Duke Nukem 3D has now been certified by Microsoft and is ready for the big time, let’s rock. It seems like “forever” since we’ve seen a Duke Nukem game, even if this is simply a flashback to 1996. There were plenty of gamers that have an Xbox 360 now that didn’t get to play Duke Nukem 3D back then
This is a great time for younger gamers to experience an old school FPS in the days where we had to network our DOS systems together and play over IPX, before the Internet would bloom to where it is today. This version of Duke 3D has Xbox 360 achievements, so you can go back and re-live and re-achieve like never before.
“Murderous aliens have landed in futuristic Los Angeles, and humans suddenly find themselves atop the endangered species list. The odds are a million-to-one, just the way Duke likes it!”
It’s important to look back at some of our old games and replay them to see just how much we’ve advanced. It may not, however, be enough to make an old school gamer re-buy the game again. I find it odd that someone took the time to put energy into porting old Duke 3D and have yet to release Duke Nukem Forever, that was promoted back in 1997 is that next great Duke game. Where is it? Instead, we get a rehash of the last title. Interesting decision.
(Thanks, Kotaku)
@New Mass Effect 3 multiplayer rumors arise:
Jonah, I see what you mean. Co-op is the better kind of MP for a game that is thick on story. The alternative would be an MMO, but I believe that will require a lot more time to wrap up.
@Bethesda says Xbox 720 three years away:
Dunno. From a technical point of view, the components to make it already exist. So I am siding with Jonah, and say 2012.
Another reason for delays is shipping Windows 8. If MSFT wants to ship both Win 8 and the new console, then I can see the console being delayed by Win 8.
@QOTW:
Don’t think they qualify as board games, but: backgammon, remi.
I just wanted to weigh in on the console launch argument. Firstly, the N64 launched at $200, not $150. Secondly, I don’t believe inflation adjustment is a useful concept when thinking of the historic nature of console launches because the prices are fairly similar across time (for example the Atari 2600 was $200 in 1977 – same as the N64 nearly 20 years later).
Of course, historically, there have been expensive game consoles such as the Neo-Geo or the 3DO, but these were more boutique, high end machines. I think it is useful to compare the launch of the PS3 to these consoles. This was the mistake Sony made with the machine’s launch: They tried to sell a high end machine to a mass market that wasn’t willing to pay the high cost. I for one waited 3 years until it was finally at the same price the PS2 launched at. I considered that the effective launch of the console.
As with any piece of technology (unless it’s made by Apple) one can wait a certain amount of time for the product to come down in price to where the consumer is comfortable with the cost. Expecting a console to launch at $100, however, is unreasonable. This has not ever happened with the launch of any home console that I am aware of and certainly could not be done without a severe loss to the manufacturer on each unit. That being said, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect a new console to launch at $200-$300 dollars, even in the HD/3D/recession era we live in now.
Regarding the possibility of an Xbox 360 successor in 2012: I believe this is highly possible. I hardly think it would be “too soon” at that point considering the console will have been out for 7 years. In historic terms, this would be considered a long cycle. I think Microsoft may be weary of putting out a console too hastily considering that the 360 came out only 4 years after the original Xbox, and they really seem to be pushing their Kinect as an extension of the lifespan of the console, but a 7 year run seems quite reasonable to me. Also, it would be a prime opportunity to sucker punch the Nintendo Wii U and possibly get an early lead on the next console war.