WOW. that. was. sick. can't make it more awesome than this. WANT!

This game is going to be a let down, just because of the build up and anticipation. I'm not saying it won't be fun...I'm just saying it's not worth the 15 years I've waited

IF... the graphics are acceptable.
IF... it's really funny. (no reason not to think otherwise)
IF... it's a long game (and from what I've read somewhere it's supposed to be 15 hours which is long for an FPS)
and IF... Multiplayer is fun.

Then the 15 years were worth it.

Next week can't come soon enough. In the mean time, I think the multiplayer demo is supposed to come out tomorrow if I'm not mistaken.

>> ^rottenseed:

This game is going to be a let down, just because of the build up and anticipation. I'm not saying it won't be fun...I'm just saying it's not worth the 15 years I've waited


Sorry Rottenseed but you're going to have to let those 15 years go. Nothing can live up to a 15 year hype, unless it propels you Tron-like into the game. I too have been chomping at the bit since DN3D for a decent sequal. At this point I'll take what I can get and from what I've seen this will be a fun, if not worthy, followup.

But if Thief 4 is a bomb, then dammit I'll be taking hostages.

Any word on a sequel?

>> ^deathcow:

Any word on a sequel?


We'll all be dead by time that comes out.

*commercial

Adding video to channels (Commercial) - requested by ant.

15 years and I still think it'll suck ass. We'll see.

Well the demo is now out. I have to say, having played through it, it felt very dated... and some of the art in there was clearly very old. It just wasn't what you'd come to expect of a game released today.

>> ^Hybrid:

Well the demo is now out. I have to say, having played through it, it felt very dated... and some of the art in there was clearly very old. It just wasn't what you'd come to expect of a game released today.


You mean the demo exclusively for people who've committed to buying the game? I guess they don't want anyone who is still skeptical actually playing it. That doesn't seem like a good sign.

Actually I got demo access because I own another of Gearbox's games, Borderlands. They gave Steam owners of Borderlands first access too.>> ^entr0py:

>> ^Hybrid:
Well the demo is now out. I have to say, having played through it, it felt very dated... and some of the art in there was clearly very old. It just wasn't what you'd come to expect of a game released today.

You mean the demo exclusively for people who've committed to buying the game? I guess they don't want anyone who is still skeptical actually playing it. That doesn't seem like a good sign.

The demo was bad, not because it felt dated, but because it felt amateur. From the general combat (which there wasn't that much of in the demo tbh) to the god awful animations to the generic sound effects. The two things that really annoyed me were: The regenerating health and the only two weapons can be carried at a time fucking bullshit.

With the health, all fights become a matter off ducking behind a rock while you wait for your health to regenerate because the enemies rarely miss and shoot the shit out of you, rather than run and gun. The two weapons... well that's just fucking disgraceful. We get it, Halo did it. It worked for Halo, it REALLY does not work for Duke Nukem. It's not the return to the good ol' days that I was expecting/hoping.

HOWEVER, having said all that, it feels Duke in personality and giving you a taste of interactivity in the first level that was awesome in Duke 3d. There's a lot of cool first person moments and from the trailers there should be more cool shit to come in the full game. The demo was not a good showcase of the full game, imo. Short and very little actual action. I'm still looking forward to the full game, but I look at the demo and think the 2001 DNF trailer looked a LOT better.

Looks kinda lame and unpolished. Typical Unreal Engine ugliness abound. Why won't that stinking pile just go the fuck away and stop snaking its way into games I might otherwise want to play?

>> ^ForgedReality:

Looks kinda lame and unpolished. Typical Unreal Engine ugliness abound. Why won't that stinking pile just go the fuck away and stop snaking its way into games I might otherwise want to play?


Oh please. DNF may use Unreal, but the renderer is a custom rewrite. You would never have noticed "Unreal ugliness" if you didn't know it was Unreal. Are you honestly saying Mortal Kombat 2011 looks ugly? Batman Arkham Asylum looks ugly? Are you saying this looks ugly:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KzjsTt_DzCw

Unreal only looks as bad as what the artists are capable of, and the newer versions of the engine are looking... unreal.

>> ^EvilDeathBee:

>> ^ForgedReality:
Looks kinda lame and unpolished. Typical Unreal Engine ugliness abound. Why won't that stinking pile just go the fuck away and stop snaking its way into games I might otherwise want to play?

Oh please. DNF may use Unreal, but the renderer is a custom rewrite. You would never have noticed "Unreal ugliness" if you didn't know it was Unreal. Are you honestly saying Mortal Kombat 2011 looks ugly? Batman Arkham Asylum looks ugly? Are you saying this looks ugly:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KzjsTt_DzCw
Unreal only looks as bad as what the artists are capable of, and the newer versions of the engine are looking... unreal.


Actually, I'm not sure you know what I mean. The way the game looks is what prompted me to check if my assumptions were correct. I didn't know it used UE until I looked it up prior to that post, and the way everything is shiny, like it has plastic wrap on it is one such aspect to which I refer.

I don't like the engine because it tends (in my experience) to not be very robust and has several issues which always seem to nag at me no matter what game it is that uses it. Epic endorses NVIDIA, because they give Epic lots of money to do so, likely. As a result, they aren't as friendly to ATI (AMD) cards. It's possiboe it was the cards I was using, but other games never exhibited the same behaviors on ATI and not NVIDIA as UE games did. One such issue would be vsync seeming to behave incorrectly on ATI.

Oh, and don't even get me started on anti-aliasing... what the fuck modern game these days doesn't support AA? Oh, right. UE games. And if you manage to get it working by forcing it in your drivers, (doesn't always work, especially on ATI), then you get a much higher framerate hit than you should. Other engines handle it just fine, but for some reason, UE has a very hard time with AA, even on extremely powerful cards. Shitty engine.

What I mean is, the renderer, the part of the engine that powers all the visuals is not the native unreal engine renderer. It was rewritten by 3D Realms, so the "unreal ugliness" isn't there, it's "DNF ugliness" . The "plasticy" or "plastic wrap" look that was coined during the Doom 3 era, has little to do with the engine but the artists.

Just because Epic is endorsed by nvidia, doesn't mean they purposefully ruin the experience for ATI cards. That's like saying since ATI endorsed Half Life 2, Source has been purposefully made to not work with nvidia cards properly.

I believe they've fixed the AA issue on new versions. Batman has AA, DNF has AA and the new DX11 AA looks great. Keep in mind, a lot of games take years to develop and by the time it releases, the engine can be a bit dated. Homefront for instance? That version of unreal is 3 years old.

The engine is not without it's flaws (IE: without serious modification, the default player movement code for a first person game, imo, feels awful. Not Metro 2033 awful, but pretty bad) but it's constantly being updated and improved. The reason why developers use it is because it's tool set is fantastically good. It makes development so much easier, unless you're a programmer unfamiliar with Unreal's way of wanting to be written. And developing on PS3... which I hear might've also been improved.