Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Pitchford: People Love Duke; St. John: Clueless Critics

By - Source: The Joypads | B 54 comments

While Jon St John defends Duke Nukem Forever against the negative "clueless" reviewers, Randy Pitchford claims that consumers are wanting greasy hamburgers instead of caviar.

Now that Duke Nukem is out and about and strutting his stuff on the Xbox 360, PlayStation 3 and Windows PC, the drama surrounding the iconic hero and his fourteen-year journey through developmental hell just won't quit, and for good reason. A lot was riding on the release of Duke Nukem Forever: a lot of time, a lot of money, and a ton of emotions. For some, the harsh criticism against the game is something personal.

“I have no comments regarding bad reviews by clueless critics," said the voice behind Duke Nukem, Jon St John. "They seem to want to compare Duke Nukem Forever to Call Of Duty and other FPS’s and they are missing the point. My thoughts about Duke Nukem Forever: It freakin ROCKS! Lots of action, lots of fun, sexy, funny, irreverent… It’s everything I hoped it would be.”

Reviewers disagree. Duke Nukem Forever's Metacritic score for the PC version is an underwhelming 57 out of 100, followed by the PlayStation 3 version at 55 out of 100 and the Xbox 360 version at 49 out of 100. "The shooting is bland, the level design is uninspired, the jokes and ideas are old and tired, and the synthesis between old-school PC shooter and modern console shooter has resulted in a hideous chimera that rarely works as either," said IncGamers who gave the PC version a 42 out of 100.

But despite all the negativity Duke Nukem Forever is generating, the game is apparently also generating some hard cash for Gearbox and 2K Games. Gearbox Bossman Randy Pitchford, who became the game's sole promotional voice from the time it was brought out of limbo until the game hit the streets, has remained surprisingly quiet until now.

"With sales data, it seems like *customers* love Duke," he said on Twitter. "I guess sometimes we want greasy hamburgers instead of caviar..."

Analysts predict that Duke Nukem Forever will sell around 1.5 to 2 million units worldwide although first day sales of the game in the U.S. were "mediocre." Even more, Take Two shares took a beating on Tuesday as the negative reviews began to roll out, plunging more than 4-percent to $14.80. Doug Creutz of Cowen & Co. believes the possibility of the company achieving its full-year earnings target "has been significantly reduced."

Display 54 Comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 14 Hide
    megamanx00 , June 17, 2011 10:30 PM
    This game is awesome \^_^/ :bounce: 

    Yes I do find it funny and no I don't care what you think :p 
  • 10 Hide
    jsheridan , June 17, 2011 10:40 PM
    what happened to rating games for gameplay and not just based on visuals? The game is fun to play, I mean obviously because people are buying it. The graphics are dated but critics should mention how the game plays and the story....
  • 10 Hide
    someguynamedmatt , June 17, 2011 10:58 PM
    dapneymTo be perfectly honest, I really never expected much from Duke Nukem Forever in the first place. The trailers never really got me all that excited, and as more and more press came out about it I just got a more negative view of the game. The humour itself seems stuck in the 1990s. Maybe it's just me, but a game that centres around degrading women (and gays to a lesser extent) and massive amounts of base humour just isn't going to make a good game.

    From that comment I can tell that you're one of those pansies who support gay people and hate it when people bash on women. And that's why this is being reviewed so badly. Society back in the 1990s didnt consist entirely of little bitches who whine because they're afraid of a little "base" humor. And until people start to grow their backbones back, this is the way it's gonna go for anything similar to DNF.
Other Comments
  • 0 Hide
    PCGOD , June 17, 2011 8:04 PM
    i am sure jon st. john is an expert on pc gaming and what makes a good game.
  • 0 Hide
    Anonymous , June 17, 2011 8:04 PM
    Silly Randy, you don't have to defend this game. Thanks be to unto Mr. Pitchford for actually bringing this out, but this is that fat moron's fault, not yours.

    EFF YOU GEORGE BROUSSARD!
  • -2 Hide
    Anonymous , June 17, 2011 8:11 PM
    It was OK.... but for a such a long development.... what where they doing? the pre release videos showed the only fun/funny bits. the rest just fizzled plently of action. but way to little interaction and unique ideas, if you where in it for they character like me and his zinger qoutes i was dissapoint... despite the fact i missed most as they came during heavy sound moments so you couldnt hear them anyway.

