Always Bet on Duke!

?????????????

New Duke?

Sure, I'll take it. Can only go up, really.

FPS games need a hot beef injection of attitude + interactivity.

Interceptor... didn't they make a remake of Duke Nukem 3D prior to developing the new ROTT game?

Please don't let this be like the whole Fallout 4 bullshit that happened a month or so ago.

Its about time Gearbox started using their new IP from the ground up.

This is...interesting. I'll keep my eye on this.

Duke4.net forums state this will be an overhead RPG-styled game. (Maybe Diablo-ish?)

Figures, really. Any third-party Duke game seems to be anything other than an FPS.

Technician said:

Duke4.net forums state this will be an overhead RPG-styled game. (Maybe Diablo-ish?)

Figures, really. Any third-party Duke game seems to be anything other than an FPS.

Ooh, Diablo-styled Duke. I'm already liking the sound of it. I'd rather see where this heads before I start hyping myself up, but still...

Technician said:

Duke4.net forums state this will be an overhead RPG-styled game. (Maybe Diablo-ish?)

Figures, really. Any third-party Duke game seems to be anything other than an FPS.

FFS I had hoped it would be that Duke Nukem Reloaded remake, instead we get this.

This world NEEDS a proper Duke3D sequel ffs.

Technician said:

Duke4.net forums state this will be an overhead RPG-styled game. (Maybe Diablo-ish?)

Based on a post on reddit that doesn't properly cite its sources. Yeah, I'll wait for official news before believing that one bit.

Doomhuntress said:

Interceptor... didn't they make a remake of Duke Nukem 3D prior to developing the new ROTT game?

They were in the middle of one, yes, but were asked by Gearbox to put it on hold since they were trying to get DNF out the door.

My bet is that they've got the go-ahead to resume and that will be the announcement.

I wish the industry at large would quit resurrecting old franchises and buggering them in the process. This includes Doom 4 and Thief 4. Even some ongoing franchises like Sonic need to be killed off. Seriously, I want to stop seeing botched new installments and pointless remakes in favor of something actually NEW.

Make a new iconic character, a new iconic setting, new iconic gameplay mechanics, and stop dancing on the graves of past legends. Those older games defined the times that they were released in, but what do we have as defining characters and settings in this decade? There's nothing but a bunch of generic slosh and bad reboots of things that should've been left in the '90s.

They already made the most out of what they could and stopped when a nice, high quality body of work in place. The grave-diggers don't seem to realize that it's all downhill past the peak. How about bring something else to a high peak?

I don't know about Thief but how can you be so sure Doom 4 will suck?

DooM_RO said:

I don't know about Thief but how can you be so sure Doom 4 will suck?

Several reasons, really.

First and foremost is that it's a difficult process to bring something back, and do it well. Carmack acknowledged that everyone has a different idea of what Doom is. I'll tell you what it is, it's a simple and straightforward shooter with elegance. It's nothing more than a maze with puzzles that you have to solve merely to reach the exit, with things that want to kill you along the way. Anything more, and it's not Doom anymore. But that can't be a AAA game by what the scope and cost of what modern AAA development demands, not to mention that mainstream gaming tastes have changed. A smaller scale indie production trying to capture the starved niche audience, yeah, then it works perfectly. id was this in 1993, they're not this in 2014. They are UNABLE make a real Doom on just that problem alone.

That's not to even mention that the project is vaporware with loads of production reboots, on top of terrible management and a superior holding a gun to their heads.

There is no possible way Doom 4 will be ANY good, and they shouldn't even try. Not unless they're willing to recreate the right environment for such gameplay to be a worthwhile production. I don't think they're willing to. Rage 2 would've been a better idea, to actually try something new and even iron out the problems of the first.

DooM_RO said:

This world NEEDS a proper Duke3D sequel ffs.

Gearbox will make it, eventually.

Sodaholic said:

I'll tell you what it is, it's a simple and straightforward shooter with elegance. It's nothing more than a maze with puzzles that you have to solve merely to reach the exit, with things that want to kill you along the way. Anything more, and it's not Doom anymore.

If you insist on being stubbornly short-sighted, then yes. If you can't accept change as part of the development, then yes. If by 'new entry' you understand 'exactly the same', then yes.

