What could have justified Duke Nukem's development time?

Recommended Videos

viranimus

Thread killer
Nov 20, 2009
4,951
0
0
12 + years, I would expect a cylon sex bot that fellates you while you play to be included. Well at least in the collectors edition.
 

Kevlar Eater

New member
Sep 27, 2009
1,931
0
0
I could understand if the developmental budget was spent on hookers and blow. Or the occasional Charlie Sheen visit/Andrew W.K. party, as either of those can get quite expensive.
 

Vonnis

New member
Feb 18, 2011
418
0
0
A blowjob would not only help justify the waiting time, it would also be in line with Duke's attitude. Just saying.
 

Twilight_guy

Sight, Sound, and Mind
Nov 24, 2008
7,131
0
0
I dunno but it would come on 12 blue-rays and have a story that was well over 1000 hours long.
 

Ice Car

New member
Jan 30, 2011
1,980
0
0
According to GI (GameInformer), 3DR kept trying to change the style of the game deep in the development process, forcing them to start over over and over again over the years. Then again, I read it a pretty long while ago, so...

(I just used the word over 4 times, over and over again over the sentence... Over...)
 

Zeema

The Furry Gamer
Jun 29, 2010
4,578
0
0
Updated Graphics

a Story about Duke having to Grow up and stop being a Wanker

More Guns
 

Morbissus

New member
Jun 9, 2011
43
0
0
Xzi said:
Start with Duke 3D. Update graphics to 2011 standards. Change nothing else.

Would have easily justified twelve years of development for me. As well as justify throwing down the $60 for it. Really, if they wanted to change anything else, it should have just been the story, the jokes, and maybe the level design as long as they kept the same design philosophy as Duke 3D. Which is to say, long, branching levels with exploratory puzzles and tons of secret paths/areas.
This person here is the only one you should listen to. I couldn't have said it better myself.
 

ScumbagEddie

New member
Mar 29, 2011
137
0
0
An arcade machine for you to play in game that has hints to the original game. I'm thinking of "Turbo Turkey Puncher" and "Sarge's Bear Blaster" from Doom 3
 

ZeZZZZevy

New member
Apr 3, 2011
618
0
0
AdumbroDeus said:
It would have to be this: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/1968-Viewers-Choice-Duke-Nukem-Forever
anything less than this would be a tragedy of epic proportions
 

ResonanceSD

Elite Member
Legacy
Dec 14, 2009
4,536
5
43
Zaverexus said:
I saw this post
Arkynomicon said:
The shock with Duke Nukem Forever is that people was curious about what could justify 12 years of development. Turns out there was nothing in it to justify 12 years of development.
and thought I would ask:

What features would a game have to include for you to consider it worth 12 years' wait? Or at least consider it a good use of the time?

Personally, I would wait 12 years for a game that dispensed bacon every time you complete a mission.
A holodeck, failing that, a robot.


Seriously, the entire mars rover program was planned, announced, launched, and COMPLETED in the time it took these *****'s to get a game out.

http://duke.a-13.net/


A list of things which took less time than this game to run out, or social phenomenon that took less time to run through.
 

Biodeamon

New member
Apr 11, 2011
1,652
0
0
everything was good to me except the goddamn pyshic puzzles. I mean Duke kicks ass and chews bubblegum not hurt his brain and solve Half-life like puzzles! remove those and it`s fine
 

LessThanThreep

New member
May 15, 2011
39
0
0
It would have to have build the entire freaking world, and have moon city exploration levels as well. That and

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/1968-Viewers-Choice-Duke-Nukem-Forever
 

Nieroshai

New member
Aug 20, 2009
2,940
0
0
A game that takes 13 years to come out needs to be able to produce deep dish pizzas on demand, print money, and be able to give a d*** good blow job. But then again, DNF didn't take 14 years to make, just to come out. I only really count the dev time from Gearbox as actual work, the 3D Realms development was a joke and other than IP had nothing to do with the finished product. I bought a copy myself, and if it wasn't for my university's firewall blocking Steam I'd be playing it right now.
 

Saelune

Trump put kids in cages!
Legacy
Mar 8, 2011
8,410
16
23
Xzi said:
Start with Duke 3D. Update graphics to 2011 standards. Change nothing else.

Would have easily justified twelve years of development for me. As well as justify throwing down the $60 for it. Really, if they wanted to change anything else, it should have just been the story, the jokes, and maybe the level design as long as they kept the same design philosophy as Duke 3D. Which is to say, long, branching levels with exploratory puzzles and tons of secret paths/areas.
Definatly. Hell, if they made an expansion for 3D that did not even update anything aside from a new chapter or two, Id buy it. I still play it.
 

NeutralDrow

New member
Mar 23, 2009
9,097
0
0
That's not the question I would ask.

The question I would ask is "why exactly were you waiting for twelve years? Didn't you have other things to do in that time?"
 

Saltyk

Sane among the insane.
Sep 12, 2010
16,755
0
0
Let's be honest. There was nothing they could have done. NOTHING! Nothing will ever be so good that a decade or greater development time will be worth while.

So what could they have done to justify the development time? Release it about 8 to 10 years ago.
 

Amondren

New member
Oct 15, 2009
826
0
0
Probably too busy watching http://nyan.cat/ and that's also what is holding up Episode 3 if anyone was wondering Gabe just sits in his office and Nyan's ALL DAY LONG.
 

Leoofmoon

New member
Aug 14, 2008
391
0
0
I really dont understand anyones logic when hateing on Duke with this game, everyone who reviewed it is saying "this wuld be cool in 1999 when this ideas where new and cool" it was a game that would turn the gameing world upside down, but du to #d relmes tanking and then Gearbox haveing to ducktape a mess together ended up floping the game.
 

Windcaler

New member
Nov 7, 2010
1,331
0
0
I really dont think anything could live up to a 14 year development time unless it was universally accepted as the greatest artistic venture of the human species. Or to put it another way it would have to be what Shakespear was to literature

The thing is people think DNF was developed over 15 years but it really wasnt even close to that (my facts might not be 100% right here Im writing this from memory). It started development in 1996 with the quake engine. Then in 1998 Unreal was released and 3D realms decided they wanted duke to look the best which meant either getting a hold of the Unreal engine or designing one themselves (which would have taken many more years). They scrapped the current DNF project and got the rights to the unreal engine before continuing development. In 2002 it happened again with the release of the Unreal engine 2, development got scrapped and they started over a third time (thats six years of this happening btw). More time passed and as far as I know nothing happened before 2009 when 3D realms began downsizing, lawsuits were filed for them not producing DNF, and 3D realms stopped development. The next year 2k announced that Gearbox picked the project up (as far as I know they never said how long Gearbox had it before that announcement). Earlier this month it was released

That leaves DNF with a development time under Gearbox of about a year (possibly longer but a year is as much as we can confirm) along with the time 3D realms had begun actual development spanning from 2002 to 2009. Thats a total of 8 years, still a long time but its also about half of what people think the development time was.