I was thinking the same thing over the past couple of weeks. I don't care what the reviews may say, I'm going to buy it because like most we grew up with Duke and turned a lot of us on to the FPS genre. Plus after so many years...you almost have to. The success is guaranteed, the reviews aren't though. I'm sure some of them will be down to earth and honest, others will be paid supporters, and the others just negative Nancy's. I have a strong feeling the long wait times, law suits, studio changes, etc. are GOING to be used by all those who review it, for good or bad you can't look past the length it took and angry reviewers are definitely going to make more use of that argument.
I remember reading about the game in GamePro, EGM, etc. way back and it is funny to think it will actually exist in a few months. Or perhaps the greatest prank of all time and it turns out it doesn't exist.
golden axe beast rider (360): got terrible reviews , mostly for not doing any thing "new" who cares , i palyed the game and loved every minute of it's old schoolhack and slach didn't caret hat the dialouge sucked dialouge is not what the game was ever about '
conan the barbarian (360): again a game that got piss poor reviews ,stil didnt care , dialouge sucked , but teh game was about old school hack and slash and like golden axe i enjoyed it for what it did do.
NWN 2: got terible reviews and was actually buggy as hell at release , stil enjoyed the game and sitl play it onien to this day
point being , i'm nto one to care about what reviews say , ESPECIALLY when they score a game low for not doing any thing new , dubmest reason tos core a game , low , genres are amde because a bunch of gmaes DON"T do any thing different hence why theya re all considered part of teh same genre, if youa re going to score a game low becasue it does nothign new them you might as well say you don't like that genre .
that said bring on the duke and i dont care if he doesn't do any thing new.
[citation][nom]joytech22[/nom]Never played the original and I'm still going to buy this game, it just appeals to me in some way.[/citation]
Well Duke Nukem 3D wasn't the original.The original was a side scrolling game however back in the late DOS era days (windows 95 was common then)Duke Nukem 3D was a must have first person shooter.It was truly incredible and a great way to spend time.
The graphics were cruder but the game play was superbly excellent better than a lot of modern FPS.
Well back in the day, I either played Duke3D or Doom95. Both were awesome but in Duke you got to see tits. Granted the pixels in those days were the size of your thumb... Duke is a classic, and regardless what the reviews say this should go down in history, just look at Starcraft 2.
Some people will give it 10s because it's Duke. Others will give it a 7 because they may not get the appeal of Duke. Finally, others will rank it lower because a game that took so damn long to develop should be so freaking awesome that nothing can live up to that. I certainly agree with the latter, but I'm going to buy it because it's Duke ^_^
[citation][nom]demonhorde665[/nom]...ESPECIALLY when they score a game low for not doing any thing new , dubmest reason tos core a game , low , genres are amde because a bunch of gmaes DON"T do any thing different ...[/citation]
I agree with y'all on almost all of that, but to play devil's advocate, i'll focus on this aspect. I'm not saying a game should lose significant points for new stuff, but a game should score higher if it does innovate. To me, it could be the difference between a 9 and a 10 or soemthing like that... while I often like the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it mentality" My examples of choice would be games like Madden, where some times a year's version is very much the same as the previous year's, only small roster differences, and maybe a few neglible "features"... If games get 10/10 scores without adding something new, then it also can make the developers lazy. When they lose an entire point or something for lack of innovation, it could hurt sales. However, if a company can take Call of Duty 13, change the character models slightly, add 5-10 new maps, add a +1, and get a 10/10 score and sell record amounts of the game, they're less likely to innovate... that's all I would say... most likely though, as this article is intended... pretty much, NONE of this is relevent to Duke Forever... that's a once in a decade/century kinda game, at the moment...
Its been a long time coming. Played all the original FPS's: Wolf.3D, Spear of Destiny, Blake Stone, Duke Nukem and the original 2d Duke Nukem (Apogee Days), Dark Forces(wish they would make a new one), Corridor 7,Doom Series, Heretic, Rise of the Triad, ect. Can't wait to see this game.
While I think that the guy is definitely overstating the importance of the game, I'm still going to buy it. But will all the console gamers, who are mostly children too young to have played Duke 3D, want to buy the game? Going by comments on forums isn't really a sound way to judge popularity.