Sodaholic said:

I wish the industry at large would quit resurrecting old franchises and buggering them in the process. This includes Doom 4 and Thief 4. Even some ongoing franchises like Sonic need to be killed off. Seriously, I want to stop seeing botched new installments and pointless remakes in favor of something actually NEW.

Make a new iconic character, a new iconic setting, new iconic gameplay mechanics, and stop dancing on the graves of past legends. Those older games defined the times that they were released in, but what do we have as defining characters and settings in this decade? There's nothing but a bunch of generic slosh and bad reboots of things that should've been left in the '90s.

They already made the most out of what they could and stopped when a nice, high quality body of work in place. The grave-diggers don't seem to realize that it's all downhill past the peak. How about bring something else to a high peak?

I agree partially, but it'll never happen. Too risky and costly to do anything new :/ I'm STILL bummed that Amalur wont be a franchise.

Touchdown said:

If you insist on being stubbornly short-sighted, then yes. If you can't accept change as part of the development, then yes. If by 'new entry' you understand 'exactly the same', then yes.

I accept change, and I'm not stubbornly short-sighted. I want to see cool new things being done, but in the case of Doom, there's not much you can add and change before it becomes Doom in name alone. One of the scrapped Doom 4 builds was a CoD clone. CoD is designed with an entirely different philosophy.

I don't want a carbon copy of what's already been done 20 years ago, that's boring and stagnant. However, I don't want to see something with a fundamentally different core trying to force conflicting elements of the old version in to justify its label. You wanna do something new? Great, let's see it! But build it from the ground up so that everything meshes well together. If you want to do something different, drop the old baggage that is at odds with the new ideas.

What I'm saying is that if I wanted them to make more Doom, I'd rather it just be expansions to the original game, like NRFTL. If they're doing a totally new game, they should be free to do a new game. Just make sure it's actually new and not a rehash.

I'm not saying that Doom is sacred and should remain untouched, just that it's so old and ingrained in people that nobody will actually agree of what a proper expansion would be. If Doom wasn't so old and infrequently done, maybe there'd be more of a case to experiment with radically different cores, but at this point it's more of wasted effort that could be better spent elsewhere.

Ragnor said:

I agree partially, but it'll never happen. Too risky and costly to do anything new :/ I'm STILL bummed that Amalur wont be a franchise.

There's still quite a market for these older type shooters. The appropriate place to develop these is in small, tight-knit teams that don't have to justify huge costs with huge sales. If anything, I think the number of people wanting these instead of CoD is more than there were in the '90s. It's just that there are even more new players that like the CoD style.

I'm certain that such a game would sell well, but the idea is that you need to have a budget proportional to the size of the audience. That's why I want AAA to do what they do best, their weaknesses lie where smaller devs thrive, and vice versa. AAA development is a completely different thing than '90s AAA development. More indies are actual teams that resemble the old AAA, and less unskilled one-man teams making poor quality shovelware.

Touchdown said:

Gearbox will make it, eventually.

Bwahahahahahahahahaaaaa...yeah right.

Sodaholic said:

I accept change, and I'm not stubbornly short-sighted. I want to see cool new things being done, but in the case of Doom, there's not much you can add and change before it becomes Doom in name alone. One of the scrapped Doom 4 builds was a CoD clone. CoD is designed with an entirely different philosophy.

I don't want a carbon copy of what's already been done 20 years ago, that's boring and stagnant. However, I don't want to see something with a fundamentally different core trying to force conflicting elements of the old version in to justify its label. You wanna do something new? Great, let's see it! But build it from the ground up so that everything meshes well together. If you want to do something different, drop the old baggage that is at odds with the new ideas.

What I'm saying is that if I wanted them to make more Doom, I'd rather it just be expansions to the original game, like NRFTL. If they're doing a totally new game, they should be free to do a new game. Just make sure it's actually new and not a rehash.

I'm not saying that Doom is sacred and should remain untouched, just that it's so old and ingrained in people that nobody will actually agree of what a proper expansion would be. If Doom wasn't so old and infrequently done, maybe there'd be more of a case to experiment with radically different cores, but at this point it's more of wasted effort that could be better spent elsewhere.

