Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Gearbox: Duke Nuken Forever Was Victim of Expectations

Last response: in News comments
Share
March 30, 2012 9:19:14 AM

It was bad, accept that; don't try and make excuses.
March 30, 2012 9:32:04 AM

If the creators had kept the story as it was originally, made few adjustments, no problem and certainly brought the graphics to today's standard than I think it would have been a better success than it worked out to be.
March 30, 2012 9:37:32 AM

Expectations? Really? Give the game to anyone who never heard of Duke Nukem before (anyone younger that 18 would probably fit in that category) and they will say the game sucks.
March 30, 2012 9:38:28 AM

Haha already huh guys. I disagree, it was exactly what it was supposed to be considering the huge fail that was the previous holder's of the franchise. I saw exactly, Duke Nukem.
March 30, 2012 10:37:59 AM

i had no expectations nor do i care about media revyes, and i love games like pain killer and serius sam, this game did simply not live up to my standards end of story.
March 30, 2012 10:44:50 AM

It was a mediocre shooter, not good nor bad. That was not what most fans expected for a follow-up for one of the most entertaining games ever made. That's what failed, deliver mid level quality for something that should have had AAA quality from the beginning.
March 30, 2012 10:45:30 AM

"The true definition of quality is not about things like fidelity or features, or you know production values, or anything like that," he said. "The true definition of quality ... is to what extent does the thing meet or exceed expectations of the customer."

Hah, PR double speak. It's the things like fidelity, features and you know production values that you're supposed to concentrate on (among other things) inorder to fullfill the customer expectations.
March 30, 2012 11:44:34 AM

The graphics were sub-standard, it had some fun moments... I agree to a part that expectations were high, but still, they could have done a better job. That being said, i hope they get it right if there's ever a sequel.
Anonymous
March 30, 2012 12:10:27 PM

I enjoyed it start to finish. No idea what game all you other yahoos were playing.
March 30, 2012 12:13:48 PM

What do people expect from a game that took 15 years to release?! It went through multiple design/creative teams and by the time someone finally got around to honestly making it happen, it was basically a game that evolved bunch of random pieces tossed in a box and left on a dusty shelf for someone else to figure out. Everyone knew this was going to be bad. What exactly were you expecting from something that took this long (let alone became a huge joke) to finally release? They took what they had, made whatever they could out of it and then released it. For them to say "Well, we have the game, but it's not quite right so we're going to completely redesign it", would have been the final nail in the coffin. It was a game that should have been released 12 years ago...
March 30, 2012 12:16:36 PM

"Gearbox: Duke Nuken Forever Was Victim of Expectations"

who the hell is Duke Nuken? o_o
March 30, 2012 12:42:41 PM

It was CRAP. 'Nuff said. Why the hell is anyone developing a game nowadays anyway if it's meant for gamers' skills 15 years earlier?
March 30, 2012 12:44:30 PM

It was not accepted because it was an old style game. As someone who has been playing PC games since since they were invented, I actually enjoyed Duke. By the same token, I would not give a plug nickel for most of what the kiddies like today.
March 30, 2012 12:47:14 PM

Duke Nukem was a victim of developers doing a piss poor job and half assing outdated game development.
March 30, 2012 12:57:51 PM

It is what it is, I am about half way through it, I can't say it is horrable.
March 30, 2012 1:01:25 PM

goldengooseIt was bad, accept that; don't try and make excuses.


it wasn't bad, it wasn't great,

rantocIt was a mediocre shooter, not good nor bad. That was not what most fans expected for a follow-up for one of the most entertaining games ever made. That's what failed, deliver mid level quality for something that should have had AAA quality from the beginning.


lol it was AAAA when it started development...

kettu"The true definition of quality is not about things like fidelity or features, or you know production values, or anything like that," he said. "The true definition of quality ... is to what extent does the thing meet or exceed expectations of the customer." Hah, PR double speak. It's the things like fidelity, features and you know production values that you're supposed to concentrate on (among other things) inorder to fullfill the customer expectations.


quality = did i like it
nothing else matters to me.
there are many games that i love that other people despise, but for some reason they were great, high quality to me.

