Thoughts on the portfolio video

[sridirelms]

Hello,

I think all of you have seen the 3 min portfolio video, with some plain animations and some ingame scenes.

Though I know that there are many fans here who think it's the holy grail, I just wanted to share some thoughts that are a bit more objective maybe.

I was a bit surprised that it's not quite the ubergame that everyone would like to have. There were many things that were about 3-4 years behind current state of the art. Of course, I know that nobody knows how recent the clips from the video were taken - but anyway.

The things I liked most were the scene with the pig cop jumping over the house, and the scene at the end where Duke walks through some kind of storage room (though this was pretty standard, it looked and felt good).

But apart from this, most animations were way too smooth and wobbly, it looked like in 3D animation movies for kids (which I also dislike exactly for this kind of wobbling animation madness), the grass texture in the stadium was a big joke, and probably the worst apart from wobbling was the shaking camera whenever Duke fell to the ground. I don't want to get sick playing a game, so what the ****? It felt absolutely bad, if they kept that in the final game, it would be a disaster. And I also thought the flip-the-bird animation was just bad and cheesy...

Overall, the trailer might have looked great 5-6 years ago, but for today's standards, I wouldn't bet on Duke. It might be cool for an average shooter, but for Duke and 12 years of expectations, it would only be a big hit for the true fans. Maybe that's the reason why Take 2 didn't want to further invest into the game.

Anyone here who shares my thoughts? Please keep the discussion fair and don't troll around, this is my opinion about the graphical and animation quality, would be nice to hear your thoughts about it.

---------- Post added at 08:15 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:13 AM ----------

Apart from that, let me also add that I thought the 2007 trailer with Duke and his cigar was also a bit strange to me. Especially the part where he steps to the camera and blows the smoke. It just didn't look too professional, the animation was really unnatural (would have wobbled as well if it had been a faster movement). And I didn't like the cylindrical haircut of Duke.

[lordlonelobo]

What do you mean "wobbling"? That doesn't make sense...

Also, graphics do not a great game make.

Finally, that teaser was, I believe, only made for the 3DR Christmas party, and they decided to package part of it up and release it as a teaser.

[SpinX]

I think it was a very good example of what full body awareness must be... it gives the player a sense of immersion that we will see more and more in the future...

I like the animations a lot,but i am not fond of the weapon looks... that shotgun was awfull and nowhere near the coolness of the one displayed in the 2001 trailer...

[lordlonelobo]

I thought the Ripper looked amazing. The holes in the heat shield actually showing the environment around the barrel.

[SplatterHappy]

Regarding the grass texture in the stadium: The stadium wasn't supposed to look top notch: It was to be the very first thing you did in the game, a rehash of the boss from Duke 3D, and after defeating it the camera was going to pull back to reveal that it's just a "Duke Nukem" arcade game screen and Duke is playing his own game. The graphics were supposed to be good, but not as highly polished or as realistic as the rest of the game.

[WoodenSword]

EDIT: splatterhappy was typing faster than me...

[Rider]

While I agree that some bits look a bit unpolished (or in the case of the mine cart crash, perhaps a bit too polished) I don't think any of the points you make hold up. Take this:

probably the worst apart from wobbling was the shaking camera whenever Duke fell to the ground. I don't want to get sick playing a game, so what the ****? It felt absolutely bad, if they kept that in the final game, it would be a disaster.

You feel it's bad, I think it's actually pretty well done, if a bit rough around the edges. I certainly don't see how that would be a disaster as you call it. Also keep in mind that you're watching someone else playing the game. You're watching someone else's camera view as they're moving the mouse and whatnot, that's bound to have impact on how right it feels.

I'll agree on the whole, that if that video is a showcase of some of their big and best for DNF, that it's overall quality is a bit dubious.

[0marTheZealot]

It was a work in progress and completely not intended to be viewed by anyone but internal development.

That being said, DNF did look like it had a long ways to go.

[Caine]

the only thing whoch got me excited was the 2001 trailer, the newer stuff just didnt make me shit in my pants, most things didnt look so dukish or not to fit somehow dunno why, but the latest leaked media looked very bland and like a serious sam 2 mod...

[sridirelms]

@ lordlonelobo:
Yes, the wobbling doesn't make sense, that's why I dislike it
Okay to be serious, with wobbling I meant those ultra-smooth and very "elastic" animations. Everything is shaking. Just look at how the pig cop makes that "pull the rope" motion, or how the plant pops up. Or the floating enemy... and so on.