I agree with some of your points but disagree with the opinion that old games cannot be adjusted and expanded. But I don't want to derail the Duke thread.

I'm planning on writing a post about how I see making sequels to older games might/should work. I don't know if I'm going to finish it because I can't be bothered to do so right now but if I do, I'll post it in the DOOM 4 section. That'll detail my take on that.

Jodwin said:

Bwahahahahahahahahaaaaa...yeah right.

They bought the franchise with the intention to make games out of it.

Never did care for Duke Nukem, I enjoyed the Vacation expansion and the first episode of DN3D but that was all really, Blood and Shadow Warrior however was a different story, I enjoyed them a lot.

That reminds me, is there a way to get those expansions out of the Steam version?

DooM_RO said:

FFS I had hoped it would be that Duke Nukem Reloaded remake, instead we get this.

This world NEEDS a proper Duke3D sequel ffs.

Reloaded wouldn't have been a proper Duke3D sequel, since it was a Duke3D remake. It's like calling Serious Sam HD a sequel of Serious Sam. No, it's not, it's the same levels, the same enemies, the same weapons, the same design, the same everything, just recreated in a more modern way.

Fuck that music made me jump, just plugged my new pioneer headphones in and listened music and then that website music started playing loud

Touchdown said:

They bought the franchise with the intention to make games out of it.

Yes, and the only "good" games they've made over the years have been Borderlands 1 & 2, and the whole Aliens Colonial Marines fiasco showed that they have very, very little interest in IPs other than BL. Sure they might have a Duke FPS made one day, but if Gearbox is going to be involved in the development I doubt it'll be too good.

Jodwin said:

Yes, and the only "good" games they've made over the years have been Borderlands 1 & 2, and the whole Aliens Colonial Marines fiasco showed that they have very, very little interest in IPs other than BL. Sure they might have a Duke FPS made one day, but if Gearbox is going to be involved in the development I doubt it'll be too good.

Oh so you meant the quality, ok. I could pull out the obvious comment that it'll probably be better than DNF but honestly, I have no idea. Personally I'm looking forward to it, whenever it comes out.

Sodaholic said:

I don't want a carbon copy of what's already been done 20 years ago, that's boring and stagnant. However, I don't want to see something with a fundamentally different core trying to force conflicting elements of the old version in to justify its label.

That's rather black and white.

You can always get those enhancement mods for the original which in a way is better than a flat out remake.

Ragnor said:

That reminds me, is there a way to get those expansions out of the Steam version?

Just open the folder and do what you want with them.

Sodaholic said:

Several reasons, really.

First and foremost is that it's a difficult process to bring something back, and do it well. Carmack acknowledged that everyone has a different idea of what Doom is. I'll tell you what it is, it's a simple and straightforward shooter with elegance. It's nothing more than a maze with puzzles that you have to solve merely to reach the exit, with things that want to kill you along the way. Anything more, and it's not Doom anymore. But that can't be a AAA game by what the scope and cost of what modern AAA development demands, not to mention that mainstream gaming tastes have changed. A smaller scale indie production trying to capture the starved niche audience, yeah, then it works perfectly. id was this in 1993, they're not this in 2014. They are UNABLE make a real Doom on just that problem alone.

That's not to even mention that the project is vaporware with loads of production reboots, on top of terrible management and a superior holding a gun to their heads.

There is no possible way Doom 4 will be ANY good, and they shouldn't even try. Not unless they're willing to recreate the right environment for such gameplay to be a worthwhile production. I don't think they're willing to. Rage 2 would've been a better idea, to actually try something new and even iron out the problems of the first.

Of course it's a simple and elegant shooter BUT it is also highly atmospheric which is the part most people leave out. Doom 3 had plenty of the atmosphere found in E1, especially in a level called Central Processing, I'll let you find out why.

Personally, I am of the opinion that an updated, modern sequel to an old franchise can work and be done well. I've been playing a lot of Max Payne 3, and I think it really updated what needed to be updated, added some new things to the table, while at the same time retaining the gameplay that made the original Max Payne games what they were. Honestly, I was really impressed that they managed to maintain that balance. Was sure that it'd either feel too much like the old games, or be so different that you wouldn't even know you were playing a Max Payne game.