 |
These are the messages that have been posted on inthe00s over the past few years.
Check out the messageboard archive index for a complete list of topic areas.
This archive is periodically refreshed with the latest messages from the current messageboard.
This is a topic from the The 1990's forum on inthe00s.
Check for new replies or respond here...
Subject: 1995 - the real midpoint for video games?
Written By: Marty McFly on 06/21/07 at 2:58 pm
I saw some commercials on shows I taped that year, and I was kinda surprised to find ads for Playstation games. In that respect, it was like the very beginning of the 3-D gaming era, even if it was very much a "hot new thing" and wouldn't really catch on for awhile. It doesn't even seem that different from today if you look at it in a technological sense that way, especially with the beginning of people knowing what the Internet was and starting to use it (some games like Doom were PC-dominated).
However, on the other hand, the 1995 and '96 time and even residually through the late '90s, was like the last gasp for arcades being a popular hangout place. There were also still commercials for Super NES games (on that same tape!), and even the original NES was popular enough for lots of people to still have it hooked up. Even if by then, there weren't any new games being produced.
Subject: Re: 1995 - the real midpoint for video games?
Written By: Step-chan on 06/21/07 at 7:37 pm
95 was sort of a unsure point for me video game wise, I was still playing my older systems(which I still do today).
Subject: Re: 1995 - the real midpoint for video games?
Written By: Marty McFly on 06/22/07 at 10:54 am
Yeah, I actually still have my NES and Super Nintendo systems hooked up today (even if I obviously don't have as much time to play the way I did when I was, say 9, lol)! I did have an in-limbo period where I was burned out on video games altogether, just from almost daily, constant playing in the second half of the '90s before I got back into it in about 2001.
I'd say 1987-'91 was the "peak" NES era, which was popular enough to residually last through 1994 (Nintendo Power still devoted sections to it, even if it was declining a little bit at a time after the SNES was released). The 3D era with the N64 and original Playstation didn't really seem to take off to the extent of most people owning them until c. 1997.
The mid '90s did seem to be a little break in between the two eras (although since I wasn't playing them at the time, I could be slightly wrong).
Subject: Re: 1995 - the real midpoint for video games?
Written By: mach!ne_he@d on 06/22/07 at 12:15 pm
Yeah, 1995 was the turning point for video games. The Playstation and Sega Saturn were both released that year in the U.S. and they really took off right away. On the other hand, like you said Marty, it was quite a few years before a 3D system became something that everyone had. The first video game system I ever owned was the SNES, which I got in Christmas '92. I didn't even own a 3D system until I got my N64 in 1998. It was around that time that you really started to see 2D games disappear from store shelves.
I would divide the era's like this:
2D era:1972-1997
3D era:1998-Present
Subject: Re: 1995 - the real midpoint for video games?
Written By: Marty McFly on 06/23/07 at 5:46 pm
^ Yeah, you may be right about that. I think the 2D era's peak stopped after 1991 and declined a little more with each year, but was big enough to last up till the late '90s, even in hand-me-downs, for instance. Like, playing an NES game in 1997 would've merely looked a little old, but it wasn't that uncommon. I was out of the scene personally at the time, and was generally too busy to play them by that point (my home entertainment was either the computer or TV, lol), but I remember it being like this.
I do wonder if the Internet and the rise of digital tech kinda had a hand in further killing off the appeal of old-school 2D games?
Subject: Re: 1995 - the real midpoint for video games?
Written By: mach!ne_he@d on 06/24/07 at 11:27 am
^ Yeah, you may be right about that. I think the 2D era's peak stopped after 1991 and declined a little more with each year, but was big enough to last up till the late '90s, even in hand-me-downs, for instance. Like, playing an NES game in 1997 would've merely looked a little old, but it wasn't that uncommon. I was out of the scene personally at the time, and was generally too busy to play them by that point (my home entertainment was either the computer or TV, lol), but I remember it being like this.
I do wonder if the Internet and the rise of digital tech kinda had a hand in further killing off the appeal of old-school 2D games?
Yeah, I think the internet may have had a hand in it. When the Sega Dreamcast came out in 1999, it was the first game system to allow online play, so that may have killed the appeal of 2D games a little quicker. And no, it wasn't uncommon to see someone playing an NES game in the mid or late '90s at all. In fact I didn't even get an NES until 1995, up until that point I had just played it at my cousins house.
