Tuesday, September 20th 2011
Duke Nukem Forever Feedback Survey: Where Did We Go So wrong?
Highly anticipated for 14 years and becoming the most infamous vapourware ever, Duke Nukem Forever unfortunately was met with widespread derision and ridicule on release in June. Many reviews gave it around 40% or less, accusing it of being a 90s throwback and made in very bad taste. Not everybody hated it though and it has some loyal fans. So, Gearbox, priding itself on listening to its customers, has set up an online feedback survey and wants to honestly, truly know what you think of it (assuming its servers survive the heat of all those flames of course, which isn't guaranteed at all). This is especially important for Gearbox, as it's going to release a sequel and wants to ensure its customers like it (and rather more importantly, buy it).
The survey starts off like this:
Source:
Reg Hardware
Hello,I hope this doesn't mean it ends up watered down and made politically correct. It had some wonderfully politically incorrect humour in it which I would like to see preserved in the sequel.
This is a survey for Duke Nukem Forever. Gearbox prides itself in listening to the community, and this is your chance to tell us how you feel about Duke Nukem Forever. You may participate in this survey if you have played or have not played Duke Nukem Forever. Please answer the following questions.
45 Comments on Duke Nukem Forever Feedback Survey: Where Did We Go So wrong?
Thumbs up on the politically incorrect humor...I missed it so much. Duke is still the king.
It took 12yrs:rolleyes:
I was one of the people who played it and really enjoyed it despite the negative aspects (although i played on PC so long load times, low frame rates etc were not present like they apparently were for the consoles), i really hope that this survey could help gearbox make better DLC or make a much much better duke game themselves.
If they intend to release another they need to go back and play the first game see what made it fun to play and not copy but update it for today's world and add something fresh to it.
There isn't enough die hard duke fans left to make the title alone profitable.
I am about as far from mature as you can get, but even I see the irony in that.
Just give it five minutes and you'll get the feel of it.
the health system, if it's a pride metere then doing things that increase dukes pride increase health. hiding behind cover should not be one of these.
if your going to make an "old school" style game then keep the "old school" elements such as carrying lots of weapons, running and gunning, etc.
the humour was good in places and awful in others.
Other than that, the game just seems to be totally different from the style of D3D where you ran around the whole time with your 2D sprite weapons killing the 2D sprite enemies, finding keys and secrets and eventually the end of the level.
I dont think it was a good game at all as far as gameplay goes. Why is Forever so stop and shoot? Also you basically have a halo style shield which is stupid since they mock Halo. Shooting mechanics SUCK. There are parts of levels that are just there to extend the length of the game. Far too linear and scripted, which isn't normally a problem but the scripted events are right out of the late 90s. Basically if you like the humour i flat out facepalm its not funny because its non-politically correct it just doesn't make sense at all. Bulletstorm had lots of "dick jokes" but they where nonsensical and thus funny and the fact they where inoffensive and where not there to insult anyone. Bulletstorm wasn't amazing it was just decent but it was worth a playthrough Forever on the other hand no just wait for the Duke Nukem 3D remake.
EDIT: My main problem is i found the singleplayer boring, felt like i was forcing my self to play it. Games dont need to have masterpiece stories and dynamic experiences, sometimes all i want is a game that i can play that is interesting and compels me to keep playing but Forever never had any reason to play there was no gameplay that made me feel like i wanted to play on no story or great design that i was like i must continue this game, the another turn syndrome was foreign or rather alien to this game.
Great gameplay but the borked video settings and screwy over use of Depth of Field causing anything you zoom in on being blurry then a 100x100 jpeg blown up to 1000x1000 was a big fail, but overall the game was alright, taking the current incarnation and changing the level design to be far more sprawling with much more focus on searching and fighting your way around would be better, bring back the vast levels of the old FPS games, and give us a good story to its not that hard, to avoid linear level design and other issues, DNF is what it is, its a finished game that was done in 2006 but spent nearly 4 years in limbo waiting for the last touches, hopefully a new Duke from the ground up will, fix those glaring issues, and polish off the humor and and gameplay.
and id like to say thanks to Kurgan :toast:
the graphics for the game were finished mostly in 2005-2006 so litteraly the games age is around Xbox 360 / PS3 launch and its just finally been released for the public of course its behind on the times, look at Resistence 1 vs Resistence 3 or Saints Row vs Saints Row 3, etc games have gotten better over time even on dated consoles, but if you look at the Duke Nukem time frame it pretty much was 70-80% complete in 2006 and then just stalled out. till 2011.
I really wanted to play through it, too, but it was just so... average. Too average and most of the jokes forced.
And how in the name of all thats holy does Duke get shitfaced from one can of beer.
Well, the Developers didn't think that. This is what they thought:
"Hey, we just received this barely started game based on assets that have been re-created 7 times.. and we have a year to complete it .... Let's just do a throw-back to the original.. that's what people want anyway, right?"
And there you have it. We'll get J.J. Abrams for the sequel.
/troll
I liked the game. Sure, it's not all that great, but it was fun and it was different. The next one should have a much shorter development cycle and be much better.
I was however impressed by the video released in 2001 when it was still using modified Unreal Engine 1.5. That looked stunning for the time and for me it still would be.