Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Of the Tabletop, and other, lesser varieties.

Moderators: SecondTalon, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
Box Boy
WINNING
Posts: 1356
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 9:33 pm UTC

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby Box Boy » Sat Sep 04, 2010 9:53 pm UTC

SoapyHobo wrote:Dude, he's Duke Nukem, he's not gonna be dying every five minutes. Crouch behind a table whilst being shot at by pig-cops and aliens, down a beer and be back in the fight before you can say 'Balls of Steel'.
There is a button dedicated to beer.
That is a real thing, and I would be willing to pay for it as standalone DLC just to be able to mock the corpses of my foes.

It irks me they're trying to cash in on the game by copying elements of other modern FPS games like CoD and Halo, something which I think is damn stupid all things considered. I hate the idea of only two weapons at a time in any game, and it's especially aggravating now because it wasn't present in older titles, is usually there to add "fake difficulty" and is going to be put in a game that normally ignores attempts at realism. Then they're also going to have the "Wipe the jam off your face to get better" thing now, which is is just annoying as it only obscures your vision when a health bar would suffice, and Duke shouldn't have that. He should get better by blowing shit up, pissing, drinking, gambling and doing other manly activities, I mean, would it really be so hard to have a few beer crates lying around in levels along with the occasional urinal/burger/cigarette to act as health packs/healing stations to use with the aforementioned beer button?
They won't bring in any remarkable surge of new players to the game, because anyone who is going to get it based on those two features is most likely going to pirate it first before deciding to pay and everyone else will be apathetic/annoyed by it at best, and it's just annoying to the old fans of the older Duke games.

(Then again, he seems to have an ego bar, so the health regen mightn't have the "Jam on screen" effect I loathe so much. Still though, only two weapons, grah!)
Signatures are for chumps.

EmptySet
Posts: 1196
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:33 am UTC

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby EmptySet » Sun Sep 05, 2010 1:29 am UTC

Box Boy wrote:It irks me they're trying to cash in on the game by copying elements of other modern FPS games like CoD and Halo, something which I think is damn stupid all things considered.


I agree. It should only run in 640x480 resolution, have two-and-a-half D sprite graphics, and no mouselook. And it should come on a series of floppy disks. Because, clearly, all mechanics which were introduced in the last fifteen years are just attempts to make everything like Halo and none of them could possibly be used for legitimate gameplay or design reasons.

Mind you, Halo doesn't have the burred vision which seems to irk you so much. It has a shield bar. So does 2K's previous FPS with regenerating shields, Borderlands. Which starts off with a two-weapon limit which is eventually expanded to four. Of course, that was obviously only because Borderlands was trying so desperately to be exactly like Halo, and I think we all know the only reason anyone bought it was because there was a weapon limit and regenerating shields.
Last edited by EmptySet on Sun Sep 05, 2010 10:39 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Woopate
Scrapple
Posts: 503
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 10:34 am UTC

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby Woopate » Sun Sep 05, 2010 8:21 am UTC

I'll buy it simply to have it's box on my shelf. Regardless of quality.

User avatar
psion
Posts: 1089
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2009 5:33 am UTC

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby psion » Mon Sep 06, 2010 8:34 pm UTC

EmptySet wrote:And it should come on a series of floppy disks. Because, clearly, all mechanics which were introduced in the last fifteen years are just attempts to make everything like Halo and none of them could possibly be used for legitimate gameplay or design reasons.

I hate circles! I demand squares!
I can't believe you're arguing design decisions to vast technological improvements, but I'd guess that the main reason it's going to have the two gun limit is because it's going to be a console port, and like everything else it's going to suffer because of it. I can't really blame them though.

EmptySet
Posts: 1196
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:33 am UTC

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby EmptySet » Tue Sep 07, 2010 2:56 am UTC

psion wrote:
EmptySet wrote:And it should come on a series of floppy disks. Because, clearly, all mechanics which were introduced in the last fifteen years are just attempts to make everything like Halo and none of them could possibly be used for legitimate gameplay or design reasons.

I hate circles! I demand squares!
I can't believe you're arguing design decisions to vast technological improvements, but I'd guess that the main reason it's going to have the two gun limit is because it's going to be a console port, and like everything else it's going to suffer because of it. I can't really blame them though.


My point is that it's a modern FPS, and the design decisions made are going be based around the genre as it is now. In other words, I'm arguing against the knee-jerk "Oh me yarm, it's not exactly the same as it was two decades ago! RUINED FOREVER!!!" mentality. Hell, back in the day people would probably denigrate an FPS which let you carry all the weapons you wanted and had non-regenerating health as an "utterly generic" Doom clone. There's nothing about switching between two weapons or having regenerating health which automatically makes the game a bland Halo wannabe, any more than having experience points and turn-based combat makes the Final Fantasy series an utterly generic D&D clone. One mechanic does not sum up the entire flavour and feel of the game.

