Duke Nukem Forever Review

By Dan Whitehead Published 12 June, 2011

The king is dead.

Version tested: Xbox 360

Randy Pitchford is thinking of me. "I would not want to be a journalist on this one," the Gearbox studio boss told Mr Minkley in our Duke Nukem Forever launch day interview. "I would not want to be a critic. It's going to be tough."

His concern, presumably, is that Duke Nukem Forever is such a monumental event, such a literally game-changing, epoch-shaking moment, that the pressure to accommodate its many facets in a single review - to boil down 14 years of expectation into a fair critical summary - is too terrible a burden for any writer to bear. Duke Nukem Forever! It's here! How can things ever be the same again?

I certainly felt that pressure. Do you let the game's famously troubled gestation - which looked like it would never come to term, until Gearbox stepped in at the eleventh hour - affect the score? Do you try to filter its off-colour humour through a modern lens, or accept the adolescent scatology as part of the Duke experience? Do you review for middle-aged fans from 1996, when Duke last appeared in a first-person shooter, or do you review for a generation of gamers that was still in infant school when our flat-top hero first asked pixellated strippers to "Shake it, baby"? So much to consider. Randy's right. It's going to be tough.

Except, with joypad in hand, reviewing Duke Nukem Forever actually proves incredibly simple. Everything else becomes a sideshow when the main event is so obviously, heart-breakingly disappointing on almost every level. The toughest part is deciding where to begin.

Commando and Robocop join the list of movies that Duke pillages for random one-liners.

The visuals that jump out at you first. This is an ugly game, committing practically every graphical sin imaginable. Textures are crude and blurry when they bother to load in at all. Jagged edges turn every diagonal into ziggurat steps while the frame rate chugs up and down. Lumpen and stuttering, Forever does not look like a game that has benefited from millions of hours of development time.

[Please note that we reviewed the game on Xbox 360, but Digital Foundry's Richard Leadbetter informs us that the PC version plays much better. "It's a complete mess on 360 - sub-HD resolutions, hugely obtrusive screen-tear, terrible aliasing, low frame rate," he says. "All of these things can be remedied by playing the game on PC. It doesn't transform it into a good game, but it makes it much easier on the eye and certainly smoother, far more responsive and thus more enjoyable to play." Look out for Rich's full Duke Nukem Forever Face-Off very soon. -Ed.]

It's the gameplay that's important, of course, but beneath the glitchy surface things aren't much better. Aiming is jerky and imprecise, even after tinkering with the sensitivity. Movement is heavy and sticky, frequently leaving you snagged on scenery or bumping up against invisible walls. Both jumping and running feel sluggish, with Duke's grunts suggesting that he probably should have put some more gym time in before his big comeback.

The physics is spotty at best. This is most obvious when you try some of the environmental interactions scattered throughout the game. Pinball tables offer perhaps the worst ball physics in living memory. Basketball hoops repel balls with forcefields apparently six inches away from the net. There's an air hockey game with such skittish animation that you'd swear it was a Flash file being streamed over a dial-up modem.

Level design isn't much better, with few of the locations inspiring the sort of exploration and excitement that made Duke 3D such a memorable experience. Duke Nukem Forever is linear to a fault, and huge chunks of the game are spent simply walking from one fight to another through uninspired corridors.

Most alarmingly, all the weapons are repeated from 1996, and there are no new enemy types either. While old favourites like the shrink ray and the devastator are still satisfying to use, it beggars belief that of all the hundreds of people involved in this game over the years, nobody could come up with a single idea for a new gun or enemy.

The difficulty level, too, holds things back. The FPS genre has changed considerably while this game was in production, and the plastic surgery scars where the circle-strafing fragfest of old has been augmented to more closely resemble today's shooters are plain to see.

Even on normal difficulty, enemies hit hard and are often able to kill you in a few seconds. It's a game that demands nimble movement and heavy firepower, yet the bulging weapon inventory of old has been replaced by a Halo-style two-weapon limit, often leaving you without the right tool for the job.

Duke's health recharges rather than relying on health packs, a concession to the unbalanced damage, yet this in turn demands a shoot-and-hide approach to combat that turns the game into a cover-shooter without a workable cover system. Duke's style all but demands a hell-for-leather approach, yet you're continually penalised for indulging in that aspect of the character. Instead, you lurk and scurry and backpedal away from every encounter.

Boss battles are particularly egregious, cramming you into restrictively narrow strips of gameplay real estate and then spamming you with enemies and rockets until you squeak through on sheer luck, or find a lucky spot where enemy fire mysteriously fails to hit you.

The game is disturbingly in love with first-person platform jumping, and many of the most annoying sections revolve not around shooting enemies but leaping from pipes and boxes, unsure as to where Duke's invisible body is. There are lengthy, clumsy underwater sequences that make Lara's aquatic excursions seem like the pinnacle of game design. Whether you fall into electrified water, off the edge of a rotating cog or simply run out of air while trying to wriggle Duke through a submerged doorway, the fact that loading times run anywhere from 30 seconds to a full minute makes every unfair death sting even more.

Despite the legendary length of time it has spent in production, Duke Nukem Forever feels terminally unpolished and often unfinished in too many key disciplines to be given a passing grade. When the best new idea on display is running over enemies with a forklift truck, something has gone horribly wrong.

There are some glimmers of the old magic. Instead of a shield, Duke has his ego, which can be permanently enhanced by doing Duke-style things. Pick up a dumbbell and do some bicep curves? You get more ego. Use a PC to look at girly pics? More ego. Admire yourself in a mirror? You get the gist. It's a neat gag, and the idea of someone like Duke literally using his arrogant self-belief as a shield suggests more satirical wit than the rest of the game delivers.

Some gameplay sections also come close to recapturing the simple charms of 1996. A sequence which sees Duke rampaging across desert highways in a monster truck, stopping off at alien-infested ghost towns and gold mines to refuel, maintains a decent rhythm and is a lot of fun. A section where a miniaturised Duke navigates a kitchen by clambering along shelves, hiding behind jars of mayo and leaping over a hot grill on burger bun trampolines is conceptually clever, if blighted by the game's bizarre fascination with first-person jumping.

These are fleeting moments, however, and taken as a whole, Duke Nukem Forever has little hope of ever coming close to the current shooter benchmarks. Even at its best, the game falls far short of its peers and often fails to improve on its now-ancient (yet still brilliant) ancestor.

Multiplayer, an area where a modern Duke game should easily outstrip its past, is poorly handled. Potentially decent maps are ruined by laggy, jerky gameplay and the brazen lack of fresh ideas - deathmatch, capture the flag, king of the hill - means there's no reason to waste your online time for more than one match.

Despite failing so badly in so many areas, Duke keeps quipping away, masking the gaping holes in his gameplay with lunk-headed bon mots and politically incorrect prattle. That's what he's always done, of course, but the world has moved on and Duke's relevance has dimmed.

In 1996, Stallone and Schwarzenegger were on the wane, so Duke's beefcake eighties action movie clichés carried some satirical weight. In 2011, he's a parody of something that no longer exists, the gaming equivalent of an embarrassing uncle who still says "Whaaaaassup?" and pretends to breakdance at wedding receptions.

Since the gameplay no longer backs up his boasts, the half-hearted digs at rival franchises feel very ill-advised. The Duke of 1996 could poke fun at a "doomed space marine" because his game was pushing boundaries that Doom had yet to reach. Given that Forever is so painfully behind the times, similar jibes at the expense of Halo and Gears of War fall awkwardly flat today.

"I hate valve puzzles," he jokes as you embark on an incredibly uninspired puzzle involving steam pipes, but the double meaning would work so much better if Duke could offer anything to rival Portal's genius, or even the basic physics puzzles of Half-Life 2. As it is, these moments feel like the lazy humour of recognition, the Meet the Spartans of video games.

As for Duke's offensiveness, it's barely even worth considering. He's more Jeremy Clarkson than Frankie Boyle, so toothless and desperate in his attempts to seem risqué and reactionary that the only sane response is to roll your eyes. This is far more coarse than Duke 3D ever was, the humour uniformly witless, a parade of blunt profanity, childish poo and wee jokes and obvious innuendo that makes it feel more of a piece with Duke ripoffs like Redneck Rampage and Postal 2: similarly weak games which failed to mask their lack of polish and ideas under a stained duvet of juvenile outrage.

Writing on whiteboards is a lot like using a broken Etch-a-Sketch. Skool Daze did it better.

And it's here that the game plays its solitary trump card. It's Duke Nukem, silly. He's supposed to be cheesy and dumb and shallow. Stop thinking about it. It's justabirrovfun.

Except it isn't. It's not fun at all. It's depressing. Duke's long-awaited comeback has turned him from genre innovator to wheezing has-been. In the time since his last outing, the likes of Halo, Battlefield, Call of Duty and Grand Theft Auto have all gone from nothing to world-conquering, genre-defining juggernauts. Even within his own narrow niche, Bulletstorm and Gearbox's own Borderlands have taken Duke's irreverent shooter crown and made it their own, and it seems that after a decade and a half on the shelf, the self-proclaimed king no longer has the muscle to claim it back. Duke Nukem Forever attempts to turn back the clock, but can't even get that right.

This is a game that only works when considered in isolation, and even then any praise must come laden with caveats. But Duke Nukem Forever does not exist in a bubble. It shares shelf space with far more worthy rivals, and competes for our affections with games that have done far more in far less time. Nostalgia only gets you so far, and in Duke's case, it's not far enough.

In the end, you feel every year of Duke Nukem Forever's ridiculous, fractured development seeping out of each unsatisfying frame. With four studios sharing title space in the opening animation, and end credits which run for almost 10 minutes, the weight of so many false starts, dead ends and endlessly revised design documents proves too much. For all his muscle and bravado, Duke Nukem is actually a fragile creature. His legacy is based on a specific combination of time and technology and a mercurial element of fun that simply doesn't lend itself to repetition, especially after so long in limbo.

The appeal of Duke Nukem lives on. But your time and money would be better spent reliving his iconic past than bearing witness to this gruesomely mangled resurrection.

3 / 10

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of Dan.

About Dan Whitehead

Dan has been writing for Eurogamer since 2006 and specialises in RPGs, shooters and games for children. His bestest game ever is Julian Gollop's Chaos.

Read more articles from Dan by visiting the Dan Whitehead archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (340) Latest comment 11 months ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • RobTheBuilder #1 12 months ago

    "Physics are"

  • thelzdking #2 12 months ago

    Shake it baby!

  • Softie2k #3 12 months ago

    After seeing gameplay a few days ago, you could just feel how bad it was going to be.

  • andywilkie35 #4 12 months ago

    WAHEY!!

  • psychokitten #5 12 months ago

    Oh dear

  • MojoDex #6 12 months ago

    hopefully this puts to bed all those people who are saying, it has to be awesome purley because it's duke nukem!
    Edited by MojoDex at 12/06/11 @ 13:52

  • GamesConnoisseur #7 12 months ago

    Should they have bothered releasing it? Why not let it lie dead and we just have good memories of the past, now this just embarrasing.

    Humilating.. all the manpowers, years for what?

  • Wildsleven #8 12 months ago

    i really wanted this game to be good but i think we all saw this coming

  • LukehMuse #9 12 months ago

    Hail to to the king... or not.

  • TheTrueSpin #10 12 months ago

    So bad it's good? No, didn't think so...

  • Lovemoose #11 12 months ago

    There's something quietly reassuring about this. We've grown up.

  • Markitron #12 12 months ago

    Was expecting a 5 or 6, damn

  • MikkyX #13 12 months ago

    Ouch.

  • Stratix #14 12 months ago

    I played Duke 3D about 10 years before I should, thanks Dad! I loved that game.

    I came to this one knowing that the reviews would be terrible. I am still enjoying it.

    I am currently playing through it on hard, and apart from a couple of sections, I am doing fine. I guess being able to aim quicker with the mouse makes it somewhat easier.

    Load times are in the seconds on PC, so that becomes far less of a frustration.
    Edited by Stratix at 12/06/11 @ 14:07

  • midnight_walker #15 12 months ago

    I've been playing it all weekend at while it's certainly not going to win any awards, I don't think it's out-and-out bad. I'm really enjoying it. And it's really not that hard. It's tougher than most recent FPSs but it's hardly Demons Souls.
    Edited by midnight_walker at 12/06/11 @ 13:55

  • GitSomE_UK #16 12 months ago

    You know what? I kind of expected this to happen... I won't be buying as I'm happy with my memories all those years ago of playing the original.

  • Hamalot97 #17 12 months ago

    It took them 12 years just to get 3/10... Should have Stayed Dead

  • mk-1601 #18 12 months ago

    "He's more Jeremy Clarkson than Frankie Boyle, so toothless and desperate in his attempts to seem risqué and reactionary that the only sane response is to roll your eyes."

    So quite like Frankie Boyle then.

  • RobTheBuilder #19 12 months ago

    DNF - Do not finish

    Duke appears to be the Chinese Democracy of gaming.

  • JBlokeUK #20 12 months ago

    I wonder what all those people think that laughed at Gran Turismo 5 "only" getting a 9 after all the delays that game had.

  • reeferchief #21 12 months ago

    I knew this was coming, it was never going to live up to the hype. See Guns 'n' Roses Chinese Democracy, See Star Wars episodes 1-3, the following, expectation, hype, all too much.

  • oerhoert #22 12 months ago

    Duke Nukem 3D had a satirical value? Really? I thought the Arnie/Stallone movies were their own satires.

    Also, a bit weird to see this reviewed on the 360. What gave you that idea? PC version load times are, uhm, 5 seconds or so, which surely has a lot to do with enjoyabillity. Also, the crowd for this one is likely to be on PC first and foremost.
    Edited by oerhoert at 12/06/11 @ 14:02

  • Lucodeath #23 12 months ago

    Ive still got the original pc version, xbox live version and the great n64 version for kicking ass an chewin bubble gum.

  • HyperTails #24 12 months ago

    3/10!?

    What the bloody hell!?

    I'd heard this was a bit crap, but that's atrocious. I cancelled my pre-order a few weeks ago as I just had a hunch it would turn out to be a turd... i'd say i'll get it in the sales, but if anymore 3's turn up I won't bother.

    Looks like Duke should've been left in the 90's. His main appeal was that the devs did what nobody else dared to do at the time, but now, as games have moved on, everyone's doing their own thing.

  • Dogs-not-Gods #25 12 months ago

    Not wanting to add to any 'backlash starts here' anti-reviewer stuff - I think everything Dan says is fair and has a point - but the simple fact is I'm having just as much fun with this as any recent release I've played. Maybe I'm just easily pleased!

