Ars Technica Review Slams Duke Nukem Forever 462
Kethinov writes "Ars Technica writes one of their most negative reviews of a game in a long time, referring to Duke Nukem Forever as 'barely playable' and 'one of the worst games from a major studio in quite some time. The jokes border on hateful. The graphics are a blurry mess. The shooting is unsatisfying.' Their verdict? Skip this one."
duh? (Score:5, Insightful)
Really? Was there any doubt?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
It's reminding me of Daikatana. I guess George Broussard just made us his bitch.
Re: (Score:3)
...because it's actually impressive they got dumped a giant mess of software and were able to polish it up and sell it. Something Broussard wasn't able to do after 13 years.
Re: (Score:3)
http://www.gearboxsoftware.com/press/duke-nukem-franchise-transferred-to-gearbox-software/
Pitchford bought the giant mess in an attempt a cheap cash in on nostalgic fans. Gearbox deserves no pity in this case, they are the ones trying to sucker people into buying an apparently very poor product.
Re:duh? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:duh? (Score:5, Interesting)
It certainly does seem that what made Duke Nukem 3D Awesome is missing from DNF. They've taken Halo and added Tits and dick jokes.
While Duke is all for Tits and dick Jokes, it was also about fast-paced action, gratuitous violence and incredibly complicated maze-like levels. Which DNF lacks utterly. In other words, it has the facade of Duke but lacks the deeper gameplay that made DN3D fantastic.
Re: (Score:3)
It certainly does seem that what made Duke Nukem 3D Awesome is missing from DNF. They've taken Halo and added Tits and dick jokes.
Not even that. Halo is a good game, even a great one, arguably.
Re:duh? (Score:5, Interesting)
Really, I'd say those things you described are exactly what gave Duke3D at least some level of depth. Add to that the interactive environments (light switches, destroyable objects, being able to drink from fountains and use toilets to regain health, usable security cameras) as well as some pretty unique weapons and items (holoduke, jet pack), and plenty of unique one-liners, parodies and cultural references, and you will have more depth than any other contemporary FPS.
"I ain't afraid of no 'Quake.'"
Re:duh? (Score:5, Funny)
Actually, Tits should be capitalized. God should not, unless it's the first word in a sentence.
Breasts (Tits, Boobs, Boobies, Funbags, etc) are real. We've all seen them. Well, some of you have only seen pictures, and the shape in women's shirts. Some of you have touched them. We all know them, in their variety of shapes, sizes, and colors. They are categorized for their size and type. There are entire industries dedicated to supporting, decorating, and even marketing them. For those who can't see them normally, there is an abundance of establishments (Tittie Bars) where you can rent the privilege of seeing them.
We even apply the term to other objects. Man Boobs, back Boobs, and the largest of them all, the Grand Tetons.
This god myth is something else. You can't see it, touch it, hear it, or in any way recognize that it exists other than a few irrational assumptions. There may be one or more, depending on which piece of classical fiction people believe in. Some believe it looks like a man, a woman, or even a plate of spaghetti.
Capitalize your favorite term for Breasts with pride. We all love Boobs!
Re: (Score:3)
So, your comment isn't really about grammar or proper punctuation. Your comment is just you yelling "hey look at me, I'm an angry atheist!". To which I reply, "good for you, but who cares?"
It struck me as a very bad attempt at a joke -- the joke being boobs are like God to men, I guess, or maybe the joke was just saying "tit" over and over -- that got derailed due to the need to wedge in the atheist thing. Also due to being irrelevant. And not making sense. But "humor" nonetheless!
Re: (Score:3)
And it ran at 800x600 on my moderately powerful PC! Quake didn't achieve that resolution until I got a VooDoo2. We laughed at the 2D monsters and some of the 2D objects (like the satellite dish that always pointed up and left, irrespective of where you were looking at it from), but unless you got close to them this didn't matter. Duke3D actually looked better than Quake (which managed 320x200 on the same system) at the time of release. It didn't matter that the Quake monsters were rendered from textured
Re: (Score:3)
First, I am calling Descent fully 3D, because it was.
