• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

Duke Nukem Forever - OMGWTF, IT'S ACTUALLY RELEASED!?!

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
#161
Gears of War isn't even that brown. It's mostly gray except when the yellow-green "immulsion" provides some highlights and in some levels it has a pink/purple tint.
Gears of War 2 is a lot browner in certain levels, but it's also a lot more colorful overall. And it's from after the trend had already died again. The so-called "trend" wasn't really much of a trend anyway. It was mostly a phase when web comics and people made fun of certain brown games and even then it was probably more because of the heavy use of bloom (which looked brownish at the time) than the actual color scheme of the games.
The big brown game that people made fun of was first and foremost Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter. Also a game that had crazy bloom syndrome.

Drab looking, colorless games/shooters definitely go back much farther. Ghost Recon 1 is another great example of a deliberately colorless game.
 
Upvote 0
#162
completed this. Absolutely crap,boring game. There are all E3 trailers of this game in Movies folder. If you look at them all you will find out that the only time this game could be worth of something is 2000.

PS I've seen a lot of guys experiencing problemsms with corrupted savegames. If you are one of them just go to the levels folder in game directory and select the file of the level you stopped at. Just open it with game exe and enjoy :)
 
Upvote 0
#165
Allright, I played it through. In short: fun, but not outstanding. And quite flawed.

Some things that irk me the most:

Grind sequences: Alien ship flies in, 2-4 aliens drop out. After you killed them, the next ship arrives. Repeated until the game decides at some arbitrary point to let you go on. That's not fun by modern standards, and that wasn't fun in the mid-nineties.

"Realism": Duke3d was unique because it was one of the first games that took the action to places that felt "realistic" and had lot's of interactivity, even by today's standards. Having shootouts in a strip club while the dancers danced for your money WAS the fun of D3D.
D4E retains both the elements of action and "real" feeling, interactive locations, but it seperates them. You have levels with high interactivity like pinpall machines, pool, babes, etc, and then you have boring grey and brown tube levels where the action happens... which kind of defeats the whole point of it. Also, there's no "wanna dance?" in game, all the girls are surprisingly non-interactive. Not even innuendo laden oneliners...

The Mighty Boot: I usually don't heed melee combat in FPS games too much, and I could've overlooked the mere absence of the mighty foot, if Gearbox simply wouldn't have deemed it important to the Dukes identity. BUT it is referenced in the whole game. If you always tease me with the mighty foot, then let me use it outside of automatically stomping shrunken enemies or executing them.

Reference Overkill: the whole game, especially after watching all the trailers that are unlocked after you beat it, feels like an hommage to the best scenes in the trailers. If it isn't referencing itself, it's ironically joking about other games and genres (fetch quests in RPGs, Power Armor, Dead Space, Half Life, even it's own past with "I don't need a red keycard!"). But the greatest irony of all is, that despite it's mocking, it's mimiking those games, and it's not very good at that. At times, it feels like Postal 2 (even graphically) without the underlying social commentary.

Multiplayer looks and feels like a nineties game. And not in a good way.

So all in all, a fun, yet forgettable experience, were it not for the nostalgia value. I can say that the biggest impact it had on me was making me want to play D3D again.
So if you haven't bough it already, I advise to wait till it's on a sale of at least 50%.

6/10
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Dcode and =GG= Mr Moe
Upvote 0
#167
Fedorov said:
[url]http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/06/13/wot-i-think-duke-nukem-forever[/URL]
Click to expand...

Not exactly high praise there huh..


You know, what made the early 90's shooters so good, be it Doom, Duke3D, Blood, Shadow Warrior, Quake and so forth, was that they where a simple concept, you are the hero, everyone else is the bad mans, you point gun at bad mans and shoot them, simple!
And in case of the Build engine titles, like Duke, Blood, Redneck Rampage and Shadow Warrior, they also managed to bring some humour to the table.

Now i'm glad the shooter genre also matured from this point, and managed to weave stories into their gameplay, and branch off into subgeneres and extended genres like the FPSRPG's, but the early 90's shooters stood as a genre of their own, they where what you went back to when you didn't feel like caring about any story, but just wanted the cathartic experiance of shooting demons, aliens and pig-coppers in the face!


That really is all i wanted DNF to be, a throwback to shooting pig-coppers and aliens in the face, nice and simple, just like the Duke himself.