  • the_dudefather #26 12 months ago

    1 point for each ball of steel

    Duke is related to 9 Toes from Borderlands

  • NOSAVIOUR #27 12 months ago

    The first EG review I agree with in years.

  • prudislav #28 12 months ago

    I knew that DNF will have some bad reviews but still I enjoy it so much and still its better then last CoD in my eyes. So 3/10 is too much severe according to 8 /10 for Black Ops (and for the info in last 1.5 yar was depeloped complete console ports + MP so 12 years are not for reviewed version - X360 version was ported in 2 years)
    Edited by prudislav at 12/06/11 @ 14:05

  • sfp_noodle #29 12 months ago

    Be honest - Whose actually surprised by this review and score? Loved Duke in the 90s, but he was never ever going to come close to those glory days. Will pick it up once it hits the bargain bins to pay my final respects.

  • CaptainQuint #30 12 months ago

    At last - a review whose words match the final score! It's been a while, EG.

    I said this would be shit about three months ago and got negged to death.

    Got the last 'laugh' though, didn't I, fanboy fuckwits.

  • jambo74 #31 12 months ago

    Come get some!

  • makeamazing #32 12 months ago

    Its a fair review and just shows that a game with such a long dev time was never ever going to live up to the hype. Credit to Gearbox for actually getting the game released, hopefully taking on the risk of getting one of gamings longest running jokes, lets hope they can at least break even on it.

  • darkmorgado #33 12 months ago

    Randy Pitchford, speaking to the BBC:

    "The software behind it is very sophisticated, very advanced stuff. It's absolutely a triple A, modern, advanced game for this era."

    Ahahahahahahaha.

  • altitude2k #34 12 months ago

    Knew it. Just knew it.

  • P1GEONPOO #35 12 months ago

    It needed more time!

  • lavalant #36 12 months ago

    I can't see how this can be any less fun than LA noire yet that got a 7.

  • Gearskin #37 12 months ago

    I like it.

  • phanboy4 #38 12 months ago

    Spot on. Played the demo and that's pretty much what I got from it. Also bonus points for talking about WHY the game is bad (modern FPS mechanics awkwardly crammed into a Duke game) and not just saying "Duke is old and not fun anymore".

    Tired of lazy reviewers intimating that DNF is boring because it's old-school. DNF is boring because it's an uninspired FPS WITHOUT old-school mechanics.

  • DUFFMAN5 #39 12 months ago

    so then sub £10 in how many days/weeks

  • darkmorgado #40 12 months ago

    So basically, they should have actually kept it more similar to the last game instead of trying to shoehorn in modern design mechanics where they don't fit.

  • Ka-blamo #41 12 months ago

    Fail to the king.

  • dagas #42 12 months ago

    Was Duke Nukem ever such a big deal? I feel like DN got a lot more attention from the game that never seemed to be finished than it ever did for the DN games that were released.

  • Flipper79 #43 12 months ago

    The PR for this game has been terrible. Before the game's reviewed saying you're not worried if it scores badly because it's such a good brand...and then really helping things by suggesting it's going to be such a hard game to review because of all that nostalgia. How many pre-orders would have been cancelled because of that first comment? I also wonder if the reviews would have been at least slightly better if it wasn't for the arrogance.

  • Mattattattatt #44 12 months ago

    I wonder how much this actually cost to develop. There was talk of the 3D Realms boss losing $20 - 30m on it alone.

  • RobTheBuilder #45 12 months ago

    What it sound like to me is a cheap finishing off of an old game to pay for development/rights purchase, and then develop a ground up game. However this may be so bad that it could be the end...

  • AbracadaverAK #46 12 months ago

    It's a relief to see that I didn't jump the gun too much when I wrote my thoughts on the demo then : [link url=http://howigotsobitter.com/2011/06/08/first-thoughts-duke-nukem-forever-demo/
    ]http://howigotsobitter.com/2011/06/08/fi...[/link]

    I tried the PC version since and I'm glad you noted the graphical differences, as it's absolutely huge. The Xbox version looks horrendous.

  • CaptainQuint #47 12 months ago

    Pitchford is clearly a ballsy, arrogant in-your-face bullshitter; whereas Molyneux is like that slightly slimy mate you've got who blags his way through life with a false smile on his face. Everyone who knows him sees right through it.

    Just an observation.

  • Genome #48 12 months ago

    Not surprised. At all. Is anyone surprised?

  • GarethBale3 #49 12 months ago

    woah I'm absolutely loving this game I guess I'm a freak then.

    perhaps it would score better if it had only a five hour campaign , was extremely conservative, PC correct, pretty dull but had AWESOME graphics and no frame rate issues?
    Oh and perhaps they could make an annual instalment with so many ground breaking changes in each one you think your playing a new game every year.

    neg away. I game for fun not just for visuals.

    that's what we really want isn't it children?
    Edited by GarethBale3 at 12/06/11 @ 14:34

  • disappointed #50 12 months ago

    What a lovely kick of schadenfreude to brighten up a gloomy Sunday afternoon.

  • Psychotext #51 12 months ago

    It's funny... despite the terrible score I still think I'm likely to buy this. Just feels like a part of gaming history at this point.

  • Doctor_What #52 12 months ago

    Throwing good money after bad is a proven problem in many industries, and I guess this shows that it happens just as much in games development.

    It might have been smarter to up-res the original and release it on PSN and XBLA. It would be a lot cheaper, less risky, and definitely faster. Testing to see if there is an audience for this kind of old-fashioned shooter would have been smart.

  • neonxaos #53 12 months ago

    This review makes very little sense to me. I am truly enjoying the game both as a gaming relic, a throwback to a simpler era of the genre and an entertaining FPS in its own right. No, it is not perfect, but 3/10 is way, way too harsh. Talking about lack of originality? I will take this any day over any modern war FPS or Gears clone. At least Duke can make it fun to be a burly dude with a gun. The only games that seem to understand this these days are Bulletstorm, which is very much inspired by Duke, Borderlands, which is basically made by old 3DR employees and then this. The King is not dead by a long shot.

    Note: I am playing the PC version.
    Edited by neonxaos at 12/06/11 @ 14:53

  • fafaf #54 12 months ago

    Everything that is described as bad in this game just makes me want to play it more.

  • Whizzo #55 12 months ago

    I really enjoyed my time completing the PC version, yes it's behind the times in a lot of ways but it was a fun experience and Duke still has more interactivity than pretty much any other FPS I can think of.

    As for there not being a single new weapon in the game, well that's just nonsense.

  • GamesProgrammer Verified Games Team Programmer, Eutechnyx Ltd. #56 12 months ago

    After playing the demo i could see this coming a mile off, there was a good reason you had to buy one of there other games to get access to the demo, cos they knew after playing it you wouldn't be buying duke!

  • SFG_Clan #57 12 months ago

    Frankly, it is a complete mis-step. They could not have gone in a more wrong direction if they had tried. I mean if they had kept all the mechanics retro it could have been at least partially successful as a kind of throwback to the shooters of the 90s.

    Instead they attempt to seem fresh and modern to appeal to a larger market, this ends up with them losing sight of what the game should be and half-baked mechanics characterise the game. I like modern shooters, more so than old ones but this mish mash 'lets appeal to the Call of Duty market cause that's what's cool' is so stupid.

    The King is indeed dead
    Edited by SFG_Clan at 12/06/11 @ 14:40

  • dfunked #58 12 months ago

    Definitely agree with a lot of the points (seriously, wtf is up with the pixel perfect jumping sections???)
    But the game itself is a hell of a lot of FUN in places, something that's sorely lacking from most other recent releases.
    I've played 5 hours of it so far,and I keep coming back out of enjoyment, not trying to get my money's worth... Which is more than I can say for Crysis 2 (got about an hour into it and just couldn't be bothered playing more)

  • TheBard #59 12 months ago

    Wow, 3/10 hurts. If the game wasn't on its way right now, I'd even cancel my order.

    But all in all, this is expected. But I still have to own this title.

  • bad09 #60 12 months ago

    Going on previous experience if EG give it a bad score it must be quite good :)

    Seriously though, it does seem the wait wasn't worth it but by the time I build a new gaming PC that will run it at a decent level this'll be cheap as chips so I'm still gonna bite in 6 months or so.

  • -cerberus- #61 12 months ago

    It's ok because "review scores don't matter", right Randy?

  • GarethBale3 #62 12 months ago

    Fun is so 2 decades a go

  • prudislav #63 12 months ago

    totally agree with neonxaos!!!
    And Console versions are far worse than PC one (they was made in 1.5 year after PC one was finished) and this review is on Xbawks :-)
    Edited by prudislav at 12/06/11 @ 14:44

  • RodHull #64 12 months ago

    Puzzles me why Gearbox didn't just start again with this once they'd acquired the IP. A combination of over confidence in the brand and sheer arrogance I imagine.

  • thedaveeyres #65 12 months ago

    Dukefall.

  • orangpelupa #66 12 months ago

    "Duke's style all but demands a hell-for-leather approach, yet you're continually penalised for indulging in that aspect of the character. Instead, you lurk and scurry and backpedal away from every encounter."

    Seems i will play in PC and use cheatengine to freeze the health or just go downloading a game trainer...
    and it will be fun "mindless" shootings.

  • Quixz #67 12 months ago

    Hahagagha and thought I was going to have a boring Sunday afternoon.

    Knew it was going to be bad but not this bad!

  • uknortherner2000 #68 12 months ago

    Eurogamer's Czech site gave the PC version 7/10. Perhaps Eurogamer UK should've reviewed that version instead?

    Also, I liked the closing statement from the Czech review:

    "For some, DNF is a nostalgic return to the early years and a welcome break from the current multitude of ultra-modern, serious shooters, but for others, it's an outdated and perverse variation on Serious Sam. Fortunately, I belong to the first group, so if you'll excuse me, I await my private lapdance. Shake it, baby!"
    Edited by uknortherner2000 at 12/06/11 @ 14:57

  • lord_raiden_128 #69 12 months ago

    I'd rate it a 5/10. Easily worth a playthrough for Duke fans.

  • theonlyix #70 12 months ago

    Imho this deserves far better than 3/10, ive only played the 360 version and havent noticed THAT much of problems.

    Not through it yet, but you have to appreciate the nukem humour to judge it fair. id give it 7/10 sofar.

    Hail to the king baby!!!

    This is retro, noone should come to this unknowing of its heritage.

  • frazzl #71 12 months ago

    The game has plenty of flaws no doubt, but it still is a lot of fun. I'd take it over any COD release to be honest. Randy was right about reviews not being important. Dan's dislike of the game doesn't effect my enjoyment in the least. Now if only he makes Gearbox fix the loading times ....

  • GarethBale3 #72 12 months ago

    "Even on normal difficulty, enemies hit hard and are often able to kill you in a few seconds. It's a game that demands nimble movement and heavy firepower, yet the bulging weapon inventory of old has been replaced by a Halo-style two-weapon limit, often leaving you without the right tool for the job."

    sounds like you need to set it to "piece of cake"

    parts are challenging but it is not especially difficult on "normal". Sounds like you are too used to hiding behind a nanny cover system in "other" FPS'.

    grow some balls of steel.
    Edited by GarethBale3 at 12/06/11 @ 14:58

  • Bernkastel #73 12 months ago

    I don't know, I kind of enjoyed the demo (the desert level, that is).

    Well, at least it'll probably hit the bargain bin fast.

  • Gambit1977 #74 12 months ago

    Brilliant :D

  • finexi #75 12 months ago

    Never bet on Duke.

  • strangerism #76 12 months ago

    game is good for what is meant to be, get some fun

  • Jacksie66 #77 12 months ago

    Another Driv3r....

  • skuzzbag #78 12 months ago

    Maybe it's time the indie scene had a go eh?

    They actually have the passion to do Duke a service and not merely get the thing out for the sakes of it.

    Release Duke!

  • CaLeDee #79 12 months ago

    To the people saying it's fun: I'm glad I don't have your sense of humour.

  • Widge #80 12 months ago

    Looking forward to the face off, actually hoping the PS3 is even more of a disaster for-the-lulz.

  • Silvervein #81 12 months ago

    I finished the pc version. I don't know about others, but I did have a blast with it. It was nice to play a game that is not affected by sticky wall cover shooter mechanic. Kind of reminded me why shooters used to be fun. Also, thank god, finally a game that has some sense of humour. A very welcome change after the parade of fps characters that are inevitably grim macho space marines/outlaws/insert hero type here, with unfolding tragic story. So depressing.

    I have a feeling that to really enjoy the game one has to be old enough to have played original duke nukem 3d at the time it came out. Duke forever has a lot of references to other games in it, and frankly, to enjoy duke brand of humour you need some maturity.
    Edited by Silvervein at 12/06/11 @ 15:12

  • silversun #82 12 months ago

    Just played up to vegas on pc version , the pc visual looks really good.
    So far reguardless whatever any one else saying i think its a great game so far and just fun.

  • lolercopter #83 12 months ago

    I wasn't expecting that.

  • SuperFLI #84 12 months ago

    well i pretty much expected that the game would not measure up to any kind of expectation. but on the plus side to some extent, he has been resurrected. where they may or may not choose to take him from here, at least they won't have the spectre of the unfinished forever hanging over their heads

  • Tomo #85 12 months ago

    Really nice review Dan: it's like Whack-a-Mole but with Duke's head popping up instead and you smashing him down with every sighting, a comprehensive list eloquently bashing everything wrong with the game.

    I've only played the demo and it was poor, but I'm a massive Duke fanboy, so I'll pick this up eventually, just to experience some history if nothing else.

  • stoopidgreg #86 12 months ago

    PC Gamer gave it an 8 which is interesting.

    I'm disappointed it turned out so badly, but it wasn't at all unexpected. I was a regular 3DR forum member since 1997 and the general vibe I got of their work ethic was to just have fun, drink lots of soda and live on the millions D3D brought them. They were pretty isolated out there in Garland, TX and they closed themselves off from the gaming community and developers, basically got stuck in the past and kept repeating the same mistakes, changing engines and so on. It's a shame they didn't get in some more experienced developers to rescue them years ago.
    Edited by stoopidgreg at 12/06/11 @ 15:20

  • spudsbuckley #87 12 months ago

    I just finished it last night and it was not that bad. Sure it's ugly and old school as fuck but it was just fun and didn't take it self seriously. People need to play games for what they are, not what they expect them to be.

    Personally, I'd give a 7.

