The Energon Pub

http://www.1up.com/news/rumor-duke-nukem-forever-gearbox

No, your eyes do not deceive you. Duke Nukem Forever is back, at least in unconfirmed rumor form, but if those rumors turn out true we'll all be playing some portion of it sooner than anyone could in their right mind have possibly thought. According to Kotaku, various anonymous sources now say that Duke Nukem Forever is now in development at Gearbox, the developer behind Borderlands, and one source even said a demo could be available before the end of the year.

For those who need a quick refresher, Duke Nukem Forever had been in development at 3D Realms since 1997 (for perspective, that was the year Batman & Robin came out), until the game's future was made less clear than ever when the development team at 3D Realms was disbanded last year. But now, if this new rumor is accurate, evidently the project remains alive with Gearbox (which, you may recall, was apparently at one point developing a now-canceled Duke spin-off called Duke Begins).

Of course, whether this rumor is accurate remains to be seen, as a wave of "no comments" has been issued by all interested parties. Take-Two confirmed to Kotaku that they retain the publishing rights to the game, but didn't comment on whether Gearbox was now working on it. 3D Realms founder George Broussard -- who had long been leading development on Duke Nukem Forever -- didn't respond either, and Gearbox president Randy Pitchford also declined to comment, although he curiously said that he might be able to "clarify the situation" at the Penny Arcade Expo in September.

In the meanwhile, it looks like a glimmer of hope -- if only a glimmer -- remains for one of the most storied projects in videogame history.

"No comment" does not mean "no"...

EDIT:

No longer a rumor.

I think we'll see Arnold Schwarzenegger making the movie Hamlet based on that dream from Last Action Hero before this overrated over-hyped game which is no longer relevant to the industry get released.
And should it ever do come out it better be "the revolutionary" and "genre reinventing" game it's been advertised to us since 97, but then again that game never existed and consisted of nothing more than fake screen shots based on the Quake level editor and a fake "trailer".

Dead Metal wrote:overrated over-hyped game

You've never played it, how do you know it was overrated?

Dead Metal wrote:which is no longer relevant to the industry get released.

Define "relevant" in this case. It's a video game, how can it be irrelevant to the video game industry?

Dead Metal wrote:And should it ever do come out it better be "the revolutionary" and "genre reinventing" game it's been advertised to us since 97

It's going to be an FPS with Doom levels of blood starring a stereotypical action hero spouting off one-liners while enjoying strippers and beer, and blowing aliens' heads open with a shotgun. Just like it's always been. And it will be glorious.

Shadowman wrote:

Dead Metal wrote:overrated over-hyped game

You've never played it, how do you know it was overrated?

Due to the fact that every time the "developers" talked about it they described it as a world changing experience, which won't ever happen. Remember Daikatana?

Shadowman wrote:

Dead Metal wrote:which is no longer relevant to the industry get released.

Define "relevant" in this case. It's a video game, how can it be irrelevant to the video game industry?

It's born in the 90's, the whole concept of it is very 90's, shooters have changed from then, Duke Nukem no longer works for the shooter genre unless they re-invent the series and update it for todays genre fans, just like Turok and look how that turned out.

Shadowman wrote:

Dead Metal wrote:And should it ever do come out it better be "the revolutionary" and "genre reinventing" game it's been advertised to us since 97

It's going to be an FPS with Doom levels of blood starring a stereotypical action hero spouting off one-liners while enjoying strippers and beer, and blowing aliens' heads open with a shotgun. Just like it's always been. And it will be glorious.

Turok and that is if the game ever comes out and if it does it will only disappoint. Yatzee put it best.

man i hope it comes out. 13 years is to long to wait for a game. but im still excited. Duke Nukem is one of my favorite game series. he pissed off my feminist mom so much, it was pants wettingly hillarious

and IMHO, i think gearbox is an excellent company for a FPS like duke nukem, they did such a good job with borderlands

Dead Metal wrote:

Shadowman wrote:

Dead Metal wrote:which is no longer relevant to the industry get released.

Define "relevant" in this case. It's a video game, how can it be irrelevant to the video game industry?