Second, allowing arbitrary geometry is not an arbitrary distinction. It's a fundamental difference in the technology of the game engine that it doesn't make simplifying assumptions about the geometry. It makes a huge difference in the kinds of levels, and the features within them, that can be designed.
The everything-is-a-deformed-cube thing worked for Descent's levels which took place entirely inside of mine shaft. And because it worked, it was a fine
Re:duh? (Score:5, Informative)
Well, I'm almost done with it.
For one, the console versions take an eternity to load by all accounts. The PC version loads each level in about 8-10 seconds (my pc is nothing special, it's been 3-4 years since I've changed any parts).
I'd give it a 6.5 or 7. The bit in the review about killing the rape victims was spot on. It wasn't funny at all. It went from crass to disgustingly callous.
But setting that aside, the ancient gameplay is strangely refreshing in comparison to the bevy of modern military shooters that have flooded the market. It's a game from a different era in gaming, for better or for worse. It takes you through a pretty entertaining variety of levels that military shooters will never attempt to do.
The combat feels good. The weapons feel good. The humor aside from the situation mentioned above, is the kind of low-brow humor you expect. The graphics are subpar as you might expect, but older gamers, particularly those who have played Duke3D, should have no problem with less-than-bleeding edge graphics. Haven't run into any bugs on the PC version.
I am definitely getting a strange sense of nostalgic value here, even though the Duke Nukem experience is fairly limited. It's really the old gameplay design that is driving the nostalgia. As I play, I think to myself, "Yeah, 13 years ago, this was what they thought would be awesome to have in a game." I particularly enjoy these throwback areas. There are some modern design conventions brought to the table, for better or for worse. 2-weapon limit, regenerating health, good checkpoint placement, player path indicators in level design (such as putting a bright lamppost next to the path out of the area).
Older players from the Duke3D era should get some enjoyment here. Newer players will probably just get tripped up on all the cludgy game design they haven't seen before, but older gamers still remember and have developed a thicker skin against. To be frank, the game is not good, but there is still fun to be had here.
Now that Gearbox has finally put this beast to rest, I wonder what they could do with the license starting from scratch?
Re: (Score:3)
Finished the game yesterday. Overall, I agree with you - the game wasn't at all terrible, and the arstechnica review is full of shit. That's not to say that it was worth waiting 14 years or anything, it's still not a good game and overall I'd rate it C-, ok but not good.
One thing I'm not sure about is "ancient gameplay" that you mention. To me, the actual gameplay is sadly as modern as gets - you've got regenerative health, 2 weapons, painfully linear levels, etc. It's really bizarre how some of the definin
Re: (Score:3)
Gearbox didn't run it into the ground. Broussard and the 3DRealms people took 14 years to squeeze out a turd log that Gearbox got tasked with polishing.
Re:duh? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, all of the stuff that made DN3D so great is missing here. They've taken the worst cliches of modern shooters and stuck them onto something that looks superficially like Duke Nukem, while leaving out all of the good stuff from modern or classic shooters.
I still can't believe they went for a 2 weapon limit, given the extent to which DN3D was about playing around with loads of cool and eccentric weapons. They even have the cheek to have a "joke" in there where Duke takes the mickey out of Halo power armour. Hate to break it to you, Duke, but you have only 2 weapons and a recharging shield bar. I'm no fan of the Master Chief, but the modern Duke looks like nothing more than a hanger on to his coat-tails.
Now if they'd wanted to do a decent Halo joke, they'd have confined the player to a pistol and shotgun up to that point, then put the third gun next to the Halo power armour. When Duke went to pick up the third gun, he could have got the "hold X to swap guns" message, but on pressing it, he'd just add a third gun and say something like "Two gun limits? Who the hell do you think I am?" That would have been a neat jab at Halo - and would have made for a better game to boot (especially when he later went on to pick up 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, etc weapons as well).