  • Rack #88 12 months ago

    You say "Finally a game with a sense of humour" how many months after Portal 2? Anyway this is more of a train-wreck than I imagined so I'm actually prepared to admit being surprised there, I figured Gearbox could have done better if they just trashed it and started over. Seems like they tried to keep too much broken code.

  • mortiz666 #89 12 months ago

    I wish reviewers would stop pretending like the FPS genre has moved on a great deal from when DN3D came out, maybe the MP side of things has but FPS Singleplayer hasn't changed at all in nearly 20 years, it's the same linear duck shoot now as it was back when the original Doom was released. As far as MP the only new additions I can see are some new game modes and unlocks, but seriously things haven't really changed that much.

    DNF is a bad game because it's a bad game, not because the genre has moved on a particular amount.
    Edited by mortiz666 at 12/06/11 @ 15:29

  • Daeltaja #90 12 months ago

    A 3/10? Come on... It's more like a 5/10.

    For me, it's a 5 or 6 at a push, but guess what? I've had more fun with it than any Halo game, any CoD game, even Bulletstorm, Signularity, you name it. It reminds me why I loved games in the first place and it's chock full of memorable scenes that I'll look back on for years to come.

    It's a bit of a rough turd, sure, but this is the one game that blurs what a review score represents. We could overlook Alpha Protocol, Nier and Deadly Premonitions glaring faults, for having some elements that stood out for us and DNF is no different. It's a throwback to a time when graphics and high production values simply didn't matter, when fun was the order of the day.

    If you need anymore comparisons, Mafia II scored 1 more point than this. (Which i'd say is about right, considering it was a 7/10 for me)

    I'm one of the more cynical gamers you'll find, but as of late, anything that breaks the cycle of yet more set piece, corridor shooter number 50, gets my attention. Also, my 12yr old Nephew who's obsessed with COD, absolutely LOVES this. He got it yesterday, and has finished it in a few sittings. He's also starting it again. He just loves it. And he has no prior Duke knowledge.

    I'm sorry but if this was released as a 1200 point download title, the score would have been a few points higher, as it wouldn't have been so wrongly compared to Halo, CoD, Battlefield etc.
    Edited by Daeltaja at 12/06/11 @ 15:32

  • M1chl #91 12 months ago

    Playing on xbox and I agree with positive comments in this thread. I haven't notices something really bad in this game and still having fun. Only bad think about this game (atleast on consoles) is horrendous load times, but aside from that, its really fun shooter...

  • MrVengeance #92 12 months ago

    I was all up for this - I was looking for a big dumb shooter from back in the day, but one that had contemporary visuals and necessary design elements from today.

    I'm genuinely disappointed now with this. It sounds awful. I suppose after the terrible ad for it on TV I should have seen that score coming, but really I think a 3 is generous from the sounds of just how broken it really is.

    Ho-hum.

  • Silvervein #93 12 months ago

    @Rack
    Portal 2 isn't really a shooter. Also, although it had funny elements in it, I found the single player campaign tone a bit depressing. I'm referring to the messages of the owner of the place. While I'm sure the ultra capitalist mindset was put there as a parody, it's too much like I've seen in real life (I do have a science background) to really find it that amusing.

    But lets look at shooters. Gears of war 1 and 2, halos and similar games, like killzone. They are all console shooters with tragic stories and sticky wall cover mechanic slowing down the action. Even bulletstorm for all the fun I had with it had that annoying 'tragic commander in a quest for redemption' story that was, in my opinion, in stark contrast with general tone of the game (not to mention sticky wall cover based shooting. It's really becoming my pet peeve).
    Edited by Silvervein at 12/06/11 @ 15:34

  • Ryuken #94 12 months ago

    Why no PC version review and why on earth is this up on the PC section of EG then? Linking to a yet to be published DF article isn't doing it for me. Sorry, but this is exactly the reason why multiplatform sites can be so disappointing, in the end they don't inform us enough.

    I am pretty sure the disappointment will remain but not as much as on the console versions which are clearly poorly executed, not just from a graphical point of view.
    Edited by Ryuken at 12/06/11 @ 15:34

  • Doncommie #95 12 months ago

    I'd give it 5/10 but maybe that's because I played it on PC. Why couldn't it have been more like Bulletstorm?

  • Crea #96 12 months ago

    I'm going to buy this purely to encourage the kind of batshit-insanity, wasteful, studio-sinking labour of love craziness that it represents.

  • GordonBennett #97 12 months ago

    I wonder if the fact that Eurogamer weren't sent a free review copy hasn't affected the score.

  • ppRogue1 #98 12 months ago

    I played this through on the PC, and therefore didn't encounter the technical issues described in the review (though the game is still ugly). However, in most other respects, the review is spot on. I was horribly disappointed by how linear it was (DN3D levels required quite a lot of exploration), by the 2 weapon limit and by how flat much of the combat felt.

    One factual clarification to the review; there are a few new weapons that weren't in DN3D. There's a new railgun (basically a sniper rifle) and three new alien weapons, broadly equating to a 3-shot pistol, a coherent-beam weapon and a small rocket launcher. None of them add much to the game and they feel pretty limp next to the rest of the weapons on offer, so I'm not surprised the reviewer forgot about them.

  • Zozzilla #99 12 months ago

    I've been having fun with it - if you take it at face value for what it's supposed to be, a retro homage to Duke 3D, and stop trying to compare it to realistic FPS's like CoD...then you see that the game is actually quite good.

  • TheBiGW #100 12 months ago

    I'm late to the comment party here, but it has to be said; this is the best game review I've ever read - bar none. Well done Dan!

  • lostlain #101 12 months ago

    look if you played dn3d when you were between the ages of 12 - 16 back in the day, then it's your duty to buy and play this.

  • The-Builder #102 12 months ago

    It's not perfect, but it is much better then a 3... Play it on the PC, fast load times, smooth animations and it looks good.
    Also there are new guns and new enemies. Pregnators and quite a few variations of the pig cops spring to mind. Some of the aliens drops new guns like lasers and enforcer rocket launcher.

  • Inmediasress #103 12 months ago

    I don't get it why can't duke make a joke about valve??????
    Why must he give something equally brilliant as portal apart from being an fps they have nothing in common.
    I have the strange feeling that most gaming sites don't even give this game a chance and everyone seems to be taking out their frustration on it that they had to wait for so long.
    This is nothing worse than other shity, mindless shooters and anyway you will have COD here in a few months stop crying for another COD copy fps.
    Edited by Inmediasress at 12/06/11 @ 15:56

  • Smoped #104 12 months ago

    Just wondering: If Gearbox bought Duke more for the possibility of making new Duke games from scratch rather than this mess, do ya think the reception DNF is getting hinder those plans? I mean a Duke game developed by Gearbox from the ground up could actually be good.

  • DrStrangelove #105 12 months ago

    As a fan of old-school FPS games like Doom 1, DN3D or Quake 1, I really expected this to be some fun, even if not overwhelming fun. I didn't have high expectations, if it would've made 7/10 for me, it'd have been fine. But it isn't.

    DNF is just a bad (and much too late) parody on DN3D. While DN3D was a great game with a lot of silly humour as a bonus, DNF seems to focus on recapturing the humour and afterwards adding some sort of game. I can't get rid of the feeling that in the development of DNF, the actual game was just an afterthought.

    That might have been ok if it was as funny as DN3D. It isn't. It's shouting out at everyone "omg look how funny I am", it's a silly attention whore in the shape of a game that never lives up to its drier role model. Take the game out of DN3D, and you have DNF. Does anyone remember Blood? A trash-horror-zombie game by Monolith built on the DN3D engine? That was more of a sequel to DN3D because it also combined off-the-score facepalm humour with a pretty decent game.

    It might have been great if it played like an old-school shooter, with all its disadvantages, but with all its advantages as well. One thing I really love about the old games is that you're put in some sector and you're on your own to explore it and to find the way out. DNF follows the modern approach introduced by Half-Life, being totally linear and getting rid of all exploring and free-roaming. Again, HL1 was (for my taste) disappointingly linear, but it was brilliant at everything else, while DNF isn't brilliant at anything. It's just linear.

    What really baffles me is that this game is made by Gearbox. The same Gearbox who made Borderlands, in my opinion the greatest FPS game in a long time. If they make DNF, it has to be good, right? Oh how wrong can one be? DNF looks (it's quite horrible graphically) and feels like it was made by the creator(s?) of Postal 2.

    So in the end, we have the original DN3D, which was cutting edge back then (I think it was the FPS game that introduced sloped floors and multiple floors above each other, before Quake 1 introduced actual 3D maps). It was technically superior, it was a fantastic action game, it had unprecedented environment interaction, etc. Now we have DNF, which is disappointing in graphics, in gameplay, and in humour.

    So I suggest you visit gog.com and buy DN3D: Atomic Edition for $5.99 and get the eDuke32 client (free) for high resolution and proper mouse-aiming instead. And wait one or two months until Duke Nukem Forever is cheaper than that.

    edit: I wrongly stated that Blood was made by Bethesda. It was made by Monolith. My mistake, sorry.
    Edited by DrStrangelove at 12/06/11 @ 16:55

  • GaryHoward #106 12 months ago

    Played it for a few hours of it yesterday, got bored. Read this and then lolololololololed.

  • DrStrangelove #107 12 months ago

    That said, I think it's still better than the shite that Call of Duty is, or Dead Space.

  • ucankurbaga #108 12 months ago

    omg 3/10 lol

  • KDR_11k #109 12 months ago

    "I hate valve puzzles," he jokes as you embark on an incredibly uninspired puzzle involving steam pipes, but the double meaning would work so much better if Duke could offer anything to rival Portal's genius, or even the basic physics puzzles of Half-Life 2.

    I wish the game just didn't try that crap at all, more shooting, less silly puzzling! The first person platforming works fine for me (BTW, Duke is NOT invisible, you can actually see his feet when looking down but that won't help when platforming), I have no trouble judging distances or how large my bounding box is in FPSes. Less so than in third person games even, the freedom that first person camera controls give helps a lot with understanding the level layout.

    On a positive note, the humour contributed by NPCs and the environment is much better than Duke's own and the boss battles were better than the ones in most other FPSes even though that's not a high bar. Also I think the gameplay starts fairly weak but gets a bit better as you progress.

  • Raiten #110 12 months ago

    Seems like you need to check the pc reviews to see how the game actualy is, afterall it's the version that has scored quite well even if the console versions are horrible.
    Tho the whole review kept me wondering what they ment by advancements in fps genre? what on earth does that mean? there's hardly been anything in years that has made any real advancements to the fps genre as whole. The only thing i can think off is Halo 1 for showing fps gaming is possible on consoles.. especialy without the gawd awfull regenerating health crap! that has no place in duke game or any other shooter for that matter, or did they mean multiplayer gaming with all sorts of pointless unlockable stuff and level ups? meh. Everything else i've seen in every single shooter is same old same old we had decades ago.

    It could've been a whole lot better game had they not tried to replace old duke mechanics with some of the most annoying current gen fps mechanics, it just doesn't feel right.

  • Cjail #111 12 months ago

    The worst thing in all this is that the loving fans of the Duke didn't get what they rightfully deserved: an epic return of the King!

  • The-Bodybuilder #112 12 months ago

    " the Meet the Spartans of video games."

    The most damning comment in videogame history.

  • Craven #113 12 months ago

    I skipped to page 3 to see what the score was. I think i'll wait till this hits £20 or less, won't be taking too much of a risk then.

  • DrStrangelove #114 12 months ago

    One thing about the PC/console thing. I have the PC version, and I am disappointed. If an FPS is great on PC, it should be at least good on consoles. Gearbox chose to make this game for consoles as well, so there's no excuse saying "oooh you should've got the PC version". That's no excuse, that's just a ripoff.

  • dirtysteve #115 12 months ago

    holy jesus, it should have been left to die. This does not ill me with hope for Colonial Marines.

  • Doncommie #116 12 months ago

    The baby octobrains were a new enemy and the impregnator was a pretty major reworking of the protazoid slimer but neither of them were substantial so the point still stands.

  • dingo75 #117 12 months ago

    Haven't played the full version yet (my copy is still on its way) but judging from the demo:

    If you have issues with "Normal" you should re-play some older shooters.
    I played the demo on "Hard" and it was not really that challenging.
    As someone else said: For people like you there is the "piece of cake" option.

  • Ryze #118 12 months ago

    Oooops!

    Remake?

  • jimr9999us #119 12 months ago

    Another example of why when gamers cry for updates to old favorites, developers respond with a:

    "You know that old girlfriend of yours, the one you still jerk off to sometimes? Yeah, she really wasn't that pretty. And she was shagging your Uncle Rob to boot."
    Edited by jimr9999us at 12/06/11 @ 16:26

  • KTroopA #120 12 months ago

    Its a bit turd then. /goes back to playing enslaved

  • tinners #121 12 months ago

    Shame randy seemed to love it

    Bar the odd Eg Italy 7 out of 10 this seems to be getting universally slated on metacriticl

  • uknortherner2000 #122 12 months ago

    @tinners: "Bar the odd Eg Italy 7 out of 10 this seems to be getting universally slated on metacriticl"

    Except the PC version which is averaging 76/100 on there: http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/duke-n...

  • Fido128 #123 12 months ago

    I think we can say we all saw this coming, right? The tragedy is preorders suggest this could well come close to the sales of something like Portal 2. Shudder.

  • jonsaan #124 12 months ago

    How come the Duke Expansion never gets talked about? I forget the name but it invovled a tropical Island?

  • Sunjammer #125 12 months ago

    Fuck this whole review. I don't give a shit what ANYONE has to say. I'm having a blast with it. Did mr whitehead ever think duke nukem was ACTUALLY cool back in the day? He was a retarded aberration even then. I guess someone grew up.

  • Fido128 #126 12 months ago

    @RoOhDaMite

    "It really doesn't surprise me the humour didn't get through to you. Dan seems to be the kind of person who gets offended by watching a rap-video."

    YEAH, GOD, this is really multi-faceted, nuanced humour, probably went straight over Dan's head. Oooor it's just a craply written, dated gag that isn't remotely funny except to hur-hur-hurring halfwits who thought Epic Movie was a good time.

    We all get the joke. It's just not very funny and very, very obvious.

  • coolbritannia #127 12 months ago

    Couldn't give a shit about the game but for Randy to just openly lie at how advanced it is makes me sad.

    I trusted you, man.

  • MdaG #128 12 months ago

    Here's to hoping that Serious Sam 3 fares better.

  • Waldo #129 12 months ago

    "What a mess!"

