Duke Nukem Countdown?

[Trycon]

I have a bad feeling about this...

[PsychoGoatee]

Touchdown said:

How about making a proper new Duke game instead of vomiting another fucking nostalgia-driven re-release?

It's not one or the other. Duke was still in legal wranglings since until not long ago (remember Duke: Mass Destruction which later became Bombshell?). I'm sure we'll see a new full Duke game published by Gearbox in the future. Maybe in a few years.

For now, call me old fashioned, I am excited about a new episode of Duke by Nerve Software (who made Doom 2's No Rest For The Living and Doom 3 Resurrection of Evil). Plus apparently a nice new renderer, new voice lines from Jon St. John, and who knows what else. And other cool rumored aspects we'll wait and see on.

Let's see the official reveal trailer/presentation on Friday before we judge, but I'm looking forward to it.

[Pencil of Doom]

Those leaked screenshots look interesting.
Also that weapon in the 1st screenshot looks like a Flamethrower.
Speaking of which, the Flamethrower was supposed to be in Duke Nukem 3D, but was scapped.

[Doktor Mandrake]

Voros said:

New game? Yep.

Its a strange year. Old classic coming back to life.

Sonic Mania

Doom 2016

Quake Champions

Blood (the whole team together AND quoting "he lives... Again"? Too good to be false)

And now Duke Nukem.

What next? Descent (i want this so badly, but it won't happen)?

How could you forget to mention System Shock?!?!?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=80eYjjthO1g

[Koros]

roadworx said:

god damn...gearbox, you did so well with the half-life expansions, why couldn't you do the same with duke nukem forever?

Am I the only one that did not think DNF was that bad? I actually enjoyed it. Not nearly as much as the classics, sure..... But I didn't think it was a bad game.

[Doktor Mandrake]

Jimp Argon said:

Am I the only one that did not think DNF was that bad? I actually enjoyed it. Not nearly as much as the classics, sure..... But I didn't think it was a bad game.

I've met other people who liked DNF, but I'd say you're probably in the minority

I mean the game launched with a 2 weapon limit for crying out loud, the game was just flat out awful for me, linear level designs, horrible mini-games, horrible gunplay, only gun I enjoyed using was the shotgun

I still completed it but after completing it I was glad to get rid of it and never look back

[Flesh420]

Jimp Argon said:

Am I the only one that did not think DNF was that bad? I actually enjoyed it. Not nearly as much as the classics, sure..... But I didn't think it was a bad game.

It wasn't bad but really linear. And the humor was totally off from Duke3d. I read a thing saying that George Broussard was really disturbed about it while everyone else thought it was hilarious. Broussard thinks Duke should be more serious. I think of Randy Pitchfork when I replay DNF, because he seems like the type of weasel to enjoy off-tune humor like that, and advertise it.

There's allot of detail in the backgrounds of many maps, indicating DNF was originally meant to be way more non-linear, but they had to cut everything down so Consoles could maintain decent performance, which is sad because DNF could have been amazing, but the cuts for console is not really surprising.

The funny thing is that DNF had the Glory Kills before Doom '16. They were a good way to get health if you were low. They were also really fast, just as fast as Doom '16 GKs. "Push Forward" gameplay before it became NuDoom's thing.

[PsychoGoatee]

Jimp Argon said:

Am I the only one that did not think DNF was that bad? I actually enjoyed it. Not nearly as much as the classics, sure..... But I didn't think it was a bad game.

I'm with you, and oddly enough close to 70% (used to be 70) of user reviews on Steam are positive, so thousands of people agree with you at least. It's my second favorite Duke game behind Duke 3D, and I've played 'em all. (well a couple handheld ones I didn't)

I can't wait to see what they show us on Friday!

[Edward850]

PsychoGoatee said:

I'm with you, and oddly enough close to 70% (used to be 70) of user reviews on Steam are positive, so thousands of people agree with you at least. It's my second favorite Duke game behind Duke 3D, and I've played 'em all. (well a couple handheld ones I didn't)

It may be 70%, but "thousands" is quite an overstatement, and DNF is actually way older than the Steam review system so the number is incredibly diluted. The only people who are going to be giving it reviews are the people who even care to anymore at this point.

The game that came out was not the game people waited 15 years for, had very monotone gameplay and the "humor" was both outdated (don't get confused with timeless) and for most people, remarkably off colour (for lake of a better description). It was universally panned as a massive disappointment and missing every possible mark, no two ways about it.

Saying it's a good game now is revisionist history. It would be like saying Sonic 06 is good.

[PsychoGoatee]

Edward850 said:

http://puu.sh/qUv9S/0f12b6c0e1.jpg
It may be 70%, but "thousands" is quite an overstatement, and DNF is actually way older than the Steam review system so the number is incredibly diluted. The only people who are going to be giving it reviews are the people who even care to anymore at this point.

The game that came out was not the game people waited 15 years for, had very monotone gameplay and the "humor" was both outdated (don't get confused with timeless) and for most people, remarkably off colour (for lake of a better description). It was universally panned as a massive disappointment and missing every possible mark, no two ways about it.