One problem (Score:4, Insightful)
There is ONE huge problem with Duke Nukem Forever and nobody seems to get it.
What is a PC game done being reviewed on a console?
Lots of weapons? Do you remember how you selected them? That is right with the row of number keys. Easy and fast to select a weapon. Can't do that on the console. THAT is why Halo has a two gun limit, because the x-box controller lacks a means to very quickly switch weapons.
Same with the inventory items, you can't use half a dozen inventory items on a console, so they limit it.
Duke Nukem Forever just shows just what consoles have removed from games. Checkpoints? For the Duke? That nobody evens cries out about this horrow shows how much we have lost.
Is it any wonder they added poop slinging? It is the level a console player would enjoy.
The Duke is dead, the consoles killed him.
Re: (Score:2)
No, not in the minds of most people. It was always going to be pants; neither the anticipation or the expectation could possibly be matched.
If anyone connected with the [projectile vomits into nearby bucket] franchise, has any sense they'll do something genuinely innovative and interesting with it after they've earned a few dollars from the dup... er ... people who bought this episode in the DN story.
Nobody hold their breath.
Re: (Score:2)
No, not in the minds of most people. It was always going to be pants; neither the anticipation or the expectation could possibly be matched.
If anyone connected with the [projectile vomits into nearby bucket] franchise, has any sense they'll do something genuinely innovative and interesting with it after they've earned a few dollars from the dup... er ... people who bought this episode in the DN story.
Nobody hold their breath.
Hype / expectations or not, a technically competent game would probably been received pretty well. It seems like it wasn't that either.
Re:duh? (Score:4, Funny)
even more recent titles such as Serious Sam
heh.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually the footage and screens I have seen (especially the old stuff), looks decent to quite good.
Re: (Score:3)
If you set the wayback machine to a time before political-correctness became the norm in comedy, you'll find that there was a time when humor could be both offensive AND funny at the same time. See Sam Kinison [wikipedia.org].
One of many (Score:3)
I read this one this morning, but there are a lot of equally bad reviews out there, and a pitiful few mediocre ones.
Software Release dates slip ... (Score:2)
People do not set out to write vaporware. Release dates slip when the software is not fit for release.
Sometimes, bad software design decisions cannot be fixed.
Re:One of many (Score:4, Interesting)
Yes, IGN with a 5.5 seems to be one of the more generous scores - and IGN tend to "mark high" anyway. That's not a criticism of IGN - their scale is internally consistent and I know that a 5.5 from them is actually really quite bad.
I've posted my own review of DNF in my journal and basically agree with the overall consensus - that this is a really bad game.
I see comments below a lot of the reviews on the major sites defending the game, claiming that the reviewers are holding it up to unfair standards due to its development time. This isn't true. It's just a bad game which is not fun. If you compare it to any current major fps, it is horribly lacking. If you compare it against the better fpses from 5 years ago, it is horribly lacking. In many ways, it is horribly lacking compared to its own predecessor; Duke Nukem 3d.
Interesting to note that the console versions are being slammed even more than the PC versions. The Eurogamer "face-off" comparison made it clear that there is a clear hierarchy to the versions. The PC version is the best, though still desperately ugly. The PS3 version lacks some of what passes for graphical polish in the PC version. The 360 version is horribly, horribly broken. That's extremely unusual for an Unreal engine game, where the 360 would normally be expected to outperform the PS3.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, note that it's Unreal Engine 2.5, and not 3 which has been out for something like 5 years now.
Re:One of many (Score:4, Insightful)
I see comments below a lot of the reviews on the major sites defending the game, claiming that the reviewers are holding it up to unfair standards due to its development time.
PCGAMER gave it an 80%, giving it leniency for the years of development. If a car was 14 years in a development and came out at full price and didnt have an engine then I cant give it leniency when it cant compete with anything else on the market.
