Duke Nukem Forever Demo Released
- Thread starter Delmustator
- Start date
I think a lot of people had super high expectations after it being worked on for so long. It's a Duke game so you know what you're going to get lol. If it does have any major flaws I think it's mostly from being bounced between developers so much. It can't be easy taking over someone else's project when it's already been partly finished.
Sigma-LS
Sr Member
Just remember guys, now that Piranha has finished with this, it's back to work on Mechwarrior 5.:love
I enjoyed the hell out of the demo though. Maybe it's just my love of sarcasm and goofy stuff. I loved Raze's Hell too and it only got like a 5 or 6 out of 10 on most sites.
Since everybody else is going to drive the price down though, I'm going to save my money until it gets knocked down a bit.
I enjoyed the hell out of the demo though. Maybe it's just my love of sarcasm and goofy stuff. I loved Raze's Hell too and it only got like a 5 or 6 out of 10 on most sites.
Since everybody else is going to drive the price down though, I'm going to save my money until it gets knocked down a bit.
Solo4114
Master Member
I'm not saying that review sites are the be-all/end-all, especially places like Gamespot or IGN. But when sites like that -- places where you can basically BUY a positive review -- give you a 3, your game is in trouble.
Now, some of that may be a reaction to expectations that weren't met. Some of it may be the conundrum of a generation of gamers who played and loved Duke 15 years ago when they were themselves 15, finding out that...SURPRISE! they aren't 15 anymore and 15-year-old humor doesn't quite do it. Although I still think that the issue is less one of style and more one of balance.
From the sound of it, balance is the critical problem for the whole game. Balance of elements (new FPS vs. old school -- like, why the f*** is Duke only carrying two weapons?!), balance of level design (too much platforming, not enough ass kicking), and balance of humor (too much lockerroom humor, not enough ass kicking).
DN3D (also available on XBLA), had SOME humor, but it wasn't non-stop and it wasn't always forced. And while you did have some platforming, most of the game was about killin' dudes and blowin' s**t up. And the multiplayer did some really entertaining things with fun weapons like pipebombs and laser trip mines, and teleporters that you could shoot rockets through (I remember the first time I scared the hell out of a friend of mine with that one). But it was, overall, well balanced.
It sounds like this one fails in how it balances these aspects and tends to go too much in one direction and not enough in another.
Now, some of that may be a reaction to expectations that weren't met. Some of it may be the conundrum of a generation of gamers who played and loved Duke 15 years ago when they were themselves 15, finding out that...SURPRISE! they aren't 15 anymore and 15-year-old humor doesn't quite do it. Although I still think that the issue is less one of style and more one of balance.
From the sound of it, balance is the critical problem for the whole game. Balance of elements (new FPS vs. old school -- like, why the f*** is Duke only carrying two weapons?!), balance of level design (too much platforming, not enough ass kicking), and balance of humor (too much lockerroom humor, not enough ass kicking).
DN3D (also available on XBLA), had SOME humor, but it wasn't non-stop and it wasn't always forced. And while you did have some platforming, most of the game was about killin' dudes and blowin' s**t up. And the multiplayer did some really entertaining things with fun weapons like pipebombs and laser trip mines, and teleporters that you could shoot rockets through (I remember the first time I scared the hell out of a friend of mine with that one). But it was, overall, well balanced.
It sounds like this one fails in how it balances these aspects and tends to go too much in one direction and not enough in another.
Qui-Gonzalez
Master Member
Oh, how I had forgotten the trip mines. I was hated for those, like the claymores in MW2.
Solo4114
Master Member
Actually, many reviewers are in their late 20s, early 30s. A fair number of them would remember DN3D. But times have changed, and the problem is sounding like this game couldn't decide whether it wanted to change with them, or be a well-done update of past glories. And the end result sounds like it's half changed, half not, and all wrong.
What did they do, declare an Iranian style Fatwa?
Goodwolf
Sr Member
Nah, they just don't let you preview any more of their games for a while, so the "good" kids hype it up, sales are brisk even if the reviews blow on the actual release date.