Saying it's a good game now is revisionist history. It would be like saying Sonic 06 is good.

Eh, it's pointless to argue about it, but PC Gamer's reviewer considered it a good game on release for example. I considered it a good game on release, so did plenty of other people. Plenty of people disliked it, but hey. As for Steam's review system, I rated it in 2012, I forget if the public percentage was added later. Doesn't make much sense to say thousands is overstating it when you showed the pic with 4,336 reviewers listed. That's about 3000 people who gave it a positive review. And there are of course plenty of people who liked it who didn't review it on steam. I know some of them.

It's all personal taste, but it's a fact that lots of people like it, and it's a bogus falsehood to pretend otherwise. And yes, lots of people dislike it too, I'm not pretending that's not the case. I know because people yell at me anytime I mention I like it. Personally I do like it, and consider it quite good.

But it does get tiring debating a particular game every time we talk about Duke. This is about a re-release of Duke 3D with new stuff, and talking about the future.

It'd be like if we argued about whether Doom 3 was good whenever talking about Doom 2016. (There was a bit a that to be fair)

[Edward850]

No, DNF was pretty much universally shat on. One good review is not what a good game makes, after all. Two cases in point; Shortly after release, the "Duke Bros" group on the Something Awful forums was very quickly renamed to "Serious Sam Club", meanwhile I think I'll just let metacritic and Yahtzee speak for the rest.

It is a very very mixed game. But the general conscious is it's just not a good Duke Nukem game, which is a quite important detail (ignoring the glaring problems with its gameplay and the weak wristed effort they took to "change" it). But yikes the internet was not pleased with it, and to say it was a laughing stock would be a bit of an understatement (perhaps becoming "an example"?). 2011 was quite a year.

As I said, saying it's good now is revisionist history, it was never good. Incredibly mixed, if not negative, but never good. Sure you can be personally satisfied with it, you do you, but that doesn't change how it was generally received.

[PsychoGoatee]

Edward850 said:

No, DNF was pretty much universally shat on.

You don't seem to have read what I wrote I guess. You don't accept facts and numbers when presented with them. Not to mention, who cares anyway? Not everything is a popularity contest, you like what you like, don't what you don't. It's entertainment. You don't like it, and for some reason you need everybody to agree with you. Just letting you know, plenty of people disagree with you. Including a couple people in this topic.

It's okay, you'll be fine with DNF fans existing.

[Edward850]

PsychoGoatee said:

You don't seem to have read what I wrote I guess. You don't accept facts and numbers when presented with them. Not to mention, who cares anyway? Not everything is a popularity contest, you like what you like, don't what you don't. It's entertainment. You don't like it, and for some reason you need everybody to agree with you. Just lettig you know, plenty of people disagree with you. Including a couple people in this topic.

It's okay, you'll be fine with DNF fans existing.

Fun fact; I never said I dislike it or not. I said the game was generally shat on. Please don't confuse opinions and history.

[PsychoGoatee]

Edward850 said:

Fun fact; I never said I dislike it or not. I said the game was generally shat on. Please don't confuse opinions and history.

I just gave some fun facts, such as how thousands of people happen to like it. Take it or leave it. You said it "was" bad (or not good) as a fact, I'm pointing out it's all personal taste.

[Edward850]

PsychoGoatee said:

I just gave some fun facts, such as has thousands of people happen to like it. Take it or leave it.

I just gave some fun facts, such as thousands of people happen to be quite livid. Take it or leave it.

(also ~4000 reviews on Steam is a small number for a AAA title)

[PsychoGoatee]

You're silly, and your points are silly. Do you harass everybody who mentions they like a game that has a mixed reception? What is the point?

[Edward850]

You have a funny idea of harassment if it amounts to "stop showing me how the game was actually received".

[PsychoGoatee]

Full disclosure, earlier today and yesterday on another Duke discussion somebody said I should "get -blank bad thing-" for liking DNF. I'm just tired of the haters, I always bet on Duke baby. (that said I don't think I'd enjoy Duke Nukem Critical Mass for DS from what I've seen)

And I'm excited to hear the dulcet tones of Duke once again in this World Tour thingy damn it!

[TheWizard]

Edward850 said:

Fun fact; I never said I dislike it or not. I said the game was generally shat on. Please don't confuse opinions and history.

People rated it based off how long it took to make rather than what it was.
Over my years of being a nerd, I've noticed nerds as a whole are the whiniest, self entitled and most irrational group of people on this world.

Seriously, if length of development really made that much of a difference they'd charge more for the game the longer it takes. But the reality is, it was the same price as any other new game.

It's like people boycotting Jason Bourne because Matt Damon is anti gun. People getting too caught up on the "behind the scenes" rather than just enjoying the fucking product.

It's also like someone giving a negative review on a product cause it was shipped broken to them by the retailer. It's stupid.

[Edward850]

TheWizard said:

People rated it based off how long it took to make rather than what it was.

No I'm pretty sure people didn't like it because they thought it was mediocre/less than. Remember that it was very much the talk of the internet before released, spouting memes well beforehand about betting on Duke. Nobody actually wanted it to be bad, nor had any reason to think it should have been. It would take something actually generally wrong to just let go of the fact that "Duke Nukem Forever" was finally released.

