Looks interesting, but I think it might make the game look too good - and highlights some of the issues with the game like cars that seem to float and slide around. Also, the somewhere the demonstration system is bottlenecking as it keeps freezing for one or two seconds. IMO if the graphics were toned down slightly (using a slightly lower def texture map) then it wouldn't have as many freezes and still look nice.

My own view of Duke Forever is that it isn't bad, and its a callback to older games but it isn't a good game as such.

The thing about Duke 3D is that it wasn't just mature humour and gunplay. It had a sense of humour, digs at films / other games around at the time and made creative use of 3D and puzzles which hadn't been seen before due to the engine.

The new game uses old technology and doesn't really bring anything new to the genre at all, and "cool" doesn't really replace innovation / nice puzzles etc.

In Kings Bounties defence, the earlier heroes games used to turn you into dogfood if you got your army balance wrong.

It still doesn't stop the game being frustrating in your eyes however.

People get kicked from games all the time, for good / bad reasons. I don't see how adding the name of the person doing the kicking is a problem, as its still a random smoe for most people playing in any case.

[QUOTE="teardropmina"]

I think the sequel will be like all sequels, that is, you don't need to play the original.

as for whether it's worth $50...well, it all depends. if you're familiar and good at the game, you can beat the game on hard within a day (I did that back then~~).

the graphic is inevitably outdated, BUT I still consider its art direction among the best, if not THE best, of all the games I've played.

wonderland is magical, puzzles are fun, and battle is intense...

Jachael

I'm not that worried about the graphics. I'm more worried about gameplay and story. I'm primarily a console gamer, but I'll jump to PC for specific games if they are that good; story, gameplay, etc. I figured you wouldn't have to have played the original by virtue it is 10 years old, but I missed this due to not being a PC gamer and the story is very intriguing.

Still a fun game and I sometimes play it, even today.

It uses the quake 3 engine, which doesn't look too bad graphically in any case. The game feels a little rushed near the end but the level structure / artwork and music are really what it has going for it.

I've played it to the end, and although there are a few tricky places its very enjoyable. Definitely worth playing in my opinion

Thought I would post this as well, I'm more of a response kind of guy and don't really do "editorials" :D but it seems to me that many games nowerdays would do much better if they kept old school ethics in mind, i.e. the KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) and gameplay matters first.

I used to think that consoles had a large part of the blame in this - if something is going cross platform and going to be released simultaneously, then it will suffer in order to maximise in sales in terms of losing featues etc - but taking more interest in consoles in general I think that the same problems are there as well.

Simply put, alot of games nowerdays are wheeled out to maximise on the graphics, blow the gameplay. A good example is Kane and Lynch 2 - which has some nice artwork and gunplay, but fails in the gameplay department. And while games like Mass Effect and Dragon Age are extremely good, it seems alot of the time is sunk into the wheel select like mechanic and the graphical look rather than the general gameplay itself (which when analysed plays like a choose your own adventure book)

If you compare this to games like say Cave Story, which has quite alot of depth for its type of game, or Spelunky, or even a game like Chime, then the shallowness shows.

This has been said many times elsewhere, but it looks like the group of games creators to follow is not the shallow, window dressing filled games pumped out by publishing houses (although you do get the odd exception in companies like Valve and games like Portal, which is back to basics puzzle solving) but with the indy developers, like Zombie Cow Studios (Ben there Dan That) or the people who did Chime, or the people who just created Amnesia: Dark Decent.

There are failures from this camp as well, sure, but it seems they keep more in line with simplicity, while allowing you to retain your free will and not tempt you with another "hook" of a game feature (I'm looking at you, Bioware and Dragon Age 2 - so having a player character thats locked to human and had a voice increases the "game interaction" does it?). So I guess what I'm saying is that big studio games could learn from independents, and not make the games they want, but make games that apply the keep it simple and gameplay is first elements.

What do you think?

I would second the specialistion suggestion - if you try being a jack of all trades then you will end up being semi good at everything, and this make it much tougher later on.

Also exploring / taking your time is a must. There is alot of humour / detail in both games, so you will get the best enjoyment if you chill out and play the game at your own pace etc.

Just something to wet your interest, look out for the hitchikers guide to the galaxy reference in the first game!

I don't like the fact that your going to have a locked human character. I can understand why they are doing it, as it will probably reach a more general fan base this way, but I liked the fact you could customise the main PC.

Just to try and isolate the problem further, do your games crash outside of steam?

If yes, then I'm wondering if the Ruse demo did something to DirectX. If no then its something in steam's subsystem thats gone wrong.