Here's what I don't get, I'm pretty far into the game about 80% through.  I only have one boss left to kill based on achievements in the 360 version .  Okay Half Life 2 came out a long time ago with a very similar pacing structure and design that DNF tried to follow.  You kill a bunch of dudes, do a physics puzzle or platforming sequence, epic moment, vehicle sequence, rinse and repeat.  You will get no argument from me that HL2 did that superbly better but here's my question.
 
We have yet to see anything HL related released in ages and maybe it's cause Valve is scared in the same way?
 
People say they want something different from linear design in CoD and other modern FPS games these days but really what can they do?  I mean what do people want?
 
To be honest I don't think DNF deserves such low scores I mean it's not great but I think it can earn an honest 7/10 at the most.  Is it just the arrogance of the game that upsets people the most?  While I find it unfunny too it's not that big of a deal to me.
 
It's just I don't remember journalists complaining that much about the motorboat sequences in HL2 or the car driving parts which I freaking hated.  I guess it's just more the point of the issue to me, and I love HL2.  But they talk all about it in DNF.

@maskedarcstrike said:

Here's what I don't get, I'm pretty far into the game about 80% through. I only have one boss left to kill based on achievements in the 360 version . Okay Half Life 2 came out a long time ago with a very similar pacing structure and design that DNF tried to follow. You kill a bunch of dudes, do a physics puzzle or platforming sequence, epic moment, vehicle sequence, rinse and repeat. You will get no argument from me that HL2 did that superbly better but here's my question. We have yet to see anything HL related released in ages and maybe it's cause Valve is scared in the same way? People say they want something different from linear design in CoD and other modern FPS games these days but really what can they do? I mean what do people want? To be honest I don't think DNF deserves such low scores I mean it's not great but I think it can earn an honest 7/10 at the most. Is it just the arrogance of the game that upsets people the most? While I find it unfunny too it's not that big of a deal to me. It's just I don't remember journalists complaining that much about the motorboat sequences in HL2 or the car driving parts which I freaking hated. I guess it's just more the point of the issue to me, and I love HL2. But they talk all about it in DNF.

Half Life 2 didn't come out today. There's your answer.

@maskedarcstrike said:

Here's what I don't get, I'm pretty far into the game about 80% through. I only have one boss left to kill based on achievements in the 360 version . Okay Half Life 2 came out a long time ago with a very similar pacing structure and design that DNF tried to follow. You kill a bunch of dudes, do a physics puzzle or platforming sequence, epic moment, vehicle sequence, rinse and repeat. You will get no argument from me that HL2 did that superbly better but here's my question. We have yet to see anything HL related released in ages and maybe it's cause Valve is scared in the same way? People say they want something different from linear design in CoD and other modern FPS games these days but really what can they do? I mean what do people want? To be honest I don't think DNF deserves such low scores I mean it's not great but I think it can earn an honest 7/10 at the most. Is it just the arrogance of the game that upsets people the most? While I find it unfunny too it's not that big of a deal to me. It's just I don't remember journalists complaining that much about the motorboat sequences in HL2 or the car driving parts which I freaking hated. I guess it's just more the point of the issue to me, and I love HL2. But they talk all about it in DNF.

Half Life 2 didn't come out today. There's your answer.

@maskedarcstrike said:

@vidiot: I don't know while some levels like ravenholm were awesome I actually did have some of the same of the same confusion in DNF as I had in HL2. Like in some of the motorboat sequences and platforming areas, and I'm talking about original HL2 not episode 2 which had amazing level design. But I remember some incredibly frustrating electrified water areas where I had to jump on wooden pallets in HL2 and episode 1 which was just like that QL for DNF.

But to be honest those sections were pretty easy on DNF and this was on normal setting.

I guess what I'm asking is what does Valve do for HL3? or any other half life project? Unless there's a major advancement in PC tech the series will stay dead for a while longer.