    - Duke Nukem

  • DrStrangelove #130 12 months ago

    Btw, somebody's gonna freakin' pay for screwin' up my vacation.

  • _LarZen_ #131 12 months ago

    Im having so much fun playing DNF....to bad people dont like it.

  • Editos #132 12 months ago

    Has anyone bought this expecting it to get over a 5/10? I know I didn't.

    I don't need someone to put a number next to a game to tell me whether it's worth spending my time playing, it's Duke Nukem so not playing it was never going to be an option despite it clearly going to turn out shite.

    For anyone saying 'Ouch' please do me a favour and go chop your fingers off. This has to be one of the most irritating things to put on a comments page.

  • CHAZBIGPOTATO #133 12 months ago

    Ouch!

    This review calls for a Highly Random personal factoid about Duke Nukem 3d.

    My brother developed a habit of singing popular songs of the current time and replacing the words with the words "Duke Nukem 3d". He doesn't play games much at all.

    Anyway, my point is...

    ...well I haven't got one.

    Sorry

  • Artamentix #134 12 months ago

    You have some errors in the article, here:

    "Most alarmingly, all the weapons are repeated from 1996, and there are no new enemy types either"

    In DNF there are new weapons such as the AT captain laser, the Enforcer gun, the Railgun, amongst others, and new enemies include octababies, energy leach, octaking and rats, with some others I may have forgotten, please correct this article

  • vodny_cz Verified Redaktor, Eurogamer Czech Republic #135 12 months ago

    This game has everything, what todays shooters lack. And has nothing, what todays shooters has. Choose your side. I'm with Duke.

  • Aka #136 12 months ago

    This is a truly sad day. Ever since reading the preview and seeing first screenshots years ago in PC Gamer magazine, I like so many, have waited patiently for this momentous day. I was in my early teens back then and Duke Nukem was the perfect game for all the wrong reasons… Oh dear, what a let down. I guess this was to be expected.
    Edited by Aka at 12/06/11 @ 17:38

  • Paul_cz #137 12 months ago

    It is 5 or 6 out of 10 on PC, simply because 5 seconds loading, 60fps and flawless mouse controls make it SO MUCH MORE enjoyable. It is still not a great game, but it can be quite fun quite often...except for last 3 hours taking place in Hoover Dam, which are really boring.

  • petran79 #138 12 months ago

    This is a truly sad day. Ever since reading the preview and seeing first screenshots years ago in PC Gamer magazine, I like so many, have waited patiently for this momentous day. I was in my early teens back then and Duke Nukem was the perfect game for all the wrong reasons… Oh dear, what a let down. I guess this was to be expected.

    With no Xbox back then, PC had the best games. I was not into fps but I found the game fun too. We were fortunate as teens, since in pre-fast internet days my friend's older brother was (and stil is) an avid gamer and he had his PC up-to-date with the best and most popular games of all genres.

    too bad DNF it did not turn out as good as Doom 3. Humor changes, horror remains the same

  • Wyrm #139 12 months ago

    Best I can say about the game is that it reminded me of Postal 2, which was way more fun.

  • photoboy #140 12 months ago

    Yes, how dare Duke Nukem break up the pace by putting some platforming, driving, puzzles and interactive elements into the levels. You can bet when Activision shit out the next COD the tedious linear gameplay and lack of cover system will be brushed over in favour of Activision's marketing money. I found nothing wrong with the platforming either.

    I finished the PC version last night, while it's not as great as Duke3D, there's plenty in the game to enjoy, unless you're a Eurogamer journo desperate to validate Rob Fahey's hysterical claims that Duke Nukem Forever is a woman beating sim.

  • curtlikesmeat #141 12 months ago

    Well at least it's out.

    This and the Colonial Marines preview doesn't exactly bode well for that game...
    Edited by curtlikesmeat at 12/06/11 @ 18:37

  • Shakey_Jake33 #142 12 months ago

    I don't agree the score.
    I see the boring tripe that's released these days, and wonder what the reviewer is smoking. Entitled to his opinion, of course.

  • mukki #143 12 months ago

    ouch!

    Good review, bad game

  • Nobunaga #144 12 months ago

    I quite enjoyed the game, especially on the PC. The reviewer seems hell bent on trashing Duke using every weapon imaginable, even his own preference for humour. It's no pearl, but I recommend DNF to an older crowd who grew up playing D3D. I did and I liked it.

  • velimirius #145 12 months ago

    always knew that its going to be loads of crap packed in one game, but ppl were like "oh its Duke, he is back" blablabla yeah ofc the crap is back.

  • Shakey_Jake33 #146 12 months ago

    @Nobugana - Indeed. The review seems to critisise the game for being exactly what it's supposed to be. I don't mind that, I don't even mind the 3/10 score, but the way that readers are happy to absorb that like a sponge irks me. It delivers what you expect it to, for better or worse.

  • Nobunaga #147 12 months ago

    What actually bothers me is how DNF gets trashed for not being modern enough, yet at the same time everyone seems to expect a retro shooter. So it's supposed to be retro and modern at the same time. And when the authors try just that - the design in retro, but it has modern elements picked from Halo such as regenerating health - the game gets destroyed for that. NO, WE DONT WANT REGENERATING HEALTH, ITS TOO MODERN!!! Okay, here's old-style health. NO WE DONT WANT OLD-STYLE HEALTH, ITS TOO OLD! And so on.

    Another example: Duke is *based* on being a silly, stupid parody of an American macho soldier. There's PLENTY of those around today, notwithstanding the 'heroes' of practically every modern shooter. Modern Warfare, Crysis, Battlefield - these are empty husks filled with cliches. They haven't changed one bit from the 80s and 90s except they use more military lingo. So here comes Duke, being a parody of them, as well as of Rambo/Commando ... and gets a finger. No, you're not funny enough, Duke! We want you to be more modern, more Zero Punctuation / YouTube comedians / hip style. You're supposed to change with times, see! Only he doesn't have to, not really. He's just as hilarious today as he was 15 years ago. The world hasn't changed.

    The games have, but not THAT much. What they have shed is the need to do certain things manually, such as operating heavy machinery, or having bits that include pissing, admiring in mirrors, playing billiards, lifting weights and carrying barrels. In new shooters you press a button and the game does all that for you, leaving you to kill terrorists. In D3D and DNF, you have to or can do these things by hand and generally if you want to. To Dan, these things are the epitome of silliness. For me, they make the world more believable and give you something to do beside just shooting and listening to brawny men saying "ECHO BRAVO DELTA TANGO ZERO". I spent 15 minutes playing billiards and another 15 playing Balls of Steel. It made me feel nice to have to remove barrels from a mine cart so I can ride it, push trolleys against a wall to open the way forward and search for gasoline to fuel my monster truck. These are a plus in my book, but here they're glossed over and treated like unnecessarities. They're not, especially not in a Duke game!

  • Guv #148 12 months ago

    Time well spent!

  • alan_stealth #149 12 months ago

    Eurogamer fucking sucks.
    Read PC Gamers review, at least they're not catering to a MW2 crowd. Duke rocks, and for everything he falls short on graphically he more than makes up for in other places, FPS's today, could learn something from "this relic".

  • a8a #150 12 months ago

    Too many people are covering for this game with meaningless defences.

    "It's Duke, it's supposed to be silly." "It's Duke, it's supposed to be a throwback to 1995." "It's Duke, it's making a satirical point about gaming!"

    If I made the worst game in the world, called it satire, and put a blurb on the back declaring it the worst game in the world, does it deserve a 10/10 score? You may not be having fun, but it does exactly what you expect from it!

    For an example of a recent "mindless fun done well" shooter, see Bulletstorm. Sounds like Duke has been reduced to "killing off brand in return for one last cash injection" mode.

  • monkfishjoe #151 12 months ago

    Ouch. So Eat Lead: Matt Hazard scored better than this? Ouch.

  • Anciegher #152 12 months ago

    3/10 seems a bit harsh. I mean it's clearly better than Operation Flashpoint and Conduit, a 5-6 would be more fitting I think. I played it this weekend and didn't give up after 10 minutes, that must mean something right? (unlike those 2 other games I mentioned)

  • Nobunaga #153 12 months ago

    Why the hell would it be the worst game in the world? It's NOT the worst game in the world. It plays well enough, the shooting mechanics are simple but clear, you have to put in some skill to survive ... It's a decent arcade shooter with adventury bits added on and Duke's personality to round it up. It's not advanced or advancing the medium, but for what it does, it does well enough. (More enjoyalbe on the PC, though. The loading times, graphics and stuttering are far, far worse on the X360.)

  • Jonny5Alive7 #154 12 months ago

    Despite it's shitness, I'm not going to wait 14 years and not play it. Heres hoping it sells enough anyway, to spawn a modern day sequel.

  • lord_fartsalot #155 12 months ago

    See EG. This is why consoles are shit. You should pay more attention to PC.

  • jablonski #156 12 months ago

    I'd actually like to see a review written by someone who isn't trying so hard to put across his liberal views.

    I'm liberal, but I certainly wouldn't knock 3 or 4 points off a score to make a statement about it

  • Snake_2011 #157 12 months ago

    the game is FUN that is what I'm getting from it compared to today's games there are flaws but its FUN.

  • a8a #158 12 months ago

    @Nobunaga

    Im not sure if thats aimed at me. If it is, I should point out that I didn't say it was the worst game in the world. I made a point that if, hypothetically, I deliberately made the worst game in the world, it would still be bad, even though it fulfilled all of my expectations. The point being that a lot of the Duke defences seem to rely on saying "It's supposed to be like that."

  • masterchimp #159 12 months ago

    yep, but one thing still rings in my mind - it's a damn sight better than Brink..

  • King_Edward #160 12 months ago

    I finished it today, and I enjoyed it. I've spent 40 notes worse games.

  • skraflar #161 12 months ago

    I don't about you guys but I love this game (PC version). Definitely the graphics isn't the best. But Gearbox brought us Duke again and for that they disserve gratitude. Think of this that way now that this game is finally out they can make a new Duke Nukem game with better game engine. Like Crysis 2 engine :)

  • lewisg #162 12 months ago

    "The physics is spotty at best"

    :)

    Enjoyed the review though

  • eviroboy #163 12 months ago

    I was expecting an 8...nothing to do with how shit the game may be but because that seems to be the Eurogamer norm.
    Well done.

    Hail to the out-dated macho man...baby.

  • YenooR #164 12 months ago

    I was expecting a 5 or 6 but a 3.It must be really bad.

  • captain-future #165 12 months ago

    hmmmm, strangely I always end up buying the "cool expensive" collector's editions on games that suck. Halo 3 Helmet Edition and now Balls of Steel Duke Nukem Forver...

    *sniff* I played the demo and I wanted to cancel my pre-order but it was already posted. too late. still I'm happy that the game came out, it gave me hope to a fault that it might be good, and I'm rubbish at shooters so this will be not fun to play at all for me. but still, I guess I will play it in good memory of how cool Duke Nukem was then.

    so... always bet on the Duke. no questions asked.
    Edited by captain-future at 12/06/11 @ 20:49

  • czrsink #166 12 months ago

    Terrible review. Duke deserves better.

  • Kami #167 12 months ago

    @Nobunaga; The confusion comes because it's compromised on the two. This wasn't going to work unless they went one extreme or the other - either totally retro or completely modern. That it falls somewhere between the two IS the issue for many.

    This game shouldn't have compromised. That it's confused about which way to go has confused many people I think. It's just something that shouldn't have held back.

    Still, I do think a 3 is harsh, it's not the worst game I've played this year after all...

  • petran79 #168 12 months ago

    So it is so bad that it is good

  • daftshadow #169 12 months ago

    3/10, ah. this is just the opinion of one guy who works for eurogamer and is definitely bias. dnf deserves at least a 6/10. it's not the best fps nor has the awesome graphics but it's still damn pretty fun. take for what it's worth, a duke nukem game.

  • azic #170 12 months ago

    An unfair review I feel. But anything that has a pop at Halo & Christian Bale is defo worth a 7.
    I see no mention of the above in the review? was it even played or did the reviewer just jump on the band wagon.
    one of the best games Ive played in ages, a no BS raw shooter that's not serious.

    And as for the reviewer saying this game is hard...oh please please, I had it on medium and felt way to easy. I guess being drip fed COD and this happens. Before Fear we had Blood, anybody remember that? Now that was a Hard game, Castlevania on Snes....HARD AS FUCK and to get the true ending you had to do it twice in one sitting.

    I think the reviewer makes some OK points, but not a fair review. I'm playing on PC the GFX are quite good maxed, I think the console gamers got bent-over on the GFX and loading times, its like 10-15 seconds on PC and this is on a SATAII drive not an SSD.
    Edited by azic at 12/06/11 @ 21:39

  • Aradiel #171 12 months ago

    Wow. I disagree with this review on every single level. I come close to agreeing on the difficulty level, which was frustrating at times, but then I had to think of a new tactic to get myself through the situation, to flex my grey matter to figure out how to get past the problem.

    I was playing on the PC, though. Maybe the 360 version is just a shit port.

  • linea #172 12 months ago

    Did anyone else laugh at the mere mention of the words 'poo and wee' in the review?

    It's both reassuring and slightly worrying that I'm if anything less mature now than when the last Duke game came out

  • midnight_walker #173 12 months ago

    "They didn't send us a review copy - knock a few points off!"

  • jimdove1976 #174 12 months ago

    This game does what it sez on the tin, its a bit of fun in an old school fps setup. dont take itself too seriously and is worth playing. Id MUCH rather play thru this game again than any of the recent COD games, Generic FPS trash like the new CODs are so overhyped everyone thinks they are the second coming when in fact we have been playing that same game for 15 years! at least duke has a laugh about it on the way.

  • jimdove1976 #175 12 months ago

    This game does what it sez on the tin, its a bit of fun in an old school fps setup. dont take itself too seriously and is worth playing. Id MUCH rather play thru this game again than any of the recent COD games, Generic FPS trash like the new CODs are so overhyped everyone thinks they are the second coming when in fact we have been playing that same game for 15 years! at least duke has a laugh about it on the way.

  • Grekon77 #176 12 months ago

    why duke...why ???

  • PameBoy #177 12 months ago

    I'm playing this on the PC, and it seems like this reviewer is playing a completely different game entirely. It's smooth, fast-paced and fun and the graphics are actually really pretty in places (although obviously very dated in others - it is running on the original Unreal Tournament engine after all, and when you think about it that way it's actually pretty amazing that they managed to get so much out of such ancient technology). Some of the lighting and various visual effects in particular are actually a bit stunning, although quite a few of the textures and some of the level geometry is definitely aged.