Why coulden't it just have been that? Why on earth would they throw in forced vehical and turret sections? Limited guns? I just wanted to shoot the bad mans :(
 
  • Like
Reactions: Makino
Upvote 0
#169
Grobut said:
Now i'm glad the shooter genre also matured from this point, and managed to weave stories into their gameplay, and branch off into subgeneres and extended genres like the FPSRPG's, but the early 90's shooters stood as a genre of their own, they where what you went back to when you didn't feel like caring about any story, but just wanted the cathartic experiance of shooting demons, aliens and pig-coppers in the face!
Click to expand...

I think Painkiller did a pretty good job bringing back the simplicity yet fun in killing hordes of hordes of demons. I'm surprised it wasn't more popular but I suppose it's because of the shooters that were causing a stir in the genre at the time (Call of Duty was released the year before, Half-Life 2 and Doom 3 the same year). Gearbox should have taken some cues.
 
Upvote 0
#170
PNV said:
I think Painkiller did a pretty good job bringing back the simplicity yet fun in killing hordes of hordes of demons. I'm surprised it wasn't more popular but I suppose it's because of the shooters that were causing a stir in the genre at the time (Call of Duty was released the year before, Half-Life 2 and Doom 3 the same year). Gearbox should have taken some cues.
Click to expand...

Painkiller was definately a nice throwback to the classic shooters, i tried the demo, and the shooting, wacky guns, interesting enemy designs and the fact that it never did take itself to seriously, it all felt like a good mid 90's shooter, it was a throwback done right for sure.

But it was a horde shooter, not a traditional SP game, and i'm just not that into horde shooters, so it wasen't really the game i was looking for.
 
Upvote 0
#171
Three hours in, on "The Hive: Part 2" and taking my time with it.

I'm still on the fence about it overall...

Multiplayer I attempted to play, but the server browser was slow loading of servers. I try quick match, get in relatively quickly and then disconnected 15 seconds later as my "network connection is too poor" or somesuch. So I gave up on that for the night. I'm assuming it's launch day issues for the MP.
 
Upvote 0
#172
Grobut said:
Painkiller was definately a nice throwback to the classic shooters, i tried the demo, and the shooting, wacky guns, interesting enemy designs and the fact that it never did take itself to seriously, it all felt like a good mid 90's shooter, it was a throwback done right for sure.

But it was a horde shooter, not a traditional SP game, and i'm just not that into horde shooters, so it wasen't really the game i was looking for.
Click to expand...
Painkiller was an amazing game, especially with all the expansions. It was also very very difficult at times.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Apos
Upvote 0
#175
hockeywarrior said:
Painkiller was an amazing game, especially with all the expansions. It was also very very difficult at times.
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong, i have a lot of respect for Painkiller, it's blatantly obvious that a lot of talent, creativity and hard work went into that game, and it's probably one of the best games of it's genre, it's a really well made game, no question about it.

Not liking a game, and feeling that it is a bad game, are not allways the same thing. Painkiller is a really good game, and as such i can respect it, i'm just not it's target audience as i'm not fond of the genre.

Fedorov said:
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/...to-punish-sites-that-run-negative-reviews.ars[url]http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2011/06/duke-nukems-pr-threatens-to-punish-sites-that-run-negative-reviews.ars[/URL]
Click to expand...

As unprofessional it was of TRG to post such a thing publicly, the only thing that's differen't here is that TRG was dumb enough to make it publicly known.

This sort of thing happens all the bloody time, just behind cloused doors (as the article also made very clear), so this news really can't shock me.
 
Upvote 0
#176
I love articles like that. People should feel justified when they dont trust review sites; especially those that accept free games and other shlock from publishers. Those type of reviewers will never really be critical with a game and will always wear kid gloves. Their existence as a reviewing site depends on their cozy relationship with the game companies.

Always go with what other gamers are saying (especially those with tastes similar to yours, then collate), never rely on review sites.. this article highlights exactly why.
 
Upvote 0
#180
Gamers give it an even lower score so they shouldn't be complaining about the press score.

Those sites are going to review their future games anyway regardless if they receive the games first or not, and they need them to promote their games, it would be completely retarded to make an enemy out of one your primary sources of advertisement.

Anyway, I guess those guys understand the business and are probably angry that terrible EA games that should have had that same score or worse, are getting hyped by the press.

So I guess that the reviewing accuracy depends on their relationship with a company... that, or (the very unlikely and optimistic option) the press reviewers are waking up now.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Community News
Forums
Merch
Menu