    Please Release a revamp pack/patch, i'll even pay more the idea of the game is good. need more gore, bullet damage specific to body part with random ragdol deaths or half deaths with more then a couple execution techniques. YES i love the idea of executing the injured.... but not the same way a thousand times!
  • 0 Hide
    senkasaw , June 17, 2011 8:12 PM
    My buddy has been playing it and...meh.

    I don't think people who were disappointed were expecting MW2 or anything, but they were expecting something more than "meh." Look at where 10+ years of development got Starcraft 2... 2k Games could have done better than "meh." Of course I am sure all of the hype and expectation isn't helping. If it didn't completely blow people away it was bound to disappoint (kinda like U.S. presidents).
  • 9 Hide
    stm1185 , June 17, 2011 8:16 PM
    It's just a bunch of reviewers who have to be politically correct and sensitive to the feelings of a bunch of pussys. They can't take a joke anymore. Duke was fun because of its crude humor and shooting stuff, DNF delivers on that.

    If you don't like the humor then its obviously not for you and the critics can go back to watching the paint dry in LA Noire.

  • 9 Hide
    misry , June 17, 2011 8:53 PM
    As I think Duke himself would put it, "If you don't like it kiss my ass. Let's see what *you* got."
  • 8 Hide
    unclealek2659 , June 17, 2011 9:18 PM
    Quote:
    "I guess sometimes we want greasy hamburgers instead of caviar..."

    reference to the duke burger?
  • -5 Hide
    mlopinto2k1 , June 17, 2011 9:24 PM
    How could you screw this game up? Just doesn't make sense. Someone TOOK the game and looked at it like cash cow. Get it out they said! Get it out as fast as possible! This thing will be a monster! Yeah, ok.
  • 1 Hide
    malphas , June 17, 2011 9:26 PM
    It was obvious it was going to be mediocre at best, and that's exactly what it is really. The development time doesn't mean much since it was started from scratch several times during then. Gearbox basically took an unfinished game from the mid 2000's, polished it up into something presentable and let people finally play a game that's become near mythological during it's prolonged development, if you go in with that in mind and realistic expecations then it's worth a playthrough.

    It's a shame they didn't just finish up the version they were making with id Tech 2 back in 2001 or whenever, rather than switching to the Unreal engine. From the trailers and footage it looks like it would have been pretty good for its time.
  • 1 Hide
    philologos , June 17, 2011 9:48 PM
    Did anybody else think NCAA basketball when they clicked on this?
  • -4 Hide
    dapneym , June 17, 2011 10:04 PM
    To be perfectly honest, I really never expected much from Duke Nukem Forever in the first place. The trailers never really got me all that excited, and as more and more press came out about it I just got a more negative view of the game. The humour itself seems stuck in the 1990s. Maybe it's just me, but a game that centres around degrading women (and gays to a lesser extent) and massive amounts of base humour just isn't going to make a good game.
  • 14 Hide
    megamanx00 , June 17, 2011 10:30 PM
    This game is awesome \^_^/ :bounce: 

    Yes I do find it funny and no I don't care what you think :p 
  • 10 Hide
    jsheridan , June 17, 2011 10:40 PM
    what happened to rating games for gameplay and not just based on visuals? The game is fun to play, I mean obviously because people are buying it. The graphics are dated but critics should mention how the game plays and the story....
  • 10 Hide
    someguynamedmatt , June 17, 2011 10:58 PM
    dapneymTo be perfectly honest, I really never expected much from Duke Nukem Forever in the first place. The trailers never really got me all that excited, and as more and more press came out about it I just got a more negative view of the game. The humour itself seems stuck in the 1990s. Maybe it's just me, but a game that centres around degrading women (and gays to a lesser extent) and massive amounts of base humour just isn't going to make a good game.

    From that comment I can tell that you're one of those pansies who support gay people and hate it when people bash on women. And that's why this is being reviewed so badly. Society back in the 1990s didnt consist entirely of little bitches who whine because they're afraid of a little "base" humor. And until people start to grow their backbones back, this is the way it's gonna go for anything similar to DNF.
  • 3 Hide
    Miharu , June 17, 2011 11:08 PM
    I agree. Look like some critic started on 80 by removed 20 out of the usual chart. (perhaps for make them wait 14 years...)
    (Perhaps they waiting for a 14 years developpement to be polish as a jewel...)(perhaps they became gay playing too much on their i*Thing.)