And yeah, I would say that the 2D era peaked right around the late '80s/early '90s, when the NES' popularity was dying down a bit, and everyone was anticipating the release of the 16 bit systems.
Marty, would you agree that one of the biggest factors in 2D games dying out was the fact that they were abandoned so quick in the late '90s, that someone born after 1993 or so really wouldn't have had any experience with them at all? I mean, I know that alot of older people play games today, but kids are still are a huge consumer of games, and unless you were born before 1992 or so, your first video game system was likely a PS1, or N64 unless you had maybe an older brother or something like that.
From my experience it seems like very few of kids today have any experience with 2D games.
Subject: Re: 1995 - the real midpoint for video games?
Written By: JamieMcBain on 06/24/07 at 1:25 pm
I would have to agree that the midpoint was 1995.
Subject: Re: 1995 - the real midpoint for video games?
Written By: Step-chan on 06/24/07 at 3:31 pm
I know there was a game I was wanting to come out around that time that never did.
That was Dragon Quest/Warrior 6.
Subject: Re: 1995 - the real midpoint for video games?
Written By: Marty McFly on 06/24/07 at 11:29 pm
^ Yeah, I'm a pretty big Dragon Warrior fan myself, especially the first 3. Too bad that never actually came out.
Yeah, I think the internet may have had a hand in it. When the Sega Dreamcast came out in 1999, it was the first game system to allow online play, so that may have killed the appeal of 2D games a little quicker. And no, it wasn't uncommon to see someone playing an NES game in the mid or late '90s at all. In fact I didn't even get an NES until 1995, up until that point I had just played it at my cousins house.
And yeah, I would say that the 2D era peaked right around the late '80s/early '90s, when the NES' popularity was dying down a bit, and everyone was anticipating the release of the 16 bit systems.
Marty, would you agree that one of the biggest factors in 2D games dying out was the fact that they were abandoned so quick in the late '90s, that someone born after 1993 or so really wouldn't have had any experience with them at all? I mean, I know that alot of older people play games today, but kids are still are a huge consumer of games, and unless you were born before 1992 or so, your first video game system was likely a PS1, or N64 unless you had maybe an older brother or something like that.
From my experience it seems like very few of kids today have any experience with 2D games.
Yeah, that sounds accurate. Unless it's from an older sibling, or maybe if they have a younger uncle or parents who played them when they were popular, anyone born from 1993 or '94+ probably would have no experience of 2D games firsthand. They also would be the first people to more or less only have remembered a world with the Internet dominating. Sure, in 1997 it was primitive compared to today. The cameraphone and Ipod were still a few years away, but 3D and digital tech were relatively popular. Those kids would be no older than 3 or 4 at the time, so their memory probably starts then!
Early '90s babies seem like the last vaguely "analog age-influenced" people whom I can usually kinda relate to as the youngest end of my generation. Sure, they seem pretty young to me (well, 1992ers are or will turn 15 this year, so they're not that young anymore) but they're old enough to get a taste for old-school games, or the waning days of VHS and cassettes in their earlier childhood and the initial excitement of the 'Net. Especially since so many young kids seemed to be into the more accessible pop culture around Y2K, like Pokemon or boy bands.
Of course it depends on the person, but anyone beyond that still seems like little kids to me from the limited experience I've had. A few years ago, my at-the-time girlfriend's nephew who was about 9 then and was a '94er I believe, thought I was such an old dude when I said how I'd played the original Nintendo at his age (he actually thought the N64 was the first system to come out until I explained it, lol).
Subject: Re: 1995 - the real midpoint for video games?
Written By: JamieMcBain on 06/25/07 at 8:44 am
Duke Nukem Forever, still hasn't come out yet.
Subject: Re: 1995 - the real midpoint for video games?
Written By: mach!ne_he@d on 06/25/07 at 3:33 pm
Yeah, that sounds accurate. Unless it's from an older sibling, or maybe if they have a younger uncle or parents who played them when they were popular, anyone born from 1993 or '94+ probably would have no experience of 2D games firsthand. They also would be the first people to more or less only have remembered a world with the Internet dominating. Sure, in 1997 it was primitive compared to today. The cameraphone and Ipod were still a few years away, but 3D and digital tech were relatively popular. Those kids would be no older than 3 or 4 at the time, so their memory probably starts then!
