What do you think the next duke nukem game is going to be about
#1 Posted 08 November 2011 - 06:07 AM
I hope its no army shooter lol.
I remember playing mw2 single player and turned it off because i had to watch some guy tell me how to shoot a targat. The boredom just flowed out of the screen lol.
So what do you think?
Army shooter?
Alien shooter?
First person?
Third person?
#2 Posted 08 November 2011 - 12:16 PM
#3 Posted 08 November 2011 - 12:22 PM
This post has been edited by thelegend4ever: 08 November 2011 - 12:23 PM
#4 Posted 08 November 2011 - 06:05 PM
This post has been edited by Captain Awesome: 08 November 2011 - 06:05 PM
#5 Posted 08 November 2011 - 08:10 PM
#6 Posted 08 November 2011 - 09:48 PM
#8 Posted 09 November 2011 - 12:59 PM
#9 Posted 09 November 2011 - 01:43 PM
#10 Posted 09 November 2011 - 03:13 PM
Captain Awesome, on 08 November 2011 - 06:05 PM, said:
Again, the Caribbean quotes were done by an impersonator called Dave Manuel and they are easily distinguishable.
#11 Posted 09 November 2011 - 05:46 PM
As for the new Duke game, Duke Begins was being worked on by Gearbox before the shit hit the fan, and in many ways it could be a good idea, tone down Duke, if its the begining he could'nt be such an asshole as he was in DNF as he would'nt yet have the arrogence developed. Either way Im not getting my hopes up, we got 3D and EDUKE it probably won't get any better.
This post has been edited by Ripemanewone: 09 November 2011 - 05:50 PM
#12 Posted 09 November 2011 - 07:30 PM
Hendricks266, on 09 November 2011 - 03:13 PM, said:
Really? They sound just like post-3D Duke to me, is there any legit proof that this is true? Someone needs to ask JSJ to clear it up.
#14 Posted 09 November 2011 - 07:36 PM
#15 Posted 09 November 2011 - 09:40 PM
This post has been edited by thelegend4ever: 09 November 2011 - 09:42 PM
#16 Posted 09 November 2011 - 10:35 PM
We'll get something that quality-wise totally embarrasses DNF. At the same time, I think the actual content could be of even further descent in Duke fanboy minds. I can't see a return to the free-roam levels, nor to the lightning-fast gameplay of Duke3D. The next one will totally be 100% "Gearbox Duke". You people bemoaned the little things they apparently did to DNF. Imagine the outrage on these boards when a Duke game entirely done by Gearbox shows up. Gearbox basically have two options;
1) Return to heralded Duke 3D gameplay formula. This is risky, since people have very low attention spans, these days. Who wants to run around massive levels looking for a keycard? 8/10 potential customers will not even entertain that idea.
2) Do something linear. In this way, potential customers do not have to 'relearn' how to play games. They can just migrate their existing skills over from other games. Once this is done, all that's really left is to get people interested. Probably with controversy.
Fin.
#17 Posted 10 November 2011 - 02:49 AM
Martin, on 09 November 2011 - 10:35 PM, said:
Duke3d didn't have that kind of big massive levels. It just had levels with different paths and that's pretty much it.
#18 Posted 10 November 2011 - 02:58 AM
This post has been edited by Micky C: 10 November 2011 - 02:59 AM
#19 Posted 10 November 2011 - 03:12 AM
ThePinkus, on 09 November 2011 - 12:59 PM, said:
If they were to do something like this, they should just re-release Duke3D in HD. They could use the old models they used and screencapture them again in a higher resolution.
This post has been edited by NUKEMDAVE: 11 November 2011 - 08:33 PM
#20 Posted 10 November 2011 - 06:45 AM
Duke was conceived in a mushroom cloud, that's all we need to know about that, honestly.
To me, DNF failed because it didn't balance the two tones it had going very well... Well, that, and the gameplay was so fucking straight forward that there was no exploration. No secrets. None of that.
So what IS it going to be about, vs what we want... Two different things entirely.
If it were up to me i'd make an old school throwback shooter with cutting edge graphics. Throw in a few of the modern tropes of shooters. (Reloading guns, maybe have iron sights on earth weapons). The primary focus of the game would be on rescuing babes, solving puzzles, and exploring/destroying your environment. It would avoid the pitfalls of modern shooters like the intense linearity, the hand holding, the overuse of scripted sequence and events. No quick time events. A lot of the canned animations would be limited so that interacting with environment objects wouldn't become tedious... Oh, and medkits and inventory. The Duke Nukem world would be more akin to a serious place that isn't aware of it's own insanity. The self awareness went too far in DNF I feel. Nothing had any weight or importance to it, Duke's anger was definitely not what it should have been. (Who didn't think that fan in the chair needed his ass thrown aside instead of the servitude that Duke performed?). A stand-alone reimaginating of Duke Nukem 3D Atomic Edition. It would have modding capabilties, and a much larger multiplayer experience than the limited schlock that DNF has.
Don't think we'll ever get anything like that though.
#21 Posted 10 November 2011 - 11:15 AM
We are the real Duke fans on this forum here couple with a few other thousands that don't post here due to various reasons.
A Duke Nukem game can't ever sell well if it's true fanbase buys it.
You have to realize that Duke Nukem's fanbase can't ever give gearbox the money they want, simply because Duke's fanbase is too small to produce a decent amount of money that would justify the development of a new Duke game.
