[Danukem]

While considering what special gameplay element would help define a new Duke game, we can first narrow down the options. If this is to be a spiritual sequel to Duke 3D, then it's a run & gun style game, similar to Doom. This means there are several things that it's NOT: a stealth game, platformer, a cover-based shooter, a hero shooter. Stealth imo should not be in the game at all. Occasional platforming is OK but we don't want Duke to become a parkour expert or anything like that. Use of cover sometimes is fine, but that shouldn't be the dominant playstyle (just as in Duke 3D you sometimes slip behind walls between shots, but there's never a time when you are pinned and ducking behind a chest-high wall). A "hero" shooter would be something like Destiny, Borderlands or Overwatch, where a lot of the gameplay revolves around the player's special powers. I'm not against Duke having some special abilities (in fact it would be good), but 80-90% of the time the focus should be on gunplay, and he shouldn't feel like a superhero. I also found it annoying in Doom 2016 how the "glory kill" system would break up the action with those long animations -- we don't want something like that either.

So putting this together, it means that the new gameplay element would have to do specifically with gunplay. Yeah, that doesn't narrow it down much.

[MusicallyInspired]

"Long animations?" They were like half a second to a full second tops. You know they cut them down from much longer, right?

[Danukem]

 MusicallyInspired, on 07 February 2019 - 02:59 PM, said:

"Long animations?" They were like half a second to a full second tops. You know they cut them down from much longer, right?

I don't want to get sidetracked by debating whether the animations were "long". Here's the crux of the issue: when fighting weak enemies that you should be able to kill very quickly, it's annoying to feel obligated to use glory kills because you want the drops; get enough weak enemies together and it drastically increases time to kill and breaks of the action a lot.

[High Treason]

Somehow I doubt Duke would have time for that anywhere but finishing off a big boss, otherwise it's just another alien/robot to mow down and is of little consequence.

[MusicallyInspired]

I couldn't disagree more. I thought the glory kills flowed seamlessly with the action and felt very natural. Didn't even faze me.

Conversely, the finishing moves in DNF were very flat and seemed like a tacked on nuisance.

[Danukem]

 MusicallyInspired, on 07 February 2019 - 03:50 PM, said:

I couldn't disagree more. I thought the glory kills flowed seamlessly with the action and felt very natural. Didn't even faze me.

So would you like to see something like a glory kill system in a Duke game? Admittedly, it does fit his character.

[MusicallyInspired]

It kind of already was in DNF. Just not implemented very well. I'm not opposed to it being in Duke, as it sort of fits his character, as you said. But Doomguy is all about brutal gory destruction. Duke is more about style, looking cool, and humiliating his enemies (this can be seen even in Duke3D with the cutscenes). So instead of incredibly creative gory glory kills, perhaps it could be reworked with his character in mind. I don't know what that could look like, but I'd be interested to see it. As I said above, in DNF they just seemed like a poorly implemented tacked on nuisance.

[Zaxx]

Any kind of glory kill system would be just ripping off Doom at this point but the mighty foot is always there as a quick melee option. That's the maximum amount of "brawling" Duke should do I think though.

[High Treason]

It's funny how I'm almost certain the same parties now arguing for QTEs are the same ones who constantly pushed against them being in DNF back on the 3DR boards. It's funny how times change, now that a generic FPS cashing on on a perceived cool name has them the perspective appears to be reversed.

Baaaaaahhh.

[Danukem]

What I would like in a new, AAA production values Duke game is a some technological progress. In particular, I would like the game to have an extremely detailed damage model for enemies, with AI that is hooked into the damage model. If I shoot an enemy in the hand, for example, the shot would damage the hand or blow it off depending on the type of weapon, and then the enemy would have to use their weapon one-handed, or drop it, or might try running away depending on the situation. If I shoot them in the head, the shot might just graze them, or one-shot them, or take out part of their jaw and allow them to continue fighting, etc. Moreover, these different effects would not be random based on the general hit location, they would depend on the exact trajectory of the projectile, its properties, and the physical properties of what it hits. If a character is wearing body armor, it should track the exact locations where anything hits it, so some pellets from a shotgun might penetrate where the armor is not covering, and others would be absorbed by it. But if you shotgun a pig wearing body armor, it might still break a rib and stun them. And so on.

