Header image

Why Duke should’ve stayed dead

PS3, Xbox 360, PC opinion by James Dewitt on 6th September 2010

My dad had a running bet with the rest of the family that there’d be a Terminator 3. This was back in 1995 or so, and the thought that Hollywood would make a sequel to it seemed unlikely. We cajoled him about it all the time. Didn’t Terminator 2 leave no dangling plot holes? Wasn’t it the apex of special effects technology and the action genre? It was always funny, until in 2003 it actually came out and we all had to judge it on its own merits. As circuitous an analogy as it is, I feel it’s similar to the strange and lengthy saga of Duke Nukem Forever.

As of September 3rd, 2010 AD it was announced that Gearbox is finishing up its legendarily long development. Every website has the news splashed on their front page. Duke is back, they say, and this time he’s brought an entire warehouse of bubble gum with him. Cue the usual cynical responses, nerd-gasms, and rhetorical questions like “Can it live up to the hype?” or “Is Duke still relevant?” I don’t know, do you consider the O.J. Simpson trial still relevant?

screenshot

Let me say that I have no real malice towards Duke, his programmers, or the fanbase that’s kept the king of alien a-kickers close to their heart after over a decade. I’m here to say that it’s in Duke’s best interest to either remain dead or permanently on hold. The best thing that can happen to Duke Nukem Forever is for it to never come out.

It’s important to see why people are even looking forward to the sequel in the first place. Though Duke already had several games under his belt, it wasn’t until 1996’s Duke Nukem 3D that he became a true gaming icon. The game came out at just the right time. It came out just after the DOOM heyday, and was enough of a technological leap to get people’s attention, but it was also under-the-wire just before true, polygonal 3D became the standard.

screenshot

Duke as a first-person shooter had a lot going for it. Crude humor, nudity, and buckets of gore went hand-in-hand. It typified everything that made a shooter great in 1996. Levels were varied and didn’t have to necessarily flow in a logical sense. The arsenal consisted of tactical fare like trip-bombs and pipe bombs along with sci-fi weaponry like the shrink ray and freeze ray which produced interesting, grisly effects on the enemies. Add on top of that pop-culture references, a protagonist that was an amalgamation of every square-jawed action hero from the ’90s, and of course gyrating strippers, and Duke Nukem 3D became an instant classic.

A sequel was announced in 1997, and the legend of Duke Nukem Forever was born. What followed was many years of ridicule and skepticism with a few blips on the radar happening once in a blue moon. Screenshots and a trailer would pop up once in a while, but otherwise the word was mum on Duke’s sequel. He still got the occasional gig—third-person shooters kept him busy, and even returned to his side-scrolling roots. But that’s not what the public was really craving. They wanted Duke, they wanted it in glorious 3D and in first-person to boot.

screenshot

The trials and tribulations of The Duke Nukem Forever Story have been written many times before and a synopsis is unnecessary. Its universality makes explanation pointless. Duke Nukem Forever is an idiom for development hell. Its been in production so long now that every gaming website has to convince gamers that Duke Nukem Forever is real, its playable, and some day over the rainbow it will occupy the disc tray in your PC, PlayStation 3 or Xbox 360. Hopefully.

Duke Nukem Forever has existed for so long as a myth and abstraction that it’s hard to imagine it ever having something so concrete as a demo, let alone a full, playable game. “When it’s done” has now been changed to “Just a little while longer.” The project can’t seem to be killed, not even a nasty lawsuit or having the original development team getting fired could do it.

screenshot

Which brings me to my point: Duke Nukem Forever is awesome as vaporware, and even better as a failed production. As a game, it will end up as much, much less. Had it come out several years prior, I probably wouldn’t be arguing this case, but the sequel was in development in 1997 and it’s 2010. It has gone beyond just a mere sequel with a protracted development cycle. Duke Nukem Forever is a myth. A story to tell children around a campfire on a dark night. A cautionary tale on the inflated ego and quest for perfectionism.

