So... About that Duke Nukem Remake/Reload/Remastered/Reanything

[Leminur]

We all might know that there was a project where Duke Nukem 3d would be remade. I know there are lots of information related to that, that it was stopped at a certain point thanks to copyright issues and bla bla bla...

But what is the current position for such project anyway? Are there new updates? Will we have enough bubblegum until there?

[Rapture_Rising]

As it stands, Duke Nukem is owned by Gearbox, they dictate what happens next to Duke. 3D Realms controls everything Duke until DNF, everything DNF and onwards is all Gearbox.

Any remakes including Duke Nukem: Reloaded is really a grey area, Interceptor tried to make a new Duke Nukem game behind Gearbox's back (speculation) thinking they still had some rights but all that lead to was a lawsuit so i am guessing that for 3D Realms' and Interceptors sake they stay well clear of anything Duke Nukem.

[Micky C]

This is how it went:
1. Fred approached 3DR and Gearbox with some images of quick Duke 3D level mockups in UE3 wanting to do a Duke 3D remake.
2. They let him do it, and give him a contract that will eventually allow them to release it as a free game.
3. Everyone gets hyped about it and stuff.
4. Turns out that that the contract allows Interceptor to "make" the game but not "release" it. Interceptor stops making it since what's the point?
5. After Interceptor released ROTT 2013, an official commercial game, Gearbox says Interceptor always had the right to release the game.

Some further points:
Gearbox never intended for DNF to have mod tools, therefore to keep the Duke modding fanbase happy, this alternate UE3 fully moddable Duke game was going to be released (Reloaded).
Gearbox never actually intended for Reloaded to get released, and IIRC there was actually a pulled comment from Fred to that affect from one of the later meetings. Probably on the off-chance that it would have made DNF look bad (which really isn't that hard).
TX the Duke4.net forum moderator and head eduke developer came across a leaked version of the game and said it was very unfinished for the amount of time it'd been in development, and had a few noob issues.
Gearbox only claimed that Interceptor could release the game after Interceptor became a commercial company, because Gearbox knew as a fact that no company in their right mind would devote resources to making a full-sized, free, commerical quality game. So Gearbox are being dicks on that one.
Considering the extreme bugginess and several poor design choices (horrible, horrible horrible horrible instadeth platforming, and "relatively" linear level design mostly resulting from the original checkpoint system, amongst other noobish things), Reloaded quite simply wouldn't have been all that good. At that point interceptor had no game making experience, weren't getting paid to do it, and were working on it in their free time. Considering how certain aspects of ROTT 2013, (an official game they were getting paid to do full time) turned out, Duke Reloaded probably would have been worse in those aspects. Not to mention that one guy who actually worked on the team stated that there were people working on it who had never played Duke 3D before, and were making design decisions that were distinctively un-Duke 3D-like.

Now I'm not saying ROTT 2013 is a particularly bad game, especially for the price (it's fun in small doses), but you get my point.
The fact remains that Duke Reloaded is never, ever, ever Ever ever going to come out. Forget about it. And it wouldn't have been that flash anyway.

If you want a modern, flashy Duke Nukem Forever, then look no further than Duke Nukem Eternity, an extremely high quality mod using all the latest features of eduke32: http://www.moddb.com/mods/duke-nukem-eternity
If you're after that classic 1998-style DNF, then the (also extremely high quality) Duke Nukem Forever 2013 is the closest you're going to get: http://www.moddb.com/mods/duke-nukem-forever

Long live Duke 3D and EDuke32.

[Leminur]

Hmmm... Noted. To be honest I have tried all of those DN mods out there. The AMC Team (Wow what a mod... It needs to be finished soon) Attrition, Duke 64 (Excelent port from Fox), Weapons of Mass Destruction, Duke Plus... I have got to be honest, I need to try the Eternity one though, that one looks so fun! Thanks a lot for these!

It's a shame that it did not end well, it had so much potential as we have saw the early images. I see that the new ROTT was not that good but damn, Shadow Warrior reboot is such an awesome game (Even though made by other company) that it enlightened my mind a bit. I dunno if there will be another reboot project, but, well, we are waiting for a good DN game for a pretty long time! (Thanks to the fan base for having such awesome mods!) I thought like they would explore Duke's past, which could certainly draw attention for the story and bla bla bla... But ohh well.