Re:One of many (Score:5, Insightful)
I hadn't spotted the PCGAMER review. That was a good, decent thing they did there, giving DNF 80%. They've sent out a nice clear signal that I should absolutely never let any of their reviews factor into a purchasing decision. Good of them to give me a warning like that, wasn't it? Refreshingly honest, in a curious way.
This is not an 80% game. Five years ago, it might just about have been a 50% game. In fact, even that's generous. Resistance: Fall of Man is a vaguely similar fps which launched with the PS3 around 5 years ago and it is infinitely superior to DNF in every conceivable way.
Re: (Score:3)
I haven't yet finished the game, but 80% sounds about right if you ignore the years of development. And really the reviewers should be ignoring that. It's got some issues to it, but the ones I've seen are pretty insignificant and ought to be relatively easily fixed via patches.
I've noticed a lot of the reviews out there being approximately 1/10 rview by column and 9/10 editorial, which made me suspicious of the accuracy in general if the reviewer can't be arsed to separate opinion from fact and disclose bia
Re: (Score:3)
Re:One of many (Score:4, Insightful)
They were mainly bitching because the jokes weren't funny and it's true. Just because a joke is offensive does not automatically make it funny nor when someone finds that offensive joke to be unfunny it means they are hypersensitive. It can truly be possible for offensive jokes to just purely be unfunny and that's unfortunately how the jokes are in DNF.
hmmmm...... (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
AFAIK that map is a critique of the modern 'rails' shooter rather than DNF in particular.
Re: (Score:2)
That is correct. FTA: "The joke in the image below may have been about Doom and shooters in 2010, but it still fits when talking about Duke Nukem Forever."
Lost interest when I saw the feces trailer (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Lost interest when I saw the feces trailer (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually, stupid stuff like that is what you would want a Duke Nukem game to be. However most of the stuff is simply over the top while throughout the rest of the game it doesn't even involve any funniness nor keeping the old gameplay or even broad levels around. It has become a very linear, boring shooter.
TotalBiscuit said it best when he said: they kept all the bad stuff from old DOS games and all the bad stuff from new shooters and added it together. They made Duke an old man that can't jump, can't hold more than 2 guns and needs assistance in every fight.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, he certainly aged while waiting for the release. What did you expect? :-)
Re:Lost interest when I saw the feces trailer (Score:5, Interesting)
can't hold more than 2 guns and needs assistance in every fight
I'm starting to miss some of the old shooters due to this. Ammo hoarding and hidden super-weapon hunting were quite fun back in the day. Would be nice to see some games stop following the "realistic" formula and bring back the "arsenal on back" model. It's always satisfying to run into a new room, take a look over the enemies, and grin as you pull the perfect gun for the job out. To quote Unreal 2, "Show me the crowd pleaser."
Re: (Score:3)
If you don't like duke nukes games, then don't play duke nukes games.
And stop complaining about people not compromising their work for your pussy sensibilities. Its not cute.
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently nobody told the new IP owner... (Score:5, Funny)
...that the whole point was that it actually was planned to be a joke, hence, "Forever", and that they weren't supposed to be working on it for real. Their only task was to load the 3d rendering program and to build another fake "screenshot" with some new changes to the old "screenshot" so that it looked like they were doing something.
They could have milked this another 20 years if they'd been smart, but NO, they had to go and actually try to build the thing...
Re: (Score:3)
They should've waited another 40 years to release this, so we can have a time capsule in 2030 of popular culture in the late 80s to mid 90s.
Re: (Score:2)
Do we know their sales though? I last played Duke Nukem 3D probably in 1999 or so, and if my peer group was the target audience for the game, most of us are probably to the point of not really caring like they should have wanted us to.
If they'd have hyped it and released a crappy game around 5 years after DN3D (so '01 or so) then they probably could have gotten a lot more sales than this version did.
Re:Apparently nobody told the new IP owner... (Score:4, Funny)
There's a movie in there somewhere. I know, we'll call it The Game Producers.
So, it's "done". (Score:3)
This is how the Duke ends,
this is how the Duke ends,
not with a bang, but with a whimper.
RIP!
