Yeah, Original quake engine? Haha. You honestly have never played quake.
Yeah, Original quake engine? Haha. You honestly have never played quake.
Having played it afterwards I said that it felt alright, not ground breaking, not terrible. Just alright.
The car seemed to handle like a goat however running over things tends to be amusing anyway. Some of the guns didn't feel particularly powerful however that may have been more due to the difficulty than the weapons themselves.
The first "boss battle" aka the ship was daft due to the invincible shed™ saving the day. Also I do feel the need to ask about the "Holsom twins", why god why?
Also where's my damned jet pack!
Felt pretty dull to me. Humor wasn't doing anything for me. Bulletstorm seems to be doing what DNF was trying to do a whole lot better. If I want an "old school fps" vibe, I'll probably just reinstall Painkiller.
It started great, then went downhill and finished rather quickly.
Breaking news! Game anticipated for over a decade turns out not to live up to hype!
Oh, it had a ton of hype even in the late 90s, well before it became a joke. I clearly remember discussing it with a friend and wondering why everyone was so excited; we'd both played and enjoyed Duke3D, but there was nothing particularly special announced about DNF. Of all the games I played in the mid 90s, Duke ranked pretty low on the list of sequels I'd like to have seen.
Last edited by TillEulenspiegel; 03-06-2011 at 11:41 PM.
I liked that I ran fine. This is a big plus. I'd have been annoyed if it didn't. I don't have that powerful a machine but it handles Bulletstorm and Brink well enough, two games that would get my attention over Duke. I also liked that I now have a game that I can compare with Prey over which has the best soap dispenser.
I just hope the full game is more engaging. The trailers seem to promise something better. If not then the only hope for it is if a decent modding scene grows out of it. Duke 3D had a ridiculously easy to use editor, even a moron like me could get a train system to work and make mirrors. I wish they could come up with something as good as that again, but I realise due to technical reasons that wouldn't really be possible. If Gearbox and 3D Realms couldn't come up with a decent Duke game then hopefully a fan project will be able to do it, even if it's just recreating the original's levels.
I kind of enjoyed it. I didn't like the minecart level but I enjoyed the first stadium level. Then again I'm a DN3D fan and my inner child really couldn't care less, so I'm probably biased. I think part of the problem with the demo is that there's no context for the levels at all; one minute Duke's in a familar setting, then he's in the middle of the desert with absolutely no explanation or progression. I didn't think it was that dated in graphics, it looks on par with most other games these days. I've seen a few ridiculous comments across the Internet comparing it to 2004 games which makes me wonder if the commentors were around in those days...
It's not going to be a smart FPS, an instant classic, or ground-breaking, but after all these years it didn't have a hope in hell of living up to the hype, just the same way as some people were initially disappointed by STALKER on release.
More to the point though is that it requires thinking in true 3D. Sector based engines were really easy to map for because of the simple level geometry, it was like drawing on graph paper. You can't make things like Worldcraft/Hammer any easier than they are in that respect. With all that said, HL2's mapping scene is pretty dismal outside of TF2, actually most games seem to have poor mapping scenes these days probably due to the greater amount of work involved and most people don't care unless it's a retail quality mod for some reason. I don't think DNF will see significant mapping at all.but I realise due to technical reasons that wouldn't really be possible.
Just need minor changes, less balancing, less mainstream and more Duke.
I finally found the time to play it and... meh. It really makes me miss the old-school FPS level design from DN3D. Also, Gearbox need to learn how to put together a good demo. Having two completely disjointed, small levels was probably not a good idea.
I'll reserve judgement until I have played the full version, though. Might still be a good game. I hope.
This game feels WAY too much like cowadoody. Why do you need only 2 weapons? Why can't you have more? Why do you have to have regenerating health? And at such a high rate no less? Why does the god damn screen need to turn red when your health is down.
I am thoroughly disappointed by this consolitis plagued mess. Canceled my pre order on this sucker.
The game looks so.... bleak?
Here's a scan of the first ever preview in 1997.
- "To build Duke Nukem Forever on the Prey engine would have delayed the release until late 1998, around the same time as Prey itself."
- "But that 256-color limit may not be the case in the final game."
What Painkiller (and Serious Sam) has is that it went for mindless shooting when most other shooters went for realism. The "oldschool" confusion probably exist because every new FPS (at the time, especially around Serious Sam 1's time) was/is presented as "better" because -among others- has more realistic AI. Going for more mindless AI sounds like a step backwards, hence "oldschool". But this is just my own assumption. In any case, there is nothing common between a real "oldschool FPS" and Painkiller/Serious Sam beyond the mindless AI.
I really wanted to get DNF when it came out, consciously just for the nostalgia value as it was a big part of my youth.
After all this marketing push and the videos and screenshots I've just totally lost interest (or even slightly annoyed by it all) and I'm not even going to get it for that. :(
Played the demo yesterday and thoroughly underwhelmed by it (though I was never expecting to love it, I was willing to be won over). Not funny, feels dated rather than nostalgic, and not all that much fun to play. As I said to a friend yesterday, 'its more like a step back, than a look back'. Having said that, its not terrible, just not great.
It looks and plays like an old game, but does have its funny moments. "Tonight you'll dine in hell" made me lol. Gearbox did the best they could without completely re-starting the game from scratch.
It seems possible this game could be loved in the same manner Serious Sam is, providing they go for the big arena combat with swarms of enemies. I cant help but think many are over-criticizing the demo based on pre-conceptions. I've heard a lot of complaints at how simple, base and ugly it is.
Base, yeah, it was always going to be. Blow jobs and faeces throwing, kinda expected from a man who sits on bleeding throats to poop. Ugly, yes and no. Some pretty horrendous textures, but with Crysis 2 not long released, we're bound to have a period where nothing really compares. It's a tech demo after all. Although, I'm kind of praying the demo was missing some death animations to save download times!
As for simple, what's wrong with simple? The best game I've played in 2011 was so simple a 5 year old wrote, voiced and drew the entire thing.
In short, I need the final product first. What we've seen so far wasn't frantic and that's the key word. If the combat gets frantic and over the top, we may yet have a worthy product. Not that the internet will ever allow amodernised IP to be considered worthy. It's just not in our collective nature.