Duke Nukem: Forever V2 - Extra Hate Edition! - Games

Who cares about hype, 12 years of drama, etc? Looking at the game on it's own merits, it's an ugly and poor shooter. If it didn't have the name "Duke Nukem" on the front, it wouldn't be any different than any $10-$20 budget shooter in the bargain bin or on weekly Steam sales...

[QUOTE=Arvuti;30471067]Ehh. But what the fuck kind of a complaint is this I don't see them complaining about that in call of duty reviews.[/QUOTE] That's kinda because of the inherent bias in Gamespot and IGN, but also because it's not really Duke-y to have, at most, an enemy go flying or burst into a couple meaty bits that causes you to get a B-B-B-BLOODY SCREEN. Pretty much the whole reason for the combat in Duke Nukem is to be fast and very, very meaty. You would think that, with all this awesome technology there is these days, Gearbox or 3D Realms would have added a complex gore system, or more death animations or something other than ragdolls and pieces of nondescript meat.

Let's see what IGNorant has to say about DNF. [quote]Turret sequences are too often used as a crutch to break up on-foot fights[/quote] There really aren't too many turret sequences, and for an expection for few scenes. The game doesn't even force you to use a turret. [quote]In most cases, the sections in Duke Nukem Forever that connect the shooting are dull, derivative experiences that feel like they exist for no other reason than to bloat the story mode, and it isn't clear if they're meant to parody video game filler content.[/quote] To be honest, if the game wouldve been just filled with action/shooting people would complain that it has too much action and has poor pacing. [quote]It doesn't try to tell a story and doesn't force you into poorly conceived vehicle sequences or drawn-out platforming sections, so it doesn't share the story mode's identity crisis.[/quote] Name a multiplayer mode for a singleplayer game what's trying to tell a story (other than team a is trying to kill team b) It's in general weird to give a game 5.0 when the review claims that it's fun and the multiplayer is chaotic and fun.

[QUOTE=usaokay;30471563]Reviewers (or the people who read/watch the review) base a game on how it's compared to other games on the market.[/QUOTE] Nope. Reviewers base their reviews on what big publishers can threaten them with. Ever wondered why they're so keen to give out review copies and free swag?

[QUOTE=Arvuti;30471699] Name a multiplayer mode for a singleplayer game what's trying to tell a story (other than team a is trying to kill team b) It's in general weird to give a game 5.0 when the review claims that it's fun and the multiplayer is chaotic and fun.[/QUOTE] You have Brink, don't you?

[QUOTE=killz2much;30465072][sp]The Duke 3D version of the freeze ray (the one that shot frozen projectiles at enemies). Black & White Mode. Mirror Mode (basically the entire SP campaign mirrored horizontally) Game Speed Adjuster. Head Scales Adjuster. And some classics like: Invincibility Infinite Ammo Instagib[/sp][/QUOTE] Those are hardly interesting. Definitely doesn't add to the games replayability. [editline]15th June 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=imaguy;30466494]I don't understand why this game is getting scores lower than 7. It's incredibly fun[/QUOTE] It's a matter of opinions. I don't like it, but I'd rate it 7 at most. There are other games out there that (in my opinion) have done a far better job than DNF and were released years before.

I don't think a game sitting at 53 on Metacritic (PC version), is reviewers fault. If it's a 70 or so, some may love it, some hate it. But for the most part, I don't think 53 average is the fault of reviewers.. it's just not that great of a game.

Just got to what I think is the final part of The Lady Killer: Part 3, and by god, this game is already getting tiring. I'm playing it on the hardest difficulty, and I think I might drop it down a level just so I can get it over with. I was very excited for this game, and while the humour is definitely there, the shooting and driving sections are just BORING.

You can smoke cigars, I found one in the Hoover Dam level and when Duke puts it in his mouth it stays at the bottom of the screen till its done as it was in his mouth

[QUOTE=eatdembeanz;30471726]You have Brink, don't you?[/QUOTE] brinks multiplayer is just singleplayer with real players. So it doesn't really count.

Oh my god this game is so fun. Especially the multiplayer.

God, what is with everyone here. At first everyone hates it, now everyone loves it?

[QUOTE=Ignhelper;30472834]God, what is with everyone here. At first everyone hates it, now everyone loves it?[/QUOTE] Half of FP hates it and half likes it. not too hard to figure out

[QUOTE=hexpunK;30470752]You're a fucking idiot Sift.[/QUOTE] Rated heart because you're my best friend [editline]15th June 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Arvuti;30471067]Ehh. But what the fuck kind of a complaint is this I don't see them complaining about that in call of duty reviews.[/QUOTE] Yeah there's some dumb reasons but thinking they paid for bad reviews is dumb as all hell, and literally the entire thread going "I DONT GET REVIEWS. THE REVIEWS ARE WRONG. DAMN PAID REVIEWS." just sounds like someone in denial like it or not :v: If you're a fucking braindead idiot like hexpunk and ignore that I said "You might not be" and you genuinely enjoy it, doesn't stop it from somewhat coming off that way. :v:v I'm happy everyones enjoying it honestly but stop getting hung up on reviews jeeze. Just enjoy the game if that's what you're doin'! Edit: I can throw insults on a internet forum to :downs: Edit 2: Amusing aside though, all the Duke bros on SA are now Serious Sam club members to save face or something, the lead mod or something disowned the game so he's switching everyone over or something. I have no idea what's going on but that's kind of hilarious in a sad way. Edit 3: To clear up what I mean, this is the same thread that said "Don't listen to reviews when they come out they'll be 10/10 because their paid to love it!" and argued about that for a brief moment, now that their all low reviews (for the most part anyway) "Man they were paid to be low scoring reviews(what) the game owns duke owns!!" it's kinda silly to bring up, in the end isn't it your opinion that matters instead of some shitty numerical score? This could be your game of the year for whatever reason, some site saying it's 4/10 doesn't change that.