It's born in the 90's, the whole concept of it is very 90's, shooters have changed from then, Duke Nukem no longer works for the shooter genre unless they re-invent the series and update it for todays genre fans, just like Turok and look how that turned out.

Game series that were made in the '90s and are still successful to this day:

Pokemon
Starcraft
Half-Life
Doom
Mortal Kombat
Dead or Alive
Resident Evil
Super Smash Bros.
Fallout
Silent Hill
Legacy of Kain
Team Fortress
Unreal
Quake
Grand Theft Auto

And that's just a few. You see where I'm going with this? The year of original release has absolutely no bearing on the quality of the latest title in the series.

So how exactly does Duke "not work" for the shooter genre? What does the shooter genre require for a game to "work?"

Shadowman wrote:

Dead Metal wrote:

Shadowman wrote:

Dead Metal wrote:which is no longer relevant to the industry get released.

Define "relevant" in this case. It's a video game, how can it be irrelevant to the video game industry?

It's born in the 90's, the whole concept of it is very 90's, shooters have changed from then, Duke Nukem no longer works for the shooter genre unless they re-invent the series and update it for todays genre fans, just like Turok and look how that turned out.

Game series that were made in the '90s and are still successful to this day:

Pokemon
Starcraft
Half-Life
Doom
Mortal Kombat
Dead or Alive
Resident Evil
Super Smash Bros.
Fallout
Silent Hill
Legacy of Kain
Team Fortress
Unreal
Quake
Grand Theft Auto

And that's just a few. You see where I'm going with this? The year of original release has absolutely no bearing on the quality of the latest title in the series.

So how exactly does Duke "not work" for the shooter genre? What does the shooter genre require for a game to "work?"

The games you listed have been seeing new releases on a regular basis since their start, none of them had a 13+ year long wait between releases. While Legacy of Kain is still kind of popular that will sadly not be continued any time soon. All the games on that list have had releases which slightly changed the series and kept them fresh and in the public eye.
Duke Nukem on the other hand has had nothing since 97, the concept is very 90's in style and execution the only people that even still care for him are a few (relatively speaking) hard core fans that will hate DN Forever (should it ever do come out) when it gets updated to today's standards and those that mock the game due to it never coming out.
What do people want from a shooter these days?
"Mature" game play
"Realistic" execution
"Gritty" story telling
"Serious" no nonsense characters

Basically stale boring 1 Dimensional Halo/Gears of War rip-off macho roid dudes in body armor. While Duke has real character and lives in a world that was cool in the 90's and hasn't been updated aqnd seen since. It's like making a direct sequel to the Gobots show from the 80's, they where real popular back in the day but are dead to today's audience.

Dead Metal wrote:The games you listed have been seeing new releases on a regular basis since their start, none of them had a 13+ year long wait between releases.

Uh, no. There was a 12 year wait between StarCraft Brood War and StarCraft II, a 10 year wait between Team Fortress 1 and 2, a 7 year wait between Doom 64 and Doom 3, a 7 year wait between Super Smash Bros. Melee and Brawl, a 10 year wait between Fallout 2 and 3. And so on.

Oh, and it's been 13 years since DNF was announced. Not since the last release in the series. Duke Nukem: Time to Kill was released in 1998, Duke Nukem: Land of the Babes was released in 2000, and Duke Nukem Advanced was released in 2002.

Dead Metal wrote:the concept is very 90's in style and execution the only people that even still care for him are a few (relatively speaking) hard core fans that will hate DN Forever (should it ever do come out) when it gets updated to today's standards and those that mock the game due to it never coming out.

This is all just baseless assumptions. It's a gritty one-liner spewing action hero who shoots up aliens. It's a method used in nearly every Sci-Fi shooter ever made.

And how do you know Duke Nukem fans will hate DNF? We know very little about the game, but even then, how do you know Duke Nukem fans will hate it? Do you have telepathy?

Dead Metal wrote:What do people want from a shooter these days?
"Mature" game play
"Realistic" execution
"Gritty" story telling
"Serious" no nonsense characters

You ever play Painkiller? It was one of few games that Yahtzee gave a good review. It has no story worth mentioning, no real characterization, hell, there's nothing to explain the changes in scenery. And it's one of less than a dozen good reviews from Zero Punctuation, who claimed "if you go more than a minute between gruesome murders, you're doing it wrong." You have a crossbow that shoots out trees for God's sake.