    "Most alarmingly, all the weapons are repeated from 1996, and there are no new enemy types either. While old favourites like the shrink ray and the devastator are still satisfying to use, it beggars belief that of all the hundreds of people involved in this game over the years, nobody could come up with a single idea for a new gun or enemy."

    - I'm a bit staggered by this statement because it's just a complete lie. The AT laser, AT Captain laser, Railgun and Enforcer gun are all completely new weapons, and the Octababies and Impregnaders are new enemies too. There are also multiple types of Pig Cop and a few other additions like the grabby-tentacle-arm things (which are actually kind of cute in a disgusting way). If you're going to slag a game off you could at least take the trouble to do some basic research so you don't end up just spouting totally untrue garbage.

    "...unsure as to where Duke's invisible body is."

    - This is also nonsense. Look down. Those are Duke's feet.

    I'm not quite finished with the game yet but so far I really like it. You can definitely see how long the game's been in development, for better and worse. It makes for quite a fascinating experience, being able to see where game design elements and references from the late 00s are mashed together side-by-side with level design and concepts from the late 90s. Parts of it are genuinely hilarious and some of the hidden stuff betrays a much more intelligent and thoughtful approach by the devs than you would at first think (I was quite stunned by the subtlety of the Inception reference for example). I LOVE that it forces you to work out the puzzles yourself - barely any onscreen prompts, no irritating NPCs playing the entire game for you.

    I agree it would be nice if they'd stuck to a more Duke3D-ish approach to level design; the linearity of the levels is just a little bit underwhelming compared to the massive labyrinths of the first game. But there's so much more variation and so many more ideas being played around with in DNF than anything you see from modern shooters (eg. Call of Duty, which let's face it, is basically a very shiny Whack-a-Mole). It's just so much more playful, more expansive, more fun. I'm thrilled that Duke's back, and that for all its occasional clunkiness and mad grab-bag of ideas, it's retained enough of the old-school Duke design ethos to show the boring identikit modern shooters what they're missing. Can't wait to see what Gearbox is going to do with the rumoured sequel.
    Edited by PameBoy at 12/06/11 @ 23:09

  • MeBrains #178 12 months ago

    well I though DN3D was kinda shite, so I did not expect this to blow us away either. but I am surprised at 3/10.

  • Darren #179 12 months ago

    "The game is disturbingly in love with first-person platform jumping, and many of the most annoying sections revolve not around shooting enemies but leaping from pipes and boxes, unsure as to where Duke's invisible body is.

    If you look down you can see Duke's legs and feet plus he casts a shadow (at least he does on the PC) which while not completely ideal - the game would have worked best here in third-person IMO - means that I had no problems whatsoever doing the platform bits. I enjoyed them actually as they made a nice change of pace from the shooting and puzzle/exploration bits.

    I've just finished Duke Burger on Normal and I'm really enjoying this game on the PC. It's silly but always entertaining and there's enough variety for me that it keeps me playing it to see what comes next. And just when I decide to leave it for the day I reach a new chapter and I'm hooked again. IMO it is deserving of at least a 7 even if the game itself feels like a relic from 2003. Nothing wrong with retro gaming IMO and this feels and looks like a Duke Nukem game and brings back fond memories of DN3D. It's childish, crude and rude and feels rough around the edges but I wasn't expecting anything else. As long as your expectations are of Duke Nukem 3D with an improved engine and you don't expect anything new then I suspect you'll enjoy it. Just don't buy it for the consoles... ;)

    My only gripes are (a) the pointless loading screens on the PC - where levels have clearly broken down into separate loads to fit onto the console - but at least the loading times are brief at 5-10 seconds. (b) the Ego stuff for a permanent health boost is a welcome distraction but I preferred the clever design of the original with its hidden secrets which encouraged replays.
    Edited by Darren at 12/06/11 @ 22:38

  • trip919 #180 12 months ago

    This is totally shit... well I am surprised...

  • Azazel #181 12 months ago

    "Most alarmingly, all the weapons are repeated from 1996, and there are no new enemy types either."

    SRSLY? At least they got a re-skin at some point I 'spose...

  • Darren #182 12 months ago

    I'd love to see the original Duke Nukem 3D as DLC running on this engine for, say, £7 or so. I'd definitely buy it.

  • Freek #183 12 months ago

    I really like DN3D and so wanted to like this game, but it's just not there. The aiming feels off, the graphics are okay but more importantly: the game is mostly dull. You spend allot of time wandering through construction sites, caves and corridors without much interesting level design.
    It feels more like an under produced mod then a real game. :(

    Borrowed the 360 version from a friend, played it till the roof section of Duke Burger and gave up.

    I still hope Gearbox makes a proper Duke game. A game with modern gameplay and a sense of humor. There's room for Duke's sillyness if it's done right.

  • Sevens #184 12 months ago

    Well, rampaging feminists are still enough reason to buy it.

  • niallo #185 12 months ago

    This game is fun, the reviewers are full of crap. Sure the game looks rough but so what, I had more enjoyment playing through Duke Nukem than I did playing Crysis 2 or any other modern fps which are supposedly the be all and end all of shooters. The gaming websites are being a little too harsh I think.

  • CaptainKid #186 12 months ago

    Why in gods name didn't they review this on PC???
    I mean I haven't played Duke Nukem 3D game (Amiga man myself) but this was a PC game back in the day.
    So naturally you could expect it to run best on PC, so review it on the device it was designed for ffs.
    Bad decision Eurogamer.

  • Badassbab #187 12 months ago

    An 8!

    Seriously who didn't see this coming?

  • aldogray #188 12 months ago

    After listening to reviews of past shooters i'll be playing it. It can't be worse than single player BF2 or MW2 surely?! Hopefully a patch will come out on PC to get rid of the regenerating health (something I hate!) This game might be aimed at gamers with the humour of 8 year olds but hopefully they won't be able to finish this with their eyes closed and their brain switched off like some others. I remember playing BF2 on Xbox on the hardest difficulty and I felt I had been ripped off as I wanted a good single player experience but there was no challenge at all because of regenerating health. I wanted to shoot the characters too after the first act. Worst story ever. All I can say is that Valve are the only company providing us with hope! I didn't even buy Black Ops after finishing MW2 single player and selling it the next day (I was quite happy that the publisher lost a sale on that). I'd rather play the original half life from 1998. All I can say is that if Eurogamer and other review sites gave MW2 9/10 I will take there advice with a pinch of salt.

    On another note. I'd like to say I completely agree with Activision charging for online time. It gets the annoying kids off the servers and you should have a better experience. I think they should release the game's single player experience as a seperate download though through Xbox Live for people who have no interest in online or Maybe just the single player for a reduced price at retail. If you like the online aspect you should be able to purchase an online only version for say 2400 Microsoft points plus 400 points a month or maybe £40 a year for dedicated child free servers with weekly competition prizes for organised matches. It's all a matter of time before this happens. Why people pay £50 for an online game which is full of annoying kids and has a tacked on single player is beyond me. At least MW fans are being given the option of a premium experience now. It might end up costing £100 a year but at the end of the day, for probably around 400 hours enjoyment it aint half bad!

  • byron_hinson #189 12 months ago

    @Captain Kid - I assume you are joking...its released across three formats, doesn't matter which one you review it on in the end, all three are poor, just the PC version is slightly less poor than the others. If they don't want it reviewed on console, don't release it on console.

  • UKGN_Zoidberg #190 12 months ago

    Definitely a 7/10 for me (playing on Xbox 360). Loving the simplicity of the run-shoot-kill gameplay and don't care if the graphics are dated. Games are meant to be fun, and this is far more fun than any Call Of Duty.

  • NHDavid #191 12 months ago

    O_o

  • CaptainKid #192 12 months ago

    @byron hinson
    But don't you agree a game should be reviewed on the device it runs best on?
    Especially Duke Nukem, perhaps the most anticipated game of all time.
    It's just wrong reviewing this game on console.

  • WildFire15 #193 12 months ago

    Actually, I'd say it's not a BAD game, definatly not 3/10 bad, but it seems to me those who mostly review console games are slating DNF more then PC reviewers. Lets get 1 thing straight, DNF is not a great game, it's meerly good, it's a reasonable bit of uncomplicated fun that while it has some modern conventions rather half hazardly put in, it's ultimately compitant. If you go in without expecting to be blown away, you'd have a good enough time, but if you expect this to be the second coming, then you'll be sorely disappointed.

  • Savatage #194 12 months ago

    "This wasn't going to work unless they went one extreme or the other - either totally retro or completely modern. That it falls somewhere between the two IS the issue for many."

    Totally agree. Whilst I am enjoying the game, I do find that the Halo/Call of Duty-style concessions (recharging health, two weapon limit, linear levels and so on) are far more detrimental to the game than the undeniably rough edges. In short, they just don't feel "Duke" like.

    Still love the purile humour (am I the only one who found that Valve quip funny?) and there are some really fun parts, but there is more than just a faint whiff of disappointment about the game overall.

  • paulf #195 12 months ago

    this comments thread just goes to show what Randy Pitchford was talking about when he said reviews didn't matter

  • arcam #196 12 months ago

    Is there anyone who doesn't think this game would be significantly improved with a small mod/patch to carry more guns?

    What were they thinking?

  • RawNinjaKid #197 12 months ago

    I never understood this franchise in its prime. Now I am absolutely sure that people who still would pay for this are nothing but has-beens and have no taste!

    It's a kind of game that makes the industry look so not cool and glad its on its way out! Hopefully!

    Edited by RawNinjaKid at 13/06/11 @ 00:39

  • lucky_jim #198 12 months ago

    It's shit. It always going to be shit. Sure, if it came out in the late 90s, or even the early 2000s, it might have been able to hold it's own, but not now. Gearbox wanted the IP and thought they might as well push this tired shit out because it wouldn't cost them much more to release it than it'd already cost to get their hands on the IP, but that doesn't alter the fact it's a 1990s game being released at full price in 2011. They should have just stuck it on XBLA/ PSN/ Steam for a tenner.

    I hope this doesn't ruin Gearbox's rep. I'm sure they can produce a Duke game that's as good as Borderlands, given a year or two. They should have been more honest about this game and the issues they inherited though- Randy Pitchford hasn't helped his company by pretending this was gonna be any good.

  • icecoldbud #199 12 months ago

    Puke Nukem... such a shame...sigh

  • castertroy #200 12 months ago

    Do you don't like it ? I rented it from LOVEFILM and its going back tomorrow

  • Muddtallica #201 12 months ago

    Yeah, I really do think EG needs to correct that part about "no new guns and enemies"; as other have pointed out, it's completely untrue. AT Lasers, the Railgun, the Enforcer Gun, plus the Octababies, Impregnators, etc...

    I don't really agree with the review much; the underlying points are fair in most cases, but the tone is harsh to an extent that doesn't reflect my mostly pleasant experience of playing the game. But the point about guns and enemies isn't just harsh, it's flat-out false.

  • ZouZouRas #202 12 months ago

    One mans 3 is another mans 8 (at least). I have a feeling that it will be the exact opposite of Portal 2. Critics will bash Duke but the audience will love it. At least all of us old wankers that we dont have alzheimer yet :-)

    Edited thanks to the person who corrected me about alzheimer. Sorry folks i am from Greece and English is not my native language please try to forgive me. I dont usualy bother you with my bad English but Duke is far too important to ignore. :-)

    PS: I dont think is nice to make fun of someone`s difficulty to express himself in your NATIVE language.

    @lucky_jim I forgive you. I`ve even put a positive vote to you. :-) Now you are back at ground zero.

    Edited by ZouZouRas at 13/06/11 @ 02:04

  • lucky_jim #203 12 months ago

    Those of us who know how to spell Alzheimer's will still hate it.

    Edit- just dawned on me that this is a pretty shitty comment. I've left it in the unlikely event it's referred to later, but consider it withdrawn and apologies issued (sorry!): I was pretty pisht when posting and thought better of it when I'd sobered up a bit.
    Edited by lucky_jim at 13/06/11 @ 00:37

  • Farstarbuck #204 12 months ago

    Maybe gearbox should have spent more time looking after Brothers in Arms than this lump of sheeeeit.

  • carlosdfn #205 12 months ago

    Excellent review.
    I'm really sad that the game turned out like this, I was rooting for them, what a shame.

  • apoc_reg #206 12 months ago

    Im surprised Gearbox didnt do a better job, I know they only had it for 1% of its development time... but thats still more than most development cycles for COD these days!

  • azic #207 12 months ago

    This game is retro, you did not have cover systems, blind fire etc, you strafed like a bitch and fired at the enemy!

    You often ran round in circles looked for areas to hide in and glitch the bosses.

    I really think Eurogamer should review the PC version!

    This review is null and void IMHO.

  • Jorendo #208 12 months ago

    What a suprise this game would fail, no one ever seen that comming /sarcasm.

    Duke Nukem Forever was doomed as soon as it turned 2000 and up. Seriousely 14 years of development, the exspectations where way to high for this game. For who did they release this game? Duke fans sure as hell wanna avoid this piece of garbabe. I mean i was 10 or 11 when Duke 3d came out and back then it was awesome, and you giggled with your friends behind the computer cause of all the jokes and pixel boobs. But its 2011, if boobs don't bounce correctly anymore these days in games then people aren't even bothered with them. And the newer generation of gamers who never experienced Duke 3D aren't gonna buy this either cause why would they? There are way better shooters out there then Duke and the missed on the legend it once was.

    I know Gearbox wanted to release this game as respect to 3d realms who sadly never seen the end of this game, but i think it would have been better to just let Duke die with its creators, now his legend died. Atleast now i understand why they kept delaying the release, i guess they where al afraid of these grades. Still would have been better to release it in the early days of internet when game sites wheren't there yet, now they have to deal with low scores in both magazines and on the internet, let allone the angry fans who gonna make a youtube hate movie.

  • B1G_D #209 12 months ago

    I think is this one of those cases where there should be one review for the console high brow wannabes and the old school PC loving fanboys who wanted this type of game. I have the PC version and it's pretty much how I expected to be. Just like the Duke this game isn't clever, but it knows how to make you laugh and killing pigcops never gets old, at least on the PC version.
    As to the 3/10, seems a bit harsh, but then I haven't played the Xbox version.
    EG "Blow it out your ass!"

  • whoyouknow #210 12 months ago

    How this came out in this state is anybody's guess. If I'd been in Pitchford's position and had any affection for Duke's legacy at all, I'd have bought the source code and the rights and binned them just to finally draw a line under it all. Like when they buried the Elephant Man in concrete to stop people having a laugh with him when he was dead. Just bury it and let people remember the past fondly.

