It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Duke Nukem Forever should have got a 7.0 on IGN.

page: 1
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 12:01 AM
link   
I Haven't played much of this game and I hear people say that Duke Nukem sucks just because a popular video game review site says so. But its just an opinion of a group of people. I admit IGN is usually right about their reviews and ratings. But based on what I have seen of the game It looks fairly good. Like a mix of Bulletstorm and Halo. I have seen plenty of videos and played the demo on Playstation 3. I do admit it has a few quarks in it but other than that it looks like a very action packed but kicking video game. Like the old ones but better. IGN says that the new Duke Nukem character is to vulgar for video games. People say that that's one of the main reasons duke Nukem forever got a bad review score. A 5.5 I believe it was. The new Duke fits the profile of what Duke Nukem was supposed to be.




posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 12:05 AM
link   
that game is suppose to be out of the norm. and you forget most people have set there expectations on shooter games to match or compete with Call of Duty....

i want to play it just because it's suppose to be different from the rest... it's suppose to be a fun play adult oriented game.... i will see for myself



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 12:05 AM
link   
I like it.

But not enough to pay for it.

Piratebay forever!

edit on 20-6-2011 by Jeanius because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 12:06 AM
link   
It would have deserved a 7.0 if it wasn't linear as hell and if the jokes didn't fall through. Duke Nukem: Forever is the guy at the party who gets blind drunk, runs around naked, and thinks you're laughing with him rather than at him.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 12:11 AM
link   
Allot of people are pissed off about that review. I thought it was a fun action packed game. Got my adrenaline pumping more then most FPS games. Its fast paced, its a shooter and it has some good puzzles. The graphics could have been better but hey it has 12 years of development. Games are ranked like movies, most parents wont let their kid watch a R movie, so why let them play M games? I bet that review was made to bring more attention to the game. To get people talking about it, for more publicity.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 12:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nosred
It would have deserved a 7.0 if it wasn't linear as hell and if the jokes didn't fall through. Duke Nukem: Forever is the guy at the party who gets blind drunk, runs around naked, and thinks you're laughing with him rather than at him.


Its supposed to be cheesy, just like the original. Have you played the original?



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 12:16 AM
link   
Yes I have, I've played all the Duke Nukem games and this is the worst. Like I said, the jokes in it aren't funny and the game is as linear as a Call of Duty or Halo game.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 12:31 AM
link   
Duke Nukem is ment to be a game where you shoot monsters and save babes, I don't see even the developers taking it too serious.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 12:34 AM
link   
Bummer I am really not happy about reading that, I was a huge Duke Nukem and Serious Sam fan back in the day, was looking forward to it.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 12:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nosred
It would have deserved a 7.0 if it wasn't linear as hell and if the jokes didn't fall through. Duke Nukem: Forever is the guy at the party who gets blind drunk, runs around naked, and thinks you're laughing with him rather than at him.


Made me laugh d**n hard. Star for you!

You are right, in a way. I am not going to lie though. I LOVED the game. I am disgusted by how horrible this generation of games is (I have played atari up until now and have never felt this way about any games. Variety is also under my belt. I am not a one sided gamer in the least) and I can only name one other game that I have enjoyed this generation. That game would be Castlevania: Lords of Shadow.

I will give duke a solid 9.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 12:52 AM
link   
reply to post by paranormal78
[more
I have Gamefly and this is one of the few games that I keep for more than a week!! It may not be graphically superior but it is definitely entertaining!!



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 06:20 AM
link   
i did not think it was that great

i think they just tried to do to much

when all every one was looking for was a

great 3 person shooter like the first one infact if you gave me

a choice of the old one or the new one i think it would have to be the old one



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 10:26 AM
link   
It would have got a 7+ rating if it were released maybe 3 or 4 years ago. It just doesn't compete with todays games when compared to graphics, story length, multiplayer etc.

In all due respect, it is a quite terrible game... they should have left Duke Nukem alone imo.

Btw, i think All Cods (bar COD4) were #e.



posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 03:12 PM
link   
Remember, the people who helped develop Duke Nukem Forever did not spend twelve years developing the game. They were working on Duke Nukem Forever a few years Before Duke Nukem 3D. They dropped the project then brought it back. That's what someone said on you tube and that seems to make sense. Its been twelve years sense the idea of Duke Nukem Forever started. It would be a huge waste of someones time to work on a game for twelve years if you ask me. The maximum a company should spend working on a game should be about six years. That's what they did with Rage. That's another game I'm going to try out.



posted on Jun, 21 2011 @ 03:44 PM
link   
All i can say is "always bet on duke"
2nd



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:22 AM
link   
It's a game that should of been done properly but it was just thrown out and it turned out really bad. Some people like it but I'm too found I expected a bit more after 12-14 years.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by paranormal78
Remember, the people who helped develop Duke Nukem Forever did not spend twelve years developing the game. They were working on Duke Nukem Forever a few years Before Duke Nukem 3D. They dropped the project then brought it back. That's what someone said on you tube and that seems to make sense. Its been twelve years sense the idea of Duke Nukem Forever started. It would be a huge waste of someones time to work on a game for twelve years if you ask me. The maximum a company should spend working on a game should be about six years. That's what they did with Rage. That's another game I'm going to try out.


I don't care how long you work on it, if you release a crap game you deserve to be called out for it. The truth is that this game would have been a bad sequel even if it had been released ten years ago.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 08:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Nosred
 


I used to like that about Duke Nukem 3D, you can raom about the levels as you please, and I did this often for getting stuck, escpecially in the space mission.

Do you still have open spaces and maybe the need to backtrack, or is it more like corridors or arenas that you'll never go back to once you've cleared the enemies?



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 10:39 PM
link   
s u c k e d



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 12:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Chukkles
 
Yea it has a few puzzles like the old ones. In one level I saw in a review you are shrunken down in a dune buggy and you half to drive around a hotel until you reach these twin girls you half to protect but get abducted anyway. There is a few levels that you can roam around after a fight but I recommend continuing levels in Duke Nukem forever. That's how most new games are.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join