The hard reality is that a new Duke game will focus on what NON Duke fans might want.
The way you make lots of cash with a game is to manage to sell it to huge masses of gamers, that don't even know what Duke Nukem is.
So if Gearbox decides that a cod type army based shooter with a soldier called Duke Nukem is something that would sell best, they would do that without even blinking.
This post has been edited by Mr.Deviance: 10 November 2011 - 11:16 AM
#22 Posted 10 November 2011 - 11:22 AM
thelegend4ever, on 09 November 2011 - 09:40 PM, said:
Actually, there are some new quotes in there that actually have better quality than original stuff. The rest of it only appears to be higher quality, but looking at the wave forms I think they've just been upsampled and mostly sound the same to me.
#23 Posted 10 November 2011 - 02:19 PM
Helel, on 10 November 2011 - 02:49 AM, said:
Dark Side would beg to differ, as would Smithsonian Terror.
#24 Posted 10 November 2011 - 02:25 PM
#25 Posted 11 November 2011 - 01:42 PM
Mr.Deviance, on 10 November 2011 - 11:15 AM, said:
If you're responding to me, I didn't contradict that sentiment anywhere in my post. I said what fans want vs what Gearbox might do are likely very different things.
Hendricks266, on 09 November 2011 - 03:13 PM, said:
No. That isn't true. The sound credit is referring to the little bit of V.O. work done for the beach babes and stuff. JSJ was brought back to do some dialogue for Duke Carribean.
#26 Posted 11 November 2011 - 10:10 PM
Captain Awesome, on 09 November 2011 - 01:43 PM, said:
It can be quicker than making 3D models.
Lets say I needed a vase for a room in a level. If I'm just using sprites, I can just take a picture of a vase, touch it up a bit in Photoshop, and then its already done. If I were to make a model, just creating the model itself could take longer than the entire process of making a sprite. Then you still need to texture it and then whatever else goes into creating a model.
#27 Posted 11 November 2011 - 11:52 PM
ThePinkus, on 11 November 2011 - 10:10 PM, said:
Lets say I needed a vase for a room in a level. If I'm just using sprites, I can just take a picture of a vase, touch it up a bit in Photoshop, and then its already done. If I were to make a model, just creating the model itself could take longer than the entire process of making a sprite. Then you still need to texture it and then whatever else goes into creating a model.
You do realize you need to make a sprite for each frame to animate an actor don't you? That takes far more time to do then a model.
#28 Posted 12 November 2011 - 02:25 AM
ThePinkus, on 11 November 2011 - 10:10 PM, said:
Lets say I needed a vase for a room in a level. If I'm just using sprites, I can just take a picture of a vase, touch it up a bit in Photoshop, and then its already done. If I were to make a model, just creating the model itself could take longer than the entire process of making a sprite. Then you still need to texture it and then whatever else goes into creating a model.
I might be nitpicking ... but I prefer Duke Nukem* to be depicted as human entity that walks, jumps, ducks, can be viewed from all angles (not just 8, or even only 1 angle) etc ... Duke as a vase that turns with the person viewing it would ruin the immersion for me (yes, I know, I have high standards).
*) and the enemies too, of course. A Duke game can contain a shooting gallery ... but the whole game should be more than just a gallery shooting static vases you can only see from one side.
ThePinkus, on 09 November 2011 - 12:59 PM, said:
You really have no idea what you are talking about. In !999 games switched to skeletal mesh animations to save memory.
I just checked the filesize of all alien animations for UT2004 (can check more modern games too, that was just the game I instantly new the locations for). All animations combined take up 3.1 MB (including walking, shooting, switching weapons, taunts). Add a mesh and a texture and you have about 50 fluent animations that can be viewed from all angles horizontally AND vertically (!!!!!!!).
If you draw the animations as sprites and only make a small amount of the 50 animations viewable from 5 angles (3 can be mirrored) and with very few frames in 256 colors and low resolution you have still used more memory and much, much more time.
And then you cannot even reuse the same animations for other sprites. All you can change is some colors of the palette, but that is all. The bone animations on the other side can be reused for other meshes.
In the end you save time, memory and have fluent animations viewable from all sides and don't even have to draw full death animations.
This post has been edited by fuegerstef: 12 November 2011 - 03:02 AM
#29 Posted 12 November 2011 - 07:49 AM
Or perhaps not
#30 Posted 14 November 2011 - 03:40 PM
ThePinkus, on 11 November 2011 - 10:10 PM, said:
Lets say I needed a vase for a room in a level. If I'm just using sprites, I can just take a picture of a vase, touch it up a bit in Photoshop, and then its already done. If I were to make a model, just creating the model itself could take longer than the entire process of making a sprite. Then you still need to texture it and then whatever else goes into creating a model.
You have absolutely no idea what you speak of. As an actual artist here, I can tell you that. All of Duke3D's enemies and stuff were MADE from 3D models. So therefor it is IMPOSSIBLE for it to be quicker than 3D models if the sprites are built of the 3D modeling process. (Even in the case of Blood and Doom they used real life models which I'd bet cash money took ten times as much work and time.) Please shut up. I love sprites, but they are not viable. Sprites are more akin to artwork, they take time and considerable amounts of work.
This post has been edited by Captain Awesome: 14 November 2011 - 03:45 PM