  • Puzza #211 12 months ago

    I played up until the first boss tonight with a friend, i really don't think the game is that bad, the graphics may not be amazing but its fun to play. People seem to be complaining it's hard, just because its not the same as COD etc.

    The game makes you think a bit which seems to rule out most people who play FPS games these days

  • BartonFink #212 12 months ago

    Yeeeeouch!! That hurts.

  • ObliviousTroll #213 12 months ago

    Haters gonna hate.

    It's really not as bad as a 3. I would be outraged if I wasn;t so high.

  • BloodSaint #214 12 months ago

    I am so relieved that I didnt pre order this game... With every gaming site giving this game such poor reviews, they can't all be wrong can they?!?

  • NeoKenzi #215 12 months ago

    It was never gonna get more than 5/10 to be honest...

  • huckan #216 12 months ago

    It's terrible but don't get me wrong, it's good fun!

  • Hermiod #217 12 months ago

    Despite this poor score, I still see this game getting a lot more press attention than it deserves.

    When non-gamers talk about video games, they never seem to realise that games can be good and bad just like any other entertainment medium. When we had the whole Manhunt 2 business, more non-gamers condemned that game on TV than gamers who actually bought it.

  • BeachGaara #218 12 months ago

    Called it years ago, said it'd be a waste of time and money and that Duke was shockingly dated.

  • cjb_bjc #219 12 months ago

    Ouch

  • StolenGlory #220 12 months ago

    Best 3/10 game i've ever played.

  • gribb #221 12 months ago

    Does Eurogamer review anything on PC anymore?

  • TheEarlOfZinger #222 12 months ago

    [sarcasm]Never saw this coming. [/sarcasm]

  • Killface #223 12 months ago

    What a masterfully succinct and eloquent review. And good score too, can't be scared to hit low sometimes, even if this is an exception, Randy Pitchford needs to realise making "Another" one of these, (which by the looks of having bought the IP is his prerogative) is a bad idea financially and creatively. I don't oft hope for failure, but not unlike any of the "Summer Spoof Movie"(s) this should really fall on its arse after an exhausting fourteen year "night at the club" and acknowledge its artistic bankruptcy.

  • Sodding_Gamer #224 12 months ago

    I for one have borrowed this game. Can't afford to pay £40 with all these mixed reviews. And to be honest it isn't that bad. But then again I loved Splatterhouse and Too Human and they got LOWW scores. I guess it's just down to personal preference. And because I grew up in the 90's, it's nice to play something old school. Some people are saying "we have moved on from the 90's now and it's not so appealing, the world has grown up"

    BLAH BLAH BLAH, Bulletstorm is very much the same, gameplay and dialogue wise. And that got like an 8.5/9 on most review sites. Immature humour is great for a blast from the past. I mean we have hundreds of WW2 games. The world has moved on a lot since then so what's different with teh 90's?!!

  • Chamone #225 12 months ago

    Disappointing result, but after 14 years there was no way this was ever going to live up to the expectations. The project should have remained a myth of what could have been.

  • MrFlump #226 12 months ago

    I think the backlash from some people and reviwers are those expecting narrative and graphics equalling call of duty. Thats not what this game is nor was ever meant to be.

    I've played this on Single Player now for longer than any call of duty game to date now and lets be honest, there isn't that much you can do from an FPS game other than point and shoot. CoD/Battlefield/Crysis/Halo - they're all the same when you get down to the bare bones. So is Duke really in terms of the game. What keeps us going back to the other franchises? Its the story, the humour and the universe. Duke is a marmite game, you love it or you hate it but you won't know until you try it. Its always going to be that way.

    I certainly for one think its quite an enjoyable game and having played the original to death back in the day even getting the null modem cable out and attaching me and my mates PC's in that way to play multiplayer. Its not a masterpiece of modern gaming for sure, but its what I came to expect from the game and its actually a pleasant journey through it.

    Its a 7/10 for me and a 3/10 makes it look like the reviewer here picked the completely wrong platform to play on. I for one can't play FPS games with a controller and playing on the mouse I'm sure would make this review come across a lot more different.

  • Ptarmigandalf #227 12 months ago

    Hey, "Redneck Rampage" was actually pretty damn good. Better than the original Duke 3D, in my opinion.

  • StolenGlory #228 12 months ago

    "Hey, "Redneck Rampage" was actually pretty damn good. Better than the original Duke 3D, in my opinion."

    It came close. The only other 3D Realms spin-off that was better than Duke 3D IMHO was Shadow Warrior: "WHOOOOO WANTA SOME WANG!?!".

  • Perfecto #229 12 months ago

    Well, I must say I really Liked it, it's got a lot of problems but my money was well spent.

  • Lemming81 #230 12 months ago

    "I'm going to buy this purely to encourage the kind of batshit-insanity, wasteful, studio-sinking labour of love craziness that it represents."

    So I'm guessing you own Hydrophobia as well then?

  • TelexStar #231 12 months ago

    But don't you agree a game should be reviewed on the device it runs best on? Especially Duke Nukem, perhaps the most anticipated game of all time. It's just wrong reviewing this game on console.

    @ CaptainKid - there's nothing wrong about it. If anything, it's just incomplete. I agree, there should be a seperate PC review as it's unfair on the PC gamers out there. However, I don't have a PC so if I'm reading a review for a game that's being released on the 360, then I want the review to be based on the 360 version.

  • Allieste #232 12 months ago


    It seems that we have a split here between people who have not played it saying "Told you it would be crap!" and people who have played it (not just the demo) saying "Actually, it's pretty fun."

    Oh, and one reviewer that was so busy dishing out a kicking that he failed to notice points salient to his review, like the new weapons and enemies he castigated the game for not providing. Okay, none of these are a major upgrade to the game but it does make you wonder - to what extent was the game given a chance before the knives got sharpened? I'm not fussed about bad reviews for games I enjoyed, it's all down to taste at the end of the day, but bad reviews that get details from the game wrong do set off alarm bells a bit.

    I'm not saying the game is a masterpiece - it's not - but it is a fun experience and a curio from gaming history that's a lot better than the score at the end and the braying from some of the nay-sayers that have not even played the full game suggests. If you're a Duke fan and on the fence - rent it and give it a go, it's worth it

  • irve77 #233 12 months ago

    ~sigh~ all Duke ever had to be was average

    if they had sorted out the loading times , the framerate who would have cared

    Average graphics
    Average level design
    Average multiplayer

    just average and the reboot DN Begins could have been properly green lit .. started from scratch adn maybe you'd get a decent DN game ... anyone who had dreams of DNF being better than average was a fool.

    But below par .. after this long ... just not good enough

  • thefishmonger #234 12 months ago

    Having played the Xbox version, I can confirm that the game plays and looks A LOT better on PC.

  • Emth #235 12 months ago

    This feels a lot like the attempted Red Dwarf revival to me. Just tired.

  • RoOhDaMite #236 12 months ago

    The longer I play this game (on pc) the less I aggree with this review.

    The Duke Burger section is fresh as fuck and reminded me of that Toy Soldiers movie. What other game ever had you luring giant rats into mousetraps? There is a lot of diversity in gameplay, pacing and shooting. Yes shooting! There is a lot of diversity in enemies too, and you have to be tactical in chosing your weapon at places because Oktabrains can throw the rockets right back at you, or those teleporting guys with jetpacks outmanouver your rockets. The boss-battles are great. You are not limited to 2 weapons only, you can throw grenades and lay bombs as well as using your fists, smack with the back of your weapons, throw barrels and other items, use torrets or the environment to your advantage, by luring enemies into mousetraps or shrinkpads. The ammonition boxes are fair placed, and the right weapon is always put at the right spot where needed. The level of interaction with the environment reminds me of Half Life 2, if not even Shenmue (Titty City Club). The leveldesign always manages to surprise you: first you have to ride a Toy-car through a destroyed casino and it all feels like a racing track, then you grow back to your full size and experience the same corridors from a totally different perspective shooting pigcops. The platforming is never annoying, sometimes even really fun (Duke Burger Kitchen)

    All in all a very satisfying and entertaining experience with some of the most memorable campaign moments I ever experienced in any game.

    8/10 (+1 if you like the humor, -1 if you can't stand it)

  • Darren #237 12 months ago

    Call it bad level design if you really want to but I kind of like the way Duke Nukem Forever makes me think about what to do in some of the levels; that's a very old-school approach to game design but it's refreshing to not be treated like an idiot and have everything little thing explained. OK so none of the puzzles are particularly complex but there's some neat stuff in there nevertheless and I'll admit that I was stumped for a short while at a few points in the game (those bouncing pipe bomb bits for example).

    What makes this game so enjoyable for me is the variety and humour which is solely missing from most FPSs these days. How can I not enjoy a game where I'm shrunk and leaping around an electrified kitchen one level, climbing around alien tendrils to get up a tower another, playing pinball and air soccer the next in a titty bar then driving a 4x4 through a desert? There's never a dull moment IMO. It's not perfect but give me this game over Call of Duty any day.

  • deadmonkeyuk #238 12 months ago

    I was beginning to think this game may turn out to be a entertaining if shallow shooter, thought maybe a 6/10. Dukes going to be raging at that score.

  • Darren #239 12 months ago

    @Allieste - If the game had been called LEGO Duke Nukem, Dan would've given the game an 8. ;)

    (Sorry, Dan... only teasing... couldn't resist a dig there! :p )
    Edited by Darren at 13/06/11 @ 10:19

  • Sar #240 12 months ago

    What idiot decided to review the sequel to a PC "icon" if you like on a bloody console?

    /facepalm

    This was always a PC game, has been for it's 14/15 years in development and that's the audience that's been waiting on it. Not the sugar-rush hyped up CoD fanboys who have only ever played an FPS with a controller.

    Let's face it, Duke was always low-brow entertainment. Like a really cheesy comedy that you laugh at and enjoy because it's so damned cheesy.

    I think the reviewer completely missed the point tbh. I'll still buy it.
    Edited by Sar at 13/06/11 @ 10:21

  • kalinichenko #241 12 months ago

    already bought 2 copies,one for my unborn kid.Its Duke afterall.

  • bushwod #242 12 months ago

    Playing this on xbox and enjoying it (although I'm only a few chapters in).

    It's flawed, but 3/10 is way too harsh. If you're an old Duke fan than get it and just have some fun.

    (EDIT: typo)
    Edited by bushwod at 13/06/11 @ 10:24

  • scowat #243 12 months ago

    Post deleted at 16:41:01 08-02-2012

  • cheekyxboxgamer #244 12 months ago

    Not to say that the review is wrong and that the game is without its mistakes. BUT ive got it and yes there are a few faults with it to say the least - but my god its fun - i feel the problem with most people these days is that they will say a game is good or bad despite not playing it - there opinion is purly based on a critics review or comments left by others or simply watching a video or looking at screenshots. I find these days that games are amazing but when you look at cod or halo or killzone or fallout or borderlands or bioshock ect or any other genre of game they are amazing and you really like them/enjoying them but whens the last time anyone put on a game and it was just good fun/laugh made you smile and laugh - brings back that feeling of a kid back on the megadrive - saturn - dreamcast - n64 - playstation ect. To sum up yes there are alot of faults with duke but that was going to happen with such a difficult make with different engines and companys ect. But come on peeps remeber when graphics and perfect gameplay wasnt always so important as long as the game was fun and for mme that what the new duke is - yes old and many faults but its good fun

  • Skooch #245 12 months ago

    I don't wish to gloat, as this is disappointing for fans of the game, but I said in a comments thread ages ago this game would be a flop and got negged to hell and back. Although 3/10 is worse than even I expected.

    EDIT: LOL at sensitivities of the people on this site, WOW, chill out guys. My point was that IMO this game wasn't going to be very good and I got negged for that which is odd as it is only my opinion. Then when it turns out the game is actually poop I get negged for saying that as well. How about less negging and more taking on others' opinions?
    Edited by Skooch at 13/06/11 @ 12:57

  • wombat987 #246 12 months ago

    Im currently loving it. Just mindless fun, with foolish comidy in tow.

    Im not that far in (i think), but its a blast :D

    And that is all that matters.

  • GarethBale3 #247 12 months ago

    The King is not so dead after all EG.

    http://www.next-gen.biz/news/duke-nukem-...

  • Lord_Gremlin #248 12 months ago

    Well, I find it enjoyable still. Biggest drawbacks are movement speed and 2 weapon limit. If only they made you run twice as fast and let you have all weapons...
    But I play on PS3. Loading times are long like on 360, but at least there are no framedrops and gameplay itself is smooth.
    I can honestly rate it 7/10.
    That said, nostalgia is taking it's toll - I played DN3D a lot and is fascinated with every enemy and weapon they brought back.

  • Spekingur #249 12 months ago

    How many people here who agree with the review and enjoy dissing on Duke Nukem have actually played the game?
    Just wondering.

  • seanyboycorben #250 12 months ago

    Thankfully I only hired this game. It's horrific, a total embarrassment. I'd question both 2K and Gearbox as to how they think this shit can be a full price title. Randy Pitchford, you should be ashamed of yourself.

  • wiggy1 #251 12 months ago

    Another 12 years would've done the trick

  • morriss #252 12 months ago

    BOOM! 3/10. Awesome game isn't awesome.

  • des #253 12 months ago

    Eurogamer is dead.

  • foodfather #254 12 months ago

    I went ahead and borught this game fully knowing how bad the reviews were going to be and I am enjoying it. Its not great, everything about the game is dated, somethings are down right appauling, but the gameplay has its moments. 5/10 from me.

  • Machetazo #255 12 months ago

    @15: That would have been really useful, and valid addition here. For Dan to have offered some kind of thoughts beyond the critical.
    Is it fun to play? To grab a rocket launcher fire off multiple salvos, and watch them explode in the face of a pig in a police officers uniform? The choice of 360 to review this on I agree, is very strange. A comparison with the PC (since it is mentioned that the 360 version performs so poorly) in the article would add a good deal of value. I hope the DF article is not too far off.

    Everyone will choose or not to play a game for their own reasons (whether I buy DNF is largely going to be determined by a similar criteria as DcP). If I play Duke, I'm just looking to enjoy a game in which I run around shooting, explore areas, and laugh a lot. That you were unable, Dan, to mention whether you found it's actually fun to play the game, on its intended platform..maybe it's endemic :(
    Edited by Machetazo at 13/06/11 @ 11:42

  • Jolly_Armadillo #256 12 months ago

    It would appear a new system for reviewing cross-platform titles is needed. As reviewers take into account problems which only effect a particular version reviews for the same game on different platforms can vary massively.