I feel like graphics and physics in games have improved by leaps and bounds, but in the area of gameplay, and in particular how damage is handled, most games haven't progressed much since the 90's. When we damage enemies, it's either straight hit points or its hit points plus a "status effect" -- which will be one of a small number of statuses that do simple things to the entire enemy. For example, if an enemy is "burning" then the entire enemy is burning, and this simply causes damage over time. As for hit locations in games: Typically, when you shoot an enemy there is a "crit spot" --usually the head, and then there is everything else. Some games will allow you to cripple the legs, and some allow other limb cripping (the Fallout series for all its flaws at least attempts this) but it's still pretty basic. Each limb is given a certain number of hit points, it functions normally until they are gone, and then it is in a crippled state. What I propose is real physics and biology applied to the whole character model, so there are no discrete parts, it is all one organic whole with sub-model processes and realistic interconnections. If something like that is implemented it could open up a whole new world of possibilities for weapon effects and how weapons are used.

[Jimmy]

 Zaxx, on 07 February 2019 - 09:56 AM, said:

I just dunno why is it the implication that if a Duke game had a bigger emphasis on storytelling the gameplay would suffer because of it, especially after Doom 2016.

It's not because storytelling is in and of itself bad, but rather because the AAA Games Industry uses storytelling to artificially drag out the length of the game. Duke games should tell the story through gameplay, not through cut scenes. Duke "stories" are classic "Bad guy do bad thing, good guy shoot bad guys, save the chicks and everyone loves you."

 Zaxx, on 07 February 2019 - 09:56 AM, said:

And the thing is that even though Duke as a character was an afterthought even in Duke 3D the King himself certainly was a huge factor in that game's success. I don't think that people want a Duke game where the story is a central thing but they want more of Duke and if done right the overall feeling of that would be just that: more Duke in a Duke game.

The problem is that if you tell the AAA Games Industry "I want more story" then you're going to get a pile of shit. DNF had more story!

 Nancsi, on 07 February 2019 - 12:37 PM, said:

These are the thing that aged poorly during the last decade or so. Playing Lunar Apocalypse with silent mode on is still as good as it was in 1996.

Bullshit. They're still just as good as they ever were. You're just a sensitive baby.

 Nancsi, on 07 February 2019 - 12:41 PM, said:

I would love to see a Wrack style art in a Duke game. The game failed on many levels, but it's unique cartoony art was very interesting, and it would fit well with Duke's charcter. No wonder Bobby Prince was involved in that game.

Fucking no! This is a TERRIBLE idea. Duke's trademark is a gritty, dystopian, neo-futurism. You wanna turn Duke into a fucking kids game.

 MusicallyInspired, on 07 February 2019 - 02:02 PM, said:

Just leave his backstory out of it. I don't care where he came from or how he used to be not as awesome as he is now. I don't want to see him vulnerable. At least not in that kind of way.

Duke Nukem is a male power fantasy. He was ALWAYS a badass. Does anyone want to see a film of John Matrix in high school being a dweeb? Fuck no. John Matrix was always chomping cigars and carrying thousand pound logs. That's who he is.

 Trooper Dan, on 07 February 2019 - 02:13 PM, said:

While considering what special gameplay element would help define a new Duke game, we can first narrow down the options. If this is to be a spiritual sequel to Duke 3D, then it's a run & gun style game, similar to Doom. This means there are several things that it's NOT: a stealth game, platformer, a cover-based shooter, a hero shooter. Stealth imo should not be in the game at all. Occasional platforming is OK but we don't want Duke to become a parkour expert or anything like that. Use of cover sometimes is fine, but that shouldn't be the dominant playstyle (just as in Duke 3D you sometimes slip behind walls between shots, but there's never a time when you are pinned and ducking behind a chest-high wall). A "hero" shooter would be something like Destiny, Borderlands or Overwatch, where a lot of the gameplay revolves around the player's special powers. I'm not against Duke having some special abilities (in fact it would be good), but 80-90% of the time the focus should be on gunplay, and he shouldn't feel like a superhero. I also found it annoying in Doom 2016 how the "glory kill" system would break up the action with those long animations -- we don't want something like that either.

So putting this together, it means that the new gameplay element would have to do specifically with gunplay. Yeah, that doesn't narrow it down much.

This 100%. DNF's HUGE mistake was limiting Duke's arsenal. I'll tell you a gimmick: 30+ weapons/gadgets. I'm talking every gun from Duke3D, Zero Hour, Time to Kill, Shadow Warrior, etc. Bring back large fun weapon arsenals. Everything has a useful alt-fire or alt-ammo.