Re: (Score:2)
this is how the Duke ends,
not with a bang, but with a whimper.
Can I get a courtesy flush over here?
What did you eat?
Re: (Score:2)
And all I have to say is:
This is how the Duke ends,
this is how the Duke ends,
not with a bang, but with a whimper.
RIP!
If T.S. Eliot was actually reviewing this game, I think he'd be more concise and simply end it with:
"Shitty shitty shitty"
So... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
> ...we should wait for the sequel then ?
Actually until it's really good and all you wanted it to be you just need to wait until Service Pack (203)1!
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Divorce?
the WTF videos (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6MjzgTZriw [youtube.com]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5Yngipvz6M [youtube.com]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q86vWgaLuwE [youtube.com]
watch in that order, and you will see about a first couple of hours of gameplay along with the reviewer's impressions. Saved me some time otherwise possibly spent downloading and trying the game myself (let alone buying it).
Ouch... (Score:2)
With licensable engines from people who know what they are doing(the Unreal engine, whatever ID is calling theirs these days, maybe lithtech, if they are still around), I could understand if they just
Agreed (Score:2)
And yet it has been topping a few of the charts (Score:3)
What's wrong with calling it Faggs? (Score:5, Funny)
Duke Nukem Forever is the kind of game where you find a pack of cigarettes whose cover shows a mustached man wearing leather—and they're called "Faggs."
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly.
I'm not defending the game, but the reviewer is a prima-dona.
"Faggs" are an "officially protected victim class" (Score:3, Funny)
One is only allowed to insult white males of Western European heritage - because they are an evil blight upon Gaia.
And if they're Christians, you're even allowed to burn them alive.
As long as you pay for your carbon credits.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:What's wrong with calling it Faggs? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
No, that's why it's a pun, because it's playing off two similar words. The British slang for cigarettes, and the offensive derogatory slang for homosexual.
If it wasn't for the British slang, it would just be homophobia. Instead of a stupid homophobic pun.
Here's the good news... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Here's the good news... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
It had no chance to meet expectations (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
According to this review, it's not just that it doesn't compete with Call of Duty -- it doesn't even compete favorably with Duke Nukem 3D.
Re: (Score:3)
You can make excuses all you like - the game is sub-par compared to even budget titles released YEARS (and in some cases even a decade) ago. You don't need to have the latest-and-greatest graphics - and I play more indie games with 2D graphics than I play anything else any more - but if you expect someone to lay out full-price, you need to have something to sell.
You can't sell nostalgia, only ruin it. Selling humour is subjective and requires a humour professional (i.e. comedian), especially if that humou
Re: (Score:3)
No, if the game had actually not sucked it would have gotten positive reviews. The reason it is getting slammed is purely because the game sucked.
Death of a meme... (Score:2)
A few moment's silence, pray, for the demise of an Internet meme?
How do we now describe the expected delivery date of vaporware without resorting to mundane terms like "hell freezing over" or "Real Soon Now..."?
This is nearly as bad as finding out what step 3 is in the underpant gnomes' business plan.
Re: (Score:2)
A few moment's silence, pray, for the demise of an Internet meme?
Alas, no. Regardless of what it's called, this is not the Duke Nukem Forever the prophecies spoke of. It's not the vaporware Messiah; it's just very naughty crap.
The meme is safe. This is not the DNF we're looking for.
Spoiler alert! (Score:2)
Step 3 is Profit!.
Skip this one (Score:2)
Their verdict? Skip this one.
Yeah, just wait for the next.
-- if you dare.
Re: (Score:2)
Their verdict? Skip this one.
Yeah, just wait for the next.
-- if you dare.
Given how long it took to come out with this one I'll be 70 by the time the next one comes out. I'll play Gears of War 3 instead.
They're right (Score:2)
Skip? (Score:2)
If we skip this one, how long do we have to wait before the next in the franchise?
This is actually the state of most modern games (Score:5, Interesting)
This is state of most modern games.