@DystopiaX: I'm asking about design issues, not technical graphics. Gameplay is still the same in CoD for black ops as it was 4 years ago for MW. Gameplay design choices don't age but remain the same, they just come and go like music genres in fads.

When did I mention graphics? The style of DNF would've been fine a couple years ago but don't fly now. It's not about time, it's about where the current genre is. Hell, Halo basically hasn't changed in 10 years but no one has evolved what they've done so it doesn't matter. The DNF formula was abandoned for a reason, making it outdated. The gameplay design choices clearly have aged, despite what you say- if they "come and go" like fads, which I'm not going to argue right now, then DNF's style is clearly "out", hence the bad reviews.

DNF deserves low score because its a BAD game

I mean judging by the scores, both DNF and Brink got 2 stars, but are they both equally bad?

DNF doesn't have old school FPS design, it has shit FPS design. 
 
Well, actually, I guess it has both. 
 
If you want an example of a game that had "Old school FPS design" and did it competently, Singularity. I hear Bulletstorm is another example but i never played it. 
 

@maskedarcstrike: I don't agree with that at all, and I hate how people nowadays seem to see "YO MONEY" as the motivation for fucking everything that happens in games. The evolution happened because games in the current style are better than DNF. They're shorter cause no one wants to play the same damn sequence 3 times in the same game, they're more focused because those "impact" moments (CoD 4 with the helicopter crash sliding towards you, everyone getting shot at the end) are much more memorable and satisfying as a story, because platforming in first person sucks, etc. I could go on and on but there are reasons other than money that they did this. Many people here aren't "mainstream" and don't need games to be dumbed down yet still can't stand DNF. It's not a question of ease of use, it's just really fucking boring and tedious to play.

I have some sympathy for this view, as I felt that the 'Duke Nukemness' of the game had been forgotten by some reviewers. We have to remember that even if DNF was completely remade today, it would still look and play very much like an old school shooter. While obviously I think it should be criticised as a game on its own merits, I feel some people need to remember that DNF is an old school game, and should be treated as such, meaning you can't really criticise it for using old school mechanics. 
 
On the HL2 note, that game did come out when I would say DNF was meant to have come out. And that's like 5 years ago? Maybe more. You raise an interesting point about Valve being stumped about HL3, how does a linear shooter/physics/platformer esque game make it in today's market?

@Pinworm45: I love Singularity, it was my most favourite singleplayer FPS last year.. fantastic gameplay.

@maskedarcstrike: You can't compare a company like Valve with 3D Realms (or Gearbox, for the last step), as far as people know DNF has been worked on for some time, then there has been a break, a little more working, another break, etc. Valve doesn't release games for the sake of releasing them, they are like Blizzard and don't release games until they are really done.

Does anyone know who pretty much invented the phrase "When it's done"? I think it was either 3D Realms or ID, but I'm not sure.

Duke Nukem Forever is almost nothing like Duke Nukem 3D. People who say it is either haven't actually played Duke Nukem 3D or have forgotten how it played and what its levels were actually like to move around in. Duke Nukem Forever is about one of the worst games I have ever experienced. I say this as an experienced Duke Nukem 3D/Build Engine fan and as someone who has always supported Broussard's ideals until now. DNF's failings aren't to do with oldschool design, they are to do with failure to design a good game.

@SeriouslyNow: True, I think DN3D is still a better game than DNF, even though it's that old.. it has its own "sprite"-charm. And mainly what I didn't like about DNF were the tight spaces, it's either all too small or the standard fov is too low. I had fun with it though. :)

it just doesn't look like a very good game and there are WAY WAY WAAAY better games out there that deserve my time and money.  

It's pretty evident that at some point DNF was inspired by the structure of Half-Life 2, but there's quite a bit of that formula that's been ditched or refined by most modern games. Add to that less-than Half-Life 2 gameplay some dated graphics, long load times, and a questionable sense of humor and you get a pretty bad game.