So bottom line...
Is this game worth getting even if im in a neutral mood?
I dont particularly desire to play first person shooters atm but if there is a really good one id go for it...
Is DNF really good?

Seems to be getting abysmal reviews...

If you liked the original dukes, shooters that don't try to be realistic or take themselves seriously then sure. I am having a blast. If you want another COD clone then no, poor reviews are because the reviewer is another cod sheeple.

I have to contradict this. It's certainly not a cod clone but it has none of the charm or action of classic shooters.

Your right, played more. The fucking regen codlike health and limited weapons ruins it. There is some charm in the classic one liners (although the references are a little worn out) and some of the level design (like the duke burger).

I still think its a decent game. Would have better if it had not given in to some of the more modern FPS conventions.

Well how much weapons you can carry? 2? 3?

I don't like regening health. In dn3d, I made 100s and 100s of levels and one of the important elements was balancing health/monsters so that players has to fight carefully. Nothing like having to hunt down that last health pick and hoping that a drone doesn't pop out of some ceiling hatch.

We are not 'roided up superheroes who can deflect bullets with their sheer ego.

HP regen gives a much smoother gameplay experiance...
You no longer get into super hard situations just cause you were unlucky enough to end up with low hp and without medkits nearby before this next super hard battle...

I dont think hp regen is good for games like the SS series though...
Hp regen simulates the "shoot and duck for cover" mechanic in games, where you dont just go in shooting a million monsters left and right..

There are other alternatives, like a regen to a certain percentage or the ability to carry medkits.
Or hire decent level designers that give you health packs before hard parts.

And they used to have health kits, I coveted them.

I think you misqouted someone

Didnt play yet but why is the 2 weapons at a time thing bad?
Just because all the call of duty games did it to death?
I think especially in an action shooter like duke it can work since it makes the game even more lol: Say you only have the shrinker + rocket launcher and encounter some weaker enemies.
Normally you would just blast them with the shot gun but now you must use the rocket launcher and it will be total overkill!
imo that fits the game because it is just even more over the top to use weapon in such ways.
Unlike CoD where you can only chose between have automatic rifles and sniper, duke's weapon are more different.
For multi player it might also be great fun if you can not just use the most effective weapon all the time but instead have to come up with ways to make the most of, say pipe bombs and freeze gun.

Because on original DN3D you can have all weapons and i like this way

related : http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2011 ... eviews.ars

SO HOW IS IT IN MULTI??

and in original duke nukem you could only walk left and right and i like this way

I am fine with the weapons not happy about the health

One problem with the two weapons is that they're heavily regulating what weapon you can use when. Their ammo capacities are really damn low (the RPG can only hold 5 rockets!) so unless you get a refill around every corner you have to ditch it to make room for whatever weapon the devs feel like giving you at the moment. Got a favorite weapon you want to use? Tough luck, you won't get to use it!


You were just too damn unclear, I figured you were asking how much we real people can carry in order to justify the limit in the game.

Oh sorry. i thought you would know what i meant of the Weapons you could carry on that Game

Remembering my miliitary and asuming myself as "the only real people" this would mean nobody ever could carry a heavy maschine gun for more than 150 meters uphill without needing a longer break.

Heavy gun is heavy, damn those kids demanding realizm.