If you don't like those mechanics, that's fine, nobody says you have to. I just think it's a bit over the top to claim that every game with a given mechanic is exactly the same (Borderlands and Rainbow Six: Vegas both have regenerating health and a weapon limit, so clearly they are both identical to Halo, right?), or that anything other that preserving the franchise in exactly the same state as it was fifteen years ago is some kind of sinister treachery.

User avatar
SecondTalon
SexyTalon
Posts: 26528
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:10 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Mars. HA!
Contact:

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby SecondTalon » Tue Sep 07, 2010 3:21 am UTC

Eh, how well did Serious Sam do? Painkiller? I'd mention Will Rock, but I'm probably the only person that remembers or bought that game.

The only real thing this has going for it is the name, and the only gamers who care or.. played Duke Nukem 3D when it was modern and relevant.. are at least 25+, and probably closer to 40.

Not sure how many of them still care.
heuristically_alone wrote:I want to write a DnD campaign and play it by myself and DM it myself.
heuristically_alone wrote:I have been informed that this is called writing a book.

User avatar
psion
Posts: 1089
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2009 5:33 am UTC

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby psion » Tue Sep 07, 2010 4:07 am UTC

EmptySet wrote:My point is that it's a modern FPS, and the design decisions made are going be based around the genre as it is now. In other words, I'm arguing against the knee-jerk "Gee Willikers, it's not exactly the same as it was two decades ago! RUINED FOREVER!!!" mentality. Hell, back in the day people would probably denigrate an FPS which let you carry all the weapons you wanted and had non-regenerating health as an "utterly generic" Doom clone. There's nothing about switching between two weapons or having regenerating health which automatically makes the game a bland Halo wannabe, any more than having experience points and turn-based combat makes the Final Fantasy series an utterly generic D&D clone. One mechanic does not sum up the entire flavour and feel of the game.

If you don't like those mechanics, that's fine, nobody says you have to. I just think it's a bit over the top to claim that every game with a given mechanic is exactly the same (Borderlands and Rainbow Six: Vegas both have regenerating health and a weapon limit, so clearly they are both identical to Halo, right?), or that anything other that preserving the franchise in exactly the same state as it was fifteen years ago is some kind of sinister treachery.

The two-gun mechanic was created for realism, which was never something Duke would pay heed to. It's a needless and jarring constriction to a series that has been more about freedom and badassery than anything. Being restricted to two guns is neither free nor badass. The concept that Triptych is blindly choosing to dumb Duke down to the current tried-and-proven formula of the genre is disappointing to say the least. I think that's what Box Boy meant had he not pressed his beer button a few too many times.
But yeah, who cares at this point? Long live the king.

User avatar
Sarr
Posts: 891
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2007 9:34 pm UTC

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby Sarr » Tue Sep 07, 2010 4:53 am UTC

SecondTalon wrote:I'd mention Will Rock, but I'm probably the only person that remembers or bought that game.

Probably, but after a bit of googling I want to try it. And I second the idea of buying it just to have the damn thing. I think I should, just because of all the jokes I've made.
Rakysh wrote:Basically, xkcd is basically for punching into submission the dumb frat guy in your brain.

EmptySet
Posts: 1196
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:33 am UTC

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby EmptySet » Tue Sep 07, 2010 2:11 pm UTC

psion wrote:The two-gun mechanic was created for realism, which was never something Duke would pay heed to.


On the bright side, magically recovering from being shot so you can kill more dudes is totally unrealistic and therefore a staple of action films everywhere.

Minchandre
Posts: 524
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 3:36 am UTC

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby Minchandre » Tue Sep 07, 2010 9:18 pm UTC

Woopate wrote:I'll buy it simply to have it's box on my shelf. Regardless of quality.


Sadly, this is me, too.

Technical Ben
Posts: 2986
Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 10:42 pm UTC

Re: DUKE NUKEM FOREVER

Postby Technical Ben » Tue Sep 07, 2010 9:26 pm UTC

Felstaff wrote:Three days ago, I had a bit of a vapourware binge and looked through all the old titles that would never see the light of day; Black Mesa Source, Duke Nukem Forever, FFVII PS3, and a couple others. I read the entire DNF Wiki page and thought, very nearly out loud, oh well, they've finally put this one to bed, and it'll never see the light of day. And now it's being resurrected?

I better go and nearly-verbally lament on all the others, now! First stop, infinium labs. LOOKS LIKE YOUR SHITTY COMPANY WILL NEVER MAKE ANYTHING BETTER THAN A LAPBOARD, HUH.



