Duke Nukem

[Cyborg]

Anyone give it a shot? I actually enjoyed the demo. I know that a lot of the humor and understanding of the game is completely gone because it's been 14 years. Most of today's youth has no idea what the game is supposed to be. How are they able to play something besides call of duty and their clones? 

But if you did give it a try, and you understand what the game is supposed to be, and where it came from, share your thoughts! I feel as if most of the review sites don't get the fact that the character is supposed to be a parody and offensive, and that there are going to be some light puzzles in the levels.

[Nalgas]

I played a decent amount of Duke 3D back in the day, so I do know where it's coming from.  I also played the demo of DNF when it first went up, mostly out of morbid curiosity and because I happened to have an access code from Borderlands.  It was the least fun I've had playing a game in quite some time.  There were a handful of mildly amusing moments, but most of the humor wasn't actually funny, and I generally like dick jokes.  It's possible they saved the good stuff for the full game, I guess.

It seems very unlikely that the gameplay is any different in the full game, though, considering that everything I've heard about it sounds exactly like what I saw in the demo: awful.  The game is ugly, the levels are linear, Duke is sluggish, he can only carry two weapons with limited ammo, he dies nearly instantly if he doesn't cower behind cover (how manly is that?), he has regenerating health, load times are painful...  Should I go on?  It plays like all the worst parts of old FPSes combined with all the worst parts of new ones.

I was hoping for a retro FPS experience, charging in at 40 mph on foot soaking up bullets and mowing down hordes of enemies with creative weapons, along with some over-the-top manliness and boobies, kind of like Duke 3D.  Instead it felt more like a half-assed Duke Nukem mod for Call of Halo or something.

[Echo35]

Anyone give it a shot? I actually enjoyed the demo. I know that a lot of the humor and understanding of the game is completely gone because it's been 14 years. Most of today's youth has no idea what the game is supposed to be. How are they able to play something besides call of duty and their clones? 

Linear shooter, two weapons, regenerating health, bad dialogue. Quick, am I talking about DNF or CoD?

[Cyborg]

As someone who generally doesn't like shooters, I actually liked the regenerating health, the hammy dialogue, and the actual gameplay. Often times in the short campaigns of AAA shooters, I feel like I'm on rails playing duck Hunt or Hogan's Alley. Is no less linear than DN. I think what grabs me about DN is that the gameplay is so varied even within levels. People said that it's too much of a mishmash of ideas(actually criticized the variety of things they could do, which is mind-boggling), but I enjoyed the variety and the fact they tried to change things up even within a level. Am I disappointed you only get two guns at one time? A little bit, although I think this is supposed to be part of the challenge. Maybe they should have enforced that on harder settings. After a while, I forgot about it. I played the demo desert level at least three times to see what I could find, and I actually found hidden caches the second and third time. In contrast, I could barely finish any of the CoD titles or battlefield.

I really hope that negative reviews doesn't just create an avalanche of Duke hate where none is needed, and I wonder if years of playing CoD clones is removing the ability for people to enjoy other kinds of shooters. Seriously, some of the reviews were denigrating the graphics, but this just tells me they have no idea where this game comes from or what to expect from it. Is it really just about creating massive graphics? That's just such a shallow analysis of a game and ignores that this game is a resurrection, not the usual AAA title.

DN is definitely out of the mold and against the grain. All in all, a fair review though; maybe this is a shooter for people that don't really like shooters, like me. :-)

I am going to wait on purchasing it though. I don't want to pay full price.

[Nalgas]

People said that it's too much of a mishmash of ideas(actually criticized the variety of things they could do, which is mind-boggling), but I enjoyed the variety and the fact they tried to change things up even within a level.

In theory that's a good thing, but the problem is that it does a lot of different things poorly.  If it did all or at least most of them reasonably competently, that would be another story entirely.  It's particularly bad that the shooting part of it feels so sloppy, considering that it's a shooter, and the main thing you do is shoot things.

Seriously, some of the reviews were denigrating the graphics, but this just tells me they have no idea where this game comes from or what to expect from it. Is it really just about creating massive graphics?

It's not just about that, but at the same time they don't have to be actively ugly.  There's kind of a disaster of filters/post processing applied to the image that makes it all a blurred, garbled mess, which isn't helping things when it's largely a grey and brown garbled mess to begin with.  It actually looks better and is easier to play with some of the effects turned off, because you can suddenly tell what's going on, which is a problem their previous game Borderlands also had (although that was at least otherwise visually interesting/distinctive and a fun game on top of that, for the most part).

Edit:

this game is a resurrection

More like Duke 3D is spinning in its grave.  Heh.

Of course, if you're having fun, go nuts.  You're not the only one, as I've run into other people out there with similar opinions to yours.

[chemical_art]

I find myself torn in two directions with this game.

If I were to ignore the parts that were not distinctly Duke Nukem, it would be a mediocre game. It's not terrible, because I have never felt bored while playing it, but its certainly nothing to rave about either.

But the parts that are Duke Nukem are great. I love hammy dialogue. The unrelenting sexual jokes. The jokes hidden on cans, signs, and other non-verbal means.