Early '90s babies seem like the last vaguely "analog age-influenced" people whom I can usually kinda relate to as the youngest end of my generation. Sure, they seem pretty young to me (well, 1992ers are or will turn 15 this year, so they're not that young anymore) but they're old enough to get a taste for old-school games, or the waning days of VHS and cassettes in their earlier childhood and the initial excitement of the 'Net. Especially since so many young kids seemed to be into the more accessible pop culture around Y2K, like Pokemon or boy bands.
Of course it depends on the person, but anyone beyond that still seems like little kids to me from the limited experience I've had. A few years ago, my at-the-time girlfriend's nephew who was about 9 then and was a '94er I believe, thought I was such an old dude when I said how I'd played the original Nintendo at his age (he actually thought the N64 was the first system to come out until I explained it, lol).
Yeah, I've got some younger cousins who have really only know 3D games. I actually kinda feel sorry for a gamer born after 1993 or so, because to one of them 3D games have always been around, so they will never know how cool it was to play a 3D game for the first time. When I played a Sega Saturn Demo at our local mall back in '96(about a year or so after it came out) I thought it was the coolest thing I had ever seen :D.
The kids from the early '90s seem to have a pretty good understanding of the "analog age". Even if some of the younger ones don't specifically remember it, things like VHS, cassette tapes, and the importance of the internet wont really be lost on them. Anybody born after 1994 or so wont really have much appreciation for all that stuff. To them DVD and MP3's has always been around. Also, to people born '94+ the internet is something that has always been there, so I don't know if they will really appreciate how important it really is.
Like these days, if a kid has a report for school to do, for as far back as they can remember they've been able to just get on the internet at there house and look up what they need, but I remember even as like 1999 or 2000, alot of us still had to go to the library or something to do research because alot of our parents still didn't have internet access. We didn't get it here until I was 13.
Subject: Re: 1995 - the real midpoint for video games?
Written By: Step-chan on 06/25/07 at 4:55 pm
^ Yeah, I'm a pretty big Dragon Warrior fan myself, especially the first 3. Too bad that never actually came out.
Although it is possible to play it now, because there is a fan translation of it, just need to download the proper things(but doing that makes me nervous).
Subject: Re: 1995 - the real midpoint for video games?
Written By: ultraviolet52 on 06/25/07 at 5:35 pm
I agree with 1995 being a good mid-point, yet at that time I stopped playing video games. I was still playing Sega Genesis or the Sega 32X, which was kinda a flop, but we still had fun with it. I can't remember when or how I stopped, it was probably because I got interested in other stuff and just sort of weened myself off of it rather quickly. Plus, they were just getting too complicated for me around that time - stuff like Dragon Slayer or Legend of Zelda.
Subject: Re: 1995 - the real midpoint for video games?
Written By: Marty McFly on 06/26/07 at 10:59 pm
Yeah, I've got some younger cousins who have really only know 3D games. I actually kinda feel sorry for a gamer born after 1993 or so, because to one of them 3D games have always been around, so they will never know how cool it was to play a 3D game for the first time. When I played a Sega Saturn Demo at our local mall back in '96(about a year or so after it came out) I thought it was the coolest thing I had ever seen :D.
The kids from the early '90s seem to have a pretty good understanding of the "analog age". Even if some of the younger ones don't specifically remember it, things like VHS, cassette tapes, and the importance of the internet wont really be lost on them. Anybody born after 1994 or so wont really have much appreciation for all that stuff. To them DVD and MP3's has always been around. Also, to people born '94+ the internet is something that has always been there, so I don't know if they will really appreciate how important it really is.
Like these days, if a kid has a report for school to do, for as far back as they can remember they've been able to just get on the internet at there house and look up what they need, but I remember even as like 1999 or 2000, alot of us still had to go to the library or something to do research because alot of our parents still didn't have internet access. We didn't get it here until I was 13.
