Unsurprisingly, Duke Nukem Forever reviews are negative

I didn't say it was aperfect game, I am not a fan of modern FPS aside from Fallout New Vegas, I am just saying that the complains are focused msotly on those terms, I have seen other complains but what substract the mroe points seems to be thso two things, the game tried to fuse 90's fps elements with mdoern ones, wich just doesn't work most of the time, and other things, but people start spammign the 3/10 from very stupid sensibilites they have about "what should be".
 
Did you skim through just one or two bogus reviews and assume they all say the same thing? Or more likely are you parroting other blind fanboys' baseless bullshit? The vast majority only briefly mention the development time and failed humor, then go onto much more about what is wrong with DNF. Try to actually read them first, you dimwitted fool. Watch some video reviews, too. The broken record of blind illiterate fans makes me sick.
 
pffft, great how you make abunch of judgements based on a single message, I watcheda lot of video reviews, I saw the game beign played and I played it myself, a 3 out of 10 seems like a too low a score for the game, I would mostly give it a 5, did you play the game so you can get all defensive about someone else's review? can you even give your own argument other than name calling and tellign me what others say? Red my message first, act righteous about somethign you didn't do later.

Also you call me an iletrate fanboy when A) I am writing ad reading, so I am not iletrare you dumbass, and B) I have already said in this topic and in my message that I am not a fan of DUke Nukem or FPS games.
 
duke nukem forever ( DNF ) is what happens when you turn a "classic" FPS Shooter and bring it into the world of COD and Halo.

you want someone to blame? blame the people who think COD games and halo games are good.
 
TheWesDude said:
you want someone to blame? blame the people who think COD games and halo games are good.
Click to expand...

They are definitely not the only ones to blame because COD actually looks good when compared to DNF. It is certainly more fun to play. Can't say anything about Halo though, never played any of those games. But I reckon I'd have more fun even with them.
 
I think the developers would be the ones to blame? Or perhaps influence from the publishers? You certainly can't blame the consumer who has had nothing to do with the actual development for all fourteen years of it? As someone who enjoys both COD series and the Halo series and I'm pretty sure I've never given any fucks about DNF.
 
Wintermind said:
Except MAG, Killzone, and Resistance are all on PS3, whereas the Halo franchise is Xbox. Most people playing shooters on the 360 are playing Halo, COD, or a Battlefield game. Other shooters like Gears of War or Left 4 Dead or Rainbow Six still have fairly decent followings.
Click to expand...

I'm very confused about the relevance of this sentence. I was replying to the following statement made by Ausdoerrt:
Well, considering that the only other FPS on the consoles that's worth talking about is the CoD series...
Click to expand...

Wtf?


By the way, I saw mention that Duke got a 0/10 on Metacritic. The game sucks but that's a bit harsh wouldn't you say? I mean, it's hardly the worst game ever made.
 
maximaz said:
By the way, I saw mention that Duke got a 0/10 on Metacritic. The game sucks but that's a bit harsh wouldn't you say? I mean, it's hardly the worst game ever made.
Click to expand...

Every game that I don't enjoy is the worst game ever.

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS HYPERBOLE AND EVERYTHING IS AS SERIOUS AS DEATH ITSELF!
 
By the way, I saw mention that Duke got a 0/10 on Metacritic. The game sucks but that's a bit harsh wouldn't you say? I mean, it's hardly the worst game ever made.
Click to expand...

Being dissapointed can do that to some folk but no, it is not a zero. If I were to rate it anything I'd just simply call it a 4.5 out of 10 for the simple fact that the tiny Duke stage was fun but the rest is ugly and generic. Also poking fun at games that are quite a bit better than yours is not a good idea at all. I know Halo is not the ultimate shooter by any means for example but it was at the time better than this. I'd score it better if all the humour didn't just fall flat on it's face or embarrass itself in context. Also the turd.....really? A piece of poo is what you've got? Not funny man.

Although.......
[spoiler:30287f71d1]I did enjoy the Holsome twins blowing up. Annoying twats pissed me off when losing at the worthless pool game at the beginning.[/spoiler:30287f71d1]
 
The game feels rather cheap and not worthy of the title "Forever". It has some interesting ideas, but in the end, they don't hold water.
 
Khan FurSainty said:
The game feels rather cheap and not worthy of the title "Forever". It has some interesting ideas, but in the end, they don't hold water.
Click to expand...

DING DING DING DING! Johnny we have a winner!

Pretty good summation. And the review score fiasco is a continuation of the problem that reviewers have of being unable to give games good reviews or bad reviews without making something "damn near perfect 8/10 9/10 goty" or "terrible, should never have been released 3/10 2/10 0/10 worst game ever."

Hell, Fallout 3 is far far buggier yet it barely got its score adjusted. DNF has FPS stuttering issues on consoles and is pretty stable and "cheap, glitch filled" is brought up in reviews fairly often.

DNF is pretty much the very definition of "average forgettable game."
 
Hell, Fallout 3 is far far buggier yet it barely got its score adjusted. DNF has FPS stuttering issues on consoles and is pretty stable and "cheap, glitch filled" is brought up in reviews fairly often.
Click to expand...

To be fair, it does make sense to be more tolerant of glitches in big, open ended roleplaying games, with many quests, inventory items, etc such as the Fallout games and less tolerant of such glitches in linear shooting games with significantly less complexity going on...and being in development for over a decade...
 
Played a bit of it at friends place today and didnt really like it too much, gunning was okay and liked how duke moves faster than your average fps hero these days but 2 weapon system and regen health plus how badly the PC version performed compared to how it looks i was quite underwhelmed. I did laugh at couple of the oneliners but thats about it. I played it at the construction site level or whatever it was called.
 
It still wouldn't be great. Not even close. Partly because there is no writing nor humour to be found. Or intelligent design.
Also, returned to my local Hastings. Got soooo goddamn boring.
 
Verd1234 said:
Hell, Fallout 3 is far far buggier yet it barely got its score adjusted. DNF has FPS stuttering issues on consoles and is pretty stable and "cheap, glitch filled" is brought up in reviews fairly often.
Click to expand...

To be fair, it does make sense to be more tolerant of glitches in big, open ended roleplaying games, with many quests, inventory items, etc such as the Fallout games and less tolerant of such glitches in linear shooting games with significantly less complexity going on...and being in development for over a decade...
Click to expand...
Its quite obvious that the gaming press has a double standart.

It was always that way. Not that it makes it better though. To often games with a huge budged and big company behind it gets different reviews then games from independ developers or smaller developers. Why ? Who knows. Probably for many reasons.

If Duke is the exception here ? Well the game was in some development cycle for the last 14 years or so. Even reviews have their limits I guess. And it was quite clear it could not hold up to ANY standarts. I have not played it. But I simply do not have any interest in it. Not from what I have seen. The layout of the levels looks uninteresting. It is missing the Duke-typical-violance (because of political correctness I assume) I mean that guy sitting on his chair to get a photo ? Why dont you get a chance to punch him a few times. And other such stuff. And the try to "modernise" this kind of shooter. The stuff with the Ego could have been really cool if it would not recharge it self while sitting behind a rock.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top