I do believe only time is going to answer us that question. I just hope we don't wait like another decade for the next DN game... And it ends badly as Forever.

[Micky C]

Oh I don't think you'll be waiting too much longer for more AMC TC (said the co-creator of Episode 2).

As for the SW reboot, it was fun on the first try, but on a second playthrough things just got real tedious due to the large amount of health enemies seem to have, as well as how cumbersome the guns are to use (in an attempt to 'encourage' sword combat).

[ZuljinRaynor]

SW is how you do a reboot/remake.
ROTT 2013 is not.

[BadRix]

Originally Posted by ZuljinRaynor

SW is how you do a reboot/remake.
ROTT 2013 is not.

SW was a great reboot. It missed one thing however: open, non-lineair levels. Some levels were just too 'corridor-minded'. Just like in the original game, I want to get lost...I want to explore.

When are companies going to learn? If you do a reboot: look at the original game for succes. There are so many bad remakes out there and they still don't get it. Look how an awsome game like 'Syndicate' turned out to be. Thousands of fans were eager to play that game and then...kablam...EA put out another mediocre FPS-game to please the casual gamer. What were they thinking?

[Lunick Fiore]

The original Shadow Warrior got quite annoying with some of its level layouts in my opinion.

[Micky C]

Very true, the excessively maze-like and/or puzzle-oriented level design is probably Shadow Warrior's weakest aspects. Once you get past that though the game is pretty damn good.

SW2013 on other other hand went the complete opposite direction with relatively linear level design with arena elements. IMO this severely damages the replay value.

If I was making SW2013, I'd take the current game, change the level design so that it's a bit more mazelike/explorable and folds in on itself more, and I'd make the weapons more powerful/functional. Then the game would be pretty solid.

[BadRix]

Originally Posted by Micky C

Very true, the excessively maze-like and/or puzzle-oriented level design is probably Shadow Warrior's weakest aspects. Once you get past that though the game is pretty damn good.

It's far better than the 'one-way-only'-leveldesign of modern shooters. I actually liked searching for an exit. A lot of classic games had maze-like levels, or at least levels where you had to look around. Look at the original Wolfenstein 3D, it actually had mazes in it. Simple leveldesign makes for zero replayability.

SW2013 was packed with invisible walls as well, I don't get what they did.

[Hendricks266]

Originally Posted by Leminur

It's a shame that it did not end well, it had so much potential as we have saw the early images.

Though the images may have looked nice, they don't tell the whole story.

Originally Posted by TerminX

The build I got a copy of was promising in terms of the graphical resources (the models and textures and what was finished of the one map were all very nice), but it was pretty clear that nobody had put much effort into actually programming the thing. They claimed publicly that they were 90%+ finished with a multiplayer beta, but even basic stuff like firing weapons was pretty badly broken. I have a feeling that they knew DN:R wasn't going anywhere and started working on ROTT quite a while before any mention of DN:R never actually coming out was made anywhere.

http://forums.duke4.net/topic/6254-/...81#entry146881

[Duke's New Chainsaw]

Originally Posted by BadRix

It's far better than the 'one-way-only'-leveldesign of modern shooters. I actually liked searching for an exit. A lot of classic games had maze-like levels, or at least levels where you had to look around. Look at the original Wolfenstein 3D, it actually had mazes in it. Simple leveldesign makes for zero replayability.

Yes. Classic FPS games had aMAZEing level design.

[Damien_Azreal]

Originally Posted by BadRix

It's far better than the 'one-way-only'-leveldesign of modern shooters. I actually liked searching for an exit. A lot of classic games had maze-like levels, or at least levels where you had to look around. Look at the original Wolfenstein 3D, it actually had mazes in it. Simple leveldesign makes for zero replayability.

Guess that's why everybody hates Half-Life so much. Oh... wait...

Linear level design in no way makes a bad game, or an un-replayable one.
Sorry, but as it stands, BulletStorm, Wolf: The New Order, Shadow Warrior (2013) and Singularity are some of my type shooters of recent years.