March 30, 2012 1:04:22 PM

it was a victim or poor management. DNF is a fun game just like DN3D was. If DNF would have been say the 4th or 5th installment, then yes i would admit that the game sucked based on todays games. But it was the second game after DN3D. Did they drop the ball? yes, because they waited far to long. If DNF was released 4yrs after DN3D people wold have praised it and i could only imagine how awesome the 4th or 5th installment could have been today. poor management. happens in every business industry, not just game development.
March 30, 2012 1:30:05 PM

A victim of the hype that they themselves generated?
March 30, 2012 1:38:37 PM

I neither loved it nor hated it. I definitely don't think it was a victim of 15 years of hype though.
March 30, 2012 1:45:48 PM

It was a victim of bad choices. When Gearbox acquired the property they should've totally scrapped it and started fresh. I know, I know, the game has had that happen dozens of times but in order to deliver a TRUE QUALITY PRODUCT like they are capable of creating this needed to be done. DNF would've been a real, amazing, hardcore Gearbox game if they themselves handled everything and trashed what 4 3DRealms teams came up with. I would've gladly waited a couple of more years for a REAL Duke Nukem game, even if the graphics were a little sub-par, I mean really... at the point they acquired the property we had been waiting 14 years already.
March 30, 2012 1:46:59 PM

hallsA victim of the hype that they themselves generated?


No, 3d realms and other companies that had taken the franchise over the years kept hyping it for a long time. People hyped themselves up when gearbox finally bought the IP up and decided they were going to finish and release it.

Unfortunately the lame brain kiddies these days have driven the market into having to base everything around online multiplayer. Which gives any game based around a single player experience an even higher challenge.
March 30, 2012 1:54:53 PM

I loved DNF , it was fun and enjoyable, to me that was enough, guess i just went in expecting duke nukem of the 90's with better graphics and it delivered
March 30, 2012 2:04:30 PM

MathosUnfortunately the lame brain kiddies these days have driven the market into having to base everything around online multiplayer. Which gives any game based around a single player experience an even higher challenge.

+1

I don't think DNF was ever going to be a game with depth, but it's fun for what it is: crude humor and shooting crap. Unfortunately Cawadooty is all anyone wants to play anymore. Record selling every year just like Madden. "Oh look we added nothing new but if you don't buy this version you'll be playing on practically dead servers in 2-3 months after all the other kids get this one." And viola; as if by some video-game devil magic the stupid game is selling like a cure for AIDs.

The game is alright, but there is absolutely no reason to release a "new" version every year. Hell at least Halo made major updates within their releases.
March 30, 2012 2:05:28 PM

It was rushed out. Given when they said they were starting to work on it it should still be in production now and maybe coming out in the next couple of months.
March 30, 2012 2:18:44 PM

I bought DNF on Amazon for $5 and I applied a $5 credit and I still feel like I paid too much.
March 30, 2012 2:20:06 PM

Gearbox came in to polish the turd. They could have torn the game down and rebuilt it from the ground up with all modern coding - but that's exactly what 3D Realms did repeatedly and never got it to market. Gearbox bought the IP to be the company to finally release it and have the rights to continue the franchise in their own way. I respect that.

Was the game crap? Yeah, pretty much. Did I buy it? Yep. Did I have fun playing it? Hell yes.
March 30, 2012 2:25:32 PM

I thought it was an interesting game. Funny at times. I liked throwing poo at my reflection in the mirror
March 30, 2012 2:26:21 PM

I'd say half of that is true... There were 2 really really BAD choices in design for the game:

1- Only 2 weapons at a time upon release (it was patched later on).
2- Instead of health packs, the "EGO" bar was dumb as F.

I was able to forgive the lousy scenarios (boring puzzles and crappy graphics) and I was also able to forgive the glued-nonsensical story line of the game thanks to the cheesy one-liners from Duke. I also missed/needed more exploration and secrets, it was way too linear.