Hmmm. Black Mesa Source is "finished" as far as the last updates were. It's just bug fixing and cleaning up. The team have gone completely "off the radar" silent. Which I hope means they have had Valves input in a good way. As it only seems to be Valve that keep absolutely silent about these things (don't make promises you can't keep and all that melarkey).
It's all physics and stamp collecting.
It's not a particle or a wave. It's just an exchange.

User avatar
Box Boy
WINNING
Posts: 1356
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 9:33 pm UTC

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby Box Boy » Tue Sep 07, 2010 9:38 pm UTC

Spoiler:
EmptySet wrote:I agree. It should only run in 640x480 resolution, have two-and-a-half D sprite graphics, and no mouselook. And it should come on a series of floppy disks. Because, clearly, all mechanics which were introduced in the last fifteen years are just attempts to make everything like Halo and none of them could possibly be used for legitimate gameplay or design reasons.
No, don't put words in my post that weren't there. I do not hate innovation, far from it, I usually hate a game unless it either brings something new to the table or does the old things in a very good way.
Two guns at a time and "jam on the screen" do not do this for DNF, they make the games more "realistic" and similar to other games with the same effects for the legions of gamers out there who claim that CoD or Halo are the single best thing to happen to gaming ever. Neither look like they are necessary, helpful or somehow make DNF better from what I've seen, and in a few videos you can clearly hear the "announcer" (from what I can tell she was an official) compare the mechanics to those of CoD/Halo/Modern FPS games while saying that the games "Has not been left behind". So yeah, while not every game may use these to be similar to the other two series I've mentioned and could have valid design/story reasons for them, they are solely there in this case to make DNF more uniform in an attempt to boost it's popularity with the fans of those two game series from what I can see (and various others like them,).
So as a result, I hate these two things. I hate the idea that after thirteen years of waiting (three and a half for me since that's when I played 3D!) DNF is already looking like it is being limited by designers for the sake of sales very early in development, which is a Very Bad ThingTM, as it only fills me with apprehension with how the rest of the games is going to pan out. True, the dedicated beer button is unique, zany and more than a little awesome, but I digress. One right does not cancel out two things I see as wrongs, and does nothing to assuage my fears in the slightest.
EmptySet wrote:Mind you, Halo doesn't have the burred vision which seems to irk you so much.

I never said it did, I may have listed it as an example of modern FPS's with which two weapons at a time and "jam on the screen" are known for featuring in, but I never said it had both. Please, at least give me the credit of knowing something about the games and mechanics I'm ranting about. (Although, I will admit that was a bit unclear in my original post)
EmptySet wrote:So does 2K's previous FPS with regenerating shields, Borderlands. Which starts off with a two-weapon limit which is eventually expanded to four. Of course, that was obviously only because Borderlands was trying so desperately to be exactly like Halo,
Where do you see ANY indication that DNF will take the Borderlands route and increase your carrying capacity? So far, its looking like a two guns at a time FPS, permanently.
Also, I did not say all games that have features shared with others are trying to emulate the ones they originated in/are most famously in, just that this one is from what I can see.
EmptySet wrote:and I think we all know the only reason anyone bought it was because there was a weapon limit and regenerating shields.
D-d-did you, did you just sarcastically imply that I believe that people actually buy these games for the features?
Really?
Dear God, the following;
Box Boy wrote:They won't bring in any remarkable surge of new players to the game, because anyone who is going to get it based on those two features is most likely going to pirate it first before deciding to pay and everyone else will be apathetic/annoyed by it at best, and it's just annoying to the old fans of the older Duke games.
Didn't clue you in on the fact that I believe this is a stupid idea that no-one will follow, and that only exec's seem to think it makes and breaks the game for people enough to justify the purchase of one that includes them?
I mean, I know my post was ranty and angry but, but, DAMN, it's not that hard to figure out I think this is a stupid notion to believe in.
EmptySet wrote:My point is that it's a modern FPS, and the design decisions made are going be based around the genre as it is now.

