The award for [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1097833-Nicest-Gaming-Company-Ever]nicest huge video game corporation[/url] goes to 2K.
[QUOTE=smurfy;30496685]The award for [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1097833-Nicest-Gaming-Company-Ever]nicest huge video game corporation[/url] goes to 2K.[/QUOTE]
The guy wasn't talking on behalf of 2K.
[QUOTE=Chickens!;30496968]The guy wasn't talking on behalf of 2K.[/QUOTE]
That's what I mean, it's good of 2K/TakeTwo to tell them to pack their bags and fuck off because they tried to bully journalists like this
Sorry, I thought that was sarcasm. :rolleyes:
[QUOTE=smurfy;30496685]The award for [url=http://www.facepunch.com/threads/1097833-Nicest-Gaming-Company-Ever]nicest huge video game corporation[/url] goes to 2K.[/QUOTE]
No.
[quote]Onion AV and Eurogamer writer John Teti claims this is more down to 2K than Redner. Teti was recently invited to a 2K event, but when word got back about his negative Mafia II review, they uninvited him. Teti tweeted: "The only mistake Jim Redner made was to disclose 2K operating practices publicly. Blacklisting writers for poor reviews is company policy. [He's] a good guy who got caught up in the 2K culture and made a bad mistake. But remember that: It's the culture, not one dude."[/quote]
[url]http://www.neoseeker.com/news/16677-pr-agency-lashes-out-over-duke-reviews-2k-gives-the-boot/[/url]
I didn't thin DNF was THAT bad. I still had fun with it
[QUOTE=The very best;30498101]I didn't thin DNF was THAT bad. I still had fun with it[/QUOTE]
It's not. Reviews of 3/10 are a disgrace. The reviewers should reconsider their position.
[QUOTE=The very best;30498101]I didn't thin DNF was THAT bad. I still had fun with it[/QUOTE]
The game is the perfect way of showing how much of a delusional manchild George Broussard is and why 3DRealms went bankrupt.
Don't really know why they criticised it for an "embarassing character". It's Duke Nukem, what did they suspect?
That's what happens when you wait too long for a sequel. The game loses its funk.
[QUOTE=Memobot;30498473]It's not. Reviews of 3/10 are a disgrace. The reviewers should reconsider their position.[/QUOTE]
Maybe 5 or 6 but 3 is pretty low.
5 is low, I'd put it at around a 7 or even 7.5
5 is average, so 3 would be a very bad game. Which DNF isn't. It is average.
I like 2k even if the game was shit.
[QUOTE=Rofl my Waff;30499799]I like 2k even if the game was shit.[/QUOTE]
You like the developers like Gearbox, not 2K itself.
[QUOTE=Ninja Duck;30499136]That's what happens when you wait too long for a sequel. The game loses its funk.[/QUOTE]
Just that it has absolutely nothing to do with it.
They just made a shit game.
Take Starcraft II for example. It's excellent. The difference is that they knew what to do, 3DRealms had no fucking clue or idea of anything but "WE NEED TO MAKE IT AWESOME! FUCK YEAH!".
To me it felt like a pretty good action game and then they changed the character to duke in the last second.
[QUOTE=dgg;30499875]Just that it has absolutely nothing to do with it.
They just made a shit game.
Take Starcraft II for example. It's excellent. The difference is that they knew what to do, 3DRealms had no fucking clue or idea of anything but "WE NEED TO MAKE IT AWESOME! FUCK YEAH!".[/QUOTE]
the main difference is that starcraft II is just prettier starcraft, you can't do that with an FPS without just calling it an hrp ( [url]http://hrp.duke4.net/[/url] )
I feel kind of bad for them because of the poor reviews. Its not really that bad, and I've read a bit about them, so it sounds like they also had a fun time making it and they're overall pretty cool people. Its not perfect, but it definitely doesn't deserve a 3/10 or other ratings close to that.