    As said before this eurogamer gave the xbox version 3/10 whereas other sites reviewing pc version are much higher as stated previously 8s and 7s.

    Sort it out, if we buy a 3/10 xbox game based on a 8/10 pc review your reviews lose their value. As vice versa we avoid a good 8/10 pc game because of a 3/10 xbox game review

    This is a big problem these days and needs to be sorted, you could decide to review all copies separately or just state obviously which copy the review refers to so gamers can look on other sites for a review of the copy they may be interested in.

  • Sir_TimAlot #257 12 months ago

    oh well, i'm hating it and loving it in equal measure.

  • miiiguel #258 12 months ago

    I might be saying something silly, but perhaps EG reviewed this on the 360 because most ppl in UK has and buy more games on the 360 than on any other platform.

    I think there's even an article somewhere about this on the front page.

  • geeza2020 #259 12 months ago

    I've been playing bits an pieces of this with a mate over the weekend on his PC, and its not as bad as this review makes out at all. But this has all been said already in this comments section, I'll just say that if you played the original Duke Nukem 3D when it was originally released, then the game deserves more of a 6/7 for nostalgia's sake. Its a bit of fun (the jokes ARE funny in places despite what the reviewer says here) its just a shame the shoddy graphics and a few questionable design decisions get in the way from time to time. Such as the two weapon system. Its awful, and I hate CoD and Halo for making it something that nearly all FPS games now have. Has their been a game since Half-Life 2 thats enabled you to carry more than two weapons? Its just lazy design by developers who havent worked out how to do a proper weapon inventory well on the consoles with its pads and limited number of buttons.

  • GAmbrose #260 12 months ago

    Shame on Eurogamer for reviewing it on the platform most people will play it on!

  • bumyoghurt #261 12 months ago

    Exactly the same as the LA Noire review. 'Games as Art' mincers cry about people (quite rightly) buying millions of copies of COD, and bemoaning the lack of original games and the amount of copy and paste formulaic AAA games, then when something different comes along, they panic and say 'nope, rubbish'. They really have to make their minds up. LA Noire just for the idea and effort alone is a 10/10 game, in the same way that this being a seminal part of gaming history deserves an 8/10 AT LEAST. A lot of these whiny, confused reviewers would have never even gotten into games, or even have their jobs if it wasn't for Duke Nukem.

    Brink got an 8/10, and I have been told it is an awful, awful COD clone gone wrong. DNF gets penalised because it's NOT copying COD??

    I understand the point about it not being old-skool nor modern, but perhaps it has created its own genre?

  • GAmbrose #262 12 months ago

    "I understand the point about it not being old-skool nor modern, but perhaps it has created its own genre"

    Yep - The over hyped pile of shite genre.

  • stegabba #263 12 months ago

    3/10 wow

  • superflyninja #264 12 months ago

    If Nintendo made the game (or outsourced it) Duke would have scored a 9 ;p

  • SPENCER41 #265 12 months ago

    Completely agree with this review, I felt ripped off after the first 40 minutes. 40 quid and for what?

  • spaceburge #266 12 months ago

    Hideous ploy by Gearbox here, give Eurogamer and similar places the review copies the day the game comes out so those who thought "yeah I'll give it a go" get to give Gearbox £40.

    Eurogamer thanks for your opinion, you're spot on. Time to cash this pure CRAP in!

    Kind regards, an idiot

  • BradlayLaw #267 12 months ago

    Apart from the horrible loading times I've been having fun with Duke. Loved that bit at the top of duke tower with the waves of enemies and variety of weapons. I think Eurogamer have had a bit po-faced here.

  • jools #268 12 months ago

    £40?

    £22.49 I paid... had I wanted to I could have waited a month or two and probably got it for £9.99

  • Machetazo #269 12 months ago

    recharging shield...
    *ducks behind cover*
    FUCKUHALO!!!
    *reappears*

    @271: no, it doesn't deserve an 8/10 because of its "heritage". What it deserves is a score that best reflects its value as a game.

  • Machetazo #270 12 months ago

    I don't take issue with the fact that they reviewed it on 360. Where I'm disappointed, and where value is lost from the article is that there is no reference therein (aside from a cheeky cursory glance to DF to help fill the blanks, alongside their own brand of analysis) to play on the PC. This is supposed to be a review of the game. It should have been anticipated that there would be interest in this case to a proper assessment of the PC version, and that commentary included - even if the score was solely based on the Xbox 360 version. In this case, it stands as a shortcoming of the article.
    Edited by Machetazo at 13/06/11 @ 12:33

  • TelexStar #271 12 months ago

    This was always a PC game, has been for it's 14/15 years in development and that's the audience that's been waiting on it. Not the sugar-rush hyped up CoD fanboys who have only ever played an FPS with a controller.

    @ Sar - Thanks for that massively generalised comment. I guess if that's true then you must be among the dwindling masses of smelly geeky virgins who sheds out four/five hundred quid every year to run the latest batch of un-optimised games.

    Seriously.

  • Darren #272 12 months ago

    @Machetazo - A Duke Nukem Forever Face-off is coming apparently but there'll be one clear winner for sure. Can you guess which format? ;)

  • fabiosooner #273 12 months ago

    So the game is good, just not greeat, and one should stay away from the Xbox version. Great, that's exactly what I was expecting. I just need to know if the PS3 version is plagued with the same performance issues (I'd guess not), and if it is, PC version here I go.

  • kangarootoo #274 12 months ago

    As someone who hasn't played this, but did play and like the original DN3D, I can't help feeling a wave of "apology" has swept through this thread. Its barely even thinly veiled with comments like "go in with low expectations and I can pretty much guarantee you'll enjoy it for what it is".

    Everyone seems to be dissing the review on the basis that the reviewer expected it to be good, and that was an unreasonable start point?... Expect the game to be quite bad, but in a retro way, and you will be delighted?

    Personally, my time and money are both limited. Why on earth would anyone in my position (i.e. all of us) spend time and money on a game that demands we "go in with low expectations" when we could get one of several top knotch 9/10 game experiences that delivers on high expectations for the same money?

    Very odd.

  • Monkey_Punch #275 12 months ago

    #3 I didn't really even need to see the videos.
    I (and many, many others) called it when the news of it being picked up by Gearbox was announced.

    Some of the things mentioned in this review are almost carbon copies of points I wrote on a post on Kotaku about the fears I had of this game being release.
    I'd say it's *exactly* as I expected it to be, except for the fact that I was hoping to be proved wrong in at least some points and everything I suspected would suck about this game - did.

  • obscured021 #276 12 months ago

    Thats a bit harsh, im playing the pc version and i love it! The action and the one liners make a duke game, even if dukes name was not attached to this game i would still play it. i loved DN3D and am waiting for the source remake! but this is duke at his best

  • Haunted_Tree #277 12 months ago

    Good score ... kick this putrid corpse to death, it deserves no better.

  • RoOhDaMite #278 12 months ago

    @Dan
    "Randy Pitchford is thinking of me."

    You wish :p
    From analysing the very first sentence of your "review" one can tell, this is going to be a personal agenda.

  • Architect_z #279 12 months ago

    I think, just because a games badly executed doesnt mean it isnt fun. I still like playing PS one games, and they are terribly created compared to what we have today. Still rock tho. ^_^

  • BigDaddy82 #280 12 months ago

    I'm really enjoying this, almost at the end now. The key is to play it whilst imagining what it would have been like if it had come out in 2001, would have been one of the games of that year. Silly to compare it to modern games though, which i suppose these reviews are forced to do.

  • Darren #281 12 months ago

    @Fobsy - One man's meat is another man's poison as they say but somehow I think the concept of people having different tastes is somewhat lost on you since you seem hellbent on passing off your own views as gospel! ;)

    Duke Nukem Forever isn't ha-ha side-splitting funny; it's occasionally naff, more often than not crude and frequently immature whilst poking fun at other games and movies with flatly delivered soundbites. But that's what we expect because that is what Duke Nukem has always been about! If it was any different then it simply wouldn't be Duke Nukem!

  • Megalodon #282 12 months ago

    Although I haven't played it, I don't care about the game in the slightest and I guess it's lousy enough, it's basically just a dumb, average, shooter and you guys make fools out of yourselves as this entire 'review' is 3 pages of fancy words and hot air. Boo.

    P.S: you damn neggers plain suck. Negging for the hell of it instead of talking like normal human beings do. I wish you'd get cancer. Fucking morons.
    Edited by Megalodon at 13/06/11 @ 14:07

  • Darren #283 12 months ago

    @BigDaddy82 - Nah, it's not silly, it's what I expected but this game was always going to be the equivalent of Marmite anyway with a 50:50 split between people who love it for what it is and those who hate it for what it isn't!

    I think the game probably should have been a low-priced budget release where it might have been received better critically but, regardless, it seems to be selling well enough anyway. I'm just really glad that I got a chance to finally play a game that two years ago I honestly thought would never come out.

  • iamtheoneneo #284 12 months ago

    nice review EG, restoring my faith in games journalism once again, whilst pc gamer gave it a 9 didnt they> laughable.
    playin the demo was enough to make me never want to play this game again and know about of fanboy 'its supposed to be stupid idiot' talk hides the fact that the game is shockingly bad and they could of probably released this 10 years ago and it still would of been bad for the times.

  • GAmbrose #285 12 months ago

    @Ro0hDaMite

    What are you talking about? Why would he have a personal agenda against Randy Pitchford. He even links to his own review of the Xbox Live Arcade version of Duke 3D which he gave 8/10!

  • digitalash #286 12 months ago

    Maybe Randy will take the shedloads of cash from this and make a decent retro Duke with modern tech.

  • ElStevo #287 12 months ago

    It doesn't have the most amazing graphics, though at times it looks quite lovely. It doesn't have amazing new gameplay, though at times it was inventive and interesting. It may not be the best game on paper, but I found it wholly entertaining from start to finish.

    Since when was it a sin to be silly fun? Games that are good or even great get written off so easily these days. Shame.

  • RoOhDaMite #288 12 months ago

    @Gambros
    Well... maybe because Randy predicted that his review wouldn't matter. That must have hurt his pride.

  • ChristopherGore89 #289 12 months ago

    yeah i bought this at weekend for £20 and tbh it barely feels like that should be the right price for it. But my main thing was i had my expectations set quite low so I'm not dissapointed like a lot of people i know are

  • GAmbrose #290 12 months ago

    Fobsy - maybe we should apply that in reverse.

    Imagine you are 10 years in the past and playing L.A Noire. 20/10!!!

  • Silvervein #291 12 months ago

    @GAmbrose
    I think l.a noire would score 2/10 ten years ago. Back then you had way better adventure/puzzle games than this.

  • mono_eric3 #292 12 months ago

    In today's mass-market of games players, this game has no home, however, I kind alike it :)

    There are lots of things I know that are broken about it, that don't fit with the modern rulebook, but it really doesn't seem to hinder my enjoyment at all.

    Most new, modern games are all variations on a theme, they all soften the edges to make them as mass-market as possible, diluting the fun for me in the process.

    I've only played for a few hours, but so far it has some real stand-out bad bits, and some stand-out awesome bits too. For me personally, I'm enjoying the stark contrast, rather than the unremitting dullness of most new titles.
    Edited by mono_eric3 at 13/06/11 @ 14:33

  • SEVQA #293 12 months ago

    I made the mistake of purchasing this on Friday pre review and half way through the game predicted 4 to 3/10 score at that point. I've been going through the game for sheer stuboness, though once completed I'll be trading in straight away for Infamous 2 of which shockingly cost's the same.

    If this game cost a tenner I would be fine with it as that's all it's worth, to charge 30 quid plus for this piece of shit is a disgrace. Maybe in the sequel in 123 years time it will be copies of DNF you'll be finding in the toilet to chuck around.

    Well done EG for a truthfully accurate review!

  • FortysixterUK #294 12 months ago

    I would just like to refer you all to the thread I created in the xbox 360 forum stating that the game had issues.
    I should like to add that I had to put on flame retardent underwear to battle off the flamewar that came from some parties after said post.
    To those flamers....fuckyou..I am exonerated.
    To the EG reviewer who had the balls to score Duke that low...well done. YOU have balls of steel.

  • Monkey_Puncher #295 12 months ago

    Ouch!

    I thought it might at least be a passable shooter that harks back to the days of Duke Nukem 3D and Blood.

    I guess I'll give this a wide birth, well at least until I can pick it up for £10.

  • handsonhips101 #296 12 months ago

    eurogamer-

    you complain its jerky:

    why not review the pc version or the ps3 one?

    is it normal to automatically pick the 360 code to review (the worst version by far)?????

    7/10 for me. ive enjoyed it. (ps3 version)

  • ISeeEverything #297 12 months ago

    I had a good fun with this game , and in my book it's at least 8 not 3/10 , this reviewer was probably expecting new symphony from Beethoven but instead he got a game , I can understand how that can be frustrating .
    Edited by ISeeEverything at 13/06/11 @ 16:41

  • cyber_nicco #298 12 months ago

    Should have just taken the IP and and done it in Unreal or some other licensed engine...

  • PameBoy #299 12 months ago

    @cyber_nicco it IS Unreal Engine. No, not Unreal 3... Unreal Tournament. The FIRST one. If you ask me, it's actually quite amazing what they managed to get that ancient platform to do.

  • Duke_Red #300 12 months ago

    ahhhh, feel bad for duke

  • DoctorFouad #301 12 months ago

    forever ? not really after all, only God is forever...

  • Koborover #302 12 months ago

    I'll buy the Shameless Cashgrab of the Year Edition later on.

  • growleroo #303 12 months ago

    Feeling a tad too lazy to read the 300+ comments, so I just wanted to say - awesome review. 9/10.

    As for the game itself, think I'll go find the original Duke Nukem 1 on a floppy disk somewhere. Duke was fun when he was a platform-jumping knucklehead...

  • Tyronne #304 12 months ago

    There are not many games lately which have made me grin and laugh....Duke is one game which has and for me that's money well spent.
    I honestly think there is too much emphasis on the latest bells and whistles with games and very little about wither or not the game is fun to play on here lately and I am finding this game fun to play...works for me and am I happy to have bought it?....yes I am (PC version).

