News Duke Nukem Forever Review

I wondered this myself when I saw this criticism in a review, but I haven't played the game yet myself or seen the animations in question.
When I read it I imagined the 'hyup!' type jump from DN3D and wondered if it was intentionally the same in DNF, but without having seen it for myself I had put that notion off as silly.
Is it actually that similar?

(Weird thing to focus on, I know)

My only other comment about DNF is that I find it hard to accept when people defend the game's humour in light of the humour found in DN3D.
DN3D had some puerile humour, but it was a sideline to the core game; a tiny part of the experience that just lended some atmosphere and amusement. It seems to me that it became the focus of DNF either for the sake of publicity or because the developers lost sight of what people actually liked about DN3D, as opposed to what they remembered thanks to the controversy.
As a point of interest, I remember feeling that way about it years ago when seeing some of the OTT stuff creeping into the screenshots; not just about this latest iteration of the game via Gearbox et al.

 

It's not the focus. The focus is still kicking massive amounts of alien ass with overwhelming firepower and the idea that "Power Armor is for pussies." It's just that in DNF there's SO MUCH more A.D.D. side-stuff you can do, one of which is fishing a turd out of a toilet bowl, to which Duke expresses complete disgust with himself. I wasted a good 30 minutes playing pinball, and another 20 playing electronic poker. I also pulled quit a few slots and played some pool until I got the ego bonus.

As for the animation and sound, It's too set-apart to be neglect. It's like 5 generations away from any other model. And I can't think of any game that will sacrifice the look of the main character so that a random bystander can look better. I take it as a throw-back, anything else just seems ludicrous.

 

There were no random bystanders in my room when I played it but still all of the character models were quite dated in look compared to most modern games. That alone is not a good enough reason to trash a game though, it was the dated gameplay that killed it. I don't have a problem playing old games when they're made well (I own serious same 1st and 2nd encounter HD and have been playing them recently).

 

I think that too, the earlier builds screenshots looked great to me. The game had armor, and "life", not EGO...

I think that lot's of the ideas during these 14 years are going to be used in the sequel, I just hope they don't make DLC, *or paying DLC*, I liked the game, it wasn't fantastic but I apreciated it...

 

Its still better than Modern Warfare 2 without any dedicated servers.

LOL

 

Touché... LOL

 

http://www.xentax.com/?p=303

Ouch. You're on the list Mr. Brown.


Well, at least I thought the score was fair...

 

Just to say I'm a casual gamer and I've just finished playing DNF - and I've thoroughly enjoyed playing.

It was a bit weak in places with some of the levels being overly elaborate and not obvious how you should solve the problem, but in the main it's a big ish game with lots of battles and silly comments. I like the sense of humour the game has about itself. Easy to pick up and put down. Disappointing ending, but some very nice inclusions with the trailers and timelines - really pushes the buttons. It's only when you see the original trailer that you get a sense of just how much of the game has been re-written during it's development cycle.

Well done to the team for finishing the game. Hope you managed to justify doing a sequel ... Duke Nukem Infinity anyone?