"I was there man, I was there when it happened" sounds fairly clichéd as fuck but I really was. I've never seen such collective expectations just... die.

[Doomkid]

TheWizard said:

People rated it based off how long it took to make rather than what it was.

For what it's worth, I was actually looking forward to DNF - A bit sceptical, but hopeful. When it paled in comparison to DN3D I was really disappointed. Too much pointless shit with pulling levers and driving RC cars and throwing shit, not enough actual content. The whole thing was all bun and no meat. To me anyway - It's by no means the worst thing ever or whatever, just very unremarkable. The same assets with a bunch of the BS stripped away and generally more "true to the oldschool" gameplay would have been great.

DN3D struck a balance, the game would still be fun without the strippers, pissing, jokes etc - that stuff acted as icing on the cake rather than the whole damn product. I'm not saying there's no game underneath the fluff regarding DNF, it's just there's no game I'm that interested in. [/ramble]

[Touchdown]

DNF was extremely subpar but it wasn't a 2/10 material that a lot of people made it out to be. Yes, a lot of folks judged it based on how long it took to make. Also, Gearbox is not responsible for it. But it is a poor frankenstein of disconnected ideas whose developers were desperate to make it similiar to their favourite shooters (namely Halo and HL2). It's a mediocre game and a crappy Duke3D follow-up.

I'd still love to see another Duke game.

[dsm]

DNF struck me as a very average "modern shooter", which was a major red flag for me. I really don't care for the kind of design that went into average shooters of the 2000-today era.

If a new Duke Nukem game was made that borrowed design elements from Wolfenstein: The Old Blood and Doom 2016 and it was well-made (because even good design paradigms can be fucked sideways by poor implementation), I'd be all for it. I'm just not very hopeful with Gearbox behind the IP - recent history of that company hasn't exactly filled me with confidence.

[CARRiON]

I don't know about anyone else but I didn't rate DNF by the length of its development time. I rated it by the simple fact it's as dull as watching paint dry. I stopped caring about the development a couple years after the 2001 trailer (which was proved to be half fake)

Is it a bad game? No. I wouldn't put it in the same category as say, Blood 2. Even bad games give you something to talk about, or something to riff on. They can be entertaining for the wrong ways, which gives them worth if you enjoy that sort of thing. The "so bad it's good".

No, I'd lump DNF in with games like Unreal 2 or DOOM 3. Nothing interesting is happening, the combat feels flaccid and weak, the levels are bland and boring.. enemies are predictable, or lack character, or are overly scripted and uninspired, weapons aren't fun to use, puzzles are generic or tacked on, probably full of gimmicky sections that are not fun to play like the RC car or turret sections, or the monster truck... It all just sort of becomes by the numbers...

In my eyes mediocre games are almost worse than bad games because there is just NOTHING to talk about, NOTHING to enjoy, it's just "meh". It's passable. I'm not feeling any sort of emotion playing a game like that, it ends up feeling like a slog, or a chore. What we got was a modern shooter still trying to hold on to selective things from the classic shooter age, from a character that hasn't been relevant in FOREVER *BUM DUM TISH*. Left a bad taste in my mouth.

dsm said:

If a new Duke Nukem game was made that borrowed design elements from Wolfenstein: The Old Blood and Doom 2016 and it was well-made (because even good design paradigms can be fucked sideways by poor implementation), I'd be all for it.

I'd be all for this, a redesign might do it some good. I really enjoy things like Old Blood, Doom '16 and Shadow Warrior '13.

[Avoozl]

I really wouldn't compare Doom 3 to DNF nor Unreal 2, Doom 3 was a much better game than them both imho.

[PsychoGoatee]

Avoozl said:

I really wouldn't compare Doom 3 to DNF nor Unreal 2, Doom 3 was a much better game than them both imho.

I love both DNF and Doom 3 myself. I also love hearing that new Dukery is afoot, oh yes!

[Voros]

DMGUYDZ64 said:

http://imgur.com/a/ajDID

Looks good. I don't think it's a bad idea. Heck Sonic Mania is just like this: Remastered, and with new content.

Duke 3D is damn fun. It's possibly the most well received game in the franchise. So seeing this on Duke 3D is most likely going to be awesome to play.

[Koros]

Anyone know that Duke4.net is giving away free Duke Nukem 3D games?

http://duke4.net/

Im not sure how many of those links are still valid. And I do not need one myself because I own my copy on Steam (Not in stores anymore atm) But I suppose its nice to know. However if you don't already own Duke 3D. You need to go sit in a corner for 4 hours and think about what you are doing with your life. Or just hurry up and grab your free copy while supplies last.

[darknation]

So are they still releasing the console exclusive episode from the Playstation on PC, or did Gearbox fuck that up by incontinently spraying lawsuits everywhere?

[mrthejoshmon]

I want to know if this new duke will have console ports.

As for the PC versions of the PSX maps I think the author is just taking ages to make them, well at least that is what I can dig up on ModDB at least.