@ SplatterHappy:
Sounded like a joke to me, but WoodenSword's posting sounds like it's true... hmm well, I don't know

@ Rider:
I guess that in those scenes where the camera was shaking around like crazy, there was no one playing, it was a scripted sequence during which you can't do anything. And it's really terrible, it's not realistic (in the real world, you have a much wider viewing angle, that's why it wouldn't look so shaky like in the game... in the game it feels like you're drunk and extreme tunnel vision).

@ 0marTheZealot:
Yes, a long way to go indeed. Nobody knows how old it is, though, but I guess it's pretty recent stuff (maybe 1-2 years).

[Needle]

I'd like you to define "wobble".

[Derfernet]

Originally Posted by Needle

I'd like you to define "wobble".

It's what weebles do instead of falling down

[wieder]

I was put off by the shadow's having a lower framerate than the rest of the scene. You can really see it in the scene where the pigcops are climbing over the walls and then moving to the house. You can clearly see them jumping and stuttering, and once you've seen it you can't unsee it.

[lordlonelobo]

What I didn't like related to the shadows as well, they were visible through a wall (the wall should've blocked it.) I'm guessing this is due to the Unreal 2 engine, or their rewritten renderer. Not sure.

[Lt.Havoc]

God, you guys are real graphic whores. Since Cryisis came out everyone wants super uber graphics. Did anyone of you forget that back in 1996 DN3D came out on a build engine with 2D sprites while ID already had Quake that had polygone graphics? Well, wihch of those 2 games was the better one?

You know, I could care less how the graphic looks like if the gameplay kicks ass and has lots of varity to it.

This whole mega graphic hype thing is the reason why we get games that look good, but play misrable compared to olde games.

I personally liked the graphics from the leaked stuff, while needing some polishing here and there it was nothing that bad.

[crunchy superman]

Originally Posted by wieder

I was put off by the shadow's having a lower framerate than the rest of the scene. You can really see it in the scene where the pigcops are climbing over the walls and then moving to the house. You can clearly see them jumping and stuttering, and once you've seen it you can't unsee it.

That and their hands & feet clipping through the wall as they climbed up the house. Also, the specularity in that cave was ridiculous! Duke looked like he was covered in baby oil (except his jeans, which looked like a texture from the '98 version).

While it probably would have been fun, there was nothing "competitive" about the graphics, as GB swore they would be.

Of course, we don't know how old all of that was, but it doesn't matter anyway - all of that will get trashed now and if we see a AAA Duke title again, it'll be completely different. But really, I don't know that I even want another one anymore, quite honestly.

God, you guys are real graphic whores. Since Cryisis came out everyone wants super uber graphics. Did anyone of you forget that back in 1996 DN3D came out on a build engine with 2D sprites while ID already had Quake that had polygone graphics? Well, wihch of those 2 games was the better one?

You know, I could care less how the graphic looks like if the gameplay kicks ass and has lots of varity to it.

This whole mega graphic hype thing is the reason why we get games that look good, but play misrable compared to olde games.

I personally liked the graphics from the leaked stuff, while needing some polishing here and there it was nothing that bad.

Sorry, but 12 years of development allows for no excuses. I'm not a tremendous graphics whore, but this game had to at least attempt to justify itself if it ever hoped to win over the gaming community it had pissed off for so long. To get it competitive graphically would have taken a good bit more time, IMO long enough to fall victim to creep yet again. It's best to just acknowledge that death is the best thing for this game.

[wieder]

Originally Posted by Lt.Havoc

God, you guys are real graphic whores. Since Cryisis came out everyone wants super uber graphics. Did anyone of you forget that back in 1996 DN3D came out on a build engine with 2D sprites while ID already had Quake that had polygone graphics? Well, wihch of those 2 games was the better one?

You know, I could care less how the graphic looks like if the gameplay kicks ass and has lots of varity to it.

This whole mega graphic hype thing is the reason why we get games that look good, but play misrable compared to olde games.

I personally liked the graphics from the leaked stuff, while needing some polishing here and there it was nothing that bad.

There is a big difference, even though *technology* of Duke was lower than Quake, the execution was high.

The complaints here aren't about the level of technology, they are about the quality of execution. They haven't asked for X whiz bang feature or said anything about Crysis level of tech... but the quality of animation, or the quality of the specular used, etc. The shadow comment I made isn't about a whiz bang feature, it's about an obvious visual artifact that once you see it distracts you from watching everything else because it's so *wrong*. No other game (that I am aware of) has shadows that do that, so it's just awkward and off putting.

