On DNF

The Duke Nukem Forever Release Update on TotalVideoGames (thanks Mike Martinez) is another of those occasional pot-stirring stories about the long-time in-development shooter, based on a quote that was attempting to do just the opposite. The story reproduces a quote from 3D Realms' George Broussard explaining why they are staying low-key at this time, as he reveals that they are still not that close to completion:
“IMO, it's more abusive to the community to continue to talk about and show the game when it's not real close to release. What's the point of leading people on? The best thing we can, and should do, is to shut up, finish the game and start showing it and talking about it when it's near enough release that people can actually see light at the end of the tunnel.”
View : : :
122.
 
DNF
Jun 12, 2004, 02:31
DNF Jun 12, 2004, 02:31
Jun 12, 2004, 02:31
 
Being a developer, I know its pretty easy for a few problems in one area to affect the other. For example, they switched engines from Quake II to unreal, so they had to start all over. We saw the first video, it looked pretty cool. We saw the 2nd video which totally rocked at the time, and I have no clue why they didn't just finish it then (that was using unreal tech). Now, I've heard they are adding in normal mapping and other features to try and compete with doom3 style tech so if this is true, then they are redoing all the art AGAIN. I don't know how they can afford to keep working on it, duke3D and a few licenses must be padding their pockets well. Rest assured, it will rock when its done, in 2089... just joking there. I hope they finish it, I'm looking forward to it. I saw the prey engine first hand at E3 ages ago. It looked incredible back then. I even met the guy who programmed it... he died a few years later from asthma?? But shit happens in game development. My hats off to 3D Realms, they don't have to eat a publishers shit and make a crap game and conform to deadlines, so they aren't. If they have the cash to take 20 years, let them I say. Duke 3D might not have been true 3D, but it crushed Quake in terms of real game play, and interactivity. It was something that stuck out of the crowd of BS. It was like GTA, back then, because you could do anything and it had attitude. Now games are getting so much more expensive to develop and they take so much longer to make, its no wonder they are taking forever. They want it to stand out above the rest, so its going to take some time. Any more, people are so critical if one little thing isn't perfect your condemned. AI has to be top notch. Graphics need to be cutting edge. Sound has to have the latest sound buzz features..... Gameplay has to own everything else, then on top of all that it has to have internet play, be moddable, etc etc etc. Its a tough industry, and is only going to get tougher to compete in. My guess is they have made duke forever like 3-4 times now. Basically got it mostly done, then the graphics were inferior to other products out there, so they thought they could overhual it quickly, so they switched engines... but discovered some other cool things they could do with that, changed the design a bit... before you know it another two years got away from them, and its nowhere near done, then the doom3 bomb was dropped on everyone... so lets scramble to put normal mapping in... oh wait, physics and ragdoll is standard now... lets waste another year putting that in properly, and now the designers have to change all their entities and level designers need to make their levels actually use these features, lets rework them quick... but then someone makes a new level from scratch that really takes advantage of the phsyics and real time lighting... and all the old stuff is... well, old. A new standard is set, so you have to throw out the old. This can turn into a vicious cycle. Hopefully they will have the wisdom to say enough is enough and just finish it someday.

Date
Subject
Author
1.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
2.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
4.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
39.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
44.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
45.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
52.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
57.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
58.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
6.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
7.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
9.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
11.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
12.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
72.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
14.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
15.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
19.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
20.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
     Re: No subject
30.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
      Re: No subject
31.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
       Re: No subject
90.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
     Re: No subject
3.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
22.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
24.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
28.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
29.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
   Really...
94.
Jun 8, 2004Jun 8 2004
41.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
5.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
8.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
10.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
13.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
16.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
17.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
18.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
21.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
23.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
25.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
26.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
82.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
83.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
99.
Jun 8, 2004Jun 8 2004
    Re: Too Late
100.
Jun 8, 2004Jun 8 2004
     Haaaa
27.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
32.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
33.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
34.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
36.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
38.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
42.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
98.
Jun 8, 2004Jun 8 2004
101.
Jun 8, 2004Jun 8 2004
102.
Jun 8, 2004Jun 8 2004
      BWAHAHAAAA
113.
Jun 9, 2004Jun 9 2004
       Re: BWAHAHAAAA
35.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
37.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
43.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
46.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
47.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
48.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
49.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
51.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
50.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
53.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
59.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
60.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
76.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
61.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
62.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
69.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
70.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
71.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
55.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
56.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
64.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
63.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
66.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
68.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
73.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
74.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
75.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
78.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
79.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
 DNF
80.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
81.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
84.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
86.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
87.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
88.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
89.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
   Re: DNF
91.
Jun 7, 2004Jun 7 2004
92.
Jun 8, 2004Jun 8 2004
93.
Jun 8, 2004Jun 8 2004
95.
Jun 8, 2004Jun 8 2004
96.
Jun 8, 2004Jun 8 2004
97.
Jun 8, 2004Jun 8 2004
103.
Jun 8, 2004Jun 8 2004
104.
Jun 8, 2004Jun 8 2004
105.
Jun 8, 2004Jun 8 2004
106.
Jun 8, 2004Jun 8 2004
107.
Jun 8, 2004Jun 8 2004
108.
Jun 8, 2004Jun 8 2004
  .
109.
Jun 8, 2004Jun 8 2004
110.
Jun 8, 2004Jun 8 2004
111.
Jun 8, 2004Jun 8 2004
112.
Jun 9, 2004Jun 9 2004
116.
Jun 9, 2004Jun 9 2004
114.
Jun 9, 2004Jun 9 2004
115.
Jun 9, 2004Jun 9 2004
117.
Jun 10, 2004Jun 10 2004
118.
Jun 10, 2004Jun 10 2004
119.
Jun 11, 2004Jun 11 2004
120.
Jun 11, 2004Jun 11 2004
121.
Jun 11, 2004Jun 11 2004
 122.
Jun 12, 2004Jun 12 2004
DNF
125.
Jun 13, 2004Jun 13 2004
123.
Jun 12, 2004Jun 12 2004
124.
Jun 12, 2004Jun 12 2004