And I'm all out of cards.

In America.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daikatana

Damn it, I think I have to rephrase that question.

Give me one example of a game that was hyped to be OMFGIJUSTCRAPPEDMYPANTSPECTACULAR but fell into obscurity after it came out and people noticed that it was just a great, well developed and enjoyable game but still wasn't that much ahead (if at all) of other games.

FarCry?

Yeah so that trailer was kind of cool. Even if some of it still looked like Max Payne.

I dunno guys. The gameplay and "story", as close as you get with Duke, had better be pretty ****ing awesome. New awesome looking graphics don't fly with me.

You're missing the point, FGR.

I'm not saying it's not going to be. I'm not saying people won't enjoy it.

I'm just saying that it will not live up to expectations. People will play it, and then say "Wow. That was good, but it wasn't worth waiting 10 years."

Also, the other examples you're looking for are irrelevent, because this is an entirely different situation. None of those other games took 10 to develop.

Of course they're gonna say "it wasn't worth waiting 10 years". I still just expressed hope that it would actually be so good that the amount of people really enjoying it (whether or not they know about its long development time) would outrank the amount of whinedonalds.

Not to mention they have restarted the project quite a few times after it was announced so only the dumbest f-ers would really be like "THEY SPENT 10 YEARS MAKING THIS LOL!?"

But I guess that's the most common breed of a gamer.

Wow, I don't remember the last time I played a DN game.

I just want to say "The Dig"... how many times did that get restarted, fall behind, etc. It wasn't the most advanced game when it was released, had plenty of faults, but was still loved by gamers.

No one's been waiting 10 years for this game...it comes out when it comes out, it's not like you preordered 10 years ago. I'd rather it had come out sooner, sure, but what's the big deal in having to wait a bit longer? Honestly.

You're right.. It's not such a big deal.. it's just that it's unprecedented.

Not really...Daikatana, SC2 (despite blizzard's furious assurances that it wasn't being made), prey, Bioshock...there's a lot of precedents, this is just the first incident people made a huge deal about.

Hell, even Half-Life 2 and TF2.

10 years and counting. The other games you mentioned? Not 10 years (Daikatana for example began development in '97 and was released in 2000). Fail.

Frankly, my expectations at this point are that the game will never see the light of day.

If it is released it will have exceeded my expectations.

If it is fun, it will go above and beyond anything I could hope for and I will be ecstatic.

I don't care if it won't look the best. All I care about is that the original crew is writing the dialog. The original voice actor is playing duke. And the original comedy and unbridled humor that was the big part of the old games comes through in this one.

What I sincerely hope is that they put so much sexism and awful comedy into it that it gets slapped AO and I have to order the damned thing online just to play it.

Teaser's up!

Duke Nukem Teaser

Man, so much emotion in this thread. It really gets me goin'.

Sounds like the same voice actor.

They've restarted development several times. This means scrapping everything they've worked on and starting from scratch. So no, nothing in this teaser has been in development for 10 years. Fail.

I never claimed anything in the teaser had been in development for 10 years. The game has been in development for 10 years. Fail.

I don't care what anyone else says. this is what Duke Nukem is about.

this is why we all played it when we were 10-14 years old.

and this is why we also loved shadow warrior.

Exactly!

Pass.

Apparently you suck at semantics so I'll be very specific.

The game was anounced in '97. What's present in the trailer hasn't been in development since it was anounced. Resident Evil 4's development lasted from '98 to '05 over several iterations and STALKER's lasted from '01 to '07 on one iteration. I was pointing out that there is precedent for this sort of thing in game development so Yoshi's point and his comparisons are valid.

The thing is, people aren't just sitting around waiting day after day for games to come out. There are other things to do in the meantime.

Except Starcraft 2 which has been in development since Brood Wars was finished, so the rumors go, and is just getting released next year. And a couple of those games had 6-7 development year cycles, which is long enough to have it among these.

Apparently you suck at understanding people's points, so I'll be very specfic. Maybe if I put it in bold... "I never claimed anything in the teaser had been in development for 10 years." (this is an exact quote to what I said in my last post). The game overall has been in development for 10 years.

Those examples are still completely invalid. RE4, 7 years total. STALKER, 6 years total. DNF, 10 years so far...and all they have is a bloody teaser trailer.