[SpinX]

Wieder? what is your opinion about the weapons displayed in this portfolio clip and the jace hall footage?

my personal opinion is that is a clear step backward from the looks and punch of the ones shown in the 2001 trailer... That shotgun fired from the donkey and now... it is even worse than the doom 3 shotgun...

[vivftp]

Meh, while there may have been glitches in the video in quesiton I see no reason to compare that to what we would've expected in the final game or even compare it to earlier trailers/teasers.

It's one guys little demo of his work on a game that was not yet complete and the footage was taken at an unknown time. Analyze the video for what it is, it doesn't necessarily represent the current state of DNF.

Originally Posted by crunchy superman

Of course, we don't know how old all of that was, but it doesn't matter anyway - all of that will get trashed now and if we see a AAA Duke title again, it'll be completely different. But really, I don't know that I even want another one anymore, quite honestly.

Unless you can see into the future that's a baseless statement. We don't know what the future holds for DNF yet so until we get some more definite answers I'd just advise sitting back and waiting before assuming everything will be trashed and blah blah blah.

[crunchy superman]

Originally Posted by vivftp

Unless you can see into the future that's a baseless statement. We don't know what the future holds for DNF yet so until we get some more definite answers I'd just advise sitting back and waiting before assuming everything will be trashed and blah blah blah.

The development team is gone and many are already employed elsewhere. It's highly unlikely that other developers could be brought up to speed and finish before this version once again becomes obsolete. Even if they could, there no money to pay them, as that's why the team was let go in the first place. They can't get advances from another publisher because they're locked in with Take Two - and they're certainly not getting any more from them. Even money from a private investor would do little good because of the development team problems I already mentioned. And all this without even mentioning the impending legal fiasco.

So you tell me - how is this version going to see the light of day?

[WoodenSword]

Originally Posted by wieder

There is a big difference, even though *technology* of Duke was lower than Quake, the execution was high.

The complaints here aren't about the level of technology, they are about the quality of execution. They haven't asked for X whiz bang feature or said anything about Crysis level of tech... but the quality of animation, or the quality of the specular used, etc. The shadow comment I made isn't about a whiz bang feature, it's about an obvious visual artifact that once you see it distracts you from watching everything else because it's so *wrong*. No other game (that I am aware of) has shadows that do that, so it's just awkward and off putting.

I am not an expert to judge that.

But i think it's not so nice to criticize their work and portfolio in a bad way, especially now that they are trying to find a job

[vivftp]

Originally Posted by crunchy superman

The development team is gone and many are already employed elsewhere. It's highly unlikely that other developers could be brought up to speed and finish before this version once again becomes obsolete. Even if they could, there no money to pay them, as that's why the team was let go in the first place. They can't get advances from another publisher because they're locked in with Take Two - and they're certainly not getting any more from them. Even money from a private investor would do little good because of the development team problems I already mentioned. And all this without even mentioning the impending legal fiasco.

So you tell me - how is this version going to see the light of day?

How likely it is that other developers could be brought up to speed on DNF tech is anyones guess, not unless you know something I don't.

Money could potentially come from any source, or the IP could be sold off to someone else if 3DR gets an offer they like.


How will it see the light of day? Damned if I know, but I don't know all the facts and I can't tell the future. That's why my take on all this is to just sit back and see what happens rather than get my underwear in a bunch.

[LiquiD]

These little graphical criticisms are only cosmetic but coming from 3d background the things u guys are complaining about can easily be fixed, smooth animations u can control the wave length of these animations.

Shadows can easily have been given higher resolutions and framerates in cutscenes. These are complaints u give to a polished completed game which surely by the animation you can see it's very incomplete.

The game looked great. It's merely subjective to criticize these little details.

The grass was only a 2d texture which I agree looks lacking but maybe 3d textures were too demanding on current hardware. Anyways it's probably never gonna be released due to incompetence, not mentioning any names George

[kingjolly]

Nothing on what I've seen has impressed me about DNF. The teaser, the screenshots, the demo rill all screamed standard, average FPS to me. Made me wonder why they've been spending 12 years on it. The 2001 trailer however was just simply amazing for its time.

[Saul]

You guys are overly critical.

I loved the demo.

[Amakou]

Originally Posted by sridirelms

Overall, the trailer might have looked great 5-6 years ago, but for today's standards, I wouldn't bet on Duke.

