Hi!
It's busy times now when it comes to video games for me. Got L.A. Noire on release date but I got sick so I didn't play it until a few weeks later. Yesterday I downloaded Duels of the Planeswalkers 2012, which doesn't seem like it adds that much but still is enjoyable. However, I'll save those two for other entries since I want to talk about something that is hot off the presses right now; namely the Dukester himself's return to form (?): Duke Nukem Forever has finally been released!
I'm an old school gamer and for sure I played Duke Nukem 3D back in the day, in fact I even played the 2D-ones. Duke 3D took the Doom-engine in a whole new direction with the interactive enviroments, much more advanced level structuring and probably most of all, letting you play an actual defined character. The Duke has always been a walking stereotype, much like the borrowed movie quotes he keeps yapping; a mish-mash of various campy 80's and 90's action flicks' mary-sue-like anti-heroes. It really feels wrong calling the Duke mary-sue, but he sure is the male variant of that, even more so in the new game since his health regenerates (sadly) and it takes a lot before he dies. Even though D3D was fun and enjoyable for its time, I still have a feeling that most people remember it as much better than it actually was. Most of the hype concerned how innovative it was, not so much about the quality of the game itself. The game shone in the first episode, the other were more of the same and the gameplay became rather tedious (a bit like Doom in that the first episode - Knee Deep in the Mud - is hands down the best.
The fact that it's been 14 years is most assuredly a contributing factor to people (well video game reviewers, it's not confirmed that you can call them people) forgetting that D3D was not the paragon of gaming people remember it as, greatly influencing their confounding stellar expectations of DNF. It reminds me very much of the Star Wars-prequels that - all things considered - were never going to live up to people's expectations. DNF has gotten awful reviews, the meanest one being the one on Gamespot where the X-box 360-version got 3.0. When reading these reviews it feels like the reviewer has decided what to think about this game before even playing it. Big parts of the texts is just downright bashing, far from any sort of constructive critisism. The reviewers are really scrutinizing the game with a magnifying glass looking for even the smallest detail to hate on. It's rather embarrassing to be honest, but I suppose the 14 year wait warrants it, not to say calls for it. It feels like the reviewers are mad that George Broussard didn't invite them to his birthday party when they were kids or something, and this is their long in coming way of getting back at him.
I bought this game expecting very little. Through the years I've read the reports and seen the screenshots of the latest engine they've used for the game. The last one was the video that a guy who worked on the game leaked right about the time when 3D Realms said they pulled the plug for good. I really liked the look of that video, and judging from the final game that's exactly the graphics they've used in the end. They've sort of stitched together what they had as best they could in order to make it as coherent of a game as possible. And with me, that is perfectly fine.
At the time of writing this I've played through probably around 3/4's of the game, and the bottom line is that it's FUN. Period. I am actually enjoying myself playing this video game. There's a challenge and I want to continue playing and exploring the area that comes next. And to be fair, I don't think you can ask for more from a game. It is sad, if not deplorable, that Call of Duty: Modern Warfare part ad nauseam is the measuring standard for a good FPS game today. In my opinion, by now CoD is not much of a game, it's more of an interactive film. And like I've said before I get the CoD's on release, but when all FPS-games just have to be CoD that really puts a hampering limitation on the genre.
There are a lot of problems with DNF. DNF is not a great game, by any means. The graphics are fine but dated, especially certain parts. Coming from the extremely advanced facial animation in L.A. Noire and playing a supposedly brand new game with barely any facial animation at all like in DNF, is not very nice. There's a strange blur effect on all textures that are far away which I think they could've gotten rid of all together. But the graphics are still functional and do what they need to, I mean look at Minecraft! Graphics have never been everything in a game and it sure as hell rings true for DNF as well.
The sound is not more than OK. It was a part of D3D that was really good, the weapons sound a bit weak here and overall it's not as spot on as in the predecessor. The intro version of the Duke Nukem-theme rocks, but the rest of the music is quite forgettable.
The game plays like an ancient relic from the Half-Life 2-era. A lot of water has passed under the bridges since then, which poses a bit of a problem. The regenerating health and two weapon-limitation is a Cod/Halo-era feature that they've jammed into the game with brute force. It clashes with the HL2-era mechanics like a high speed train into a rock wall. I'm just going to say that I hate the aforementioned two alterations to the Duke formula and leave it at that, they add nothing and just take away from the experience. The Half-Life games brought scripted events into the world of gaming, which were at the time considered the best thing since sliced bread, but now just feel unendingly stale. My hope is that the reason the game reviewers are not aware why the scripted events exist in the game, is because they simply didn't play games back then. Because if they did and still can't make the connection there is simply no excuse for what they are writing in their reviews. There is no question that if DNF was released a couple of years after HL2, the reviewers would praise the scripted events and how they provided a nice pause from the action at points in the game - instead of them being a negative. Of course, today we live in the CoD-land where the action has to be in warp nine at all times, otherwise it's a bad game. I for one think the variety of the gameplay in DNF feels like a breath of fresh air, as weird as it sounds, compared to the on-rails feeling of games like CoD. And don't get me started on the turret sequences, CoD has TONS of turret sequences yet the ones in DNF get all the bad rap? You have to be kidding me.
People should play this game and judge for themselves, it's possible I like it mostly because of the nostalgia. But that doesn't necessarily have to be a bad thing, the old school gamers who played D3D is the target audience Gearbox should've gone for, not the CoD/Halo-kids with ADHD who have not taken their pills. Next up: I will discuss L.A. Noire and trying to detect lies successfully.
Later!
Inga kommentarer:
Skicka en kommentar