I'm enjoying it regardless of the reviews.
I don't see why people dislike this game so much. I think it's a great game and keeps me interested with its multitude of humorous outside relations (like Master Chief's power armor).
"America! Fuck yeah!"
[QUOTE=ButtsexV3;30499970]the main difference is that starcraft II is just prettier starcraft, you can't do that with an FPS without just calling it an hrp ( [url]http://hrp.duke4.net/[/url] )[/QUOTE]
Not really. They did a lot to the story mode that was not present in the first Starcraft at all.
The multiplayer is prettier Starcraft in order to keep it balanced and please all the Starcraft players, because that's all they wanted for their competitive gaming. The map editor however got a giant motherfucking overhaul.
They did a-fucking-lot more to Starcraft II than just polishing the graphics and add a couple of new units. But they knew when to hold back, something that can not be said about 3DRealms.
I don't know, maybe you just never played any of the other duke nukem games, but Duke3D wasn't very duke compared to the rest of the games. In Duke3D he had a somewhat sharper sort of wit that didn't follow too well with the rest of the series. He had always been considerably more vulgar and immature. the biggest change from Duke Nukem II to Forever (ignoring obvious ones like the transition from 2D to 3D or the different storyline) was the graphics and interactivity.
DNF is pure unadulterated duke
Duke Nukem Forever is a shitty game with bland, unhumorous jokes, terrible gameplay, and honestly one of the worst levels in the history of gaming, "The Hive". Duke Nukem Forever deserved every negative review it got and then some. People who say otherwise are just blinded by nostalgia. It has killed all the charm of both the character and the franchise, and sucked all the fun out of the design of the original game to make it appeal to modern gamers, but failed miserably.
[/rant]
[editline]16th June 2011[/editline]
I wish I could have been part of the design team of DNF. Just to see what the hell they were thinking.
and not to mention that the games had never been about the game itself, but the character.
[QUOTE=ButtsexV3;30500726]I don't know, maybe you just never played any of the other duke nukem games, but Duke3D wasn't very duke compared to the rest of the games. In Duke3D he had a somewhat sharper sort of wit that didn't follow too well with the rest of the series. He had always been considerably more vulgar and immature. the biggest change from Duke Nukem II to Forever (ignoring obvious ones like the transition from 2D to 3D or the different storyline) was the graphics and interactivity.
DNF is pure unadulterated duke[/QUOTE]
I've played all of them except #2, never finished any of them however.
The gameplay is on completely different planets. Duke Nukem 3D were much more like Doom, which is a good thing. DNF is more like a bunch of scripts and mini-games coming at you in a row and you have to press some buttons and shoot some people to keep going to the next script and mini-game.
Just the fact that you can't wield more than two weapons at the time kills a major part of the game.
Once again it's a case of gamers forcefully lowering their standards so they don't disappoint themselves. Facepunch does this all the time, even with franchises the majority of them despise like COD.
[QUOTE=dgg;30500970]I've played all of them, never finished any of them however.
The gameplay is on completely different planets. The [b]first Duke games[/b] were much more like Doom, which is a good thing. DNF is more like a bunch of scripts and mini-games coming at you in a row and you have to press some buttons and shoot some people to keep going to the next script and mini-game.
Just the fact that you can't wield more than two weapons at the time kills a major part of the game.[/QUOTE]
Duke Nukem 1 & 2 were side scrolling Shoot-em-ups.
:frog:
[QUOTE=TraderRager;30501043]Duke Nukem 1 & 2 were side scrolling Shoot-em-ups.
:frog:[/QUOTE]
I edited that a long time before you made that post. I just mixed up some memories. I've played #1, Manhattan and 3D.
[QUOTE=TraderRager;30501043]Duke Nukem 1 & 2 were side scrolling Shoot-em-ups.
:frog:[/QUOTE]
Yeah and DN1/2 Duke was pretty clean in comparison to D3D Duke.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.