    DNF is not the game of the year (meh is allow) but it's should have at least 75-80 on 100. Even bad game get 70 on 100 so I can't really understand 49 on 100.
  • 2 Hide
    malphas , June 17, 2011 11:28 PM
    MiharuDNF is not the game of the year (meh is allow) but it's should have at least 75-80 on 100. Even bad game get 70 on 100 so I can't really understand 49 on 100.

    Game scores like that are nonsense and always have been though, if you're doing a scale from 0-100 then 50 should be an average mediocre game, with varying levels of badness/goodness either side of that, instead it works like 90+ for good games, 80+ for OK games and 70+ for bad games, with the rest of the scale being redundant.
  • 3 Hide
    FloKid , June 18, 2011 12:27 AM
    Isn't it a sin to even look at Duke, after all he is soooo sexxy
  • -4 Hide
    doorspawn , June 18, 2011 1:12 AM
    @senkasaw
    Where did 10+ years of dev get SC2?
    The worst DRM in existence. Better graphics. Game engine (game logic, not graphics) on par with their previous release 6 years earlier (lacks functional water that WC3 has, 3 cliff-heights (WC3=16), 1/4 tile height resolution (compared to WC3)). Editor is an order of magnitude more complex when doing the same things compared to WC3.
    SC2 has not become what they wanted, the ultimate eSport. And that's down simply to it not really being very good.
  • 6 Hide
    therabiddeer , June 18, 2011 3:49 AM
    doorspawn@senkasawWhere did 10+ years of dev get SC2?The worst DRM in existence. Better graphics. Game engine (game logic, not graphics) on par with their previous release 6 years earlier (lacks functional water that WC3 has, 3 cliff-heights (WC3=16), 1/4 tile height resolution (compared to WC3)). Editor is an order of magnitude more complex when doing the same things compared to WC3.SC2 has not become what they wanted, the ultimate eSport. And that's down simply to it not really being very good.

    How is SC2 the worst DRM in existence? Have you ever had issues with installing or running it? Are you an idiot? Better graphics, better game engine (both graphics and logic), no reason to have more than 4 "real" terrain levels and you have just as much height to work with. It is a bit more complex, but you can do WAY more, and they are constantly making improvements and have a big editor release coming with HotS to simplify many things.

    Also, SC2 HAS become the ultimate eSport. It is doing fantastically amazingly well. I reference you to MLG columbus from just about a week ago... which pulled in 16k attendees and another 450k+ people watching the stream online. And the amazing thing is... this was in AMERICA. Also, IGN has a SC2 league as well as numerous other leagues that are popping up. An equal number are around in europe and of course korea has the GSL.
    Watch this and tell me you dont get excited watching it: http://tv.majorleaguegaming.com/video/mlg-video/977857427001-idra-vs-mc-pool-play
    Basically, no... you're wrong.

    PS: Duke wouldve been way better if it werent for the 2 gun-at-a-time limit and no duke boot.
  • 2 Hide
    alidan , June 18, 2011 3:58 AM
    malphasGame scores like that are nonsense and always have been though, if you're doing a scale from 0-100 then 50 should be an average mediocre game, with varying levels of badness/goodness either side of that, instead it works like 90+ for good games, 80+ for OK games and 70+ for bad games, with the rest of the scale being redundant.


    people only really want to play good games, so people only really make good games.

    when a game is bad, its REALLY BAD. and there are a few.

    i personally think that a 1-10 rating system, that is weighted, and a final precent would be the best way to go.

    like a fps gets a 30-40% of its rating from graphics alone (not realism, but how well it all flows, because its one of the few games thats selling point IS graphics) but a survival horror game would get weighted 30-40% on sound, and racing would get 50-70% on game play (good or bad graphics, good or bad sound, racing games live and die on game play alone, where others can get compensated from other aspects)

    duke i believe (not haveing played it) is about
    7/10 graphics
    8/10 game play (personal taste)
    10/10 music (if they dont fuck up the sound track, which i dont think they did)
    and a 5/10 over all presentation (from what i hear of later levels.

    coming in somewhere around a 7-7.5/10
Display more comments