Not sure if this has been posted, but Ars Technica reviewed the game yesterday.
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/revie...-playable-unfunny-and-rampantly-offensive.ars
To sum it up: Kuchera thinks the game is "putrid."
Oh, I'll play it... Just not for $50...
I'm surprised that you would say the graphics look great though. Unless they drastically improved the graphics from the demo, I just don't see how anyone could argue that angle.
He needs both hands to pull the stick outta his .. self-righteous indignation.Wow, I just read through the Ars review. I've played maybe an hour and a half so far and it's really not as offensive as he makes it out to be. Plus, it's a video game. It's not meant to be taken seriously.. The humor is clearly outdated and childish, but if you take it seriously I feel bad for you.
I typically enjoy and agree with Ars Technica game reviews but this one was pretty blown out of proportion IMO.
<3 TF2. So much better than TFC. In fact, I'd say TFC isn't TF. It should be called "bunny hop with guns". Umad?
Not sure if this has been posted, but Ars Technica reviewed the game yesterday.
I'm not sure I've ever uninstalled a game halfway through before this.
Gamespot/faqs forums = "You played DNF on the 10th and it's not out yet-PIRATE!!" (It's an international forum, and EU got it on the 10th.)
I'm sorry but TF2 is not TF. I don't care how popular it is, it is not the same game.
It should be called "bunny hop with guns".
<3 TF2. So much better than TFC. In fact, I'd say TFC isn't TF. It should be called "bunny hop with guns". Umad?
I'm sorry but TF2 is not TF. I don't care how popular it is, it is not the same game.
The haters are the ones who will never play it and they are taking embittered reviewers word for it (on XBox360, no less with Slow-ass load times and crap graphics to boot - nothing like the PC version evidently on a decent system)
It LOOKS great .. it is funny and IRREVERENT and it INTENDS to OFFEND
- what is not to like about that?
i think some of the reviewers with ultra-unrealistic expectations and haters who will never play it, need to get a stick outta their keisters and admit they are getting OLD
^_^
The haters are the ones who will never play it and they are taking embittered reviewers word for it (on XBox360, no less with Slow-ass load times and crap graphics to boot - nothing like the PC version evidently on a decent system)
It LOOKS great .. it is funny and IRREVERENT and it INTENDS to OFFEND
- what is not to like about that?
i think some of the reviewers with ultra-unrealistic expectations and haters who will never play it, need to get a stick outta their keisters and admit they are getting OLD
^_^
i removed all of the excess verbage from your quote and tried to get to the kernel. . . The actual gameplay mechanics (which I find to be most important) were woefully inadequate for a modern game . ..
Wow, I just read through the Ars review. I've played maybe an hour and a half so far and it's really not as offensive as he makes it out to be. Plus, it's a video game. It's not meant to be taken seriously.. The humor is clearly outdated and childish, but if you take it seriously I feel bad for you.
I typically enjoy and agree with Ars Technica game reviews but this one was pretty blown out of proportion IMO.
i removed all of the excess verbage from your quote and tried to get to the kernel
What "gameplay mechanics" are inadequate for a "modern game"?I find the game to be a lot of fun - very much like a Serious Sam game; and i am looking forward to finishing it tonight.
^_^
Until the 10 year old ending at the end of that statement, I probably would have discussed your difference in opinion.
That's because the statement was for funnies I was purposely attempting to get some crazy feedback, like when I said Planescape: Torment sucked
2005? Huh?It's too straightforward, killing isn't fun (there's no feeling of power from your guns), there's just not alot to it. It just feels unfinished and bland with stuff tacked on for no reason.
It looks, feels and sounds like a 2005 game, that's the best way I can explain it. To me that's not acceptable, whether it's a big name title or not.
If this was the first game from a publisher with a no-
name main character doing the exact same thing, it would be shot down in a second.
I thought it was humorous and had some interesting moments, but overall it disappointed.
As you said it intends to offend, but most of the subject material that was offensive stopped being offensive years ago. It's an R-rated movie in 2000, but a PG one in 2011.
I am glad people are buying it, as I want them to make a good one, a real Duke Nuke game, but at the same time I don't want them to think for a second that this is acceptable for $50-$60.
WtH are you babbling about? Did you play only with the pistol and the shotgun. There is a LOT of variety in the guns and there is real satisfaction *executing* one of the pigs or ripping the pipes out of a boss. The only issue might be that you have to choose wisely (as in Bulletstorm) as you can only carry a couple of them at a time.killing isn't fun (there's no feeling of power from your guns)
2005? Huh?
