If I had something I had worked hard on for so long get shit on by everyone and their mother, I'd probably have an outburst as well. That was really unprofessional, but I totally understand where he comes from in all this.

That's the PR team who did that, not the dev team. Completely childish.

That's not making Gearbox and 2K games look good. Someone dropped the ball big time.

I don't think 2K Games and Gearbox were expecting great reviews. Randy Pitchford himself said he wouldn't want to be a critic on this one, and if you look at all the interviews with him and the team they never say that DNF will be any good. They just say that they're going to finish it.

Looks like IGN gave it a 5.5/10 and Game Informer gave it a 6.75. Those are by far the best reviews I've seen, though reading IGN it sounded like 5.5 was being generous.

Some PC game review gave it 80 out of 100.

After reading and then watching IGN's review I'd like to bring up some points that won't fall on deaf ears.



Why would we want Duke Nukem in any other way? Did you want him to be the silent protagonist so you feel like you're Duke Nukem. Turns out that would be boring as shit because just like in real life you're boring as shit. "Yes, please let's make Duke Nukem politically correct that's what I want in a Duke Nukem game. Funny one liners? Crude humor? Strippers? No sorry, I'm an asexual, woman worshiping, PC dipshit."



Ok. So 5.5 felt like a score that accurately represents this sentiment. There's a hidden agenda here.



God forbid they implement new features to the game. Sheesh, those barrel puzzles really make the game suck really hard. Considering it's probably what maybe 5% of the actual content of the game?



Hypocritical much? I thought we wanted Duke to grow up, get a job, and not appreciate a solid pair of tits. No now we'd rather have him ignore puzzles altogether and not take a break from shooting aliens.



Thank fucking Jesus! A positive comment not sandwiched by half assed negative comments. More FPS should take this initiative and bring back old school death match.





"Yep. That level of detail looks like total shit."




I honestly think there's a hidden agenda going on here. Reviewers couldn't have really expected more from this game and why should they? The story of Duke Nukem 3D was about as insipid as your average high school girl. There wasn't much variety outside of just shooting shit and solving the occasional puzzle. This was fine because we had the Duke. A crude, stripper appreciating, bad ass. Man enough to take on the alien invasion and abduction of the babes of the world by himself all the while keeping the situation lighthearted with immature humor. Why did this formula work in 1996 but not 2011? Why do we demand serious story and game play depth from our games? If you want to watch hour long cut scenes and listen to a long, overly drawn out story then go play a Hideo Kojima game. Otherwise leave this game for people who just want to have fun and not have to think about their video game all that much.

You know, I thought the same thing going into it. I'm just going to play it to have some mindless fun because it sure as hell wasn't going to be the Citizen Kane of shooters. The thing is... I just could not get into the game. It's just not a very engaging game on any level. By the time I made it to the first boss it already felt tedious and just boring, and I REALLY wanted to like this game. You know what a better Duke Nukem game is? Bulletstorm.

Should of game it more time it got better after the first boss. I felt the same way after beating that 3 tittied bitch. Hell I was playing it on Normal thinking it was going to be a walk in the park. That quickly turned around once you get further in the game. Expect to see that loading screen plenty of times.

The hidden agenda is to turn all game critique into a bitchy hipsteriffic whiny bitchfest. Think "what if Jay Sherman and an emo chick fucked and had a baby, and his favorite uncle worked for Pitchfork."

I can't speak for everyone here, but a lot of us were around ten years old in 1996. What we enjoyed then isn't likely what we enjoy now--especially in video games. Playing with shit and coochie coo references don't really work for me.

The comment about people who just enjoy fun games should play it is a tad silly. Battlefield, Halo, Call of Duty, and Team Fortress 2 are all infinitely more entertaining than this game. I don't find myself putting a great deal of thought into those games either. We'll agree on the last metal gear game. A lot of the cutscenes were retarded.

I'll say this much for the game, fellas. It's better than Conduit 2 and Epic Mickey.

I wouldn't recommend it to everyone but if you find humor in dick and fart jokes then the game is probably for you.

I was 11 when Duke Nukem 3D came out and other than seeing pixelated titties for the first time I don't think I really understood the jokes in great depth. Playing it later on when it came to Xbox Live, I definitely understood the jokes and still had an appreciation for the game.

The rant wasn't really in defense of the game, it was more about the overall confusion of what people actually expected. Did you honestly expect a Game of the Year from Duke Nukem Forever? I hope not. Did you expect to see the same old Duke blasting aliens away. I fuckin' hope so.

For those of use that bought the game. There is already DLC coming this summer called Bodacious.

Edit:
After diving into multiplayer today for a bit. People talking on their mics were not dissing the game at all. Most of them happen to like it and said they were having a blast with the multiplayer. Though most of those guys have to have already been Duke fans.

Oh yeah, that's what I expected... but it's just not a good game even by those standards. I dunno what it is. It just seems boring. I'm thinking I need to be in the mindset that I'm playing a game that came out a decade ago (with graphics from 3 years ago) to enjoy this game.

I don't know what these complaints are about with the graphics. They look good on the PS3. /shrug They're not over the top amazing but shit they're a lot better than the 2.5D graphics from Duke Nukem 3D.

It's not a perfect game but it has it's moments. I'm having fun with it.

Maybe I've been spoiled by Unhcarted, Red Dead, Call of Duty, LA Noire, Mass Effect, and... well, pretty much any game that came out since 2008. It's really the noticeable after the prologue of the game (especially in the fire effects, hair, and character movements). However, I've never been one to judge a game on graphics alone.

But, I will admit, the beginning before the actual game starts where you're in the football stadium is pretty dang awesome.

Graphically the game looks good. The PC version is graphically on par with many current games.

I actually get pretty annoyed with people complaining about graphics in general, just because most people don't really seem to be aware of what good and bad graphics are ... they do things like confuse it with art direction, or use their distaste for how a title plays when describing how it looks.