Just thought I'd nitpick at this. You called your post an objective opinion, then compare this game to something from 2003? The video looked a lot better than Call of Duty (1) and Max Payne 2. Don't call yourself objective if you're going to close in an exaggeration.

Also, as far as the "wobbling." did you ever play Mirror's Edge?

~Amakou~

[wieder]

Originally Posted by Saul

You guys are overly critical.

I loved the demo.

I think like a lot of things... how you would feel about it might be different when you've paid $60 for it and have been looking at it for several hours, rather than being eager and happy to see anything at all.

Kinda like how previews are almost *always* positive, because a benefit of the doubt and mystery is there, but once the actual games come out the true colors shine and people's real feelings come out.

[crunchy superman]

Originally Posted by vivftp

Money could potentially come from any source, or the IP could be sold off to someone else if 3DR gets an offer they like.

Like I said, regardless of where any money comes from, the problem now is going to be getting a team together and bringing them up to speed. All the key folks are gone, and I doubt GB is intimate on every detail of everything.

If the IP is sold for cash, then they have no control over anything Duke anymore, so that certainly won't help DNF.

"Wait and see" is all we've ever been able to do, and here's where it has brought us.

[dukeMadness]

Originally Posted by wieder

I think like a lot of things... how you would feel about it might be different when you've paid $60 for it and have been looking at it for several hours, rather than being eager and happy to see anything at all.

Kinda like how previews are almost *always* positive, because a benefit of the doubt and mystery is there, but once the actual games come out the true colors shine and people's real feelings come out.

Don't underestimate other people's judgement.

Maybe you have played the game and you think it sucks.We don't care. We just say that we like the demo. I personally didn't like the teaser at all even there was a lot of "mystery" and doubt there also and i REALLY like the demo reel because:

1) It looked like great old-school FPS
2) The animations.The animations of the boss at the stadium (i really liked how he rotated his "claws", the animation of the pigcops, the animation of the alien troops coming out of the van.
3) Amazing full body awareness that shows up when you fall, jump,e.t.c. and more than "just look your body " that we find in other typical FPS(remind me of mirror's edge ->and even better than that)
4) The enemies are not just props shooting at you.They open doors, make stupid things ( i loved the door that slammed on the pigcop), e.t.c.
5) I have not seen another FPS where you can climb on a monster in that way.It was something new and exciting for me.

Maybe the graphics sucks (i don't believe so looking at the other leaked media), but what i liked in the demo reel is not that it will have the best graphics/shadows/animation in the world but that the game promises a strong (and old-school in a good way at the same time) gameplay.

Maybe that promise is false, but i prefer this false promise and "bad graphics" than the "predictable" COD:Modern walfare where the story (boring) and the gameplay (UNBELIEVABLY boring and ultra-linear) make it a "commercial", soulless video game.

[wieder]

Originally Posted by dukeMadness

Don't underestimate other people's judgement.

I specifically said "might" for a reason.

Year in and year out I've seen the pattern over and over with games where people see something ahead of time and are excited about it, but then when it comes time to put real money down and look at it for real, you lose the majority of them.

There is definitely a lot to like conceptually in what we saw... but I also saw enough clues in there that set off my warning bells based on experience and watching our rather fickle industry when it came to imagining it in real customers hands. Even if it *was* average or worse there would of course still be people who love it and that wouldn't be to say they would be wrong, just I can guarantee if the guys at 3DR were to choose between "Haze" or "CoD" on the fan and success meter, I know which end they were aiming for.

[Dennis]

It doesn't matter anymore the game is buried, dead, past away, killed and forgotten by everyone (except Kaisersoze) in a few months.

What surprises me is that some people still have hopes that the current build will be released someday. Why do you think that so many screenshots and game videos popped up after the news came out that 3Drealms was toast, George gave permission to the guys to post these videos to help them getting a new job. He would never gave permission to do that if the game was coming out later.

It was only until the laywers of Take2 came into action that the contents was removed from several places.

George is playing now in Las Vegas at a poker tournament, he probably will lose all of his remaining money and will be broke the rest of his life, Bye George

[SpinX]

we are commenting on images that were shown totally out of its context, and were shown from a animation point of view... it was shown with awfull image quality and the lack of sound... (still one of the most underestimated aspects and powers of the entertainement sector)

keeping those things in mind, i must say that the full body awareness that was displayed, was the best I've seen in games... and the custom made animations of the bosses and asstroopers were very well done...

My only point of critisism is the overall art direction/ production design of this build... I mean, the 2001 version looked more duke than this... it felt like vegas and almost reality, this looks like a game...

