[Person of Color]

I can't seem to make it past the two hour mark.

I'm on my third playthrough of the DLC, but damn, once you play a level of this game...it's never fun again.

I should have just let this stay in the back of my head as fond memories. Like Sonic Adventure. I'm never replaying that wet log again.

[OpenMaw]

Because the very nature of replayability in DNF is nonexistent, really.

In Duke3D there were secret areas, obscure locations, multiple ways to approach many of the battles (Your entire arsenal of guns to use).

All the limiters really is the antithesis of fun.

[Person of Color]

True, but the DLC lacked a lot of that stuff and it's an absolute riot.

At least the DLC gave us closure. We now know just how much Georgie B fucked up that game.

GBX and T2 have their own issues, but at least they gave us a damn fine campaign.

[OpenMaw]

The Doctor Who Cloned me is literally just DNF leftovers repackaged by Triptych, essentially the same exact team that gave us DNF.

I'm a regular broken record on this, but there is nothing in Doctor Who Cloned me that isn't in DNF. It's the same exact gameplay experience as DNF, only it's shorter.

[MusicallyInspired]

For some reason, though, it's better than the main campaign.

[xMobilemux]

It had some of the things we wanted to see like Dr. Proton, a Space Level, Area 51 and also Duke Nukem's character was way better than the main campaign, so was Dylan.

[TerminX]

Commando Nukem, on 28 June 2012 - 06:40 PM, said:

The Doctor Who Cloned me is literally just DNF leftovers repackaged by Triptych, essentially the same exact team that gave us DNF.

I'm a regular broken record on this, but there is nothing in Doctor Who Cloned me that isn't in DNF. It's the same exact gameplay experience as DNF, only it's shorter.

I've heard that's not the case, but that it was new content created based directly on the design document for the main game (stuff with very low completion % in the leaked doc). Leftover ideas, sure, but not actual leftover maps and whatnot.

[Tetsuo]

Actually I felt the same way playing the main campaign again after playing the Doctor Who Cloned me. I can hardly get myself to complete it again. It wasn't until I played the DLC that I felt that way either.

[OpenMaw]

Wesker500, on 28 June 2012 - 07:13 PM, said:

It had some of the things we wanted to see like Dr. Proton, a Space Level, Area 51 and also Duke Nukem's character was way better than the main campaign, so was Dylan.

Yeah, but a lot of that is honestly cosmetic. Once you get past the "Holy shit, Proton. Holy shit, The Moon. Holy shit, Duke isn't acting like a douche... Sort of" You kinda realize. "Hey, this is the exact same gameplay with different models and textures."

In a way, that's rather neat. It reminds me of Duke it out in DC, or Duke Carribean. If only the core game was really good, then it would be an AWESOME DLC.

TerminX, on 28 June 2012 - 07:19 PM, said:

I've heard that's not the case, but that it was new content created based directly on the design document for the main game (stuff with very low completion % in the leaked doc). Leftover ideas, sure, but not actual leftover maps and whatnot.

Looking at the documentation, and then combining that with what George had to say on the subject, yeah, it's pretty damn obvious that they repackaged the clone facility levels and repurposed them with some new content (The moon levels, some of the Area 51 stuff, and the inclusion of Proton). A lot of it was very clearly already done. The whole forklift/EDF base part was absolutely done, we have pictures in the big leak of those exact areas.

[Micky C]

I thought they were the same levels initially as well, but when I found areas that resembled leaked screenshots, and compared them side by side, I found that they were different. Whether they were built off heavily unfinished levels or not is uncertain though.

And about the original topic, I had the exact same feeling when I tried playing TDWCM for a second time as the above people felt when recently trying to replay DNF. The DLC is seriously not that much better in terms of gameplay. I just couldn't get past the first 30 minutes. After the first big fight, I was like "if the rest of the game is like this why the hell am I playing?" I even tried replaying specific levels which I thought were super awesome the first time I played them, and I actually found them quite dull.

[Person of Color]

Commando Nukem, on 28 June 2012 - 09:13 PM, said:

Yeah, but a lot of that is honestly cosmetic. Once you get past the "Holy shit, Proton. Holy shit, The Moon. Holy shit, Duke isn't acting like a douche... Sort of" You kinda realize. "Hey, this is the exact same gameplay with different models and textures."

In a way, that's rather neat. It reminds me of Duke it out in DC, or Duke Carribean. If only the core game was really good, then it would be an AWESOME DLC.