All linear. But all incredibly fun, and I've replayed all a lot.

Linear does not equal bad.
Just like everything else in gaming it comes down to how well it's designed, and how it's used. Even open ended games can feature awful level design and end up terrible excuses for games.

And, I'll gladly take a game like Wolf:TNO or Shadow Warrior over a maze like key hunt. While I love Blood, Doom, Duke... and several others... each had plenty of levels with simply awful level design and poorly laid out key placements.

[BadRix]

Indeed, Half-Life was an incredible game, but how many times did you replay it? I didn't replay it at all. I was a cool run, nice story and (most importantly) was something different and new.
I hardly ever replay a shooter these days, do you know which shooters I replay? Wolfenstein 3D, Doom, quake, Hexen, Duke Nukem 3D, Jedi Knight... those are the kinda games I replay, even today.

Wolfenstein: the new order, was (suprisingly) a decent shooter. I loved every minute of it, despite the poor 'explorability'. But...I didn't replay it. I know the story now, there's nothing new to see anymore. It just disappeared on top of a pile of games.

I don't have that with those older shooters: there's still something new to explore. You can never find all the rooms, secrets,... and you can jump into action immediately. I love that about a game.

I'm the type of gamer that loves games like 'Boiling point', which was poor according to some reviews. Not too much story, just drop me in an open world and let me find my way. I hate games that, even remotely, hold my hand.

How many times do you get stuck in modern shooters? Hardly ever... In some classic shooters you will get stuck, and not because of the maze-like levels. Jedi Knight is a great example: at some points you will encounter puzzles, you'll have to think you're way out. Again: that's what I miss with modern shooters.

SW2013 was a good game, I loved it. But again: it became very predictable. At some point, you knew from a mile away that a door would slam shut behind you and opponents came spawning in front of you. You were stuck, you had to defeat them all untill another door opened. What was wrong with enemies patrolling an area? A good balance makes for a good game. But with SH2013, it wasn't balanced at all. In combination with the lineair levels (allthough less linear than many other modern shooters), it became boring after a while.

[Bad Sector]

IMO Shadow Warrior 2013, while a good game, it doesn't really feel like an oldschool game. There is little meaningful exploration - sure you can collect trinkets and stuff, but it isn't the same like looking for a better weapon, powerups, etc in secret areas and the skill system took away from it (instead of exploring the level to find stuff, you kill the enemies to collect XP and upgrade yourself). I think TotalBiscuit's video about oldschool FPS design is spot-on (which also uses the classic Shadow Warrior as an example). Also Shadow Warrior 2013 seemed to have very little vertical variation - even the classic Shadow Warrior with the limited Build engine had more vertical variation. As TB says (or i think he says since it has been a while since i saw that video :-P), a big deal with these old games was mastering the level. The level isn't just a backdrop for you to kill baddies, but it is an entity by itself. Personally i'd add that navigating and exploring a level should be entertaining by itself (of course just the level cannot stand by itself, except in games where exploring the environment is the main reason people play, like in Stanley's Parable).

When it comes to level mechanics i found the Rise of the Triad remake much better and true to the classic FPS. My two biggest problems with the new ROTT however are the lack of polish (several little bugs, especially movement bugs - loosing your "flow" because a little polygon got in your way is not fun, the levels should use more invisible collision geometry) and the level design/layout doesn't seem very well thought out. It may remind a bit of the original ROTT, but the original ROTT's engine limitation made things a bit more straightforward. Also the levels had many areas where looked a lot the same and there wasn't a minimap available to help you out. Classic FPS games had minimaps which helped exploration, but few modern games have them and when they do they're often very crude top-down approximations. I think the last FPS game to have a proper minimap based on the level's layout (which was fully 3D) was Dark Forces 2.

I think level design-wise the new Shadow Warrior was better than the new ROTT, except the lack of vertical variation. However its mechanics weren't very different from Flying Wild Hog developers' previous games, like Hard Reset, Painkiller, etc and all of them had a problem with too simple arena-like layouts. The Shadow Warrior levels are an improvement, but IMO not a big one and certainly not like the FPS games of older times.