I agree, the 1993ers+ probably tend to take the Internet for granted. Sure, alot of us have "adapted" and gotten used to it (I admit I've become accustomed to it enough to not want to be without it), but we also know what life was like before it dominated culture. For some of them, it might as well have been the horse and buggy days, lol. Although it really depends on the person and their tastes/circumstances.
Another loosely-related thing was the rise of "virtual reality" games, which is like 3D in a way. I went to a place like that c. 1996 and thought it was great, too.
I agree with 1995 being a good mid-point, yet at that time I stopped playing video games. I was still playing Sega Genesis or the Sega 32X, which was kinda a flop, but we still had fun with it. I can't remember when or how I stopped, it was probably because I got interested in other stuff and just sort of weened myself off of it rather quickly. Plus, they were just getting too complicated for me around that time - stuff like Dragon Slayer or Legend of Zelda.
Yeah, same here. After about 7 straight years of hardcore playing, I was like hey, this is cool, but I've done it enough for now, lol. BTW, Zelda is probably my one favorite series if I had to pick only one game, especially the original. I think that was the first game to require "save" codes.
Subject: Re: 1995 - the real midpoint for video games?
Written By: annonymouse on 06/28/07 at 12:04 am
Yeah, 1995 was the turning point for video games. The Playstation and Sega Saturn were both released that year in the U.S. and they really took off right away. On the other hand, like you said Marty, it was quite a few years before a 3D system became something that everyone had. The first video game system I ever owned was the SNES, which I got in Christmas '92. I didn't even own a 3D system until I got my N64 in 1998. It was around that time that you really started to see 2D games disappear from store shelves.
I would divide the era's like this:
2D era:1972-1997
3D era:1998-Present
maybe 96 for 2d but not 97. the reason the ps1 was such a big hit was the fact that it was 3d (and ofcourse that sony had snatched all the 3rd party developers). and in the case of the saturn, outside of japan, i wouldn't say "took off" is the correct term. more like "fell over wheezing and died shortly after."
Subject: Re: 1995 - the real midpoint for video games?
Written By: mach!ne_he@d on 06/28/07 at 11:21 am
maybe 96 for 2d but not 97. the reason the ps1 was such a big hit was the fact that it was 3d (and ofcourse that sony had snatched all the 3rd party developers). and in the case of the saturn, outside of japan, i wouldn't say "took off" is the correct term. more like "fell over wheezing and died shortly after."
Yeah, Sony didn't really have any serious competition in the PS1/Saturn/N64 generation. The Saturn was a huge flop that didn't have any true blockbuster games, and the N64 seemed to be slightly hampered by the fact that it still used cartridges, and the fact that it wasn't able to get off to a quick enough start to really compete with the PS1(it launched with just two games,lol).
As far as the dates go, yeah 1996 was probably the last big year for 2D. Sega came out with new Sonic, and Vectorman games that year, and the SNES had a few big hits as well. I sort of think that 1997 was the transition point between the 2D and 3D era's because, IMO, that was the year that the 3D consoles officially became dominant.
After the beginning of 1998, you basically never saw commercials for 2D games anymore, and the 3D systems had become much more affordable. By the time the Dreamcast was launched in 1999, and the PS2 in 2000, 2D was totally gone.
Subject: Re: 1995 - the real midpoint for video games?
Written By: annonymouse on 06/28/07 at 11:27 am
Yeah, Sony didn't really have any serious competition in the PS1/Saturn/N64 generation. The Saturn was a huge flop that didn't have any true blockbuster games, and the N64 seemed to be slightly hampered by the fact that it still used cartridges, and the fact that it wasn't able to get off to a quick enough start to really compete with the PS1(it launched with just two games,lol).
As far as the dates go, yeah 1996 was probably the last big year for 2D. Sega came out with new Sonic, and Vectorman games that year, and the SNES had a few big hits as well. I sort of think that 1997 was the transition point between the 2D and 3D era's because, IMO, that was the year that the 3D consoles officially became dominant.
After the beginning of 1998, you basically never saw commercials for 2D games anymore, and the 3D systems had become much more affordable. By the time the Dreamcast was launched in 1999, and the PS2 in 2000, 2D was totally gone.
long gone! poor poor dreamcast. overshadowed by sony's godly ps2.
Subject: Re: 1995 - the real midpoint for video games?
