Gearbox soliciting Duke Nukem Forever feedback
Gearbox has opened a survey to solicit feedback on Duke Nukem Forever. You can respond with your thoughts whether you played the game or not.
Duke Nukem Forever had a less-than-stellar critical reception, but who cares what critics think? Gearbox wants to know what you, the teeming masses of the Internet, thought of the game. A new survey is gauging feedback, most likely to make notes for future Duke games.
"Gearbox prides itself in listening to the community, and this is your chance to tell us how you feel about Duke Nukem Forever," the survey states. "You may participate in this survey if you have played or have not played Duke Nukem Forever." The survey itself lets you rank whether you liked individual aspects, like the sense of humor, puzzles, two-weapon inventory, and level design. If you didn't play DNF, the questions shift to your perception of the character and game.
Gearbox seems to have already rethought the two-weapon inventory, at least, since it issued a PC patch to expand the weapon slots shortly after release. Despite the reviews, Duke Nukem hit #2 on the NPD charts. Gearbox head Randy Pitchford recently said we'll hear about the company's own Duke game "soon," so feedback from this survey will probably be used when designing the next iteration of Duke Nukem. Giving your name and e-mail address will also enter you into a drawing for Gearbox swag.
Web denizens aren't exactly known for their thoughtful critiques, so Gearbox had the foresight to make the survey a simple checklist with numerical ratings. You won't find any blank spaces to write freely, which given the internet's taste for trolling, is probably wise.
-
Steve Watts posted a new article, Gearbox soliciting Duke Nukem Forever feedback.
Gearbox has opened a survey to solicit feedback on Duke Nukem Forever. You can respond with your thoughts whether you played the game or not.-
-
-
-
-
-
But don't you think it really should have been far more than what we got? Christ, I would have been thinking :
You were the first guy I thought of when I realized that the game wasn't going to live up to a fraction of what we expected. If I had the time I would've taken you out for beers and hookers just to cheer you up ;P -
-
-
-
-
-
That's actually a decent survey. They asked the questions they should have.
Unfortunately, the answering method limits the usefulness of the data in some cases.
Still, I'm glad to see them at least trying. It was a fun, if flawed, game, and it deserves the 6.5 I'd give it if I could do fractionals, but it's not quite a 7. -
The problem is it required you to get in a position that, if you were low on health, would get you killed just by trying. The better move was to hide behind cover, which broke the game out of the self-established character.
So I'm low on health and need to do something awesome. There should be ego boots for using the envoirnment to kill a baddie, kill streaks, and other "setups" that game design can provide to give you an incentive to run in guns blazing. (Hell, it could be so obvious as having the game highlight an enemy to kill, and if you do, you get a boost.) The EGO bit is a great idea, the problem is it just works like Halo.
The same can be said for 2 Weapon Inventory -- it CAN work. But you have to go whole hog. And personally, I think that works against Duke's weapon inventory. I want to have my shotty, RPG, and then bust the shrink ray out of no where for giggles. I don't want to ignore a goofy gun because I'd probably die if I didn't bring the more useufl one. Duke is about excess. Why try and fit the mold of 2 weps?
Linear levels? This is a survey thing. Are they really asking if we want Duke GTA or Duke 3D? Shouldn't a game desinger decide that?-
Sweet lord the first half of my post is missing. I was basically trying to say the survey wasn't worded well (it's tilting the responses). The second half was talking about Ego. It was a great idea, but executed poorly.
The survey just says "health regeneration." The issue isn't if gamers "like" health regeneration. It's whether or not you made it fun. EGO was a cool idea. I want to play a game where I'm always thinking "Man, I better do something cool so I don't die here." -
I agree with all of your points. Especially the question about linear game play... that shouldn't be on the survey. That's like asking a kid what his favorite soda is, and then mixing all the soft drinks together with the intention of creating The Best Drink Evar. Design is about a continual process of elimination from possibility to final product. Coke is Coke because they also didn't try to be Sprite and Mtn. Dew.
-
-
-
I wanted a "I like mature humor but it has to actually be funny and not grossly sexist" button.
Same for "base" or "tongue-in-cheek" humor. The whole way they have worded that survey makes me think someone decided that not being a fan of ridiculous sexism = not having a sense of humor.
BUT I GUESS I'M BEING A NEUROTIC SHREW
asshats. -
-
I liked that it was an expansive and varied single player experience, that was one of the best parts of the game. The humor was pretty lame in the end, they shouldn't have put so much time into it as it was pretty painfully bad at parts. It had good pacing. The concessions to newer trends such as regenerating health and a two weapon system did the game no favors. The platforming and puzzles were great and really brought back an element missing from single player FPS nowadays.
The game should have made you feel like a badass, I think it failed at pulling that off with the general gameplay. They could have done more with the full body awareness in that respect also. Speaking of that, the context sensitive combat related actions are not as good as being able to do these things of your own accord. I don't want to perform the action when the game wants me to, I want to perform it any time.
Also I hate to say it but the explosions were disappointing. Duke 3D had explosions out the ass where the screen would shake, and the effects were stunning and big. They were weak as hell in this game and most games. -
I'm a bit confused as to why Mr. Pitchford is even asking this. He KNOWS full well what the game was and what peoples expectations were.
Now I seriously doubt said expectations could have ever been met but what we got was little more than a banal, by-the-numbers FPS that I couldn't even bring myself to finish.
C'mon Randy, you know better than to even ask this. -
Can't take the survey since my hopes to buy DNF were dashed after trying the demo. Boooooriiiinnng. And from my experience with the demo the interactive environments were little more than specific set peices for certain segments of the game and not something that lent itself to true organic, sandbox gameplay as in HL2, Far Cry, or , of course, DN3D. Very disappointing yet not surprised the outcome considering DNF's history.
-
-
Really wish there was an option to let them know that I strongly disliked how the gameplay was constantly interrupted by story elements.
I love a good story in my games, but it shouldn't ever require pinning the player down for long stretches in order to tell it. Also, of course, it should be a story worth telling. If you're just gonna pen a shitty story on a napkin overnight, then I'd prefer gameplay over story.