I can say I had fun playing it at least, but the full retail price I paid was not meant to be putting all this together. Also, terribad finish.

Cheers!
March 30, 2012 2:30:50 PM

A long long time ago I played the original game. From the reports and comments I read I am glad I didn't purchase the new version.
March 30, 2012 2:32:58 PM

Wait a min. They had 15 yrs to make the game and they couldn't meet expectations? Are you kidding me!
March 30, 2012 2:55:27 PM

ahnilatedWait a min. They had 15 yrs to make the game and they couldn't meet expectations? Are you kidding me!



Well, part of the problem is that the "they" changed a number of times over the years, and the company that was the last one holding it isn't the one who began it.

Also, few things can live up to the expectations built over 15 years of waiting. DNF could have been ME3 with a better ending, mixed with the shooting mechanics of Battlefield and the graphics of Crysis, and there would still be people complaining after 15 years of waiting. That's the real reason I think that Gearbox didn't invest more than they had to to get it out the door - it was a lost cause. Get it released and focus on doing the next one right.
March 30, 2012 2:57:44 PM

hahahahaahahahaha "victim of expectations"! What were the expectations on the other side? O.K. , so if you were expecting something comparable to Crysis, maybe expectations were much. But you would have also had unreasonable expectations if you were hoping for say, a boring, mildly entertaining shooter. It couldn't even do that. I'd rather play angry birds on a pink cell phone for eternity than EVER play DNF again.

Rushed? Didn't we wait more than a decade for that "game"?

WOW. If I had ANYTHING to do with that project, I'd shut my mouth and let it disappear into the ether. There is NO excuse for the suck that is DNF. Just let it go. Let Duke rest in peace, with Leisure Suit Larry and the Noid.
March 30, 2012 2:59:30 PM

the_cripplerWell, part of the problem is that the "they" changed a number of times over the years, and the company that was the last one holding it isn't the one who began it.Also, few things can live up to the expectations built over 15 years of waiting. DNF could have been ME3 with a better ending, mixed with the shooting mechanics of Battlefield and the graphics of Crysis, and there would still be people complaining after 15 years of waiting. That's the real reason I think that Gearbox didn't invest more than they had to to get it out the door - it was a lost cause. Get it released and focus on doing the next one right.

The issue is that they may not be able to sell the next Duke Nukem given the critical response to DNF. That is a huge deterrent for the company to consider.
March 30, 2012 3:20:21 PM

buddhabelly34The issue is that they may not be able to sell the next Duke Nukem given the critical response to DNF. That is a huge deterrent for the company to consider.



It was certainly a gamble, and one that I'm sure they considered. Time will tell if they managed to pull it off.
March 30, 2012 3:35:41 PM

Wait... DNF was pretty fun. It was stupid and crude and hilarious... that was my expectation.
March 30, 2012 4:02:00 PM

I don't think any amount of lowered expectations could save that game. The problem was, it was a 12 year old game, and felt like a 12 year old game. Also, maybe its just me, but its also 12 year old humor, though I may just be getting old and uncool, and I accept that.
March 30, 2012 4:18:07 PM

Well it was not Duke Nukem and it was crap
March 30, 2012 5:12:11 PM

Again, probably 65% or more of people tearing the game apart I guarantee did not play the game at all, or at most, played the awful demo. The game was a solid fun time. I'd give it an 8/10. It wasn't a revolutionary mindblowing masterpiece like 3D was, but it was a solid good time with the Duke. In no way did it deserve a 0/10 1/10 or even a 4/10 review
March 30, 2012 5:19:36 PM