 Trooper Dan, on 07 February 2019 - 03:11 PM, said:

I don't want to get sidetracked by debating whether the animations were "long". Here's the crux of the issue: when fighting weak enemies that you should be able to kill very quickly, it's annoying to feel obligated to use glory kills because you want the drops; get enough weak enemies together and it drastically increases time to kill and breaks of the action a lot.

Glory kills are the worst aspect of Doom 2016. Brutal Doom is shit and no one should copy it.

 Trooper Dan, on 07 February 2019 - 03:53 PM, said:

So would you like to see something like a glory kill system in a Duke game? Admittedly, it does fit his character.

Against bosses only. You get a reward for beating the episode, if you ripped the heads off every enemy and shit down their neck it's not very cool. But if you do it to the big bad boss man, it's hilarious.

[Jimmy]

Another thing is creative interactivity, that was always Duke's trademark. You could find secrets, blow shit up, play "minigames" inside the world etc. Shadow Warrior followed up this theme beautifully. DNF failed to do this because it never let you be creative. It wasn't a sandbox, it was shoved right in your face. It's why the "grabbing turds" joke didn't work. It was supposed to be something you shouldn't be able to do. They made it into a set piece!

[Forge]

 Trooper Dan, on 07 February 2019 - 04:53 PM, said:

What I would like in a new, AAA production values Duke game is a some technological progress. In particular, I would like the game to have an extremely detailed damage model for enemies,

[MusicallyInspired]

 High Treason, on 07 February 2019 - 04:24 PM, said:

It's funny how I'm almost certain the same parties now arguing for QTEs are the same ones who constantly pushed against them being in DNF back on the 3DR boards. It's funny how times change, now that a generic FPS cashing on on a perceived cool name has them the perspective appears to be reversed.

Baaaaaahhh.

Get outta here, Glory Kills are not QTEs.

Also, I hit downvote and it upvoted you instead.

So just know that.

....that'll teach em.

[----]

Someone comparing glory kills to QTEs, which have nothing in common?

Well, that's new.

[NNC]

 Jimmy 100MPH, on 07 February 2019 - 05:00 PM, said:

Bullshit. They're still just as good as they ever were. You're just a sensitive baby.

Not that I'm sensitive to such stuff. Never had been a feminist or having some anti-male agenda. It was just a forced lame humor for adolescents. Like the sitcom series Married with Children. Also fucking hate that 99 of 100 people only knows Duke from the "I want chew ass" quote and stripper tipping, not because of the great gunfight, futuristic atmosphere or handcrafted leveldesign.

Quote

Fucking no! This is a TERRIBLE idea. Duke's trademark is a gritty, dystopian, neo-futurism. You wanna turn Duke into a fucking kids game.

Duke 3D's art style is already cartoonish with saturated colours and over the top characters like pigcops and octabrains. Ion Maiden went even further with the colours, yet it's still a dystopian, cyberpunk game. Heck, even your avatar is a cartoonish version of the pigcop, yet it doesn't look like something for kids. You just can't imagine how many shit can be done with creative cartoonish art IF it's done right. Wrack failed on many levels like generic levels and annoying monsters, but it's art was unique.

[Jimmy]

Wrack is literally cel shaded. No. DNF 1998 and 2001/2003 are natural progressions from Duke3D's style. It's not a cartoon. It's stylised due to limitations of technology. You are clearly not an artist and you have exemplified time and time again you don't understand the tone or the appeal of Duke Nukem the character/universe, in fact your finger isn't anywhere near the pulse but instead directly up your ass. Ion Maiden is amazing but going in an entirely different art direction than Duke3D or Wrack, it's more akin to a graphic novel/comic book.

[NNC]

Of course Duke3D (or Doom, SW etc.) were cartoonish because of hardware limitations, yet other games didn't made them obsolete, and people still play them. There were attempts to improve graphics with the HRP and such, but the classic look returned, and it's still the gold standard to play these games.

Nowadays many devs discovered the power of stylized "retro" art, and don't give fuck to "natural progression". Duke's over the top character and his over the top foes are much better fit for this stylized look imho, you can argue if it can work with the style of Wrack or the style if Dusk or others, but your arguments like "natural progression" is wrong.

If you want a Duke game with improved Duke3D look, ask Todd Replogle and the original dev team to make you the next Duke game.

[Jimmy]

You're a fucking idiot, mate. I'm downvoting your post and not replying to it's points because it is objectively bad and you should feel bad.

