Slashdot Log In
3D Realms Won't Rush Duke Nukem Forever
Posted by
Zonk
on Wed Jun 14, 2006 11:14 AM
from the why-rush-it-now dept.
from the why-rush-it-now dept.
WeAz writes "GameSpot has news that 3D Realms has no plans on rushing Duke Nukem Forever. Despite the $500,000 bounty that Take-Two Interactive was found to be offering for the game after a filing with the SEC last week, George Broussard, President of 3D Realms, has given his official response: 'We're certainly not motivated by that amount of money, after all this time, and getting the game right is what matters. I would never ship a game early (even a couple of months), for 500k.'"
Related Stories
[+]
Duke Nukem Forever Due This Year? 251 comments
nz17 writes "Under the original deal, 3D Realms was to receive some $6 million from Take-Two to develop the title. Now the Texas-based developer will receive only $4,250 for the oft-delayed game when it is completed. Just the same, 3D Realms has a fairly large incentive to get Duke Nukem Forever done by the end of the year; Take-Two has offered the studio $500,000 in the form of a promissory note if the game sees commercial release by December 31, 2006."
[+]
Duke in Trouble? 114 comments
1up reports on rumours of trouble at 3D Realms, the long-term developers of the Duke Nukem Forever project. The duke project is apparently in jeopardy, according to the buzz, as several key developers have left the company for greener pastures. 3D Realms webmaster Joe Siegler has responded to these rumours, saying on the message boards "It's internal business - all employee departures and comings have always been that way. This is nothing new. People have left before, IT IS THE NATURE OF THIS BUSINESS. It's the way it goes ... There's honestly nothing to be concerned about. People leave. People come. There's staff on the project you don't know about."
[+]
Duke Nukem Forever 'Confirmed' For Late 2008
An anonymous reader writes "A Dallas newspaper is claiming that the long-in-development title Duke Nukem Forever is headed for retail release in late 2008. Unfortunately, game creator 3D Realms says that's not exactly what they meant. 'What the modest Texas newspaper actually seems to suggest is that 3D Realms is "on target" to release the mythical sequel sometime this year, though company president Scott Miller adds, "we may miss the mark by a month or two" (wink, wink). Miller also hinted that "hitting the big three" (in this case, PC, Xbox 360 and PS3) is the obvious development strategy, but he continued to stress that 3D Realms has not "formally announced any platforms for DNF."'"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
What??? (Score:5, Funny)
Rushing it could... (Score:5, Funny)
What would the kittens do?
Re:What??? (Score:5, Funny)
Misquoted (Score:5, Funny)
"I would never ship a game early (even a couple of months), for 500k.'"
What he really said was:
"I would never ship a game"
Re:What??? (Score:5, Funny)
They keep using that word. I do not think it means what they think it means.
Oh good! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Oh good! (Score:5, Funny)
I'm concerned that if it's released too soon, it might not be certified to work on Windows Vista.
Re:Oh good! (Score:4, Funny)
More like a fine wine that has to age for decades. :-D
Besides, they've already missed the end of one century. Why not go for two?
Re:Oh good! (Score:4, Funny)
Ha! (Score:5, Funny)
Don't wory George, I don't think anybody could accuse you of doing that!
DNF v. Vista (Score:5, Funny)
Re:DNF v. Vista (Score:5, Funny)
Weirder still is the fact that Duke Nukem Forever has taken more time to create than NASA took to design & build a pair of robots, fly them to Mars, and drive them around for a year.
Re:DNF v. Vista v. NASA (Score:5, Funny)
What DNF Can Teach NASA (Score:5, Funny)
Nice Try but... (Score:5, Interesting)
5 years != 10 years.
Thank God. (Score:5, Funny)
Good headline (Score:5, Funny)
Right up there with "A new study shows that Men like to have sex" and "The sun is expected to rise in the morning"
Wait. Im being handed a piece of paper. Holy Cow! Breaking news! "Companys like free publicity!"
baaad grammatical pun (Score:5, Funny)
Oh yeah, well how long will they be rushing it?
Bad-dum-dum
Get it? Forever? Like they'll be rushing it forever
Thank you!!! I'll be here all week!
Ha! (Score:5, Funny)
1998 called. They want their story back.
Early? (Score:5, Funny)
This must be some new usage of the word 'early' that until now I have been unaware of.
Something doesn't add up (Score:5, Interesting)
Use common sense for a moment.
It takes 3-4 years to write, cast, design, film, edit, and release a major Hollywood picture like a Star Wars or an X-Men, which can cost $100MM or more to develop.
It takes 3-4 years to concieve, design, manufacture, and ship a new console like a PS2 or Gamecube.
Rockstar developed and released three new hit games with a new engine and tremendous amounts of content since 2001.
But it takes nine years to program a knockoff Doom clone? Really? Are they coding it on a loom?
Things I would love to know:
1) Exactly how many programmers are working on DNF.
2) What percentage of their days are spent on DNF versus other tasks.
3) Why management keeps an obviously defunct product on the books when normal business practice would suggest writing it off at this point, having missed at least SEVEN release years in a row.
4) I am dying to see the balance sheets for this project.
There is no game, there never will be a game. But there may be an audit.
Re:Something doesn't add up (Score:5, Interesting)
The man has a point. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:WTF? Talk about uninformed (Score:5, Informative)
As they say on their website: In business since 1991. Never had a loan. Never had layoffs. Extremely stable and successful environment.
The problem is (Score:5, Insightful)
So when development starts to stretch in to the 5+ year bracket you are losing a lot of work. Unless they orignally planned to release it this far off and designed accordingly (which would be hard with the way technology changes) they've been doing a lot of development to no end.
A similar thing happened to Shadowbane. Though it had many other problems, one was just that it didn't look very good. It's graphics were fine for when they first started talking about it, but it took so long to release that by the time they came out they were rather dated. That could have worked perhaps had it been an awesome game, but it was so it flopped.
I think DNF faces a similar problem. Either they have been updating their engine and assets, in which case they've been wasting colossal amounts of time and money, even if it is their own, or they are talking about releasing a game with Quake 1 graphics to compete with things like FEAR.
They claim they are using the Unreal 2.5 engine (basically the post UT2004 development engine, UT 2004 was UE2) so that means that they have redone development. In fact, if you look at their timeline they went from Q1 to Q2 to UE1 to UE1.5 to UE2 to UE2.5. Well that means there's had to be some significant updating of grpahics assets to keep pace with that. It's also a lot of money sunk. iD and Epic do not give their engines away, they license them for 6 figures, regardless of if you get your game out the door.