Written By: agoraphobicwhacko on 07/03/07 at 4:28 pm
Duke Nukem Forever, still hasn't come out yet.
Thats considered the Chinese Democracy of video games. I don't know if you've ever read the whole Duke Nukem Forever story, but its quite sad and laughable.
It will never be released.....
Subject: Re: 1995 - the real midpoint for video games?
Written By: annonymouse on 07/04/07 at 12:35 am
Thats considered the Chinese Democracy of video games. I don't know if you've ever read the whole Duke Nukem Forever story, but its quite sad and laughable.
It will never be released.....
some speculation suggests that by 2010 they'll be finishing up with floor textures.
Subject: Re: 1995 - the real midpoint for video games?
Written By: agoraphobicwhacko on 07/04/07 at 9:36 am
some speculation suggests that by 2010 they'll be finishing up with floor textures.
add two years to that speculation, and you might be correct. :P
Here's why it will never be released: How can it? Production started on it back in the PS-N64 era. As they kept dragging their asses, the console industry kept evolving. The gaming industry has literally went through 3 generations of consoles since Duke Nukem went into production. How could they even keep up? Every few years, the world gets a new console.
I haven't checked for Duke Nukem news in a long time, but I will go out on a limb and say there is zero progress being made on it.
I believe that someday the world will get a new Duke Nukem game. It was huge back in the mid late 90's, and no way does someone not take advantage of that popularity. But when we do get a new Duke, it wont be the game that has been in limbo for almost a decade.
Subject: Re: 1995 - the real midpoint for video games?
Written By: annonymouse on 07/04/07 at 10:26 am
add two years to that speculation, and you might be correct. :P
Here's why it will never be released: How can it? Production started on it back in the PS-N64 era. As they kept dragging their asses, the console industry kept evolving. The gaming industry has literally went through 3 generations of consoles since Duke Nukem went into production. How could they even keep up? Every few years, the world gets a new console.
I haven't checked for Duke Nukem news in a long time, but I will go out on a limb and say there is zero progress being made on it.
I believe that someday the world will get a new Duke Nukem game. It was huge back in the mid late 90's, and no way does someone not take advantage of that popularity. But when we do get a new Duke, it wont be the game that has been in limbo for almost a decade.
well, it is coming out (if it does) on pc so that won't be a huge promblem. they'd have to switch from cd to dvd i guess, but i don't think blu-ray will be a widely accepted pc gaming format for quite some time. people don't like to spend MORE money.
Subject: Re: 1995 - the real midpoint for video games?
Written By: JamieMcBain on 07/04/07 at 2:11 pm
I agree, it may never be released.
Me and my friends, have an inside joke about GNR'S album....
"There will be actual democracy in China, before Chinese Democracy gets released as an album." ;D
Subject: Re: 1995 - the real midpoint for video games?
Written By: annonymouse on 07/04/07 at 3:04 pm
I agree, it may never be released.
Me and my friends, have an inside joke about GNR'S album....
"There will be actual democracy in China, before Chinese Democracy gets released as an album." ;D
have faith my friend. duke nuke 'em will be released! someday. and when it does, it better be REALLY good. the real reason it's taking so long is that they are making litterally everything in the game full interactive. go inside EVERY building. play EVERY arcade game. get something from EVERY vending machine. watch EVERY television. it's a huge game. how they will fit it onto a six gigabite dvd is beyongd me. maybe a double layered dvd? although, i suppose that by the time it comes out we'll be using holodisk!
Subject: Re: 1995 - the real midpoint for video games?
Written By: agoraphobicwhacko on 07/05/07 at 12:21 am
Here's an article about Duke Nukem Forever:
Duke Nukem Forever (DNF) is a yet-to-be-released first-person shooter video game being developed by 3D Realms, and is the next game in the popular Duke Nukem series. It is notorious for its protracted development, which has been ongoing since 1997. Many consider the game to be a classic example of vaporware, often being referred to as the Chinese Democracy of video games.
Although two E3 trailers and a series of screenshots have been released, the game's plot remains only vaguely defined, as most of the publicity is now out of date and development has changed direction many times since its release. In the November 1997 issue of PC Gamer, Scott Miller stated that Doctor Proton, Duke's original nemesis, would return. Originally, it was planned that Duke would be teamed with a female sidekick named Bombshell, who appeared in a 1998 trailer for the game. However, she did not appear in a later trailer released in 2001, and it has yet to be confirmed if she still plays a role in the final release of the game.