You see? Thinking like that is why the industry regularly goes through periods of stagnation where certain genres barely progress at all. People don't expect new, exciting spins on old concepts and original ideas, because Gaming companies repeatedly take features from one game to out them in another. They expect Ctrl + c and then Ctrl + v.
EmptySet wrote:In other words, I'm arguing against the knee-jerk "Gee Willikers, it's not exactly the same as it was two decades ago! RUINED FOREVER!!!" mentality. Hell, back in the day people would probably denigrate an FPS which let you carry all the weapons you wanted and had non-regenerating health as an "utterly generic" Doom clone.
I did not say ruined forever, I said it was worse off for using those two particular effects in my opinion because it was doing so for the wrong reasons and wasn't even trying to make them fresh, original or "Dukey" in any way.
EmptySet wrote:There's nothing about switching between two weapons or having regenerating health which automatically makes the game a bland Halo wannabe,
There is when you don't even try to justify there inclusion beyond making it more similar to Halo or other FPS games.
EmptySet wrote:any more than having experience points and turn-based combat makes the Final Fantasy series an utterly generic D&D clone.
Except Square use it as a good game mechanic, and not to try and be like D&D, that's why it doesn't bother me.
EmptySet wrote:One mechanic does not sum up the entire flavour and feel of the game.
But it sure can make me like it less, especially when it may be a sign of things to come later on in it's development.
EmptySet wrote:I just think it's a bit over the top to claim that every game with a given mechanic is exactly the same (Borderlands and Rainbow Six: Vegas both have regenerating health and a weapon limit, so clearly they are both identical to Halo, right?), or that anything other that preserving the franchise in exactly the same state as it was fifteen years ago is some kind of sinister treachery.
But I didn't say that! I tried to make it clear that I hated them being included in this game in this way, and not every game in every way. When did I say that I hated changing it? I'm fairly certain that I included a paragraph at the top where I celebrated a new mechanic that was being included. Actually, here it is again;
Box Boy wrote:There is a button dedicated to beer.
That is a real thing, and I would be willing to pay for it as standalone DLC just to be able to mock the corpses of my foes.
See? New things != bad in my opinion.
New things which are copies of old things without any effort put into them = bad in my opinion.
EmptySet wrote:
psion wrote:The two-gun mechanic was created for realism, which was never something Duke would pay heed to.
On the bright side, magically recovering from being shot so you can kill more dudes is totally unrealistic and therefore a staple of action films everywhere.
That wasn't my complaint, I hate the "jam on screen" effect that so many modern FPS's have because it does nothing that a health bar can't and obscures your vision when you need it most to boot.
Heck, I'll freely admit that Duke is one of the few characters who should have regenerating health in any form of media. I just wish it didn't come with that damn effect, as I loathe it, even in the games it originated in (which once again, you'll notice I never attributed directly to Halo)
Signatures are for chumps.

ProZac
Posts: 891
Joined: Wed May 02, 2007 3:57 pm UTC

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby ProZac » Wed Sep 08, 2010 1:01 pm UTC

I'll be buying this no matter how terrible it is (I've waited too long damnit), but the 2 weapon limit (and a little bit the health regen) annoys me. I finally opened Resistance 2 recently. The first Resistance was great! It had a nice mix of health regen with health packs (you could regen 1/4 of your health, essentially). There was a variety of weapons, some nearly useless except for a few specific situations or just for fun. Also, there was 2 player co-op for the campaign, which everyone knows co-op makes everything better. These were the best parts of Resistance 1 and every single one of them is gone in Resistance 2. Full health regen and I get to carry 2 of the 3 core weapons the entire game, maybe picking up others for 5 minutes to use when the game wants me to. I couldn't finish more than a couple missions. In short: I'm sick and tired of playing Halo.

User avatar
evilspoons
Posts: 98
Joined: Tue Aug 26, 2008 12:44 am UTC
Location: Edmonton, AB, Canada

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby evilspoons » Wed Sep 08, 2010 8:48 pm UTC

Rounded off to months, I have been waiting for DNF for 53.0% of my life. I've gone from reading PC Gamer in the library at lunch time in junior high school to having a university degree, a job, a car, a mortgage, etc... and still no Duke Nukem sequel.

Duke Nukem 3D was great, of course, but I spent a hell of a lot of time playing Apogee's Duke Nukem/Duke Nukum (potential lawsuit prompted renaming) and Duke Nukem II.

(Incidentally, Apogee's Raptor: Call of the Shadows was also pretty awesome.)

User avatar
Felstaff
Occam's Taser
Posts: 5178
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 7:10 pm UTC
Location: ¢ ₪ ¿ ¶ § ∴ ® © ™ ؟ ¡ ‽ æ Þ ° ₰ ₤ ಡಢ

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby Felstaff » Thu Sep 09, 2010 8:17 am UTC

Being reminded of that made me go on one of my patented triannual Apogee/iD Shareware Binges. Duke Nukem, Crystal Caves, Rescue Rover, Wolf3D, Cosmo's Cosmic Adventures and Doom all got a right good hammering on my DOSBox/Windows/iPhone last night.

I just wonder how contrived they're going to make the storyline so Duke has to traverse through as many XXX shops/strip clubs as possible. "Guys, I forgot my keys" (cue Halo-style level reversal)
Away, you scullion! you rampallion! You fustilarian! I'll tickle your catastrophe.

User avatar
Jessica
Jessica, you're a ...
Posts: 8337
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 8:57 pm UTC
Location: Soviet Canuckistan

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby Jessica » Thu Sep 09, 2010 4:09 pm UTC

I'll wait for actual reviews of a finished game before caring at all about this. I mean, duke nukem was... eh. A shooter created in a time when I didn't like shooters.