Course, the "good" kids take a credibility hit, but the developers still make a ton of cutter on a crap game so they couldn't care less.
Solo4114
Master Member
Yeah, certain outlets seem to always get preview info and then advance copies sooner than others so they put up reviews sooner, all of which directs traffic to their sites. Whereas other outlets aren't "most favored nations" and have to wait a bit longer. I've taken to patronizing the latter more, lately. Mostly because their reviews seem more honest.
In this case, it strikes me that the PR team didn't effectively butter up the reviewers on the front end. I don't recall seeing a ton of preview info on the game, so pretty much aside from announcements that this or that edition will come out on XYZ date, the reviewers were only judging the game on its face.
Kind of like not doing a screening for film reviewers, but hyping up the trailers for some lousy remake film with a brand name.
In this case, it strikes me that the PR team didn't effectively butter up the reviewers on the front end. I don't recall seeing a ton of preview info on the game, so pretty much aside from announcements that this or that edition will come out on XYZ date, the reviewers were only judging the game on its face.
Kind of like not doing a screening for film reviewers, but hyping up the trailers for some lousy remake film with a brand name.
cboath
Master Member
Demo did nothing for me, really. I was hyped off the trailer, then was more 'meh' at the demo. Didn't bug that it was nothing new gameplay-wise, but I had graphics maxed on 2 year old video card and wasn't impressed. It wasn't bad, mind you, just nothing inspiring really. The boss wasn't hard - i had a harder time with the ship. The mine car was fun the first time, but you couldn't really mess it up it seemed. Second one was basically a repeat.
I don't think anyone expected innovative. The game was at it's highest production level at around 2003/4. If it came out then, well, it would have been amazing. 7-8 years later - not so much. That's not EA's fault or whoever was the last group to finish this off, it just is what it is. As they say, too many cooks...The opening credits show 5 game companies with their name on this, plus the distributor.
Maybe the entire thing is better, but I didn't get any desire to play the full thing after the demo.
I don't think anyone expected innovative. The game was at it's highest production level at around 2003/4. If it came out then, well, it would have been amazing. 7-8 years later - not so much. That's not EA's fault or whoever was the last group to finish this off, it just is what it is. As they say, too many cooks...The opening credits show 5 game companies with their name on this, plus the distributor.
Maybe the entire thing is better, but I didn't get any desire to play the full thing after the demo.
only had 1 lol moment, when hes walking around the studio and bumps into 1 guy screaming at another "do you want me to trash your lights!" i punched him and kept going
Stormie
Well-Known Member
He just blows the puzzle to smoldering bits.. Or at-least I wish he did.
Solo4114
Master Member
Can't say I'm surprised. The PR guy really stepped in it. Makes the publisher look bad, the PR house itself look bad, and pretty much vindicates the bad reviews. The whole instance could've been handled WAY better. But, actually, I'm hopeful that it starts waking people up to the fact that all those gaming industry websites/magazines that seem to get dozens and dozens of previews, day 0 reviews, etc. are in league with the gaming companies, which CANNOT HELP BUT COLOR THEIR REVIEWS.
I still read these sites, and when they give a BAD review I pay attention (because it happens so rarely, or only for indie games), but I've learned to read between the gushing lines that go something like "It's AWESOME! It's so pretty, and the sound is great. Ok, so there are some minor problems with the netcode and matchmaking for online play is a bit off..." Uh oh. Sounds like it's got crap multiplayer then...
For generally solid opinions/reviews that seem unswayed by PR backroom deals, I stick with Avault.com.
Right. In the original DN3D, there was one button puzzle where, in order to advance, you had to demolish an entire building. Like, press buttons an bring it crashing down. Granted, back then that just meant a slab of "ground" with the sides painted with building textures slid down like an elevator while the screen shook, but it sounds like this game would've had you hopping from floating pig cop car to floating pig cop car, in an effort to scale the building, then get shrunk down and navigate a series of plumbing pipes to reach the bottom. Just f***ing blow it up already!
Similar threads