The second trailer, released in 2001, shows an alien invasion in Las Vegas. It features Duke fighting with several weapons, most notably a rifle, his Desert Eagle and the shrinking gun. Duke fights the aliens in many areas: a mine, some rural areas, the streets of Las Vegas, on water, indoor areas, etc.
It featured:
* Duke fighting an alien while in a moving car, driven by a fellow soldier.
* Duke riding several vehicles (a boat, a spaceship). The character also slides a motorbike under a tanker.
* Duke interacting with several characters, most notably some spooked civilians, in a scene where Duke and they hide in a restaurant whilst the entrance door is smashed by aliens from the streets. Duke also speaks with a general regarding the President of The United States being kidnapped by the aliens.
Duke Nukem Forever was officially announced on April 27, 1997 along with the purchase of a license to use the Quake II engine. Original prototype work on the game had begun as early as January. In August and September, the first screenshots of Forever were released in PC Gamer. In its November issue, Scott Miller stated that the intended release date was 1998. However, 3D Realms didn't actually get the Quake II engine code until December of that year, and the earlier screenshots were simply mock-ups with the Quake engine, that the team had made in their spare time.
At the May 1998 E3, 3D Realms released the first video footage of Forever.
In June 1998, the 3D Realms team switched to Epic's Unreal Engine. All previous work except for textures had to be started over from scratch. (The textures were replaced later, however.) George Broussard predicted the transition will only take approximately six weeks, but later said that it took much longer than expected.
In 1999, 3D Realms announced that they had upgraded to the newer version of the Unreal Engine. In December, they released a second batch of screenshots, which showcased the Unreal Engine version of the game for the first time. Later in December, 3D Realms released a Christmas card that suggested that DNF would be released in 2000. However, in 2000, they released another Christmas card, suggesting DNF would be released in 2001.
At the May 2001 E3, 3D Realms released a second video that showed a couple of minutes of in-game footage.
In 2002, after hiring several new programmers, the team completely rewrote the renderer and other game engine modules, beginning work on a new generation of game content. Broussard estimated that around 95% of the previous level design work had been scrapped. The engine, which now contains parts of an early version of Unreal Engine 2.0 (the team broke off from the engine in 2001), is for the first time supposedly complete, and supports such features as pixel shading, normal mapping and high dynamic range based lighting.
George Broussard has stated several times that the only parts of the Unreal engine that are still part of their code base are UnrealScript, the networking code, and the UnrealEd. Everything else, except Meqon, which is the physics engine, has been written from scratch by 3D Realms. The principal technical reason given by Broussard for the extensive delays was the unstable tech base. Once this problem seemed to have been solved, 3DR expanded their team considerably, from 22 to 31 members, marking what many hope to be the final stage of the development cycle.
On May 20 2003, Jeffrey Lapin, then CEO of Take Two, told reporters that the game would not be out by the end of 2003. In response, George Broussard commented on Shacknews that "Take Two needs to STFU imo" — Internet parlance for "Take Two needs to shut the fudge up, in my opinion."
Later in the year, December 18 2003, an article from GameSpot revealed that Jeffrey Lapin had a recent conversation with 3D Realms. Discussing a revised released date with the developers, he was told that Duke Nukem Forever was expected to be finished by the end of 2004, or the beginning of 2005. 3D Realms' CEO became infuriated with Jeffrey Lapin for releasing confidential information regarding Duke Nukem Forever, and had neither denied nor confirmed the information that Jeffrey Lapin revealed.
On September 9 2004, GameSpot published a conversation between Take Two CEO Rich Roedel and UBS analyst Mike Wallace which alleged that Duke Nukem Forever had switched to the Doom 3 engine. Many gaming news sites mailed George Broussard to have him confirm or deny the rumor, but after receiving no answer from him, they published the rumor as fact, ending the article with "Attempts to contact 3D Realms for comment were unsuccessful as of press time." Later that day, George Broussard explicitly denied the rumor and explained that he was not able to answer the emails only because he was working elsewhere in the building. As of May 2005, it is believed that Rich Roedel had mistaken DNF for Prey, which Human Head (supervised by 3D Realms) developed with the Doom 3 engine.
