Should the delay be used as part of review criteria for DNF? - Page 2

Oveneise · 08-26-2010, 08:54 PM

I think its inevitable that reviewers will bring up the extremely long development cycle. However, like Damien said, they should really just review the game based on the finished product. First post here btw. Its a great community.

pjVgt · 08-27-2010, 12:13 AM

Battlecruiser 3000 AD was being in development hell for like 10 years and is pure crap.

delta2kbr · 08-27-2010, 03:41 AM

Not to mention the flame wars that were more entertaining than the game.

KaiserSoze · 08-27-2010, 03:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oveneise

I think its inevitable that reviewers will bring up the extremely long development cycle. However, like Damien said, they should really just review the game based on the finished product. First post here btw. Its a great community.

Welcome aboard Oveneise!

bazboyz · 08-27-2010, 04:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damien_Azreal

Half-Life 2's development cycle was longer then that, from 1997 to 2004... seven years. Still, not as much as DNF's... but still.

Qoute from wiki about elite 4
A new sequel, Elite 4, has been in a lengthy development phase since 1998, and is currently eight years overdue from its original scheduled release date.It is not currently scheduled for release, with Braben stating that full production will commence after the release of The Outsider
this was back in 2006 ps (the outsiders is still in development)

KO Gilligan · 08-27-2010, 09:26 AM

Didn't Fallout hit the 10 year mark in between games? Damn that was a rough crowd of fans waiting so many years. I was watching the Beth boards prior to release. It was pretty brutal. Not much could live up to what they expected for waiting so long.

Stevey Boy · 08-27-2010, 10:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KaiserSoze

Simple-do you think game reviewers should use the long development time as part of their review criteria for Duke Nukem Forever?

No i dont

Oveneise · 08-27-2010, 09:42 PM

I remember back when Too Human got released, it got panned because they were expecting so much out of it. I played a little bit of it and thought it was pretty fun. Thats why game reviewers should review the final product. Hopefully that Kevin guy from Gamespot won't be reviewing DNF... He gave Chronicles of Riddick: Assault on Dark Athena a 7.0! >:|

Sharpie · 08-28-2010, 01:06 AM

Much like has been discussed I personally believe that the only thing that should be reviewed is just the game and its content. The delay shouldn't be incorporated into or have any influence over the overall pedigree of the reviews.

It will though. And to be honest I don't really blame them.

That is all if DNF actually comes out of course.

Don't get your hopes up, be pleasantly surprised instead of severely disappointed.

Jeager1999 · 08-28-2010, 02:41 AM

But lets take into account that a lot of these Critics are Gamers. And I bet they are just as much burning to play DNF just as much as we are. I'm sure if this Rumor is True that ounce they play the Game. They forget about the long wait and enjoy it. Sure there going to mention the long wait time. But I bet it would be like. "It was a long wait, but worth it."

08-26-2010, 08:54 PM	#41
Oveneise	Re: Should the delay be used as part of review criteria for DNF? I think its inevitable that reviewers will bring up the extremely long development cycle. However, like Damien said, they should really just review the game based on the finished product. First post here btw. Its a great community. __________________ Take his BED.

08-27-2010, 12:13 AM	#42
pjVgt	Re: Should the delay be used as part of review criteria for DNF? Battlecruiser 3000 AD was being in development hell for like 10 years and is pure crap. __________________ "Imma want my dukemz to pley!!!" - chaosomega

08-27-2010, 03:41 AM	#43
delta2kbr	Re: Should the delay be used as part of review criteria for DNF? Not to mention the flame wars that were more entertaining than the game.

08-27-2010, 09:26 AM	#46
KO Gilligan	Re: Should the delay be used as part of review criteria for DNF? Didn't Fallout hit the 10 year mark in between games? Damn that was a rough crowd of fans waiting so many years. I was watching the Beth boards prior to release. It was pretty brutal. Not much could live up to what they expected for waiting so long.

08-27-2010, 09:42 PM	#48
Oveneise	Re: Should the delay be used as part of review criteria for DNF? I remember back when Too Human got released, it got panned because they were expecting so much out of it. I played a little bit of it and thought it was pretty fun. Thats why game reviewers should review the final product. Hopefully that Kevin guy from Gamespot won't be reviewing DNF... He gave Chronicles of Riddick: Assault on Dark Athena a 7.0! >:\| __________________ Take his BED.

08-28-2010, 01:06 AM	#49
Sharpie	Re: Should the delay be used as part of review criteria for DNF? Much like has been discussed I personally believe that the only thing that should be reviewed is just the game and its content. The delay shouldn't be incorporated into or have any influence over the overall pedigree of the reviews. It will though. And to be honest I don't really blame them. That is all if DNF actually comes out of course. Don't get your hopes up, be pleasantly surprised instead of severely disappointed. __________________ 360 gamertag: sharpie92 DNF on 360 please http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFct6lg0Vmo <<<< Watch for a laugh Last edited by Sharpie; 08-28-2010 at 01:10 AM.

08-28-2010, 02:41 AM	#50
Jeager1999	Re: Should the delay be used as part of review criteria for DNF? But lets take into account that a lot of these Critics are Gamers. And I bet they are just as much burning to play DNF just as much as we are. I'm sure if this Rumor is True that ounce they play the Game. They forget about the long wait and enjoy it. Sure there going to mention the long wait time. But I bet it would be like. "It was a long wait, but worth it."