The myth is always more interesting than the reality. As a game, it will be played by consumers and critics, then thousands of opinions will flood the internet. It will be picked apart and dissected. Numbers and letter-grades will be assigned. Verbal jabs will be made at how it apes modern gaming cliches, or is a throwback, or strays too far away from the original or too little. In the end, it doesn’t matter if Duke Nukem Forever is the greatest or worst game ever. No matter how good it is, it will never be as good as the Duke Nukem Forever you’ve dreamed about for over a decade in your head.

screenshot

Had it stayed dead, the myth of Duke Nukem Forever would’ve grown even more. The what-ifs start to take over, and the imagination envisions how it was to be the pinnacle of the shooting experience. Weaponry becomes deadlier and the breasts of the strippers become all the riper. A game valiantly struggling for greatness, brought low by hubris and a world not yet ready for its brilliance. As a game, though, with load times and leaderboards and cutscenes, it no longer has those qualities. It’s just a video game now. What a terrible end for Duke Nukem Forever to actually come out.

Spread the word

About the author

James Dewitt is a Staff Writer at Thunderbolt, having joined in March 2010.

Comments

  • Cormac Murray

    6th September 2010

    Gravatar

    Very interesting point. It’s never going to be the game we dreamed about. It parallels with Guns ‘N Roses Chinese Democracy Album, made with virtually a different band, something far more significant in a musical group, and less to talk about once it’s out. It’s not as good when you see it. We want what we can’t have.

    But there’s nothing wrong with trying, even if it won’t be a game that was worth a 14 year wait. Come to think of it, most ends are an anti-climax. Yet dreams are there for achieving, even if the end product sucks, otherwise this world would be a completely different place. Development was hardly going to stop for the sake of a talking point.

  • Relayer71

    6th September 2010

    Gravatar

    Terminator 3 was surprisingly good.

  • Sean

    6th September 2010

    Gravatar

    Duke can obviously never live up to the expectations of over twelve years in development. Even when you finally get your hands on it, the game will be impossible to judge objectively as the mystique of the title and overall property has gone through so much and for so long.

    When I played it at the show I found it hard to really even judge the game as I was frankly happy to just be playing it. It was loud, it was crass, and it was Duke, but I couldn’t separate its checkered history from my time playing it.

    I get what you’re saying, but I think it’s best for everyone that this game is finally delivered - especially for Duke himself.

  • Calvin Kemph

    6th September 2010

    Gravatar

    Although I disagree with some of your reasoning, I enjoyed reading the article and felt it was well-written. I enjoyed my time spent with the game, regardless of all of the hype and press it’s attracted within the last 12 years and couldn’t be more happy to see that it’s on track for an eventual release.

  • Guymar Dudikoff

    6th September 2010

    Gravatar

    As a gamer, after 13/14 years, naturally I’m well past getting excited about a new Duke game. But, for closure it should come out. I think a better analogy for Duke is that one episode of The Critic where Jay enters a marathon and wheezes across the finish line like a week after the last runner and everyone’s stopped caring

  • JamesDew

    6th September 2010

    Gravatar

    Speaking of sequels, I’d wish they’d come out with another Blood game. And Shogo, those were good shooters.

  • Jeremy

    7th September 2010

    Gravatar

    I didn’t think anyone expected this game to cure cancer and put Valve’s FPS titles to shame. I just want to kick some alien pig ass and spout out funny one-liners. If DNF finally gives me that after 13 years of waiting, I call that a success.

  • M0nk3m4n

    1st February 2011

    Gravatar

    I think the Gearbox devs need to take a good long look at this post.
    As much as I want DNF, I have to agree. Very solid point to this.

  • My Name is Anonymous

    1st February 2011

    Gravatar

    What hype?

    We all know that Duke Nukem has been in development for over a decade. We also all know that it was a troubled production that was restarted several times.

    I personally don’t expect DNF to be a game changer, its not trying to change your perception of a what a video game can be. Its not trying to be Heavy Rain!

    As long as it contains guns, birds and aliens the core fans will be happy.

    Peace!

    P.S the comment that Terminator 3 was actualy not that bad is pure nonsense! It was awful!

Show the six other comments

Add your own comment »

You may also enjoy