Wait.. you guys haven't put your entire lives on hold waiting like I have? No, I know, Gris. But still, a company announces a game. They hype it up calling it "next-gen" etc.. We get excited. A couple years go by. We hear nothing. A couple more years... Then we get a *gasp* screenshot! a couple more years go by... Nothing. A couple more years... Finally 10 years in, we get *gasp* a thirty second CGI trailor! I'm just saying it's a bit ridiculous.

[quote=Dj Yoshi]Except Starcraft 2 which has been in development since Brood Wars was finished, so the rumors go, and is just getting released next year. And a couple of those games had 6-7 development year cycles, which is long enough to have it among these.[/quote]Regarding SC2, I'm willing to put it in the same category, but it's a bad example because it hasn't been released yet, so we don't know the effects the long dev time will have on it. The others are not the same at all. See my response to Jin above. 6-7 years and then you have a completed game is *not* the same as 10 years and you have a teaser.

They have showed plenty of screenshots from the various stages of DNF development. Up to 2001, that is.

As well as some trailers. (I think two)

Yeah, I think there was a trailer in 1998 and one in 2001.

TF2 was in dev for almost as long as DNF has been, I remember an issue of PC Gamer from 1999 that had a sneak peak of it. This was when they were going for a realistic military style of gameplay, big departure from the TF formula (and the way TF2 ended up).

Oh, yeah, I remember drooling over the old TF2 pics.

Dude, you are still missing my point. RE4 was officially announced in '01. In '98 they started development with ideas that eventually went on to become Devil May Cry. There were then, I think, two other iterations before they got on to the game that was eventually released. That build that was released wouldn't have started development until around '02 or '03. So what was released was only in development for around two or three years.

Are you seeing what I'm saying here? I'm trying to say there's a difference between the game being announced as a title 10 years ago and what we're currently seeing being in development for a fraction of that time. They did scrap the entire project at least twice. So when you say "The game overall has been in development for 10 years," that's the point I'm arguing. You might think this is a petty technicality, but it hasn't been a continuous cycle and I don't think it should be treated as such.

STALKER, mind you, had six years continuous development - as far as anyone knows - and it took almost as many years for those guys to show us anything of the final game. Which, in my opinion, turned out to be a really great game.

Regardless of whether it's been cooking for 10 years, or several 2-years spurts, the problem is it was hyped prematurely and now the fan-base is so skeptical, many will only believe it exists when they hold the box in their sweaty little hands (like me).

One of my favorite games, I might add.

(So, thank you failed ideas )

^^^^^^
thank you.
Why is this concept so difficult to understand?

And then further, what will likely happen is they'll be so excited when they finally have it, then they'll install it, and play it.. and it will be mediocre, based on the standards of games out at that time (that time being approximately 34 years for now, based on their current progress over the last 10:suicide: ).

But TF2 was just shelved for most of that time. They didn't say anything about it, because they had no plans for it. When they actually wanted to get it out, they got it done fairly quickly. The folks at Duke Nukem have been telling us "next year" and believing it them selves through out the last ten years.

Not really, they've been telling "When it's done" in 2001. Much more TF2esque.

Announced != in development. They took many breaks, tried 3 diff engines (unreal being one of them and doom 3 being the newest one) and have developed different games.





You act as if they owe you something. They don't owe you anything--a CGI trailer is nice, but it's not bad, it's not ridiculous, it's not stupid. It's just what there is.


...how is it a bad example? I'll agree yeah they hyped it too much to nix every iteration, but after the hellhole that was daikatana can you blame them? SC2 is a perfect example--it could be great, it might not be, but nobody's keeping super close tabs on it. If you ever kept super close tabs on Duke Nukem Forever, then you've either been around for a while or you're kinda :downs:.


Uh...no. It's been bouncing around for a while now--but tf2 was always a mod first and a game second, up until steam games became huge. Then it was ready for digital distribution (which is the main way it sells now), which is the way Valve's been pushing games.

Dj Yoshi, did you just decide to *completely ignore the entire last post I made? Because the things you're arguing are things that have already been adressed. here. I'll post it again.

---------------------------------------


^^^^^^
thank you.
Why is this concept so difficult to understand?

And then further, what will likely happen is they'll be so excited when they finally have it, then they'll install it, and play it.. and it will be mediocre, based on the standards of games out at that time (that time being approximately 34 years for now, based on their current progress over the last 10 ).
----------------------------------------

Now that you've read it a 2nd time does it make sense yet?

Best use of it yet.