[Danukem]

[Zaxx]

 Trooper Dan, on 07 February 2019 - 04:53 PM, said:

What I would like in a new, AAA production values Duke game is a some technological progress. In particular, I would like the game to have an extremely detailed damage model for enemies, with AI that is hooked into the damage model. If I shoot an enemy in the hand, for example, the shot would damage the hand or blow it off depending on the type of weapon, and then the enemy would have to use their weapon one-handed, or drop it, or might try running away depending on the situation. If I shoot them in the head, the shot might just graze them, or one-shot them, or take out part of their jaw and allow them to continue fighting, etc.

All of this is in Resident Evil 2 btw.:

Since the zombies are very durable the gore system is part of the gameplay too: for example if you shoot a zombie's both arms off it will no longer be able to grab you, if you shoot them in half they'll still be able to grab your legs but only if you run right into their faces (their range will be shit and they can't turn fast so they'll just reach out for you and miss if you're just running next to them). If you shoot all limbs off and somehow they are still alive they'll crawl on the ground very slowly but the only thing they can do is just trying to bite you when they are near (and if you're not standing right in their faces they'll miss).

However I don't think stuff like this would work in an FPS: in a survival horror game you always conserve ammo because your objective is to just navigate the environment without getting killed but in an FPS you just shoot and move on. Doom 2016 had a very detailed gore system, I think the majority of players did not even notice it. Quake Champions has a very elaborate, dynamic gore system too but the game is so fast that you just can't pay attention to it, even the trailer can't show it off well in gameplay:

What would make sense I guess is if enemies changed their attacks based on their wounds, like for example if you shoot a pig cop's arm off he'd just charget at you for a bite. Doom Eternal seems to have another good solution: there the damage you do to enemies will be just very visible and that's all (on top of the stuff the 2016 game already had I guess).

[ReaperAA]

 Jimmy 100MPH, on 07 February 2019 - 05:00 PM, said:

Glory kills are the worst aspect of Doom 2016. Brutal Doom is shit and no one should copy it.

Fun Fact: Doom 2016 had glory kills even before Brutal Doom. In Doom 4 1.0 alpha, it was called "sync melee kills"

But I agree that glory kills are a bad aspect of Doom 2016. Not because the animations are bad (infact they are really good). The problem is that it is a mandatory gameplay mechanic. Wanna replenish ammo/health, go perform a glory kill.

[Jimmy]

It should be called "cringe melee kills."

[MusicallyInspired]

Sigh. So close. You were so close to being 100% right.

[gemeaux333]

I mostly do glory kills in DOOM 2016, and it is not a Health or Ammo consideration...

[Danukem]

 Zaxx, on 08 February 2019 - 05:05 AM, said:

However I don't think stuff like this would work in an FPS: in a survival horror game you always conserve ammo because your objective is to just navigate the environment without getting killed but in an FPS you just shoot and move on.

Man, I could go on for pages trying to argue with that, but I don't have time.
I guess I'll just say this: I do get your point, but there are many ways that a sophisticated damage & AI can work in an FPS, even if it doesn't make a big difference in every single encounter.

[Zaxx]

The interesting thing about glory kills: skilled players use them very rarely. There are a few reasons for that:

- You only need glory kills if you're at a stack deficit and there are no health pickups around. If you don't have that problem, just shoot away.
- A glory kill is a risky move if there are other enemies around, it's just very easy to put yourself into a bad position when you're going in for a glory kill. If you're playing on Ultra Nightmare you're pretty much banned from doing glory kills because of the risks.

So no, it's not a mandatory gameplay mechanic, there is plenty of health and armor on the maps. What is kind of mandatory on the other hand is the chainsaw because at some parts ammo can be a problem.

[MusicallyInspired]

I use glory kills because they're freaking fun. It's not based on skill at all.

[Kathy]

 Jimmy 100MPH, on 07 February 2019 - 05:00 PM, said:

Glory kills are the worst aspect of Doom 2016. Brutal Doom is shit and no one should copy it.

Indeed.

[Perro Seco]

All those brutal-gory-etc features are very childish in my opinion. Like a kid when gets angry and starts screaming and doing silly things. I respect people who likes that in games, but in my opinion it makes the game look very exaggerated and ridiculous, killing other interesting aspects like inmersion or atmosphere. I think the original Doom / Duke 3D / Blood / Quake have the perfect amount of gore.

I hope I don't upset anyone with my minority opinion.