Letsee, F.E.A.R. is from '05; PainKiller and Half-Life 2 is '04 along with Vampire tMB - superb games were released in 05 and before that that still haven't been surpassed. Those are great games, but that was not my point. Maybe thaey have not been surpassed in gameplay, but in look, feel and sound they have.
It obviously DID offend - read the prude at ARSTechnica's review. He is obviously offended by PG-13 - according to you. Some people will be offended by anything, I had no problem with the game's "offensive" stuff as I've seen it many times before.
- and M-f'er is not a PG-13 word along with much of DNF.
My usage of "R" and "PG" was more public perception, not strict movie standards.
Things are simply more acceptable now, especially now that games are more realistic. Every chick in a game has her (usually large) breasts barely covered, if at all. I think GTA4 is more vulgar than this because it's more realistic.
What was tacked on? The mini-Duke and the RTC were fun; the bosses are big and badass and the puzzles are there but not too annoying and easy to figure out (for a FPS). The white board, the autograph, stuff that in a good game people might think "wow, great detail". Here it just seems tacked on. Mini-Duke was cool, but the RC car segment lasted longer than I wanted it to and was ready for it to end way before it did.
WtH are you babbling about? Did you play only with the pistol and the shotgun. Nope.
There is a LOT of variety in the guns and there is real satisfaction *executing* one of the pigs or ripping the pipes out of a boss. The only issue might be that you have to choose wisely (as in Bulletstorm) as you can only carry a couple of them at a time.
I'll admit I hate QT events, they do not give me any pleasure at all rapidly pushing a button until it lets me stop. Especially for just lifting a gate. Once maybe, but not for every encounter.
All i can see is you being *disappointed* in a long-delayed Duke sequel
If you had read my previous posts, I had nothing invested in this going into it.
- NO, i wouldn't pay $55 either ... but it is a very good bargain bin game and it is holding my interest and pissing me off when i get killed. Maybe this is where the problem lies. If you had paid $50-$60 for it you would most likely be more disappointed. I will agree that it is a decent game for $15-$20 tops. To not include bang for the buck when reviewing would be a great disservice. There are games I've borrowed from friends in the past and thought "that was pretty good, but I never would have bought it." I would have felt that way about DNF if I had borrowed it and not paid for it.
Gameplay:
one of the things that made duke3d awesome was the ability to explore and access "secret areas" or whatever they were called. The maps didn't have that many ways to get from point A to ___ (e.g., the keycard) to point B, but there were more places to go. This game likes to force you down the one path, and if you don't follow it, you run into roadblocks, invincible enemies, etc.
There are so many turret sequences. These are boring. Also why can't Duke piss on the overheating barrel or something, geez.
Power armor is for pussies... but still have regenerating health. Which in turn encourages you to move from cover to cover, shoot & hide, etc. Not very Duke-like. Duke can take 20 rockets to the face and shotgun blasts to the balls and keep on rocking.
Guns:
He's fucking DUKE! He can carry 1000 guns with 100000 rounds of ammo each, COME ON. Two guns is ridiculous. Now as you walk along, the "right" gun(s) for the next section are laying on the ground waiting for you. What's the fun in that? Why not let players carry every weapon and use them at their discretion? On that note, why the hell does the RPG only get 5 rounds? FIVE! WEAK. Even the devastator gets more and that shit fires basically the same rockets. But yeah I digress: two weapons is bullshit. Not Duke at all. What the hell, was that to appease the console weenies? B/c it's too hard to scroll through 20 guns on a console? Lame.
Most of the weapons are from Duke3D. Really? Couldn't have given us something new? The rail gun is pretty generic and boring. The alien weapon is cool though. That said the guns are loud and the kills are satisfying. I would've liked more blood & dismemberment. I don't feel like aliens fragmented very much unless I shot the dead corpses.
"Mouse precision" is the devil.
Mighty Boot! WHERE ARE YOUUUUUU? Slapping guys with weapon butts is weak compared to kicking them in the face. Some gory melee would've been sweet. Or more variety in the finishing moves.
Yeah the humor & aesthetics are Duke. I think this game tries a little hard at times to be offensive but hey I laughed so it's good . That ars-tech guy is a bit too uptight and seems to forget that its a game. Besides his whining about offensiveness though, I agree w/him 100%. So yay humor/aesthetics, but the gameplay & game design are not Duke. They have some Duke features, but those features have been thrown into a tubgirl with common traits of more recent shooters, blended together, and shat right back out.
I'm not sure this game is truly awful or anything like that. But it isn't great either. Like it's not so good that I would play a second time. It's not so bad or annoying that I wouldn't play a first time. It's pretty meh, average. Enjoyable at times, some memorable moments, but on a whole nothing special. Duke3D was a much better game, and I think the game designers would've done well to borrowed more from it (more than 2 weapons jesus christ).