On the flip side, the games making up the Orange Box. Again, one of Yahtzee's good reviews. He called Portal "perfect" and yet it doesn't meet any of your requirements. The same with Team Fortress 2, and that's the exact opposite of everything you mentioned.

How about Halo? Nothing about it is realistic, the character never speaks in gameplay and outside is typically very quite, though he has a love of sarcasm ("I thought I'd try shooting my way out. Mix things up a little") and the story in the games is sub-par compared to the novels based on the games.

How about BioShock? Gritty storytelling, maybe, Intelligent storytelling, yes. Realistic gameplay, none, maturity, I shot a swarm of bees at a guy then shot him with a supersoaker filled with napalm.

Ooh, let's go with Borderlands. Calling it mature or realistic or no-nonsense would be an outright lie.

Also, Serious Sam is anything but.

Shadowman wrote:

Dead Metal wrote:The games you listed have been seeing new releases on a regular basis since their start, none of them had a 13+ year long wait between releases.

Uh, no. There was a 12 year wait between StarCraft Brood War and StarCraft II, a 10 year wait between Team Fortress 1 and 2, a 7 year wait between Doom 64 and Doom 3, a 7 year wait between Super Smash Bros. Melee and Brawl, a 10 year wait between Fallout 2 and 3. And so on.

Oh, and it's been 13 years since DNF was announced. Not since the last release in the series. Duke Nukem: Time to Kill was released in 1998, Duke Nukem: Land of the Babes was released in 2000, and Duke Nukem Advanced was released in 2002.

So I was wrong on the release time. With StarCraft the game staid popular due to it having annual competitions and playing it is a serious job in Korea, due do these things it stayed
popular and in the public eye.
And how well where the last Duke games received?

Dead Metal wrote:the concept is very 90's in style and execution the only people that even still care for him are a few (relatively speaking) hard core fans that will hate DN Forever (should it ever do come out) when it gets updated to today's standards and those that mock the game due to it never coming out.

This is all just baseless assumptions. It's a gritty one-liner spewing action hero who shoots up aliens. It's a method used in nearly every Sci-Fi shooter ever made.

And how do you know Duke Nukem fans will hate DNF? We know very little about the game, but even then, how do you know Duke Nukem fans will hate it? Do you have telepathy?

I said they'll hate it if it's updated to today's shooter standards eg changing most of it.

Dead Metal wrote:What do people want from a shooter these days?
"Mature" game play
"Realistic" execution
"Gritty" story telling
"Serious" no nonsense characters

You ever play Painkiller? It was one of few games that Yahtzee gave a good review. It has no story worth mentioning, no real characterization, hell, there's nothing to explain the changes in scenery. And it's one of less than a dozen good reviews from Zero Punctuation, who claimed "if you go more than a minute between gruesome murders, you're doing it wrong." You have a crossbow that shoots out trees for God's sake.

On the flip side, the games making up the Orange Box. Again, one of Yahtzee's good reviews. He called Portal "perfect" and yet it doesn't meet any of your requirements. The same with Team Fortress 2, and that's the exact opposite of everything you mentioned.

How about Halo? Nothing about it is realistic, the character never speaks in gameplay and outside is typically very quite, though he has a love of sarcasm ("I thought I'd try shooting my way out. Mix things up a little") and the story in the games is sub-par compared to the novels based on the games.

How about BioShock? Gritty storytelling, maybe, Intelligent storytelling, yes. Realistic gameplay, none, maturity, I shot a swarm of bees at a guy then shot him with a supersoaker filled with napalm.

Ooh, let's go with Borderlands. Calling it mature or realistic or no-nonsense would be an outright lie.

Also, Serious Sam is anything but.

Notice that I used "" on those words, indicating irony? Meaning that what you explained to me was the exact point i was making?
OK so maybe people still enjoy comedic games, still think this will never happen and if it does it will tank due to not being the be all end all game they made us believe it would.
But in order for it to come out they will have to start working on it, which is hilarious considering they haven't done that for the past 13 years.

Dead Metal wrote:OK so maybe people still enjoy comedic games, still think this will never happen and if it does it will tank due to not being the be all end all game they made us believe it would.