Doesn't keeping it in the press, good or bad, sell more copies? I bought it for about $6.49 on steam. I started with a copy version and then waited for the price to go down. It wasn't terrible enough to not buy it at all. The developers deserved at least something. Yeah I know I squandered what almost $60 from them but look, it goes on sale. People buy it. A lot of people. They probably made a lot of money from it going on sale so much and people talking about it all the time. Most people don't pirate games despite what goes on on tom's hardware or any niche sites online. Piracy doesn't help this game, but at least I can say I don't own a pirated copy of it.
March 30, 2012 5:25:46 PM

goldengooseIt was bad, accept that; don't try and make excuses.



the thing is it was bad by todays standards. the game was created in the mid-late 90's. all gearbox did make the graphics look good and release it
March 30, 2012 6:22:43 PM

The game itself was awful even if you forget the extreme development time and history behind the game.
Were expectations unreasonably high? Maybe but even a person who never played a Duke Nukem game before or knew the history behind it would no doubt see it as a poor game as well.

If they are going to live in this state of denial than expect no improvement if they make another.
March 30, 2012 6:47:57 PM

Game was absolutely terrible... and that is with low expectations. From its game play, graphics, to its vulgar script and opening cut scenes. If you were fool enough not to see that in them lame demo and bought the game, shame on you.
March 30, 2012 8:42:38 PM

And about the game, it just completely sucks, i prefer playing hello kitty island adventure for 10 years than playing this game for 10 minutes, well ive played a shitload of games, so everywone that should say i never played anything else can shut the fuck up, the game development took 12 years for this completely shitty hopeless mindless unworthy piece of mammoth shit, just think of the first duke nukem game, completely awesome right?(i mean for that time) now think of that duke, being raped by 15 giant alien dicks for 6 years, then smashed into a wall of shit for another six years, and you have the 12 years development of duke nukem forever, the most shitty game of all time, i mean the guy can have only two weapons, the game have the most stupid jokes full of stupid easter eggs and the SINGLE and ONLY funny part is drawing a dick every time somewone asks your autograph, IGN was being IGNorant when they gave a 3.5 for this game, i think they felt sorry for who wasted 60 bucks on it, this junk would deserve 0.5, and dont say i didnt played this game, because i did.(unfortunatly)
March 30, 2012 9:41:14 PM

People were expecting DNF to be the top GOTY with Badass graphics and best gameplay ever. What they don't realize is that that's not what made duke nukem 3d shine in the past.... It was the hilirious comments/jokes and fun FPS. Get over it already!
March 30, 2012 10:47:16 PM

michalmierzwaIf the creators had kept the story as it was originally, made few adjustments, no problem and certainly brought the graphics to today's standard than I think it would have been a better success than it worked out to be.


Kinda hard when you don't have the same development team members...
March 31, 2012 1:24:38 AM

Good I don't pay to play, some titles I just stop and uninstall after 15m of play... like DNF?
Like some said, don't make excuses! Just try harder next time, and don't make any announcements if you don't want any expectations!!
March 31, 2012 7:11:37 AM

It still had better tech and gameplay variety/depth than any recent CoD game, yet critics have no problem still praising that. I think most of it is just the unfortunate reality that it's "cool" to jump on the hate wagon for a game that's an exceptionally easy target. Admittedly DN:F was rough around the edges but exactly what were people expecting for a game that's been Frankensteined together the last decade and a half?

People throwing this game under the bus need to really go back and play the old ones, and once the nostalgia clears it'll be pretty obvious that DN:F is still an improvement over them. Probably still moreso than, again, any recent CoD game over the initial ones.
March 31, 2012 7:51:38 AM

The production of this game was a complete disaster

March 31, 2012 10:04:55 AM

lets be hones this was a Gears of war with Duke skin on it and some vintage duke parts, some of the games parts felt old i mean really old. Like duke3d with a newer skin, some newer and so on , So yeah the fragmentation did't help it but the fact that they pretty much used the same mechanics as in Gears of war was a big let down for me, where's the walking armory Duke used to be, WHERE WAS THE MIGHTYFOOT ?
I still remember kicking people in the face in LAN party's and having a blast. But this thing began to ambitious and it did't even measure up to the more "el cheepo" shooters coming out from some Russian developers.
!