As for buying it no matter what... god that's just...
Don't reward companies for 13 year development periods! They were bad and they should feel bad.
doogly wrote:On a scale of Mr Rogers to Fascism, how mean do you think we're being?
Belial wrote:My goal is to be the best brain infection any of you have ever had.

ProZac
Posts: 891
Joined: Wed May 02, 2007 3:57 pm UTC

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby ProZac » Thu Sep 09, 2010 5:14 pm UTC

Jessica wrote:As for buying it no matter what... god that's just...
Don't reward companies for 13 year development periods! They were bad and they should feel bad.

I can and will. If the game is terrible, I want to experience just how terrible. I will witness what this train wreck of a development cycle has produced. If it's awesome, great! I'm ready for cheesy one-liners and explodey aliens.

User avatar
Jessica
Jessica, you're a ...
Posts: 8337
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 8:57 pm UTC
Location: Soviet Canuckistan

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby Jessica » Thu Sep 09, 2010 5:51 pm UTC

To each their own of course.

Though I'd rather not pay for terrible. There are always ways to play something without paying for it.

NOTE: I DO NOT ENCOURAGE PIRACY.
doogly wrote:On a scale of Mr Rogers to Fascism, how mean do you think we're being?
Belial wrote:My goal is to be the best brain infection any of you have ever had.

User avatar
broken_escalator
They're called stairs
Posts: 3312
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 1:49 am UTC
Location: _| ̄|○

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby broken_escalator » Thu Sep 09, 2010 6:16 pm UTC

Jessica wrote:To each their own of course.

Though I'd rather not pay for terrible. There are always ways to play something without paying for it.

NOTE: I DO NOT ENCOURAGE PIRACY.

otakon2010.jpg
otakon2010.jpg (7.07 KiB) Viewed 5696 times


But yeah, I think I'll wait to hear how it turns out before I dish out any cash.

User avatar
el_loco_avs
Posts: 1294
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 1:14 pm UTC

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby el_loco_avs » Thu Sep 09, 2010 6:17 pm UTC

Jessica wrote:I'll wait for actual reviews of a finished game before caring at all about this. I mean, duke nukem was... eh. A shooter created in a time when I didn't like shooters.

As for buying it no matter what... god that's just...
Don't reward companies for 13 year development periods! They were bad and they should feel bad.


I think the cost of 13 years of development is punishment enough in itself. :lol:
iirc the current developers are Gearbox. Kinda switched over to them in 09.

I don't think that game will come close to breaking even on the full development cycle.
You go your way.
I'll go your way too.

Technical Ben
Posts: 2986
Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 10:42 pm UTC

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby Technical Ben » Sat Sep 11, 2010 9:12 pm UTC

Meh, with enough advertising it could be the next COD5. I mean, he's the duke Baby!
It's all physics and stamp collecting.
It's not a particle or a wave. It's just an exchange.

Glmclain
Posts: 442
Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 12:51 pm UTC

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby Glmclain » Sun Sep 12, 2010 12:09 am UTC

Image

... What, no time for Commentary, Dr. Jones? - ST
You Samoans are all the same! You have no faith in the essential decency of the white man's culture!

User avatar
GhostWolfe
Broken wings and scattered feathers
Posts: 3892
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:56 am UTC
Location: Brisbane, Aust
Contact:

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby GhostWolfe » Mon Oct 18, 2010 12:06 am UTC

The Mana Bar did a preview event on the weekend. They had the playable demo on all five screens. I have to confess that I didn't play it - how embarrassing, but I can't coordinate two analog sticks at the same time cause I suck :(

The graphics look really pretty; and the demo is full of silly stuff like a turd in a toilet cubicle that you can pick up and throw around. I think it's going to be a lot of fun.

/angell
Linguistic Anarchist
Hawknc: ANGELL IS SERIOUS BUSINESS :-[
lesliesage: Animals dunked in crude oil: sad. Animals dunked in boiling oil: tasty.
Belial: I was in your mom's room all night committing to a series of extended military actions.

Technical Ben
Posts: 2986
Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 10:42 pm UTC

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby Technical Ben » Wed Oct 20, 2010 5:21 pm UTC

Glmclain wrote:
... What, no time for Commentary, Dr. Jones? - ST[/color]

I think the image is a commentary ST. Or are you joking about XKCD comic threads?
There are going to be a lot of bookies keeping their eyes on this one. If you had money on it failing, or taking longer than 15 years... you've got an incentive for sabotage! :shock:
Or the universe will cease to exist when the paradox of DNF existing tries to become a reality.

GhostWolfe wrote:...and the demo is full of silly stuff like a turd in a toilet cubicle that you can pick up and throw around. I think it's going to be a lot of fun.