For the millionth time, how do you know that? You haven't played it, you haven't seen gameplay footage or screenshots or even a trailer, how do you know the quality of the game? None of your arguments make sense.

A game isn't good or bad based on the year of it's original release.

A game doesn't become hated simply because it hasn't been in the public eye recently.

A game isn't bad because the developer slacked off causing a different developer entirely to take over. Which is what this thread is about.

Dead Metal wrote:But in order for it to come out they will have to start working on it, which is hilarious considering they haven't done that for the past 13 years.

Who is "they?" You're acting as if we're only talking about one dev team. You read gaming news much? 3D Realms, the original team, was shut down due to their slacking off on developing DNF. This thread is about the rumor that Gearbox Software is possibly working on it. (Just a rumor, but they didn't say "no") They were responsible for Half-Life: Opposing Force, Brothers in Arms, and Borderlands, and are currently working on Aliens: Colonial Marines. (Which I had heard was canceled but apparently is still in development)

Seriously, stop. You're making baseless assumptions about a game you haven't seen.

Dead Metal wrote:And how well where the last Duke games received?

Duke Nukem Advance actually got really good reviews. 9/10 from IGN, 7.5/10 from Gamespot, 91 from GameSpy.

Shadowman wrote:

Dead Metal wrote:OK so maybe people still enjoy comedic games, still think this will never happen and if it does it will tank due to not being the be all end all game they made us believe it would.

For the millionth time, how do you know that? You haven't played it, you haven't seen gameplay footage or screenshots or even a trailer, how do you know the quality of the game? None of your arguments make sense.

A game isn't good or bad based on the year of it's original release.

A game doesn't become hated simply because it hasn't been in the public eye recently.

A game isn't bad because the developer slacked off causing a different developer entirely to take over. Which is what this thread is about.

I never said the game (if ever released) would be bad or hate due to it not being in the public eye for a long time. I'm simply saying that the only people who actually still care for the game might not like if it's been changed too much to fit into the current market. And that ultimately people will not really care for it all too much as it won't live up to the hype that's been surrounding it for the past 13 years.

Dead Metal wrote:But in order for it to come out they will have to start working on it, which is hilarious considering they haven't done that for the past 13 years.

Who is "they?" You're acting as if we're only talking about one dev team. You read gaming news much? 3D Realms, the original team, was shut down due to their slacking off on developing DNF. This thread is about the rumor that Gearbox Software is possibly working on it. (Just a rumor, but they didn't say "no") They were responsible for Half-Life: Opposing Force, Brothers in Arms, and Borderlands, and are currently working on Aliens: Colonial Marines. (Which I had heard was canceled but apparently is still in development)

I know that 3D realms used to claim they where working on it but due to a lack of funding they axed the DNF team and many of their employees and for a time where said to no longer operate, I also know that there was a huge fit due to the DN license and that the DNF team wanted to buy all rights relating to DN, which was when I stopped caring and direct my attention to more interesting things.

I know this thread is about an unconfirmed and desperate rumor and I only commented on it stating what my opinion on the matter was.

Seriously, stop. You're making baseless assumptions about a game you haven't seen.

You started it, you're the one that's assuming this game that officially has never existed is going to be glorious and you say I'm making baseless assumptions

Dead Metal wrote:And how well where the last Duke games received?

Duke Nukem Advance actually got really good reviews. 9/10 from IGN, 7.5/10 from Gamespot, 91 from GameSpy.

Should check it out then.

Dead Metal wrote:You started it, you're the one that's assuming this game that officially has never existed is going to be glorious and you say I'm making baseless assumptions

Did I ever say this game would be good? I don't think I did. In fact, I think I've been arguing more on the fact that we don't know enough about it to write it off as "over rated."

I have been waiting for this game since 98 when it comes out I will buy it definately I've been a Duke fan since I got Duke Nukem 64 for my N-64 for christmas along with several Transformers beastwars figures most notably RazorBeast I miss that stuff

Well, Take 2 sued 3d Realms for not having that game put out (I think giving them money to make it), so I assume that they still want to have their money's worth. I don't think they will be dropping the making of this game.