Overglossy graphics, crappy game play, rollercoaster ride.
Look at the map comparison between Duke 3D and Forever. The sad part? It's like that between all games from the 90's compared to now.
Games that you used to have an openish enviroment, are all now rollercoastered.
Games you used to play for 20+ hours, are all 4-6 hours now.
This is what happens when you get big corporations running the show. and of course, Hollywoodizing crap. Let's make it shiny and expensive, but not give any value. (it's like going from the great black & white movies, to the trashy color movies that came out).
ya, Duke Nukem Forever is a crappy game, should of never been made. But it's actually a shining example of the current gaming industry and what they think about their customers.
Re: (Score:2)
it's like going from the great black & white movies, to the trashy color movies that came out
There were crappy black and white movies. Lots of them. Just as there were crappy games on Nintendo or Atari. Sure if a game is all style it won't be any good, but it doesn't necessarily make it awful.
Re: (Score:3)
The map on the left is actually a Doom level, from the shareware episode.
Re:This is actually the state of most modern games (Score:4, Insightful)
This is what happens when you get big corporations running the show. and of course, Hollywoodizing crap. Let's make it shiny and expensive, but not give any value. (it's like going from the great black & white movies, to the trashy color movies that came out).
You do realize that those "great" black & white movies were made by Hollywood, right? And there were many terrible black and white films. This sounds like the same nonsense when people were whining about how "talkies" were ruining the film industry.
No surprise... (Score:3)
Most reviews I've seen are generally bad. Given how hard the publisher was pushing the lewd aspect of the game is it really any surprise it turned out to be crap. They were hoping to lure in a few suckers with the "mature" content before they figured out how bad the game actually was.
I also tend to think the intervening years colored memories of Duke Nukem 3D. I personally don't think it was nearly as good as some people remember. I recall it being entertaining, finding some of the subject matter amusing, but generally as an FPS it didn't stand out. For the time it was fine, but then the bar was a lot lower then. It's no wonder DNF would disappoint even if the level of quality is comparable to the original. Of course the mess that was it's development certainly didn't help matters.
This is a good object lesson. When a company plays a sleight of hand trick, trying to sell you on some aspect other than gameplay, it's a near certainty the game won't be any good. And they sure played that angle pretty hard with Duke Nukem Forever.
Well... (Score:3)
I don't think the graphics are that bad...but this looks more like a Halo mod with Duke characters than a Duke game proper...
This is getting fucking ridiculous (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm the last person who should be defending this game as I've been taking the piss out of it for 5 years. I've never been a fanboy of the sequel, never did I have confidence it would ever deliver anything at all. I liked the original as a teenager but that's about it.
Regardless though, I've nearly finished the game (Australia, we got it 4 days early) and I can say if you liked the original game, this is a fantastic melding of the original and modern day gameplay. This game is getting slammed far far too excessively.
I guess it was to be expected - but I personally went in expecting garbage and got a half decent game. It's certainly better than diluted trash like Crysis 2.
The game is a little obnoxious for the PC types but you know that going in to it, you wouldn't go to see Fast and the Furious 5 to expect high quality cinema. This game is trashy, dumb - yet quite fun, it's a guilty pleasure for my childish side and honestly the core gameplay itself? It's really fairly decent.
The graphics while not top of the line (quite bad in spots) are also quite GOOD in other places, several scenes I've been outright surprised at how good they are.
If you played the original game and you're in the 27 -> 45 age group with any sense of nostalgia, try it out with an open mind. Don't expect some thick storyline, I think you'll be pleasantly surprised. I know I was.
P.S no it's not perfect, some scenes are frustrating in difficulty or not funny - but all games have low spots, overall, it's not even 1/3 as bad as some of these people are saying.
Ctrl-Alt-Del's review (Score:3)
Ctrl-Alt-Del's review [cad-comic.com] is a graphical representation of Ars Technica's review.