/angell

You like that kind of thing? :barf smiley:
It's all physics and stamp collecting.
It's not a particle or a wave. It's just an exchange.

User avatar
GhostWolfe
Broken wings and scattered feathers
Posts: 3892
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:56 am UTC
Location: Brisbane, Aust
Contact:

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby GhostWolfe » Thu Oct 21, 2010 12:03 am UTC

Technical Ben wrote:You like that kind of thing? :barf smiley:
While I'm simultaneously horrified and amused by the toilet humour (pun intended), I also wanted to pick something to describe that wouldn't be a spoiler in any way.

People who haven't played the demo might not be happy about me telling them what the cool gag bit at the end of the demo's boss fight is; or what happens when you use a certain weapon that becomes available at one point; or what the hidden item that only a few players found in the second part of the demo is.

Plus, graphics are really good; even if it's a smear of sloppy shit on the wall, if the whole game has such excellent in-game graphics, and dedication to detail, it's going to be visually amazing.

/angell
Linguistic Anarchist
Hawknc: ANGELL IS SERIOUS BUSINESS :-[
lesliesage: Animals dunked in crude oil: sad. Animals dunked in boiling oil: tasty.
Belial: I was in your mom's room all night committing to a series of extended military actions.

User avatar
Jebobek
Posts: 2219
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 7:19 pm UTC
Location: Harrisburg, Pennsylvania Geohash graticule

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby Jebobek » Thu Oct 21, 2010 3:18 am UTC

It reminds me of the Snakes on a Plane hype where they decide that they'd better turn around and work on it some more, such that the finished product might match expectations. The original intended audience might not care as much but those following the hype and those following others following the hype are intrigued.
Image

User avatar
mosc
Doesn't care what you think.
Posts: 5403
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 3:03 pm UTC

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby mosc » Thu Oct 21, 2010 11:09 pm UTC

I do like the idea of a little bit of retro in a modern shooter. Serious Sam was a good example of this but as a game, it was pretty... straightforward. Things varied by screwing around with physics and throwing various waves of enemies at you rather than by much subtlety or intrigue. I think there's room for an over-the-top old school shooter done in a modern way. I guess I want something like a cross between serious sam and rainbow six if that makes any sense. Fuck cover systems and realism, but at the same time don't just make me yawn with my button holding down the trigger mowing shit down nonstop for minutes at a time. I want duke kicking ass front and center, not hiding behind a box. At the same time, I want to enjoy kicking each specific enemy's asses and not just trim down a herd of them.

I guess I like regenerating life though I agree the screen blurring thing is stupid. I agree with the comments about cover and 2-weapon limits being rather pointless. It's an FPS for god's sake, not some tactical simulation.
Title: It was given by the XKCD moderators to me because they didn't care what I thought (I made some rantings, etc). I care what YOU think, the joke is forums.xkcd doesn't care what I think.

User avatar
GhostWolfe
Broken wings and scattered feathers
Posts: 3892
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:56 am UTC
Location: Brisbane, Aust
Contact:

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby GhostWolfe » Tue Oct 26, 2010 10:47 am UTC

mosc wrote:I guess I like regenerating life though I agree the screen blurring thing is stupid. I agree with the comments about cover and 2-weapon limits being rather pointless. It's an FPS for god's sake, not some tactical simulation.
Insomuch as the demo is indicative of the final game, I'm not sure what people mean by "screen blurring". The screen can get splattered with blood or rain, but I saw a couple of people die in the demo and I didn't see anything that messed with visibility.

The two-weapon limit was annoying. A loading screen even points out that certain weapons are better for certain applications, but forces you to juggle around the weapons to carry the "best" two at any given time.

All that being said, I don't play shooters cause I suck at them, so I'm really not the best person to provide commentary.

/angell
Linguistic Anarchist
Hawknc: ANGELL IS SERIOUS BUSINESS :-[
lesliesage: Animals dunked in crude oil: sad. Animals dunked in boiling oil: tasty.
Belial: I was in your mom's room all night committing to a series of extended military actions.

User avatar
SecondTalon
SexyTalon
Posts: 26528
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:10 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Mars. HA!
Contact:

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby SecondTalon » Tue Oct 26, 2010 1:27 pm UTC

GhostWolfe wrote:
mosc wrote:I guess I like regenerating life though I agree the screen blurring thing is stupid. I agree with the comments about cover and 2-weapon limits being rather pointless. It's an FPS for god's sake, not some tactical simulation.
Insomuch as the demo is indicative of the final game, I'm not sure what people mean by "screen blurring". The screen can get splattered with blood or rain, but I saw a couple of people die in the demo and I didn't see anything that messed with visibility.