The DLC and the main campaign aren't the same experience, the DLC improves on what was already there. It's a really drastic improvement.

The DLC is, aside from two levels, pure run and gun. The combat is better, with bigger set pieces, more enemies, and new weapons. The vehicle portions are actually fun and challenging this time around, and they aren't very long. They are a far cry from the shitty Vegas and Desert levels DNF had. Jesus Christ, I swear to God those snoozefests never ended.

The pacing, overall, is really good. Dr. Protons training area and that whorehouse can be completed in ten minutes or less, no sweat. The main campaign was 60% stupid bullshit, 40% action, and there were maybe like five enemies in every given setpiece. Ten on rare occasions.

I loved the DLC. It was frantic as shit...much better than the tedium the main campaign had.

DNF had a solid foundation, but George Broussard thought it would be cool to build a blinged out toolshed.

It's not Duke3D by any means, but it's a solid shooter with the right content.

[OpenMaw]

Descent, on 28 June 2012 - 09:53 PM, said:

The DLC and the main campaign aren't the same experience, the DLC improves on what was already there. It's a really drastic improvement.

The DLC is, aside from two levels, pure run and gun. The combat is better, with bigger set pieces, more enemies, and new weapons. The vehicle portions are actually fun and challenging this time around, and they aren't very long. They are a far cry from the shitty Vegas and Desert levels DNF had. Jesus Christ, I swear to God those snoozefests never ended.

The pacing, overall, is really good. Dr. Protons training area and that whorehouse can be completed in ten minutes or less, no sweat. The main campaign was 60% stupid bullshit, 40% action, and there were maybe like five enemies in every given setpiece. Ten on rare occasions.

I loved the DLC. It was frantic as shit...much better than the tedium the main campaign had.

DNF had a solid foundation, but George Broussard thought it would be cool to build a blinged out toolshed.

It's not Duke3D by any means, but it's a solid shooter with the right content.

It's the exact same experience. It even has the exact same beats in it's action when you break it down level-to-level. The only reason people feel different is because it's short. IE: there's less of the boring parts. but there's also less of everything else. It's an overall shorter experience. It's still the same content in terms of gameplay.

DNF is by no means a solid shooter experience. That would imply the shooting was good. It is not. It's typical duck-and-cover mechanics of modern shooters with Halo's limited weapons system mashed onto it. Both of those elements are non-Duke. A good shooter experience in my view is Bulletstorm, or Serious Sam. Somewhere between those two is how Duke's arsenal should be handled. Beefy, onslaught.

Micky C, on 28 June 2012 - 09:53 PM, said:

I thought they were the same levels initially as well, but when I found areas that resembled leaked screenshots, and compared them side by side, I found that they were different. Whether they were built off heavily unfinished levels or not is uncertain though.

And about the original topic, I had the exact same feeling when I tried playing TDWCM for a second time as the above people felt when recently trying to replay DNF. The DLC is seriously not that much better in terms of gameplay. I just couldn't get past the first 30 minutes. After the first big fight, I was like "if the rest of the game is like this why the hell am I playing?" I even tried replaying specific levels which I thought were super awesome the first time I played them, and I actually found them quite dull.

Not exact, no. But many of the "new" assets, and a number of the catwalks/the forklift/elevator section are pretty much exact to the EDF sections.

[Person of Color]

Commando Nukem, on 28 June 2012 - 10:09 PM, said:

It's the exact same experience. It even has the exact same beats in it's action when you break it down level-to-level. The only reason people feel different is because it's short. IE: there's less of the boring parts. but there's also less of everything else. It's an overall shorter experience. It's still the same content in terms of gameplay.

DNF is by no means a solid shooter experience. That would imply the shooting was good. It is not. It's typical duck-and-cover mechanics of modern shooters with Halo's limited weapons system mashed onto it. Both of those elements are non-Duke. A good shooter experience in my view is Bulletstorm, or Serious Sam. Somewhere between those two is how Duke's arsenal should be handled. Beefy, onslaught.

Agree to disagree. The four weapon limit helps out a lot. The two weapon limit drove me fucking insane when the game came out. Dear God, I hated that shit.

Some of the setpieces were larger, and that helped.

[Micky C]

Haha, that's pretty accurate actually; the only reason that the DLC was better is because aspects were "cut out" from the main campaign, such as some boring segments, and most of Duke's (new) personality. Just because the campaign isn't dragged down by these things, doesn't make all the other horrible aspects any sweeter really.

I agree that if it didn't have the crappy core gameplay of DNF than the DLC would have been 100 times better though. However, the fact is that it does have DNF's core gameplay.

Edit @ Descent: So what if Duke has 2 more guns? When each gun only holds a literal average of a dozen shots after which you need to chuck it out and get a new gun, combat is still frustrating. Duke's health issues still put the brakes on the fun factor too.

[trustn0!]

It aint like we were expecting something drastically different,
Its a DLC based on the base game with the same mechanics that existed in the original campaign so any issues that stem from that do come into place here.

However we can all agree that it is better structured and better designed but that doesnt mean it isnt flawed as mentioned before.

I only completed the DLC twice.
My first run and another for hard mode achi and then i did the moon a couple of times because i enjoy the setting(the moon transforming into a hive is just all sorts of kicass if you ask me) and how the zero gravity effects worked with the gameplay.

[BeetleatWar1977]

Should i mention that i have played over 160h......


maybe not

[necroslut]

Well, I've completed the main campaign seven times and will play it again, so I obviously disagree with you. While it's quite far from the brilliance of Duke 3D I'd take it over people's beloved Bulletstorm and Serious Sam any day.
The DLC IMO improved on some things, but I think it also did some things worse, so it kinda evens out and in the end it's just more of the same. Which - if you loved the main game like me - is just fine. But really, it's not that different.

[Mikko]

The original campaign is better.

Edit: Btw, as for exploration, searching for Ego items is more fun than searching for secret closets with relatively useless items.

[----]

Mikko_Sandt, on 29 June 2012 - 03:17 AM, said:

... searching for Ego items is more fun than searching for secret closets with relatively useless items.

No, it is not. For you maybe. But that is your opinion, not a fact.

And if you think that presenting items on a silver plate you cannot miss in a total linear corridor and are highlighted by a message like "press use to boost ego" as "searching for" I think you either have a different dictionary defining "searching for" than other people have or you look at the term "searching" from an ADHD point of view.

[Sangman]

fuegerstef, on 30 June 2012 - 01:24 AM, said:

No, it is not. For you maybe. But that is your opinion, not a fact.

I like how you talk about it being an opinion but say "no it's not" as if that's a fact in the same very sentence.

[Micky C]

Mikko_Sandt, on 29 June 2012 - 03:17 AM, said:

The original campaign is better.

Edit: Btw, as for exploration, searching for Ego items is more fun than searching for secret closets with relatively useless items.

The only real ego items that are hard to get are usually the interactive ones like pinball, pool, and air hockey, and only because they're frustrating to do. The ego doesn't even do much in the end. At the end of the day your screen flashes red when you're injured and you have no idea how many more hits you can take.

As for searching for useless items, the items are only useless because they're so fucking limited:
You barely get to use weapons before the ammo runs out and you have to trade them in, so what's the point?
Health pick ups... Yeah, no.
Inventory items such as beer and steroids? They impair your vision and hinder your movement so you're almost better off not using them.

So you're right, in this particular game, the ego items are more fun then secrets, but only because of poor design. In any game where items are actually worth looking for and make a difference to the game, like a jet pack or a really powerful weapon early on that you can keep and use (or health if you're low), exploration is far more fun.

Edited for formatting.

[Mikko]

Rory, on 29 June 2012 - 05:59 AM, said:

Out of interest, why d'you think the original campaign is better?

I like the variety it has and its sense of progression. For example, when you're at the top of Duke Burger you can actually see all the locations you visited previously. Or when you hit the desert you can actually see the dam with several specific features and then later on when you actually get there you see the area where you were before. (It's only the jump from Duke Burger to the desert that I didn't really like.) In fact, it's shit like this that made Duke3D stand out back in the days (Doom/Quake, for example, had no sense of progression within its episodes and the maps were totally generic).

In contrast, TDWCM had Doom 3-like maps, the antithesis of the urban maps that made Duke3D so special, and a Moon segment that felt even more random than the Duke Burger-->desert jump.

fuegerstef, on 30 June 2012 - 01:24 AM, said:

And if you think that presenting items on a silver plate you cannot miss in a total linear corridor and are highlighted by a message like "press use to boost ego" as "searching for" I think you either have a different dictionary defining "searching for" than other people have or you look at the term "searching" from an ADHD point of view.

Some ego items are easy to miss, some are hard to miss, just as it was with Duke3D's secrets. I cannot think of many secrets in Duke3D that presented a challenge (and I've known the maps inside out since 1996) unless you consider hugging walls a challenge.

Micky C, on 30 June 2012 - 05:57 AM, said:

The ego doesn't even do much in the end. At the end of the day your screen flashes red when you're injured and you have no idea how many more hits you can take.

The ego bar is obviously very significant. Just compare it at the beginning of the game to its full version. Obviously you cannot "feel" any single ego increase just as you cannot see yourself get older by staring at the mirror for several hours.

Quote

As for searching for useless items, the items are only useless because they're so fucking limited:
...
Inventory items such as beer and steroids? They impair your vision and hinder your movement so you're almost better off not using them.

The "useless items" bit was a reference to secrets in Duke3D.

As for beer, steroids and holodukes in DNF, they're a lot more useful in DNF than steroids, holodukes and nvgs are in Duke3D. Only DNF's "Dukevision" is horribly executed.

[----]

Sangman, on 30 June 2012 - 02:55 AM, said:

I like how you talk about it being an opinion but say "no it's not" as if that's a fact in the same very sentence.

That was on purpose.

[Striker]

I enjoyed both campaigns, imho.

[burymeinsmoke]

The campaign is a mess. Shame, because the gunplay is fun at its heart. I know they did their best to just release what was ready but the campaign is basically on rails. And I hate to say it, but TDWCM isn't really any different. The reason TDWCM is more enjoyable is because the humor is better than the main game. But it still suffers from the lack of cohesion that makes great games great.

[Martin]

I personally don't particularly mind an on-rails experience, so long as it's a quality one. Played through MW3 this week, for example, and had a damn good time doing it. However, that game has a real sense of quality about it. DNF does not. How on earth they spent that long on making such an unpolished linear shooter is beyond me. From what I understand, Infinity Ward was imploding from within during the production of MW3, yet they still delivered a quality experience. There's just no excuse for how DNF turned out. I'm not one for decrying DNF's linearity as 'not Duke', because in my opinion that's really silly. Yes, Duke 3D wasn't linear. But you only need to rub a couple brain cells together to realise that no shooters were linear in that era. They gave you a level to run around in as you saw fit, collecting keys for locked doors. All shooters from that era follow that formula.

So to me, there's nothing 'Duke' about open-plan levels. That's just how it was back then. 'Duke' is willing to go the extra mile, have more gore in it than it's competitors, genuinely funny pop-culture references, extremely cool and unique weapons, fun environments. All those things could be in a linear shooter. DNF, on the whole, did not deliver them. There were little hints of past genius in there. I'll always love the Duke Burger section. Very funny, indeed. That felt like Duke, to me.

[trustn0!]

Martin, on 05 July 2012 - 08:39 AM, said:

Infinity Ward was imploding from within during the production of MW3, yet they still delivered a quality experience.

Not exactly.
IW has been dead since 09.
Sledgehammer made MW3.

And on a semi unrelated note,i didn't play MW3 and i never plan to because if every other cod title has been any indication it will just as unengaging as the rest.
For me an example good on rails experience would be something like Half Life and Bulletstorm which is still heavily influenced(sadly) by cod

COD just pisses me off in every single way imaginable.

So no,im on the complete opposite end.

For the unfinished and unpolished nature of DNF,it is STILL a better and more satisfying game than COD.

[OpenMaw]

trustn0!, on 05 July 2012 - 12:48 PM, said:

For the unfinished and unpolished nature of DNF,it is STILL a better and more satisfying game than COD.

You're still not explaining how it's any different than COD, though. The game uses nearly all the same mechanics. Except there's a lot of dick jokes. I swear, I could take the Black Ops campaign, or the MW2 campaign and from the standpoint of the way they play out compared to DNF, you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference in terms of mechanics. Everything else over the top is essentially superficial and interchangeable.

Even if you can make the arguement that it's not anything like COD, it's still nothing like Duke 3D, and banks wholly on the nostalgia of the player. Which works for about ten minutes, and then flat-lines when you realize... This is it. This is Duke Nukem Foever. A medicore First Person Shooter with no hope of having a long term life span, or being expanded upon, or anything.

Just went and played Serious Sam 3 again. Aside from the style of the shooting(By that, I mean, fighting hordes and hordes of monsters in arena's), that's exactly what DNF should have been like. Non-stop balls-to-the-wall with just enough story setting the game up and continuing it. Not taking away control constantly, not huge sections where you do nothing but looking at things or have to collect items for some random whore-bitch. The guns feel good, beefy, effective, the humor is used properly, and here and there, not over saturating the environment. Oh, and? You can mod the game! How nice of them!

[trustn0!]

I actually have explained how cod is vastly different to how DNF works.

Did i say its a worthy successor to DN3D?
No i didnt ,because it isnt.
DNF has a fuck ton of problems.

And its STILL better than COD.

And no,if anyone thinks that SS3 is how DNF was supposed to be they are sadly mistaken.
Sam has always played like custom maps and mods of old school shooters with a strict linear progression.

[Martin]

trustn0!, on 05 July 2012 - 12:48 PM, said:

Not exactly.IW has been dead since 09.Sledgehammer made MW3.

Nope. Sledgehammer made the multiplayer. Infinity Ward made the campaign, which is what I was referring to.

trustn0!, on 05 July 2012 - 12:48 PM, said:

And on a semi unrelated note,i didn't play MW3 and i never plan to because if every other cod title has been any indication it will just as unengaging as the rest.For me an example good on rails experience would be something like Half Life and Bulletstorm which is still heavily influenced(sadly) by codCOD just pisses me off in every single way imaginable.So no,im on the complete opposite end.For the unfinished and unpolished nature of DNF,it is STILL a better and more satisfying game than COD.

Well, that's up to you. In my opinion, only a poor man judges something he has not witnessed. I found it to be a damn exhilarating experience, whilst I found DNF to just be constantly rubbish throughout, with a couple exceptions. I have played both games from start to finish.

trustn0!, on 05 July 2012 - 11:55 PM, said:

I actually have explained how cod is vastly different to how DNF works.Did i say its a worthy successor to DN3D?No i didnt ,because it isnt.DNF has a fuck ton of problems.And its STILL better than COD.

Except it isn't. There's no COD game that doesn't bury DNF alive. DNF pretty much buried itself alive, so there's just no saying that COD isn't better. MW3 was awesome. Fantastic campaign, and while I'm not particularly interested in the mainline multiplayer, the Spec Ops stuff is extremely fun. I love well done co-operative multiplayer. It's a massive package of quality content, whether it's "your thing" or not doesn't really come into it when we're talking about quality. MW3 is as extremely well put together linear game. It is good at what it attempts to do. DNF was really bad at nearly everything it tried to do. It lacked any sense of quality.

This is why I downvoted you, since you are confusing what you like with what "quality" actually is. MW3 looks nice, is smooth, plays well, packs incredible action, and achieves everything it sets out to do pretty much. It has quality. DNF looks awful, plays badly, woefully tries to copy games like COD but fails where they succeed, and just doesn't deliver on anything it tries. It may have a preferable gameplay formula from your perspective (which I don't understand, it's basically a bad COD clone in many ways), but this has nothing to do with actual quality. Some nice craftsmanship went into MW3. It has a high quality bar which is maintained throughout the campaign. Nothing of the sort went into DNF. There were little islands of good quality work and ideas juxtaposed by a sea of blandness and inadequacy.

As for this "linear vs open", I think it's just a matter of storyline. COD is a cinematic experience, and tells a very tight storyline. You're constantly being fed bits of story, be it by set-pieces, comms chatter, or actual cut-scenes. Those who enjoy it like it for the story and intense action, nicely rounded off by being very playable. DNF tried to have just as big of a story, but it's a really stupid one which doesn't resonate at all, and isn't helped any by the overall extremely-low quality bar. COD never pretends to be anything other than what it is. Meanwhile DNF throws half-hearted red herrings at you, and poorly tries to disguise it's set pieces and it's ripped-off mechanics. It's like a hybrid of Halo and COD. If I want Halo, I'll play Halo. If I want COD, I'll play COD. If you're gonna copy those games, at least do it well. DNF was just an embarrassment to itself and the fans it let down.

Seriously, saying DNF is better than MW3 is ridiculous, and just sounds like sour-grapes. MW3 just absolutely murders DNF in pretty much every way. I guess DNF is funnier? Just about? Not that MW3 ever tries to be funny (apart from a few choice Captain Price moments). I'll also add that without any DLC at all, I have enjoyed a full experience with MW3, which has an extremely gratifying ending, unlike DNF which was unfinished without the DLC and had an awful ending. Price's cigar puts Duke's to shame.

/hides in bomb shelter