On September 14 2004, 3D Realms announced that they had replaced the Karma physics engine with one designed by Swedish developer Meqon. Several sites have also speculated that DNF will be using the latest generation of this technology, designed for next-gen consoles.
Rumors in April 2005 suggested that the game would appear at 2005 E3, along with 3D Realms' previously cancelled Prey. While Prey did make an appearance, the rumors of DNF's appearance turned out to be false.
In October 2005, Broussard reported that the game size was now at 9.6 gigabytes, although the size will be optimized somewhat for release.
In February 2006, Broussard gave an interview and updated the status on Forever. He reported that everything was together and in full production; that the guns, creatures, and everything else had been finished. Broussard said that the development team was tweaking and polishing the game and putting it all together. In April, Broussard demonstrated samples of the game, including an early level, a vehicle sequence, and a few test rooms.
In June, in a filing with the SEC, Take-Two revealed that they had renegotiated the deal and will receive $4.25 million instead of $6 million upon the release of the game. The filing also revealed that Take-Two was offering a $US 500,000 bonus if Forever was commercially released by December 31, 2006. However, Broussard denied the rumors that DNF would be released, saying that 3D Realms never cared for or asked for the bonus. He stated that he would "never ship a game early...for 500K."
On August 30 2006, shacknews.com reported that several key employees had left 3D Realms. They further speculated that this did not bode well for the future of Duke Nukem Forever. They noted that "while the game's team has reached a size of about 24-28 developers, recently it has been closer to 18, meaning these current departures may actually comprise a majority of the team." However, Broussard commented that the physics and animation systems a couple of the departures were involved in were "virtually finished" and in a maintenance and polishing stage.
Wired News has awarded Duke Nukem Forever its Vaporware Awards several times. It placed in second in 2000 and topped the list in 2001 and 2002. Wired News created the Vaporware Lifetime Achievement Award exclusively for Forever and awarded it in 2003. George Broussard accepted the award, simply stating, "We're undeniably late and we know it." It did not make the list in 2004, but Leander Kahney noted that they had received a lot of nominations for the game. By popular demand, it topped the list again in 2005.
Forever has drawn a number of jokes related to its development timeline. Gamers have substituted several names in place of Forever, calling it ForNever, Never, Whenever, If Ever, Taking Forever, and Neverever. In the April 24 2006 edition of FoxTrot, Jason Fox compiles a list of reasons why to get a PC. One of the reasons was to "play Duke Nukem Forever someday." Gaming website 1UP.com lists its scheduled release date as 5 March 2999.
When the GameSpy editors compiled a list of the "Top 25 Dumbest Moments in Gaming History" in June, 2003, Duke Nukem Forever placed #18.
Subject: Re: 1995 - the real midpoint for video games?
Written By: JamieMcBain on 07/05/07 at 11:06 am
Wow, it sounds like the game will never get made! ;D
Subject: Re: 1995 - the real midpoint for video games?
Written By: agoraphobicwhacko on 07/05/07 at 11:47 am
Yeah, as I mentioned earlier, it can never come out because consoles and gaming technology are always changing. It would be like some company starting a game on atari, pulling a stunt like this, and eventually hoping to release it on N64. Not gonna happen.
Only way we get a game is if some other company buys the rights to Duke Nukem.
Subject: Re: 1995 - the real midpoint for video games?
Written By: Dominic L. on 07/05/07 at 1:33 pm
add two years to that speculation, and you might be correct. :P
Here's why it will never be released: How can it? Production started on it back in the PS-N64 era. As they kept dragging their asses, the console industry kept evolving. The gaming industry has literally went through 3 generations of consoles since Duke Nukem went into production. How could they even keep up? Every few years, the world gets a new console.
I haven't checked for Duke Nukem news in a long time, but I will go out on a limb and say there is zero progress being made on it.
I believe that someday the world will get a new Duke Nukem game. It was huge back in the mid late 90's, and no way does someone not take advantage of that popularity. But when we do get a new Duke, it wont be the game that has been in limbo for almost a decade.
I'm sure some nostalgic folk would like an older feel.