Screen Blurring - the modern FPS trope in which, while the player is injured, the screen is blurred and/or covered in a substance not unlike strawberry jelly that slowly fades over time, indicating that the player is back at full health. I like to pretend my little space marine is eating the jelly and gaining health.
heuristically_alone wrote:I want to write a DnD campaign and play it by myself and DM it myself.
heuristically_alone wrote:I have been informed that this is called writing a book.

User avatar
Emerald Hawk
Posts: 11
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2006 4:47 pm UTC
Location: Freehold, NJ

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby Emerald Hawk » Tue Oct 26, 2010 3:12 pm UTC

Regenerating health can be a valid design decision. It eliminates the problem of having saved at low health and thus having to tediously retry a section over and over. On the other hand it dilutes the satisfaction of completing a section while taking little to no damage, since you can just heal up after every fight. Personally I like the hybrid approach used by games like Metroid Other M where you can regenerate some small portion of your health bar.

A limit of two weapons only I'm much less fond of. Often the "best" strategy in such games is also the most boring: use the one weapon you find tons of ammo for to kill all the mooks, while saving the really good (but limited ammo) weapon for a possible "boss" fight which may or may not be coming up soon. Thus ignoring all the really cool but highly situational weapons. This can leads to lame, repetetive gameplay and removes the strategy of picking the best weapon for the job. I also find the time spent looking through the pile of weapons after a fight and picking the best two to be a tedious exercise in inventory management, something I can tolerate in an RPG but that really breaks the flow in an action FPS. In a game series known for pioneering the use of the shrink ray and frost gun in an FPS, this makes me a bit sad that Duke would go this route.

Spambot5546
Posts: 1466
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 7:34 pm UTC

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby Spambot5546 » Tue Oct 26, 2010 3:19 pm UTC

See, i don't normally have a problem with the weapon limit. I thought it was a cool addition to Halo (i'm sure they weren't the first to do it, but it was the first place i saw it) that added to strategy by forcing you to work with what you had available.

But this is Duke Nukem. Duke Nukem can carry as many damned weapons as he wants. Seriously.
"It is bitter – bitter", he answered,
"But I like it
Because it is bitter,
And because it is my heart."

User avatar
broken_escalator
They're called stairs
Posts: 3312
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 1:49 am UTC
Location: _| ̄|○

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby broken_escalator » Tue Oct 26, 2010 3:26 pm UTC

I must be one of the few that like the gun limit. I like having to deal with a situation with the tools you brought. Duke doesn't need to pull out his anti-tank gun to deal with a tank. He isn't the goddamn batman, he's the goddamn Duke Nukem. He'll just shoot the crap out of the tank with whatever he feels like it and then go to a strip club.

User avatar
SecondTalon
SexyTalon
Posts: 26528
Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:10 pm UTC
Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Mars. HA!
Contact:

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby SecondTalon » Tue Oct 26, 2010 3:27 pm UTC

Hm. Regenerating shield + 100 points of health. Shield can take 1-10 shots of *Weapon*, with your larger caliber/explosions/whatever knocking the shield AND doing health damage. I wonder if that's been done...
heuristically_alone wrote:I want to write a DnD campaign and play it by myself and DM it myself.
heuristically_alone wrote:I have been informed that this is called writing a book.

User avatar
psion
Posts: 1089
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2009 5:33 am UTC

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby psion » Tue Oct 26, 2010 3:34 pm UTC

broken_escalator wrote:He'll just shoot the crap out of the tank with whatever he feels like it and then go to a strip club.

...Exactly? You can't shoot with whatever you feel like when there's a two gun limit.
If you have your big-boom gun and your well-rounded gun, then there's going to be no reason to use a more unique weapon because you'll have to drop one of the two.

ProZac
Posts: 891
Joined: Wed May 02, 2007 3:57 pm UTC

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby ProZac » Tue Oct 26, 2010 4:18 pm UTC

SecondTalon wrote:Hm. Regenerating shield + 100 points of health. Shield can take 1-10 shots of *Weapon*, with your larger caliber/explosions/whatever knocking the shield AND doing health damage. I wonder if that's been done...

Erm... Isn't that the original Halo? I mean, you had shield and health. Shield recharged health did not? Really preferable in my opinion as it does still allow you to get hit without immediately thinking "Shit I took damage", but also rewards you for minimizing the amount you take (don't want to lose health). As I mentioned, I also think Resistance had a nice system for this.

The weapon limit works in some games. CoD it fits: weapons don't have much variety and it pretty much comes down to preference. Halo was designed well with this in mind, and (imo) there's not a lot of weapons you would want to use anyway. Other FPS's like to be unique in other ways. Borderlands used a level up system, multiplayer, and classes to vary itself. Resistance gave you unique weapons to play with. I kinda expected DNF to be like that as well. Take the shrink/expand rays for example. I never found these to be particularly useful, but they were fun. If I decide to use one of these, now I have one weapon spot left for something more useful. I could take a trusty shotgun, but now I'm screwed for range. I could take a chaingun, but now I have to worry about ammo, and I have to hope something evil doesn't get close. Clearly, if I want to be best prepared, I should just carry that shotgun/chaingun combo. Until the game drops a sniper rifle, which is an indication it wants me to use that right now, but I should probably pick back up my shotgun/chaingun as soon as I'm done with it.