Also I would like to add that i find it completely contradictory that we see the vehicles from a 3rd person view... isn't the whole point of FBA that you are immersed as much as possible in the character? the 2001 version showed complete first person driveable vehicles and that looked really impressive...

[sridirelms]

Well, I'm not an extreme graphics-must-have-boy or whatever you might call it but that's also part of being objective. Objectively, I think we should admit that it's a few years behind, no matter if that's something that bothers you personally or not. But it might still be a reason for a publisher to say "no, thanks". Also, think about the 12 years. After 12 years, people expect WAY more than after 2-3 years.

Also think about this: whenever the graphics seemed outdated, the next engine switch was straight ahead. Remember?

Wobbling: I didn't define it, but at least I gave some examples. It should be enough to describe it, maybe better than if it's described with words. But I'll repeat the examples if it helps: 1) the pig cop who does the "pull rope" animation, 2) the plant that pops up and 3) the floating-in-air enemy. They all share some kind of wobbling, elastic, rubberlike animations. Too smooth, too wobbly. Just like in those modern 3D animation movies for kids. I know that 3D animation is not an easy task (that's why most stuff still doesn't look as good as classic 2D animation), but still, I think that most modern games are already a step ahead.

---------- Post added at 10:05 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:04 AM ----------

@ SpinX: Yes, from an animation point of view, but it's the animations that I'd criticize the most.

That said, I think the animation with the boss falling over looked pretty good. And, as I said in my initial post, the animation where the cop jumps over the roof.

[jet jaguar 2.0]

For what it was, a tech demo, I thought the graphics and animation were fine. They shouldn't be indicative of what the final product would've looked like. The big thing for me in DNF was the expected level of interactivity. I would've liked to have seen what special things water did in DNF(assuming GB wasn't blowing smoke up our asses).

[Rider]

I'm actually kind of curious how well the quality of these things (specular, the shadows, some clipping/animation issues) are represented in the reel. As in... how close that video was to the way it appeared and was supposed to appear ingame.

Also on things like the shot of the shrunken duke on the craps table, the one with the horrid textures. Where these things that where intended to be kept "as is" or had already been flagged as needing a redo.

[Tualmasok]

For a demo reel of animations, the video showed a remarkable amount of gameplay. This is unexpected, as it is largely showing animations only. Luckily they had to be shown in context, which resulted in the extra footage we see.

And it's great!

Considering just how much is missing from the game in the video shown is a huge indicator of quality. And what is shown is of such a high standard that it only makes one crave more.

Lots of people bag the quality of the graphics. Based on what can be seen in that video - damn straight. But what's the resolution of the video?!? Certainly isn't HD, so how can anyone honestly rate the graphics when they can't be seen properly? You can try, but it only makes you look stupid.

Crysis has great graphics, as did Doom 3. Neither were great games. Wii is the highest selling console at the moment and has very sub-par graphics. People want to have fun.

Pong is Pong, it doesn't matter if you run it at 640x480 in mono chrome or 1440x900 at 32bit...

[StrikerMan780]

*Facepalms*

Ugh, I imagine the reason for the Low framerate shadows and low texture quality is because it was probably running on a Debug Mode, with texture quality toned down and whatnot. If the game has a console, maybe some CVars were set to have the shadows update less and whatnot.... there are many scenarios to think of. Remember, that was a WIP, and wouldn't end up like that in the final product.

As for the shitty grass texture on the football field, that is for a reason, like another dude explained. One of the Art guys for 3DR, iirc, said that it is meant to look crappy at first, since it is a DN3D Arcade machine that Duke Himself is playing, and after defeating the boss, it pans out of the screen, and through a cool transition, the graphics go from crap, to very realistic, to show that we are now in the "Real World".

[froggerdonkey]

I thought it all looked ok...not great but ok- but the shotgun really did look horrible and totally in the wrong position (2001 trailer looked waaay better for this). It might sound petty but weapon look/feel/sound is super important for any fps game, let alone duke.

[Kristian Joensen]

I must say this I never thought any footage from any game would ever remotely approach the E3 2001 trailer but the demo reel crapped all over it, easily. It is like a race between a man walking exceedingly slowly and the Starship Enterprise at maximum speed(Warp 9?)

[Kalki]

It was a demo reel for animation, not a trailer and so the level of polish in certain areas could have been raised a few more notches to be at AAA shippable level. The fba animations shown (physical characterization, boss fatality type moves, etc.) was pretty much what I've been asking for the last 6 years or so. Which is saying a lot actually.