Released too soon! (Score:5, Funny)
Public Statement (Score:3)
Dear Ars Reviewer, Dear Slashdot'ers,
we are greatly honored and moved by the reactions, the release of our fully playable "Duke Nukem Forever" demo has received. While we are working diligently on the final version (to be out real soon now, wink wink), we will take your numerous suggestions into account, perhaps even into Duke's dialogs, to make DNF the greatest game ever released.
Things are looking good despite being very busy and without promising too much, we are on track for the final release target date, which, according to our lawyer, may or may not be within this awesome decade. But the code is mostly in place and once the technical issues like a lack of holographic displays, quantum consoles and their telepathic controllers are resolved, we'll be gold(en). Looking forward to Forever....ain't 'ya excited? ^__^
Am I getting old? (Score:3)
Is it just me, or were crazy comedies in the 70s, 80s and early 90s on average a little less abysmal? If I, for example, compare the works of Mel Brooks to movies like Scary Movie X or American Pie Y I can't help think that somewhere along the line we lost the intelligent humor and settled for what is truly the lowest common denominator?
I can't help feel a certain pattern emerging here...
Am I just getting old?
Letter to Gearbox... (Score:3)
Stay the FUCK Away from Shadow Warrior.
You get anywhere CLOSE to it and I'll personally firebomb your offices.
Coulda just use UT3 as a starting point but no... (Score:3)
I played the demo. The instant I had to juggle weapons I gave up on it. Duke deserves better. Try again Gearbox.
Re:14 years of hype (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
It sounds like an excellent game.
If it had been released in 1999.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
> humor being offensive is something personal. i don't think they will
> be able to include much humor that i would find offensive.
> on the other hand, my grand mother might get a heart attack due to
> it.
Mine already did. Damn you, Duke! :-/
Re:14 years of hype (Score:5, Insightful)
Hype? More like "running joke". DNF wasn't hyped so much as it was ridiculed and made the butt of jokes.
And not in a good way, either.
Re: (Score:2)
Sometimes something is just a bad game, and you shouldn't reward companies for putting out bad games by spending money on them.
This is one of those times.
Forget about Duke Nukem entirely. This fails as any kind of shooter.
Re: (Score:2)
So, basically, the hype is the age group this game is designed for? Maybe the game could play with itself. Oh, it is...
Re: (Score:2)
"an fps is not a cultural work like Meet the Spartans."
Fixed that for you.
Re: (Score:3)
1) Climb off high horse
2) Read review
Re:Offensive? (Score:4, Interesting)
You know what? Under other circumstances I'd agree with you.
However, having actually played through the "alien hive" level mentioned in the review, I can't actually think of a better description of it. As the Ars Technica review states, that level made me feel almost physically dirty. Not in a good way, like after making an uncomfortable neutral or "dark side" choice in one of the better RPGs, but rather in a "I really wish I had never had to play that and never want to play it again" way.
Re:Offensive? (Score:4, Insightful)
Obviously, what different people take offense at varies; but, at a population level, you can categorize and quantify to a reasonably useful extent. At that point, you can, in fact, come up with an "offensiveness" metric relative to a given assumed audience for something. If your assumed audience is sufficiently broad, you can omit specific mention of the assumed audience and let context carry the load for you. There is certainly room for rhetorical chicanery, as with many ambiguous areas of natural language; but that doesn't equate to meaninglessness.
Saying "thing X is offensive" is somewhat analogous to saying "humans are bipedal". In strict point of fact, there are counterexamples. People exist with zero, one, very occasionally more than two, legs and there are a few specimens who walk on all fours. Implicitly, we are treating those as anomalies outside the universe of discourse when we say that. Similarly, there are almost certainly who find gunning down alien-rape victims as they plead inoffensive. However, the reviewer(correctly or not) is implicitly arguing that they are an anomaly among the audience of the review. Now, as noted, "offensiveness" leaves room for chicanery, and you can also make "thing X is offensive" statements that implicitly argue for a highly unrealistic audience sample; but that just makes you wrong or dishonest, rather than "offensiveness" as a metric meaningless.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)