving it. Love the humour, game runs smooth.

I think a lot of people expected to much from the graphics and wanted to compare it with games like COD. This should not be the case, it's a complete different game.

A non sophisticated shoot-em up!

next up, checking out the multiplayer
 
cad-20110613-2a6e0.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top