[Damien_Azreal]

Originally Posted by BadRix

Indeed, Half-Life was an incredible game, but how many times did you replay it? I didn't replay it at all. I was a cool run, nice story and (most importantly) was something different and new.
I hardly ever replay a shooter these days, do you know which shooters I replay? Wolfenstein 3D, Doom, quake, Hexen, Duke Nukem 3D, Jedi Knight... those are the kinda games I replay, even today...

You are generalizing replayability for games based on your personal preferences.
I've replayed Half-Life many times, and have also done so with the Black Mesa mod.
Same with HL2 and it's Episodes.

You personally can't find replayability in newer games, but that doesn't mean it's not there.
I, and many others, replay games a LOT. It has nothing to do with linear, open ended or if it uses the "maze like/key hunt" level design of the 90s.
It's about the quality and enjoyment of the level design itself.

The only games I don't replay, are games I don't enjoy. Games that I felt were poorly made, boring... tedious and just plain bad.

Redneck Rampage and Dark Forces, two games I love, but they both suffer from absolutely awful level design at times. Simply... horrid.
Even DN3D had it's fare share of really bad levels. Most of Episode 2 is just... meh.
Shadow Warrior, and even my all time favorite Blood.
And the thing is, a lot of developers that made these classic games we all love... have said many times on their own how horrible level design was in the 90s.
Craig Hubbard has talked some on the issues and restrictions of level design on Blood. Even George has mentioned DN3D's short comings in level design.

[Micky C]

Care to give us sources on those so we can get a first hand account of what they said?

[BadRix]

I follow you on Redneck Rampage, it has horrible levels. Still, it wasn't a bad game. I loved Dark Forces. The atmoshere on its own was great.
Blood is one of my all-time favs. There were many incredibly good levels, I thought.

I'm thinking: could it be the nostalgic factor that 'troubles' my mind? It probably does, to some extent. But it can't explain why I'm playing those old(er) games again and again, and why I throw those modern shooters on a pile after a single play-through.

I just think there is zero replayability in these modern 'Hollywood-shooters'. They got a great story, they're thrilling, exciting, full of FMV's...but they're lacking the taste: should I play them again? Nah, I've seen it all. I'm an explorer.

From time to time I play Doom or Wolfenstein 3D on my androidphone. After all those years, I thought I'd seen all the levels, all the secrets. But that's not so, I still keep exploring and finding area's I didn't know about. I think that's great.

And that's what it's all about: we all seek different things in games. Nothing wrong with that

[Damien_Azreal]

I fully understand the "hollywood-shooter" theme. Those to me are CoD and BF. Their campaigns are lifeless Michael Bay style explosion porn with no "meat". It's all style and no substance.

And yes, Blood stands as my favorite shooter ever. And it has some truly amazing levels, but even it has a couple that just... don't measure up.
The expansion "Plasma Pak" is the worst offender. Using levels from an alpha build of Blood it's levels lack some of the polish and greatness of the full game's designs.

And yeah, nostalgia can be a huge player in how we view things... even without us knowing.
It can also blind people to things in new games that share an older name. It's been no secret that I didn't enjoy the new RotT remake, but, so many people blindly defended the game even before it's release based solely on the nostalgia they had for the original.


And Micky C, George made his comment on DN3D's level design back when 3DR were porting DN3D to Xbox Live.
It was on this forum, but it was several, several years ago. Back before the 2009 layoff/shut down drama.

Craig doesn't talk much, and it's even harder to find quotes from him. Mostly he only really does podcast stype interviews, and it was about a 30+ minute long interview where he made one comment on being limited on what was possible level design wise and not being a fan of find key, go here, find key go there...

[ReadOnly]

It is a common mistake to confuse replayability with different outcomes, routes, areas or story branches in a playthrough. If you're playing game differently then you're not replaying it per se, cause you're still exploring its content, i.e. still playing it.

When you have a linear adventure game or fps game you want to replay then it is replayability. Game is good enough that you want to replay it and not because you want to play it differently this time. You'll play exactly the same, because it is that good.

[Frederik Schreiber]

We've had enough Reloaded threads the past 3 years, with the same outcome.
Once we have news to share, we'll re-open for discussion.

Thread Closed