Besides, Kotaku doesn't just jump on any fanboy rumours, otherwise they'd lose their esteemed reputation. I think this rumour has a grain of truth.

I also think they updated the game's theme somewhat, the monsters look darker and scarier (even the PigCops, or in this case, PigSoldiers), so it shouldn't be stuck in the 90s. Though he does drop a lot more F-bombs in the old Previews then I'm used to...
(Though I guess with the PigSoldiers, since the Aliens have already mutated the Police, they are moving onto the Para-Military and Military now )

I will be excited to play this game when it comes out, and definately wanting to own a copy. I have been hoping for this game for years, I am looking quite forward to it if/when it comes out.

I used to be a huge fan of 3D. In fact, I still rate it among my favourite games and it'll never be replaced as my favourite FPS. Quake never had a foothold on Duke Nukem, even with all of its modifiability. I still remember my first online 1-on-1 deathmatch. Exciting when you're laying a pipebomb trap and the guy who's way better than you spots your hiding place and jetpacks up and through the window to blast you.

Still, I think Gearbox has a HUGE mountain to climb to make this game worth the 13-year wait (or 14, 15, whatever year it comes out). It's probably the most infamous game-that-isn't-a-game-that-might-still-be-a-game in recent history, probably the most infamous vapourware ever. Gearbox has a huge task ahead of them and it better not be a clunker.

I'm not saying this game will be good, bad, or ugly, but I will say Gearbox is brave.

And it isn't a rumor anymore.

Amid swirling rumors of a PAX reveal, Gearbox has finally confirmed that they've taken the reins on Duke Nukem Forever. Gearbox founder Randy Pitchford delivered the news today, just as word hit the Wall Street Journal and eager gamers lined up at PAX to try the game for themselves. A live stream from 2K is still (as of now) showing off footage of the hands-on players.

"The approach and investment and process at 3d Realms didn't quite make it and it cracked in the end," said Pitchford in the WSJ interview. "With Gearbox Software we brought all of those pieces together. It's the game it was meant to be." The report claims the game is expected to ship in 2010, and Pitchford says it's in the "polishing" stage. But they're still working on a launch plan so he's hesitant to commit to a date.

And just because it's not as good as it's been boasted for the last decade doesn't mean it's going to be bad. The bar was set so high that even if it falls short, it's still going to be good.

I just find it funny because the latest episode of Zero Punctuation was a parody of a review about how people still care about this game even though it is never going to come out. http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/ ... em-Forever

ChrisRiss wrote:even though it is never going to come out.

Dude, did you read either of the articles? They had a playable demo at PAX. They're almost done making it. It's set to be released this year. This isn't the same development team anymore.

Shadowman wrote:

ChrisRiss wrote:even though it is never going to come out.

Dude, did you read either of the articles? They had a playable demo at PAX. They're almost done making it. It's set to be released this year. This isn't the same development team anymore.

I realize that, I was trying to say that he was reviewing it as if it was never going to come out.

ChrisRiss wrote:I realize that, I was trying to say that he was reviewing it as if it was never going to come out.

Ah, I see. Well, at the time, you could hardly blame anyone for thinking it wasn't coming out and that 3D Realms was only saying it was so they could still get paid. But now Gearbox has it, and anyone who made Borderlands can't be bad.

EDIT: GameInformer says it's good.

-Duke runs across a huge three-breasted demon. In classic Duke style, he says, "I'd still hit it."

While there was a time I anxiously awaited Duke Nukem forever, that ended at least 8 years ago with the project becoming one of the longest running jokes in video game history. If the game actually does come out, I'll probably still check it out but I just don't see it living up to its development time, its hype, or any current standard for greatness.

Fingers crossed, mind you. But I foresee a fairly generic FPS that will be too afraid to go for the full 'Duke-ishness' that we want and cater to a more conservative demographic in hoping of reaching the masses instead of the dedicated fanbase. In all fairness, I still wouldn't mind seeing a current gen rendition of the OctaBrain or Pig cops.

Not only was it playable at PAX the line to try it was one of the longest on the entire showfloor.

While I didn't get to give it a try, (as I didn't have a few hours to spare for the attempt) I did get a jar of Duke's Steroids. (mints)