  • Jodo #305 12 months ago

    Somewhere behind all this is one of videogaming's greatest untold stories; just what *were* 3D Realms doing all that time and with all that cash? Whether the lawyers will ever allow the full story to be told is doubtful, which is a shame; it's probably more enoyable than the end product. The most relevant word in this review for me is 'heartbreaking' - for anyone who was there when Duke 3D came out it truly is. The videogame equivalent of sending Shaun Ryder to Barbados to finish a new album, you just knew it was all going to go horribly wrong...

  • Happyhammer7 #306 12 months ago

    What a joke.





    Will pick it up when it hits a fiver

  • seabassuk #307 12 months ago

    Just when I think Eurogamer can't shock me, they do this. Well...Erm...I guess I'll check Metacritic to see what everyone else is saying. But damn.

  • Skorms-Boss #308 12 months ago

    I just knew it!

  • Collymilad #309 12 months ago

    Best review since Dead Space.

  • Toploader #310 12 months ago

    Played the PC version and loved it. The most fun I've had playing a game in a while. 3/10? Really?? Honestly guys don't listen to this review, it's a fun game that for those that don't take life or gaming to seriously, it will provide many hours of enjoyment. Bare minimum it's a 7/10, although I'd give it higher.

    Personally I think this review was just a 'hits' grab. Give a conversational game that has mixed opinions the lowest score on meta critic and it will have people flooding to the site to defend it. (I didn't see this on meta critic btw, and until this day I always regarded EuroGamer as a site I would frequent for reviews, but not anymore after this blatant attention grab in the style of .destructoid). I will never visit this site again, what a fall from grace.

    Anyway, unless you are 100% hung up on the graphics of the game, you will enjoy it.

  • Toploader #311 12 months ago

    Played the PC version and loved it. The most fun I've had playing a game in a while. 3/10? Really?? Honestly guys don't listen to this review, it's a fun game that for those that don't take life or gaming to seriously, it will provide many hours of enjoyment. Bare minimum it's a 7/10, although I'd give it higher.

    Personally I think this review was just a 'hits' grab. Give a conversational game that has mixed opinions the lowest score on meta critic and it will have people flooding to the site to defend it. (I didn't see this on meta critic btw, and until this day I always regarded EuroGamer as a site I would frequent for reviews, but not anymore after this blatant attention grab in the style of .destructoid). I will never visit this site again, what a fall from grace.

    Anyway, unless you are 100% hung up on the graphics of the game, you will enjoy it.

  • ghostgate2001 #312 12 months ago

    Well this jaded gamer is having a whale of a time with DNF, and that's all that matters. I'm on the Xbox 360 version, too, seemingly the dog of the bunch.

    It's easily the most fun I've had with a single-player FPS game since Half-Life 2. Like a lot of other people here, it's reminding me why I liked games in the first place - and it highlights just how soulless, slick, bland, and cookie-cutter most games have become these days. It's been a long time since I've been served up a decent single-player FPS campaign like this - full of inventive little set-pieces, no idea what the game's going to throw at you next, and can't wait to see where the next level goes.

    3/10 is an absolute mickey-take. Glad I didn't base my decision to buy it on that review, because I'd be missing out on one of gaming's roughest diamonds if I had. There, I've vented - now let's get back to slapping those wall-titties...
    Edited by ghostgate2001 at 14/06/11 @ 04:32

  • Mr.Mouse #313 12 months ago

    Dan Whitehead is such a loser. Eurogamer is dead, indeed. This game deserves much more than a 3/10. What the hell were you thinking of doing Dan? Got some personal grudge? I played the game on PC and I'd give it 6.5 or perhaps even 7/10. The game is definitely fun to play, the nostalgia bit is ok, and there were some really decent battles in there.

    Nothing, but absolutely NOTHING warrants your score of 3/10. What a loser you are.

  • Tonne #314 12 months ago

    Hail to the king baby?

    looks more like the king should stay dead.

  • styles_dg #315 12 months ago

    I've played it and it's fun. No, not the best game ever, but the point is it's FUN. Eurogamer's bias and hypocrisy become ever more apparent ....giving this game a 3/10 is ridiculous and is evidence of Dan Whitehead's pathetic critiquing skills. "whitehead" is quite apt, because this guy seems to have a pimple for a brain.

    The fact that Eurogamer always seemed to award stupidly inflated scores to incredibly mediocre games did much to make me suspect that this review was a farce, and lo and behold, it is.

  • thedriffter50 #316 12 months ago

    You idiots who are defending this game should be ashamed of yourself.

    Your defending this pos just because of its history. Look past Duke and the 15 fecking years it took to make and you will find one of the worst games this gen.

    Oh and for the people bashing Eurogamer. I only have this to say...STFU and do one and go to a different site if you think they suck you hypocrites.

    What you want every game to get 10/10s ? Your only defending DNF because you wasted 15 years waiting for it.

  • Meh #317 12 months ago

    i wonder how many people played the first one on PC, before ripping this apart

  • styles_dg #318 12 months ago

    @thedrifter50

    lol ....people should be ashamed of themselves for liking something you don't? Grow the fuck up, kid.

    'nuff said.

  • thedriffter50 #319 12 months ago

    '' lol ....people should be ashamed of themselves for liking something you don't? Grow the fuck up, kid. 'nuff said. ''

    If there are people who like trash thats their own problem. DNF is mediocre and you know it.

  • Lamb #320 12 months ago


    Well I have played alot of turds, very briefly.

    At this moment I reserve judgement till I play the whole thing. Kinda got lazy at the Octaking lift fight.

    I did get this game with high expectations on launch day and practically regardless of the reviews I was going to get it anyway. But since there were was only one PC review at 80%, I felt good about getting it. I mean hey I was going to get this game in 98!!!

    The bastardized James Bond motif turned Duke motif was a nice touch at the beginning, and so was the victory lap at Duke's penthouse/casino/museum and the game started off with a bang with aliens attacking and suddenly I'm playing the Batman erm... Duke Cave. :D Still happy. Shooting a bunch of aliens, using the gym, boosting da ego.

    My character is then shrunk and given an RC car. And thats fun for about 2 seconds till it becomes samey. Also the monster truck is cool at first but then samey and the environments bland. (Skipping around a bit.) Head over to Duke Burger after some bland fighting. Then I enjoyed being shrunk again in the kitchen where it was fun reading the food labels and shooting the pigcops while trying to save the fries cook.

    It would have been more impactful and more fun if they kept more of the shrunken parts together to make it more amusing and cohesive. Same with the shooting give me more space to run and gun with more bipedal enemies and bigger levels instead of just ambush and choke points. And let me carry more weapons and inventory especially holodukes.

    Add more humor with more pigcops trying to emulate Duke like they did in the gym at the beginning. More ego powerup bonuses with a collection of Dukes video games/X-Rated tapes stolen by an elite pigcop squad! :p Maybe even higher bench scores while on pills err.. vitamins. :D Also a salute to all the steriod junkies with movie and wrestling posters like they did in the Hangover 2, maybe put a rack to flip through like a calendar.

    Its harder to get back into a game unlike back then when everything was new and Duke was supreme. Love that car alarm keychain detonating the pipe bombs. Hated the textures that looked like they came from my old Tandy TL1000. The jumping was atrocious as it was back then, having to look up substantially higher than the point to jump to.

    What else is there to say that has not been said? I hope to finish the game sometime and feel good about it like I did back then.

  • DAN.E.B #321 12 months ago

    Better late than never!

    /reads reveiw
    oh maybe not.......

  • Lamb #322 12 months ago

    Congratulations, you guys made CNN along with Kotaku and Joystiq for this review.

  • Martin #323 11 months ago

    Ouch! Not that I didn't see it coming though after a number of previews and hands-on around the web.

    Just let the old dogs lie, it's never a good thing to make them do tricks.

  • Kalak #324 11 months ago

    334 comments.... OMFG !

    By the way... why, WHY they can´t let Duke die with HONOR ?!

  • dfinit #325 11 months ago

    So mainstream as a review... so easy. No depth. Just taxing not_enough_pixels_per_sq_meter thing like a mindless bot.
    The review tries so hard to be clever... almost as DNF to be brand new. But at least, the last one had s3x...

  • Mr.Mouse #326 11 months ago

    @thedrifter50:
    Nobody said this game is worth 9/10, hell no. But I defend it, because it is somewhere between 6.5/10 and 7/10. What it is NOT is 3/10. That's just trashing a game for no good reason but personal, subjective and dimwitted reasons. Mister reviewer wanted to look really cool by boasting like this. If he had been honest, he would have played the game until the end, and set aside his eagerness to look cool. Eurogamer is a joke. They're a parody now.

  • neonxaos #327 11 months ago

    Many hours in, still liking it. I hope Gearbox makes enough money to get that sequel going. I missed Duke - he is just so far over the top it's actually funny.

  • HyperTails #328 11 months ago

    I got Duke today after trading in some games I was never going to play again to pay for it. Graphics suck balls, and the driving is crap, but the game itself is good. Its a laugh, and doesn't take itself seriously. Yeah, I like it.

  • Videogamer. #329 11 months ago

    From myth to legend. Duke lives on. ;)

  • BradlayLaw #330 11 months ago

    I finished it last night and apart from the loading and the underwater sections I loved it. Better than COD or Gears of War single player at the very least. Not the best game ever but I feel I got my moneys worth and hope they get onto DN5.

  • Zomeguy #331 11 months ago

    Hey look, 340 comments! The score worked, enjoy the ad revenue!
    Edited by Zomeguy at 15/06/11 @ 13:11

  • KanePaws #332 11 months ago

    3/10, are you serious!? Talk about an inflated score; how much did they pay you to sugar-coat it, Eurogamer?

  • headcrash #333 11 months ago

    Wow,
    what a disappointment. In Eurogamer. I am lurking this site since aeons and never felt the urge to comment, but this is just rediculous.
    I can see that the game is crap on 360 or on both consoles if you want but everybody I spoke to and pretty much every opinion on the net says about the PC version that it is great fun. So much more fun than any of the on-the-rails, serious biznez shooters which were mentioned in this thread several times.
    Especially grown-up gamers who remember the childish humour of the good old days of gaming appreciate this raw approach.

    So, EG, please consider splitting your verdicts according to platforms. Your german sister does this. Result?
    PC: 7/10 X360/Ps3: 6/10

    Lazy F*cks :-P
    Edited by headcrash at 16/06/11 @ 09:14

  • zedzee #334 11 months ago

    I think Duke Nukem should not be taken so seriously, in terms of breaking any graphical world records in a videogame. Same thing for the dialogue and all other aspects of the game. It's just a bit of fun.

    And besides, it's released on my birthday, so can't be that bad! :-)

  • alcides #335 11 months ago

    Let me express my full support to EG about everything. You rock guys, and I'll still be reading and commenting.

  • petran79 #336 11 months ago

    Even as platformer Commander Keen was better. Sadly no 3d revamp of this one.

    Anyway sometimes to go two step forward you have to go one step back.
    Amazing that no matter how many epic cod, moh, bioshocks, fears, smears etc i play, the 90s pc fps remain the best and funniest due to their simplicity and pixelated graphics. I do not say this out of nostalgia.

  • xrnzaaas #337 11 months ago

    3/10 is really harsh. The game is far from being good, but in my opinion it deserves 5 or 6/10, mostly because of the humour and a rather long SP campaign filled with some interesting ideas.
    Edited by xrnzaaas at 17/06/11 @ 15:41

  • swatson9 #338 11 months ago

    "Buy my game if you know whats good for ya" haha..no

  • LockLock #339 11 months ago

    I have to say I vehemently disagree with this review. This game should never score below CoD Black Ops. It's a pretty fun game, that's getting a lot of crap because people don't understand those years of development were basically reset upon reset. And I can't shake off the feeling that the poor scores may be due to the hype. One could go into a conspirator mood, and wonder just how much these reviews reflect a desire to keep in the good graces of some FPS developers...

    Honestly, anything below a 6/10 is unfair. Perhaps anything above is as well, since the game is hardly flawless... But considering the amount of FPS clones out there, DNF's a damn breath of fresh air. I do notice that the reviewers tend to ignore interesting points in AI behavior, like the semi-intelligent targeting done by the octopus aliens, their throwing back of ordnance at you, and the use of cover by the enemy. This to me, seems like a good satyre of modern FPS staples: even with all their new tricks, Duke's kickin' their asses.

    The levels are linear, but they have more than their fair share of interesting puzzles. The major flaw, I'd say, was not enough enemies. Sometimes you'd feel like you were playing a satirical Alone in the Dark. The amount of puzzles vs shootouts should've been more balanced, even if the latter were very fun. Complaints that they were "hard even in the easiest levels" are unjustified. You had all the tools at your disposal at any time, and even at critically low ammo you could manage an amazing comeback if you played smart.

    Also, I'm noticing a trend of XBox players bitching about the game.... Well, you're playing an FPS in a bloody console, don't complain if your stupid gamepad isn't fit for it. FPSes and RTSes are the domain of the PC, and shall always remain so. Sell your piece of crap toy and get a PC, if you want the best.

  • nicolascy #340 11 months ago

    I cannot believe how unfair your review is about the game.I agree its not the game that was supposed to dominate all fps shooters but its a hell of a better game than what you describe ...

    To begin things WHY OH WHY you reviewed the xbox 360 version ?????????????

    The game is broken on the 360.Duke nukem was never supposed to be a console game and when 3d realms stopped working at the end of 2008 the game was pc only.Only after more than a year at early 2010 gearbox tried to port the game on consoles too by hiring other porting companies....

    It barely plays at sub 30 frames and at sub hd 1100x688 i think.And without aa or af and with very low quality textures and hideous load times...

    When i played the PC version on a decent system i played with 1920x1200 at 100 + fps with full aa and af (You cannot select the level of aa and af under the games options-only enable and disable it but you can go to the nvidia or catalyst drivers and make a profile for duke nukem forever and set it to 16x or 32 x....Also with the hd textures the pc version has the game looks decent and sometimes even nice...

    And the interactivity it has is beyond any other game out there...IT is sad how reviewers forget interactivity witch is a long forgotten feature on fps shooters...Also duke nukem forever has great player /hand animations as everything you interact you interact while seeing your hands and body simiral to mirror's edge and fear games...Why nobody mention this ever ????

    And what about downgrading the game for its humor...The game is what it is...Duke nukem 3d was no Tolstoy.....So what is the problem with duke nukem forever ? If you don't like its humor don't play it ...let other play the dumn game...Its the same shitty story as with grand theft auto and mass effect and resident evil 5 where every idiot that has complexity problems uses games as cannon fodder.....

    So please GIVE THE DAMN GAME A REAL AND DECENT REVIEW...AND PLAY IT ON A GAMING PC AND THEN REVIEW IT.OK ?