I definitely think there is an issue of expectation. When I started it, I decided I would enjoy it how I can. I do that for almost anything I have. I simply ask myself "Do I enjoy it?" and I answer "yes". If, however, I were to view it as a 14-year game I would not be so inclined. However (yet again!) I also know that in Duke Nukem's case in those 14 years little, if anything, survived from the first 12 or 13 of those years because nothing really developed. I also don't compare it with the old games heavily simply because you aren't comparing Apples to Apples I think. The games were made in very different times, with different crews, and for different audiences. It would be like getting mad at the new DOOM games because they aren't like the originals (although that is its own can of worms).

The sequel I have much higher expectations though. I can mentally forgive a lot of failures for the game crew had some insane deadlines. However now that they'll use the same game engine likely I expect the game crew to make a more distinct game.

[eRe4s3r]

Might easily be the worst fps ever made. Its not just the noobish health system, the ammo boxes and the 2 weapon limits (which makes exploration to find secrets an utter waste of time), its not just the degenerate boss-battles and absurd physics, the broken animations, the sloppy hit-detection.

What really breaks this game, is that Duke Nukem 3D is the better game. If you fail to develop an FPS thats better than a 14 year old game, no matter how much time you spent doing that, then you fail as a developer.

But the crown of it all is that its 6 hours long with PADDING.

PADDING

6 Hours, and they PAD the CONTENT, with driving sections, unskippable cutscenes, bad check point placements.

6 Hours with actually non-imaginative generic set-pieces, and a game thats browner and blurrier than even borderlands, and that game plays on a BROWN PLANET.

Yurks, this game makes me regret to have ever hoped for a sequel. Maybe its true, good things should be kept in memory, and not be re-threaded.

[Echo35]

Might easily be the worst fps ever made. Its not just the noobish health system, the ammo boxes and the 2 weapon limits (which makes exploration to find secrets an utter waste of time), its not just the degenerate boss-battles and absurd physics, the broken animations, the sloppy hit-detection.

What really breaks this game, is that Duke Nukem 3D is the better game. If you fail to develop an FPS thats better than a 14 year old game, no matter how much time you spent doing that, then you fail as a developer.

But the crown of it all is that its 6 hours long with PADDING.

PADDING

6 Hours, and they PAD the CONTENT, with driving sections, unskippable cutscenes, bad check point placements.

6 Hours with actually non-imaginative generic set-pieces, and a game thats browner and blurrier than even borderlands, and that game plays on a BROWN PLANET.

Yurks, this game makes me regret to have ever hoped for a sequel. Maybe its true, good things should be kept in memory, and not be re-threaded.

All of this. The game should have just faded away and never come out. Boy do I love me my FPS's that let me fling poo, make fun of gay people, and have abortion jokes and extreme misogamy.

[Mánagarmr]

Well that takes DN4E off my wishlist. Here's to hoping Red Faction:Armageddon is worth the time instead.

[zebramatt]

Well that takes DN4E off my wishlist. Here's to hoping Red Faction:Armageddon is worth the time instead.

Should be!

[KingIsaacLinksr]

I find it slightly amusing that people expected a multi-developer 14 year old game to actually be excellent.  There is a reason why games don't get developed that long   Heck, if Arcen decided to develop a game for more than 10 years, I'd think they were crazy .

King

[BobTheJanitor]

I find it slightly amusing that people expected a multi-developer 14 year old game to actually be excellent.

I don't think anyone really expected it to be excellent, except in an ironic way. People were hoping that it would at least be moderately enjoyable. It just seems like they forgot all the things that made its ancient predecessor a good game, and instead tried to stuff in all the boring overplayed gaming conventions that have become standard since then. If they would have made a game full of dumb jokes and fun weapons where you went around convoluted maps chock full of secrets while booting pig cops in the face, that would have been perfect. And it would have been DN3D again, just with updated graphics. And that would have been fine! But instead they've tried to make it be every game that has sold well since then, with limited inventory, linear levels, regenerating HP, and everything else that's standard for games these days. People were just hoping for a return to the good old days, not for anything new and exciting.

[Echo35]

I don't think anyone really expected it to be excellent, except in an ironic way. People were hoping that it would at least be moderately enjoyable. It just seems like they forgot all the things that made its ancient predecessor a good game, and instead tried to stuff in all the boring overplayed gaming conventions that have become standard since then. If they would have made a game full of dumb jokes and fun weapons where you went around convoluted maps chock full of secrets while booting pig cops in the face, that would have been perfect. And it would have been DN3D again, just with updated graphics. And that would have been fine! But instead they've tried to make it be every game that has sold well since then, with limited inventory, linear levels, regenerating HP, and everything else that's standard for games these days. People were just hoping for a return to the good old days, not for anything new and exciting.

Fact. If they had done it more like Serious Sam but with all the stuff that made DN3D great, I'd have bought it.

[Nalgas]

Speaking of Serious Sam, if anyone has played both the original and the remake, how do they compare?  I never got around to playing the original, but I tried the remake and could not get into it at all.  It's definitely not because I don't like the old style of shooter, because I had just played a bunch of Painkiller not too long before that and was having a great time like back in the day.  Actually, I like the old style shooters so much that I get mildly distressed when circle strafing doesn't work in new games, but that's another issue entirely...  Heh.

[KingIsaacLinksr]

Good point Bob, and that is sad that they didn't evoke the original games as such. 

King