You think after 12 years of dev time it would have been finished ^_^. Anyway the problem was they restarted development like 3 times, so yeah if they would have just finished one of the first two and just called it "Duke Nukem 3.5" or something, then they could have had some funds to develop DNF. Oh well, such is life.
Those fools, if they released the game ASAP it would end up like Final fantasy and the profits would make them go from bankrupt to Legendary. I get the feeling it will be released in 2010-2011 simply because it is probably almost already done and it has more hype than anything in existence.
If Crytek had half a brain they would buy it and give it Crysis Graphics or the option upon install to use 2 different engines based on the computers speed.
What's the point of releasing all these videos and pictures AFTER they've gone under? This is kinda like the ex-post facto statements parents use: "oh, if you had gotten an A, I would've bought you a Maserati. " Please. Spare us this nonsense.
Duke Nukem is what we need today, especially with this apologist idiot-in-chief. Duke Nukem is unabashedly pro-American, kicks candy-ass liberals in the junk, and beats the living hell out of aliens. None of this PC bulls*it where everyone is "special" in their own way. The Taliban ain't special. Duke would've ripped their heads off and s*it down their necks.
I'm not so much into the blatant nudity in that video myself. As a parent, I'm kind of scared of the future. California courts are now saying you can't restrict game sales based on age. As games get more and more graphic, we'll start seeing more and more nudity, and 10 year olds will be playing it.
[citation][nom]jerreece[/nom]I'm not so much into the blatant nudity in that video myself. As a parent, I'm kind of scared of the future. California courts are now saying you can't restrict game sales based on age. As games get more and more graphic, we'll start seeing more and more nudity, and 10 year olds will be playing it. Otherwise, the game looks great.[/citation]
I always find it funny that titties are horrible for our children to see, but killing large numbers of people, that's ok. Prudish to say the least.
[citation][nom]piper5177[/nom]jerreece, I always laugh at this argument. Would you rather your kid see nudity or violence? I personally think violence is far worse but that's just me.[/citation]
Our children probably shouldn't be subjected to either. Unfortunately this is the world we live in. We live in a society that flaunts sexuality. As a Catholic, I believe children should be taught to hold themselves until marriage. Nudity and sexual items in games fight against this, and is not good for any of us.
Personally, I see graphical violence as less of an issue when compared with sexuality. I don't personally think graphically violent games necessarily make children want to murder people. However, sexually explicit games do make children want to have sex. And children should NOT have sex.