Subject: Re: 1995 - the real midpoint for video games?
Written By: Brian06 on 07/05/07 at 10:23 pm
As I remember 1995 is when the 3D hype for home consoles was really getting big and when it really got into my head personally, not to mention having games on optical media like compact discs opposed to the older cartridges. So in a lot of ways it was like a midpoint between the old cartridge based 2D era and the more modern era systems (like a XBox 360) which are basically specialized PCs.
Subject: Re: 1995 - the real midpoint for video games?
Written By: annonymouse on 07/06/07 at 11:35 am
Yeah, as I mentioned earlier, it can never come out because consoles and gaming technology are always changing. It would be like some company starting a game on atari, pulling a stunt like this, and eventually hoping to release it on N64. Not gonna happen.
Only way we get a game is if some other company buys the rights to Duke Nukem.
but it's coming out for the pc, which isn't so everchanging format wise. sure, it went from cd to dvd. but that's all.
but you're right, it will never come out. from what i hear there's a bit of corruption over at take 2. i think they'll die out before it can be released!
Subject: Re: 1995 - the real midpoint for video games?
Written By: yelimsexa on 08/01/18 at 1:46 pm
Well, 1995 is midway between the release of Pong in 1972 and the VR-enhanced world of 2018, where development feels like its nearly complete, just like rock music became during the '90s and hip hop is today. It's sort of the equivalent of 1975 for rock music and 1997 for hip hop and "dance music" (dating back to disco). It may remain true as I feel that the 2020s and beyond will see video gaming will pretty much run its course in terms of technology, unless if some sci-fi-type developments like holograms and portals that allow a player to actually feel like their elsewhere happen. The addition of all those cutscenes is sort of like when MTV launched for rock, the gameplay was still there, but it seemed to take a backseat to the graphics and plot, just like how rock/pop music took a back seat to the videos in the '80s/'90s.
It's a very distinct era looking back today. "New school" compared to the '70s/'80s, "old school" compared to the past decade and a half. You still had a major company supporting cartridges, while others now use memory cards (very dated nowadays thanks to cloud technology) to supplant the optical discs. Classic gaming company Sega jumps the shark while Sony, still the biggest gaming console today, rises quickly, with Nintendo sort of there like it was and still is today. Atari was gone as a console company, but Microsoft and XBOX wasn't here yet. About 50/50 in terms of 2D and 3D games being released, and the concept of running out of lives and starting over was nearly dead by this point, and even if it wasn't, save features had become so prominent (password or backup battery) that gaming was simply more merciful. Of course, cut scenes were on the rise, but nothing compared to this century. This was also the point where the offline strategy guide or gaming magazines started to lose relevance as the Internet started to take off, but of course, it wasn't until around 2001 or so that those Prima strategy guides started to look quaint, while game enhancers like Game Genie and later Game Shark were at their peak.
Another thing is that arcades have made a comeback over the past decade, as the mid-90s through about 2006 or so was a time where arcades were for quarter-eating (later dollar-eating) dorks or redemption prizes that nobody would care about anymore. This coincidentally was also the heyday of PC gaming, when it declined around 2006 or so, that was also when arcades seemed to make a comeback as well. "PC" gaming is mainly replaced by smartphone games/apps nowadays, even though a niche still exists, not to mention ROMs of classic gaming systems.
Next is that cartridges weren't the original form of gaming, it was actually sticker-type layouts that you would place on a TV screen during the '70s "Pong era". 1995 was also about 50/50 between cartridge (SNES/Genesis) and disc (PlayStation/Saturn). Meanwhile, just like CDs/DVDs are definitely pretty much a relic of the past, so will discs for gaming, and the "library" for gaming is more or less headed to the cloud nowadays, even if discs still linger for now.
Finally, I'd say the market for "classic" game collecting was born right around this time, and at first, involved mostly the '70s/early '80s stuff, with a few of the savvy going after the rarer NES/Master System games as the first generation of gamers started to make a living.
Subject: Re: 1995 - the real midpoint for video games?
Written By: mwalker1996 on 08/03/18 at 8:41 pm
1995 was a pretty revolutionary year for gamming because of the ps1 and Saturn comming out and it was when memory card were becoming more mainstream, it gave an eaiser way to save games rather than using batteries.