The reviewers don't seem to like the game. Look at metacritic and find something interesting: The users who rated the PC version not only rated more, but they rated higher. The PS3 and 360 views are low, VERY low. Something must not feel right when playing on the console, but on the PC everything feels oh so smooth.

[QUOTE=killz2much;30473314]The reviewers don't seem to like the game. Look at metacritic and find something interesting: The users who rated the PC version not only rated more, but they rated higher. The PS3 and 360 views are low, VERY low. Something must not feel right when playing on the console, but on the PC everything feels oh so smooth.[/QUOTE] I can explain this somewhat! Xbox360/Ps3: -45 second load times for every new map, 30 second respawn times -Muddier graphics, textures are more flat -Loads and loads of bugs, The president for example in the intro when you're in the duke cave has a habit of locking up mid animation and it's kind of weird -Duke doesn't talk AS much -It's mainly the loading though Pc version really is the way to go on it

[QUOTE=Sift;30473398] -Duke doesn't talk AS much [/QUOTE] I WONDER HOW MANY PORKCHOPS I COULD MAKE OUT OF YOU I WONDER HOW MANY PORKCHOPS I COULD MAKE OUT OF YOU I WONDER HOW MANY PORKCHOPS I COULD MAKE OUT OF YOU

[QUOTE=Hakita;30473445]I WONDER HOW MANY PORKCHOPS I COULD MAKE OUT OF YOU I WONDER HOW MANY PORKCHOPS I COULD MAKE OUT OF YOU I WONDER HOW MANY PORKCHOPS I COULD MAKE OUT OF YOU[/QUOTE] I don't see the issue with this line, I have only heard him say it 2 or 3 times at the max.

[QUOTE=bobsynergy;30473473]I don't see the issue with this line, I have only heard him say it 2 or 3 times at the max.[/QUOTE] He keeps saying it over and over for me. Like, every 7 kills

[QUOTE=Hakita;30473445]I WONDER HOW MANY PORKCHOPS I COULD MAKE OUT OF YOU I WONDER HOW MANY PORKCHOPS I COULD MAKE OUT OF YOU I WONDER HOW MANY PORKCHOPS I COULD MAKE OUT OF YOU[/QUOTE] PORKCHOPSANDWICHESPORKCHOPSANDICHESPORKCHOPSANDWICHESPORKCHOPSANDWHICHES I mentioned earlier someone made a drinking game in a stream from how often he said it :v: [b]I wasn't lieing[/b]

Terrible generic shooter with all the bad mechanics of modern shooters with all the bad mechanics of 90s shooters. The humor isn't humorous, the naked women aren't sexy, and honestly "The Hive" is the worst experiences I've had in the history of gaming, and only made me hate Duke. GG gearbox.

[QUOTE=eatdembeanz;30471673]That's kinda because of the inherent bias in Gamespot and IGN, but also because it's not really Duke-y to have, at most, an enemy go flying or burst into a couple meaty bits that causes you to get a B-B-B-BLOODY SCREEN. Pretty much the whole reason for the combat in Duke Nukem is to be fast and very, very meaty. You would think that, with all this awesome technology there is these days, Gearbox or 3D Realms would have added a complex gore system, or more death animations or something other than ragdolls and pieces of nondescript meat.[/QUOTE] It's strange because in the extras menu there's some 2006 gameplay footage (with some broken animations, I guess it was a WIP footage that was to be shown to the public) that shows Duke shooting some pig cops and every shot left a bloody mess on the walls and floor.

[img]http://i.imgur.com/1gCd5l.jpg[/img] ahahaha I fucking love the SA goons

Why are people saying that it's gearboxes fault ? It's mostly 3d realmses fault, they are the one who made the game. Gearbox just mainly finished it. Ive heard somewhere that gearbox was responsible for the two guns thing but still.

gee thanks wasnt planning on sleeping tonight anyway

[QUOTE=Arvuti;30473662]Why are people saying that it's gearboxes fault ? It's mostly 3d realmses fault, they are the one who made the game. Gearbox just mainly finished it. Ive heard somewhere that gearbox was responsible for the two guns thing but still.[/QUOTE] More accurately it's everybodies damn fault.

[QUOTE=Sift;30473650][img]http://i.imgur.com/1gCd5l.jpg[/img] ahahaha I fucking love the SA goons[/QUOTE] What does that have to do with SA? There's an adjuster for head size in the extras menu, you can do that yourself.

[QUOTE=Arvuti;30473662]Why are people saying that it's gearboxes fault ? It's mostly 3d realmses fault, they are the one who made the game. Gearbox just mainly finished it. Ive heard somewhere that gearbox was responsible for the two guns thing but still.[/QUOTE] Gearbox probably didn't touch the actual game. More push it through the release phase by testing it, building the final release and publishing it.

You know how they could have fixed this game? A. Remove the Hive B. Carry all guns at all times, rarer ammo C. A TRUE ego system. Trying to take cover would lower your ego, but putting your gun away and charging headfirst to punch a enemies head off would make you Nigh-Invulnerable, unless you got hit by something that would make you lose ego, like getting blown up or knocked off your feat.

[QUOTE=killz2much;30473694]What does that have to do with SA? There's an adjuster for head size in the extras menu, you can do that yourself.[/QUOTE] I read it was only big head mode :v: my bad, and it was posted over there and reposted it here so, yeah.