Slashdot Mirror


Ars Technica Review Slams Duke Nukem Forever

Kethinov writes "Ars Technica writes one of their most negative reviews of a game in a long time, referring to Duke Nukem Forever as 'barely playable' and 'one of the worst games from a major studio in quite some time. The jokes border on hateful. The graphics are a blurry mess. The shooting is unsatisfying.' Their verdict? Skip this one."

10 of 462 comments (clear)

  1. Apparently nobody told the new IP owner... by TWX · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...that the whole point was that it actually was planned to be a joke, hence, "Forever", and that they weren't supposed to be working on it for real. Their only task was to load the 3d rendering program and to build another fake "screenshot" with some new changes to the old "screenshot" so that it looked like they were doing something.

    They could have milked this another 20 years if they'd been smart, but NO, they had to go and actually try to build the thing...

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    1. Re:Apparently nobody told the new IP owner... by jcwayne · · Score: 4, Funny

      There's a movie in there somewhere. I know, we'll call it The Game Producers.

      --
      Failure to follow this advice may result in non-deterministic behavior.
  2. Re:duh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    It's reminding me of Daikatana. I guess George Broussard just made us his bitch.

  3. So... by softWare3ngineer · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...we should wait for the sequel then ?

  4. What's wrong with calling it Faggs? by kvvbassboy · · Score: 4, Funny
    I am no gamer and I have no idea what Nuke Dukem is, and but I was amused that the author of the review was offended by this.

    Duke Nukem Forever is the kind of game where you find a pack of cigarettes whose cover shows a mustached man wearing leather—and they're called "Faggs."

  5. Here's the good news... by Jawnn · · Score: 4, Funny

    I heard that Ewe Boll will be directing the feature film... [ducks]

  6. "Faggs" are an "officially protected victim class" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    One is only allowed to insult white males of Western European heritage - because they are an evil blight upon Gaia.

    And if they're Christians, you're even allowed to burn them alive.

    As long as you pay for your carbon credits.

  7. Re:duh? by Thud457 · · Score: 3, Funny

    even more recent titles such as Serious Sam

    heh.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  8. Released too soon! by ReverendLoki · · Score: 4, Funny

    It sounds like it could have used some more time in development...

    --
    09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
  9. Re:duh? by JWSmythe · · Score: 5, Funny

    Actually, Tits should be capitalized. God should not, unless it's the first word in a sentence.

    Breasts (Tits, Boobs, Boobies, Funbags, etc) are real. We've all seen them. Well, some of you have only seen pictures, and the shape in women's shirts. Some of you have touched them. We all know them, in their variety of shapes, sizes, and colors. They are categorized for their size and type. There are entire industries dedicated to supporting, decorating, and even marketing them. For those who can't see them normally, there is an abundance of establishments (Tittie Bars) where you can rent the privilege of seeing them.

    We even apply the term to other objects. Man Boobs, back Boobs, and the largest of them all, the Grand Tetons.

    This god myth is something else. You can't see it, touch it, hear it, or in any way recognize that it exists other than a few irrational assumptions. There may be one or more, depending on which piece of classical fiction people believe in. Some believe it looks like a man, a woman, or even a plate of spaghetti.

    Capitalize your favorite term for Breasts with pride. We all love Boobs!

    --
    Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.