User avatar
broken_escalator
They're called stairs
Posts: 3312
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 1:49 am UTC
Location: _| ̄|○

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby broken_escalator » Tue Oct 26, 2010 4:24 pm UTC

psion wrote:
broken_escalator wrote:He'll just shoot the crap out of the tank with whatever he feels like it and then go to a strip club.

...Exactly? You can't shoot with whatever you feel like when there's a two gun limit.
If you have your big-boom gun and your well-rounded gun, then there's going to be no reason to use a more unique weapon because you'll have to drop one of the two.

No see, you choose what you carry around. So whatever he feels like is whatever he is carrying. He's not lugging around a utility belt of guns for every occasion; he doesn't need it. If you decide you don't want to carry anything except big-boom and well-rounded guns then its really your own fault. Unless your unique gun cannot be used to win you aren't forced to carry anything. And arguing that its easier to use the best guns really just points at fault with the user imo.


In mass effect I think I remembered some attacks bypass shields or can bleed through shields. Not quite the same but similar.

User avatar
psion
Posts: 1089
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2009 5:33 am UTC

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby psion » Tue Oct 26, 2010 9:20 pm UTC

broken_escalator wrote:No see, you choose what you carry around. So whatever he feels like is whatever he is carrying.

Then I can just say that maybe Duke wants to carry three weapons. You'd have to agree, because why would he carry more than one? He can't fire two different weapons at the same time, and three guns is 50% more badass than two. Then I'd continue to four weapons and so on.

Technical Ben
Posts: 2986
Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 10:42 pm UTC

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby Technical Ben » Tue Oct 26, 2010 10:11 pm UTC

The whole thing about the game was having the choice to select any weapon to get a different result.

What results from the limited system? Want to use the trip mines on the section up ahead? Nope, you left them behind to swap for a sniper scope. Now your stuck in close combat and well... out of gum, to say the least.

Yes, it means you can setup the levels different. "Oh, we know the player will find this bit hard, because they only have 2 guns". But look at HL2. That thing had weapons everywhere, unlimited carry (but limited ammo) and I still ran out, and had to think and plan carefully. Having a max of 2-3 weapons in that game would have made it less fun, and interesting IMO.
It's all physics and stamp collecting.
It's not a particle or a wave. It's just an exchange.

User avatar
Decker
Posts: 2071
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 4:22 pm UTC
Location: Western N.Y.

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby Decker » Tue Oct 26, 2010 11:37 pm UTC

F.E.A.R had a 3 weapon limit. I'm not sure I would have been able to manage with 2.
I was angry with my friend. I told my wrath. My wrath did end.
I was angry with my foe. I told it not. My wrath did grow.

User avatar
GhostWolfe
Broken wings and scattered feathers
Posts: 3892
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:56 am UTC
Location: Brisbane, Aust
Contact:

Re: Duke Nukem Forever. Seriously.

Postby GhostWolfe » Wed Oct 27, 2010 2:29 pm UTC

SecondTalon wrote:Screen Blurring - the modern FPS trope in which, while the player is injured, the screen is blurred and/or covered in a substance not unlike strawberry jelly that slowly fades over time, indicating that the player is back at full health. I like to pretend my little space marine is eating the jelly and gaining health.
That wasn't happening in the demo. Jelly on the screen was purely environmental, and faded really quickly (except for the rain, I suppose, because the drips kept appearing on the screen as long as you remained outside).

Technical Ben wrote:What results from the limited system? Want to use the trip mines on the section up ahead? Nope, you left them behind to swap for a sniper scope. Now your stuck in close combat and well... out of gum, to say the least.
They tried to counter that, I think, by having a lot of weapons lying about. In a single game area, Duke finds lying on the ground: several shotguns, a few pistols, one or two railguns, and the shrink gun - hence my description of "juggling" where you are carrying two weapons and standing on a third and decide to drop your secondary weapon, which can only be done by making it your active weapon, then picking up the new one.

There were also multiple ammo crates, which seemed to reload whatever weapon you had active; and there are pipe bombs you can pick up (that you detonate with your car remote).

/angell
Linguistic Anarchist
Hawknc: ANGELL IS SERIOUS BUSINESS :-[
lesliesage: Animals dunked in crude oil: sad. Animals dunked in boiling oil: tasty.
Belial: I was in your mom's room all night committing to a series of extended military actions.


Return to “Gaming”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests