[mrDUKE!zone]

Man i really do wish that one of the dnf builds were released. But knowing gearbox. I highly doubt it.

[Never Forgotten]

Altered Reality, on 16 March 2018 - 01:56 PM, said:

Why do you believe that? What happens if you don't have faith?

I believe that because I have faith, I know that sounds ridiculous, but that's the only way I can say it.

[MusicallyInspired]

Take it to the retard section, Altered. It's getting boring in there.

[Hank]

Sorry guys, lets face reality


Faith = good, hope = good; but that's it.

[duke a number1]

I know you guys have a lot of doubt in Randy, but think of it this way. Sure we're waiting sooooooooooo long, but in 2018, this forum pops out of nowhere. Think of it, even Fredrick wants to release it. Now of course there is the problem with the licences and what not, but I really do believe that Randy can make some money on this. So far, at the end of 2017 and 2018, I have never seen so many new old looking games come out. For example, Ion Maiden , Dusk Devils Daggers, Strafe, etc.


I have faith because I don't think this forum and so many other leaks would have been released. I don't know what you all think me being a strong strong duke fan, I really think they are going to release it.

For the people who don't believe that they will release it, I can understand your doubts.


But if they dont release the build, we still have the duke nukem forever 2013 mod, which might hopefully get more updates.

[Altered Reality]

duke a number1, on 16 March 2018 - 06:46 PM, said:

I have faith because I don't think

That pretty much sums it up about everyone who ever proclaimed their faith since faith was a thing.

The problem is that the people who want to get it released cannot do anything to get it released, and the people who can, don't want to. The only way it can be released is if someone leaks it, which will not happen, because whoever leaks it would be discovered and sued to hell and back.

[Never Forgotten]

Altered Reality, on 16 March 2018 - 07:10 PM, said:

That pretty much sums it up.

Fine, let me explain it in detail. I have faith because what is the point of life without it? I have faith in God, I have faith in people, because faith is what drives me. Faith is what gets me out of bed in the morning, faith is the only reason I haven't given up hope on becoming an actor, and because of that, I have hope. I don't see a point in living if you don't have faith.

[Altered Reality]

Never Forgotten, on 16 March 2018 - 07:16 PM, said:

Fine, let me explain it in detail. I have faith because what is the point of life without it?
(cut)
I don't see a point in living if you don't have faith.

Holy crap, you sound seriously depressed. Even suicidal. No point in living without making up a delusional belief? What about looking for very real rewards (the 2001 build of DNF not being one of them) the world has to offer? If you can't find any, you need therapy.

But of course, this kind of digression would be more suited for the General Discussion section, so let's get back on topic. Let's talk about one particular kind of faith several people around here seem to have, namely the faith of seeing a release of the 2001 build of DNF, which is what my original question was about. Why do you need faith in THAT?

[Never Forgotten]

Altered Reality, on 16 March 2018 - 08:14 PM, said:

Holy crap, you sound seriously depressed. Even suicidal. No point in living without making up a delusional belief? What about looking for very real rewards (the 2001 build of DNF not being one of them) the world has to offer? If you can't find any, you need therapy.

But of course, this kind of digression would be more suited for the General Discussion section, so let's get back on topic. Let's talk about one particular kind of faith several people around here seem to have, namely the faith of seeing a release of the 2001 build of DNF, which is what my original question was about. Why do you need faith in THAT?

But to me it is not delusional, it's very real. I'm not depressed or suicidal, if anything I'm pretty happy. Faith is just what keeps me from falling into depression whenever I do feel down.

Anyway, as you said, back on track (I apologise for misinterpreting what you meant.) I think it's good to have faith in the 2001 build being released. If nothing at all, it keeps the Duke fan base alive, and shows just how many people are interested in seeing it released. Maybe Randy will see this and realize that it could give Duke a chance to be seen in a good light again, and not as the failure he's become since 2009. I love the game's and the character, but in the public eye he's a misogynistic joke. (No, I don't believe he is, but that's what everyone assumes about him.)

[Dan]

Blue, on 12 March 2018 - 10:39 AM, said:

Aside from 1998 there were no restarts. Everything was iterative and taken in isolation not really a big deal. The madness was indeed the refusal to STOP iterating but the feeling of restarts is an illusion of time in hindsight. Similar to how historical events appear as punctuated moments when in reality the people living them barely noticed anything substantial changing within their lifetime. Even the lighting change didn't result in an immediate redoing of all the levels... especially not any sort of "scrap 'em and replan 'em". It's just that after enough time they had been adapted to the new possibilities and limitations that to compare them across two years *looks* like a restart but the transition was more grsadual.

So than what was the reason in getting ride of all the open world RPGish gameplay? Was it all about getting the game running on consoles?

[OpenMaw]

Saying "I have faith" in an unfinished build of a game from 17 fucking years ago is not keeping this community alive.

The people who donate to the website keep this community alive. The people developing Eduke32 keep this community alive. The people putting out mods, TC's, and maps keep this community alive. This community has been in this state for decades. It survived the barren empty zone between 2002 and 2011, and it survived Duke Nukem Forever. This community keeps itself alive by continuing to play and mod Duke Nukem 3D.

Dan, on 17 March 2018 - 03:12 AM, said:

So than what was the reason in getting ride of all the open world RPGish gameplay? Was it all about getting the game running on consoles?

I don't think it had anything to do with the consoles, but it most likely did have to do with "cutting is shipping." There are still bits and pieces of work in the game that date back to the earlier builds. One of the neon signs in the strip club in the final game is actually visible in one of the early screenshots. Which is really sad because there's no way that texture is high res enough to be considered next gen. There are other bits and pieces too. The font for the slot/card games is seemingly identical to what can be seen in the 1999/2000 build screens. It just got cut out, and cut down. No interactive computers where you can send yourself an email. No menu vending machines that you can eat the food from. None of that. It was all just hacked out to get the game done.

Now, looking at the spread sheet and the documents that were leaked regarding DNF circa 2007/2009, there aren't any mentions of those bigger pseudo-rpg elements at play. So it might be more appropriate to say that after the mass exodus and the revamping of everything, a lot of those ideas were taken out before they were event implemented/reimplemted.

[MajorTom 2417]

Altered Reality, on 16 March 2018 - 01:56 PM, said:

Why do you believe that? What happens if you don't have faith?

Well, if your faith is below 25%, you can't make sacrifices at altars, and if it falls below that, then---WAIT, no, I'm thinking of the purity meter in Demon's Sword, never mind.

[Bloodshot]

It seems like they sacrificed the actual vision of the game, and along with it everything that would've made DNF unique, just to get it shipped.

Even if they did release the 2001/2 version and it was hot garbage at least it would've been interesting garbage. Like those older games you stumble across that were way to ambitious for their own good but people still go back and play them for their interesting ideas

[Never Forgotten]

When did the Duke community become so pessimistic about anything Duke related? I mean, I've been on the forums since 2014, and the only time you get excited is when it's something unrelated to Duke. I get excited about anything Duke related, even if it turns out to be hot garbage. Who cares if DNF 2001 was unfinished, or even if it was a horrible game, it exists in an almost finished form... shouldn't that be something to at least pique your interest? Instead you say that the game you wanted 17 years ago would either suck anyway, or be unplayable. Does it matter? I mean, at least you'd know. DNF 2001 is something I've wondered about for 16 years now, and haven't gotten. But yet I still get excited when something is mentioned about it. DNF 2011 sucked and was a disappointment, Critical Mass was a horrible rip off of Manhattan Project, World Tour was really good but still left something to be desired, and Duke's Bulletstorm Tour was lazy. Yet I still get excited whenever they say there might be a very slight chance a Duke Nukem game, or movie, could be thought of. Maybe I'm just crazy, and maybe I'm rambling, but I just don't understand all of the negativity towards Duke stuff from the very community keeping him alive.

And I know that DNF 2001 possibly being released isn't solely what's keeping the Duke community alive, trust me I know there's much more to it, I guess what I meant was it keeps something Duke related, and official, in the conversation. It isn't just mods or TCs, it's something that was officially part of Duke, and if there's a chance that if could be released, it could boost the public's opinion of Duke, and therefor make the movie and future games more tangible.

[Altered Reality]

Commando Nukem, on 17 March 2018 - 11:26 AM, said:

No interactive computers where you can send yourself an email.

That was scrapped before 2009, because it turned out that every key on the keyboard could be set to send an email when it's pressed, in addition to its regular function.

Never Forgotten, on 17 March 2018 - 03:24 PM, said:

When did the Duke community become so pessimistic about anything Duke related?

Maybe...
...when DNF wasn't getting done early in 1998?
...when DNF turned out not to be a 1999 game?
...when DNF was not out in 2001, and something was very wrong?
...when DNF did not come out before Unreal 2?
...when DNF did not come out before Doom 3?

[spessu_sb]

Dan, on 17 March 2018 - 03:12 AM, said:

So than what was the reason in getting ride of all the open world RPGish gameplay? Was it all about getting the game running on consoles?

My wild guess is money. Because games like Call of Duty, Halo and Gears of War selling like hotcakes (all slowerpaced games with regenerating health and stuff like weaponlimit etc ironsight aiming) and classic PC designed fps being "old and dated", that financial risk was not dared to be taken. So on paper DNF adapting similarity of those, should mean it's more acceptable too right? Except people who always wanted the game, did not want it to be like the aforementioned games beacause that's not what Duke is about.

Consoles possibly also did play a role in having to cut down the size of the gameworld because rumour has it the Xbox 360 had extreme trouble in being able to run the game at any bit of what's called acceptable framerate. So about 30fps, and then we can only imagine the game apparently struggled to maintain even that because thats the lowest of low usually is acceptable for singleplayer fps games. But it all makes sense. For a game that started development in ~97 and was always primarly designed for PC firsthand, it's no wonder it to struggle run on a weaker system especially when when after half-way of development decision to switch console focused only came.

Commando Nukem, on 17 March 2018 - 11:26 AM, said:

Which is really sad because there's no way that texture is high res enough to be considered next gen. There are other bits and pieces too. The font for the slot/card games is seemingly identical to what can be seen in

Someone once pointed out the thing how duke altervista you can see screenshots from an area that is present in the DLC. Those textures having quite highgrade texture resolution on them. Released 2011 DNF same section, those same textures being now extremely low mud quality however. I do think consoles played a role here especially because of the infamous rumour that it was a massive operation to get the game even acceptably runnin on the Xbox 360 and how yet it even still has those loading screen issues and other choppyness in it.

[Zaxx]

spessu_sb, on 17 March 2018 - 04:38 PM, said:

Someone once pointed out the thing how duke altervista you can see screenshots from an area that is present in the DLC. Those textures having quite highgrade texture resolution on them. Released 2011 DNF same section, those same textures being now extremely low mud quality however. I do think consoles played a role here especially because of the infamous rumour that it was a massive operation to get the game even acceptably runnin on the Xbox 360 and how yet it even still has those loading screen issues and other choppyness in it.

DNF didn't run like horseshit on consoles because consoles weren't good enough, it ran badly because the engine was a mess. Hell, Deux Ex Human Revolution looked better than DNF, it was roughly as open as DNF would have been and it ran just fine on consoles.

And really if you think about it when DNF was supposed to come out the PC market was still kicking, the death of it came years later when the 7th console generation dropped, Vista was a failure and publishers just couldn't do a damn thing about piracy. The dark days of PC started around 2006-2007, at a time when DNF was already in development for 8-9 years. FPS titles that had a big name behind them (Doom 3, Half-Life 2) still sold wonderfully in 2004 so there was no reason to change the game around that time and on top of that 7th gen consoles were powerful when they came out (Doom 3 and Half-Life 2 ran just fine even on the original Xbox, they just looked like ass ). Especially if you think about what the Xbox had to offer you find Halo, an FPS with huge open maps, vehicle combat etc. so there was no reason to make a corridor shooter because of consoles.

Why did they make a game with a smaller scale at the end? That's easy, two things:

- The engine was not up to snuff.

- 3D Realms no longer had the resources to make a large game after 2006-2007. After that time 3DR only burned money instead of making it, meanwhile development costs started to go up to the point where only a big publisher could make large scale AAA games. Even id Software had to scale back RAGE significantly because they just couldn't afford more as an independent company.

Really if you want to blame anyone blame 3DR for being late instead of blaming the demon of the day (consoles).

[spessu_sb]

Zaxx, on 17 March 2018 - 09:03 PM, said:

DNF didn't run like horseshit on consoles because consoles weren't good enough, it ran badly because the engine was a mess. Hell, Deux Ex Human Revolution looked better than DNF, it was roughly as open as DNF would have been and it ran just fine on consoles.
Really if you want to blame anyone blame 3DR for being late instead of blaming the demon of the day (consoles).

You do realize you're comparing apples to oranges. DX Human Revolution being from start to finish a multiplatform project, meanwhile DNF had been optimized for the PC as it's primary target platform and then when most of the work has been done on that and all the sudden you switch the target/main focus to be consoles you're bound to have your game in disaster state especially if you try to just rush it out. Had DNF been from the start as multiplatform project, ofc it would have performed better on consoles because then it wouldn't have had features etc that were too much for the system to handle. It neither would have used an engine that was around before original Xbox was even out, which means the tech is quite very different.

Consoles were at fault on the choice of some specific gameplay design decisions such as the weaponlimit etc because its easier to have a button with what you just toggle gun A or B as opposed to a weaponwheel where you can accidental select or skip weapon from an arsenal. It has also been said somewhere that 3DR's own Prey game surprised them how well it functioned and it was kinda console focused (though that game still is very good actually).

DX HR's graphical quality btw neither were even close to the level DNF once had and it was criticized for having lower res/dated graphics on the PC version. Clearly held back again due to multiplatform design limitations. Back in the day there were no multiplatform games and every system had its own identity and all systems had what you'd call Full games, no gimping down or any being cheap about features and leaving stuff out just because. That was so beautiful but now you got games that are multiplatform and in the end one system always gets the shortend of the stick and it's PC because console's where the money's at.

[Zaxx]

spessu_sb, on 17 March 2018 - 10:29 PM, said:

meanwhile DNF had been optimized for the PC as it's primary target platform

DNF? Optimized? You do realize that optimization happens at the end of a development process right before shipping the final product, right? DNF was not optimized for anything, it was a mess during most of its development and I wouldn't say that even DNF 2011 performed well on PC when it came out if you consider its outdated looks.

As for PC being the target platform I think that's a myth. It was true when development started but even if you look at the gameplay video from the 2006 version you see a console shooter there. When the last remnants of DNF 2001 got removed a console game took its place and really that's why DNF 2011's bad performance on consoles is inexcusable. Really if you look into it it's easy to find out that even when Gearbox got the IP nothing of the console versions existed... they literally made a console game on outdated tech that was never meant for consoles. If that's not incompetence I don't know what is. Oh, George.

Quote

now you got games that are multiplatform and in the end one system always gets the shortend of the stick and it's PC because console's where the money's at.

That's false. 5 to 10 years ago consoles were the leading platform but since Steam got PC gaming back on track the field is pretty even, a lot of games usually sell better on Steam than on the Xbox One for example with PS4 usually being the leading platform. Sure, you can make money on consoles but really if you really want to be successful it's not consoles where the money's at, it's multiplatform, especially if you're making an AAA title. An AAA game is expensive, that's why they have to be multiplatform and a game can only be massively successful on all platforms if it's equally good on every single one of them. Because of this we see less and less of the good old "lazy console port" and more of the multiplatform games where the experience is fine tuned for every platform. Take something like Max Payne 3 as an example: it's a multiplatform game yet the PC port still feels like a PC game (hell, you can even argue that MP3 IS a PC game because really it's on PC where you can truly appreciate how the aiming system is working together with the procedural animations). The same goes for GTA 5, Doom 2016 or the new Wolfenstein games etc.: they work perfectly well on consoles but if you play them on PC they ARE PC games. Meanwhile console architecture is becoming more like PCs with every generation, the difference between a controller and a mouse & keyboard setup is getting less and less as controllers improve etc.

The point is that the so-called "console vs. PC" debate is getting pointless when it comes to arguments about gameplay. It's just weird seeing your opinion getting voiced in 2018 and really what the "haters of console gaming" say is not why I (and most people) personally hated everything that was a console port 10 years ago. I hated console ports because I wanted to play those console games people were crazy about but usually I only got lazy shit like the first PC port of Resident Evil 4 that was actually ported from the already inferior PS2 version instead of the cool as shit GameCube version. I also find the nostalgia for unique platform libraries weird as hell, I love the fact that I no longer have to buy every system on the market just to be able to play certain games and I love when a classic console game gets a shiny new PC version so I don't have to emulate the old stuff if I want better graphics.

[necroslut]

Zaxx, on 17 March 2018 - 11:12 PM, said:

DNF? Optimized? You do realize that optimization happens at the end of a development process right before shipping the final product, right? DNF was not optimized for anything, it was a mess during most of its development and I wouldn't say that even DNF 2011 performed well on PC when it came out if you consider its outdated looks.

As for PC being the target platform I think that's a myth. It was true when development started but even if you look at the gameplay video from the 2006 version you see a console shooter there. When the last remnants of DNF 2001 got removed a console game took its place and really that's why DNF 2011's bad performance on consoles is inexcusable. Really if you look into it it's easy to find out that even when Gearbox got the IP nothing of the console versions existed... they literally made a console game on outdated tech that was never meant for consoles. If that's not incompetence I don't know what is. Oh, George.


That's false. 5 to 10 years ago consoles were the leading platform but since Steam got PC gaming back on track the field is pretty even, a lot of games usually sell better on Steam than on the Xbox One for example with PS4 usually being the leading platform. Sure, you can make money on consoles but really if you really want to be successful it's not consoles where the money's at, it's multiplatform, especially if you're making an AAA title. An AAA game is expensive, that's why they have to be multiplatform and a game can only be massively successful on all platforms if it's equally good on every single one of them. Because of this we see less and less of the good old "lazy console port" and more of the multiplatform games where the experience is fine tuned for every platform. Take something like Max Payne 3 as an example: it's a multiplatform game yet the PC port still feels like a PC game (hell, you can even argue that MP3 IS a PC game because really it's on PC where you can truly appreciate how the aiming system is working together with the procedural animations). The same goes for GTA 5, Doom 2016 or the new Wolfenstein games etc.: they work perfectly well on consoles but if you play them on PC they ARE PC games. Meanwhile console architecture is becoming more like PCs with every generation, the difference between a controller and a mouse & keyboard setup is getting less and less as controllers improve etc.

The point is that the so-called "console vs. PC" debate is getting pointless when it comes to arguments about gameplay. It's just weird seeing your opinion getting voiced in 2018 and really what the "haters of console gaming" say is not why I (and most people) personally hated everything that was a console port 10 years ago. I hated console ports because I wanted to play those console games people were crazy about but usually I only got lazy shit like the first PC port of Resident Evil 4 that was actually ported from the already inferior PS2 version instead of the cool as shit GameCube version. I also find the nostalgia for unique platform libraries weird as hell, I love the fact that I no longer have to buy every system on the market just to be able to play certain games and I love when a classic console game gets a shiny new PC version so I don't have to emulate the old stuff if I want better graphics.

You still don't understand how multiplatform standardization affects game design, apparently.
You're right about things having changed since 5-10 years ago though, but that's when DNF came out and that's when those sacrifices were made.

[Zaxx]

necroslut, on 17 March 2018 - 11:54 PM, said:

You still don't understand how multiplatform standardization affects game design, apparently.

I perfectly understand it, what you guys fail to see is that what you interpret as "consolization" or whatever has nothing to do with consoles but gaming as a whole. For example CoD is not linear because a console couldn't handle complex level design, it's linear because it's made for a very wide consumer base that includes kids and idiots. The games that play like console titles on PC were always console games first and foremost but when it comes to genres like FPS, genres that started out on PC it's pretty evident from games like Doom 2016 that you can make a "multiplatform PC game" these days even if franchises like Halo or CoD were always console titles first and foremost and they will stay that way. It's about what you want to make, not what you can make.

Edit: And please, downvote every one of my posts just because you happen to disagree, that's so mature.

[stumppy84]

Randy has a call in show today. Why don’t you guys call-in and berate him about it?

[Zaxx]

stumppy84, on 18 March 2018 - 06:57 AM, said:

Randy has a call in show today. Why don’t you guys call-in and berate him about it?

What would be the point of harassing him? We roughly know what's up: Randy wants to make some money out of DNF by releasing a DNF Collection under the Gearbox Publishing banner but he can't do that since the publishing rights of DNF belong to Take 2 / 2K Games. He is in the process of sorting that problem out and if he's successful we get DNF 2001 as part of the collection. Will he be successful? My guess is no, he won't but that's the only way we're going to see this version of the game so there's not much else we can do other than wait to see what happens... and we're very good at waiting.

[Altered Reality]

Zaxx, on 18 March 2018 - 09:28 AM, said:

What would be the point of harassing him?

Let's harass 2K instead.

[Green]

Randy Pitchford discusses Duke Nukem Forever 2001 with a Nerdvana Live caller, gives an update on the publishing rights, discusses some future plans, and talks about having reasonable expectations.

Nerdvana Live Show, Ep. 11 with Randy Pitchford and Randy Varnell!

[AdrenalinDragon]

Green, on 18 March 2018 - 05:48 PM, said:

Randy Pitchford discusses Duke Nukem Forever 2001 with a Nerdvana Live caller, gives an update on the publishing rights, discusses some future plans, and talks about having reasonable expectations.

Nerdvana Live Show, Ep. 11 with Randy Pitchford and Randy Varnell!

Interesting. So Randy says it was nowhere near close to being a finished game, while Fred says it was. Who do we believe, or should we assume Wieder is the most accurate?

[Zaxx]

AdrenalinDragon, on 18 March 2018 - 06:05 PM, said:

Interesting. So Randy says it was nowhere near close to being a finished game, while Fred says it was. Who do we believe, or should we assume Wieder is the most accurate?

Fred is a super enthusiastic fan so of course Randy and Wieder are right. Anyway it's great that Randy managed to get that sublicense so at least we'll get to see the bits and pieces soon.

[Bloodshot]

Next episode somebody should ask him if releasing the old stuff includes the tools and source code

9% and 90% are certainly very different numbers

[NUKEMDAVE]

Bloodshot, on 18 March 2018 - 10:23 PM, said:

9% and 90% are certainly very different numbers

I think the truth will come out about that in the end. If they do end up releasing some sort of package and lots of content is left out, I could see more 4Chan media leaks happening to prove it. Both stories can't be true, though.

I will say this. If it's true that the 2001 version only reached to about 9% complete, then it would be best they just not release it. I can already see this not going well with fans due to their expectations being so high for these old builds, especially if they're locked up tight without developer tools.

[Zaxx]

NUKEMDAVE, on 19 March 2018 - 01:46 AM, said:

I think the truth will come out about that in the end. If they do end up releasing some sort of package and lots of content is left out, I could see more 4Chan media leaks happening to prove it. Both stories can't be true, though.

I will say this. If it's true that the 2001 version only reached to about 9% complete, then it would be best they just not release it. I can already see this not going well with fans due to their expectations being so high for these old builds, especially if they're locked up tight without developer tools.

I think it's pretty obvious that what Randy is doing is damage control with that 9%. Fred made a mistake when he said it's 90% complete because if you go around saying stuff like that to overly enthusiastic fans like spessu_sb the next day they'll start spreading the word that DNF 2001 is real and it's 15 hours of awesome gameplay that will be better than DNF 2011. That mentality has to be discouraged so people don't start imagining things because that will only lead to a shitstorm that's bad for everyone. If the expectations are not realistic then let's say Gearbox releases the damn thing only so conspiracy theories and accusations can surface an hour later about how they deliberately held back content while the "real DNF 2001" is in some secret basement being awesome and 90% complete. The reality? If it was 90% complete then 3D Realms would have finished and released it.

How complete is DNF 2001? You can't put a percentage on that, any number you come up with will only be an assumption, the point is that THERE IS NO GAME and there never will be. What we will get is a nice little archive to an amazing part of gaming history, an awesome tour in a museum but nothing else. Honesty I started to have some respect for Randy after this: he did not BS, he did not pull out his marketing skills, instead he was just honest about the situation and acted as a responsible IP holder should.