swaaye wrote on 2022-05-12, 20:36:

Did your download include a few different wrappers? I had to delete their D3D8.dll to even run it on XP. But I see a lot of text […]
Show full quote

tgod wrote on 2022-05-12, 12:39:

Interesting resultts swaaye, my geforce 4 mx win98 system had no problems with the game, zero graphics errors without having to use wrappers like on modern systems.

Did your download include a few different wrappers? I had to delete their D3D8.dll to even run it on XP. But I see a lot of texture corruption with what I think is the stock game renderer direct to Windows D3D8. The boot "weapon" model in particular corrupts across the screen when it is equipped. It was doing this on my modern desktop as well.

Of course it's possible a X1900 on Catalyst 7.11 is still too new.

Actually GF4MX is D3D7. Maybe that works better than having D3D8 support.

Mine included the wrappers separate.

Soulreaper wrote on 2022-05-13, 04:09:

God I hope it gets leaked I am playing day one. I remember watching that trailer over and over again I think I had it on a pc gamer disc or maybe a max payne game had the trailer on the disc. But damn that game looked so good. I can say that was the only game that had me so hype that I frequently checked up on it the only other game I can think of that had me like that was Black Mesa. That day in 2012 when it finally came out boy.

It's already out

It was released on a well-known, controversial image board.

For all the ones that want to stay legal, there's another gameplay video released by Neogamer:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRXVawDfQ9A

I wonder how he got it to run so smoothly.

gedbag wrote on 2022-05-11, 08:01:

Tried it out yesterday and it's really impressive what they had back then. This was absolutely the version they needed to finish up instead of redoing everything because the tech may have been slightly outdated. Movement and gunplay feels great and there is ton of interactivity. They had Doom 3 type in-world HUD elements in 2001! I think this puts to rest the claim that the 2001 build just consisted of a bunch of scripted stuff for E3. Those elements are in there as well but fully formed in a way that could definitely have been integrated into a full game.

Would be awesome to see if modders could transform this into a more complete experience.

What makes this leak even better is that it contains the source code, too, so that, combined with the very impressive collectives skills and enthusiasms of the Duke Nukem modding scene, there is huge potential for this build to be not just patched up to be a fully playable, if uneven and disjointed, set of pre-beta levels, but to actually become a fully playable, quality consistent full length AAA game , containing the best of the leaked version, plus well designed (by the modders) additional levels/graphics/sound/gameplay-mechanics that are either (to the best of the modders' judgement) very authentic to the 2001 build's ascetic and ideas, or are judged to enhance the game without taking away from the feel and atmosphere of the 2001 build's look and feel.

I've briefly tried the leaked build, and it is certainly more enticing than the 2011 released game, but I have decided to wait for the modding community to work it's magic. As a few people have said "I've waited two decades for this game, another six months won't hurt".

And it's just as well that we have this to look forward too, since Gearbox apparently aren't planning to release a new Duke Nukem game.

Gearbox will shut down any attempts to modify this source code and release a full game out of it very quickly. They shut down attempts to release Duke Nukem 3D beta releases, too.

This company is one of the worst ones that could hold the Duke Nukem license - except EA, maybe.

schmatzler wrote on 2022-05-13, 19:47:

Gearbox will shut down any attempts to modify this source code and release a full game out of it very quickly. They shut down attempts to release Duke Nukem 3D beta releases, too.

This company is one of the worst ones that could hold the Duke Nukem license - except EA, maybe.

Have Gearbox commented on the leak yet? I agree that Gearbox and Randy Pitchford aren't names that inspire confidence, or even just a bit of hope, when it comes to giving gamers what they want.

I think Gearbox is in a little bit of a pinch because obviously they don't want this stuff out, but this is the most positive people have been about a new Duke Nukem thing in a while so it can only be good for a franchise they own.

Kerr Avon wrote on 2022-05-13, 19:23:

but to actually become a fully playable, quality consistent full length AAA game , containing the best of the leaked version, plus well designed (by the modders) additional levels/graphics/sound/gameplay-mechanics that are either (to the best of the modders' judgement) very authentic to the 2001 build's ascetic and ideas, or are judged to enhance the game without taking away from the feel and atmosphere of the 2001 build's look and feel.

no.

leileilol wrote on 2022-05-14, 13:30:

Kerr Avon wrote on 2022-05-13, 19:23:

but to actually become a fully playable, quality consistent full length AAA game , containing the best of the leaked version, plus well designed (by the modders) additional levels/graphics/sound/gameplay-mechanics that are either (to the best of the modders' judgement) very authentic to the 2001 build's ascetic and ideas, or are judged to enhance the game without taking away from the feel and atmosphere of the 2001 build's look and feel.

no.

Why not? A huge community effort could result in a great game, and the Duke Nukem modding community are very devoted and able. It might all come to nothing more than a few stalled attempts and some minor improvements and badly judged attempts to populate the already existing levels, but it's certainly not impossible that we could end up with something really good.

Kerr Avon wrote on 2022-05-14, 15:41:

leileilol wrote on 2022-05-14, 13:30:

Kerr Avon wrote on 2022-05-13, 19:23:

but to actually become a fully playable, quality consistent full length AAA game , containing the best of the leaked version, plus well designed (by the modders) additional levels/graphics/sound/gameplay-mechanics that are either (to the best of the modders' judgement) very authentic to the 2001 build's ascetic and ideas, or are judged to enhance the game without taking away from the feel and atmosphere of the 2001 build's look and feel.

no.

Why not? A huge community effort could result in a great game, and the Duke Nukem modding community are very devoted and able. It might all come to nothing more than a few stalled attempts and some minor improvements and badly judged attempts to populate the already existing levels, but it's certainly not impossible that we could end up with something really good.

At best, something like that would probably get shut down from the very beginning by the rights holders.

At worse, something like that would probably get shut down by the rights holders after plenty of people put in time and effort which will all have been wasted.

Then there is possible fallout from lawsuits linked to distribution of the originally leaked, assets, code and Duke Nukem derivative IP .

I am not a lawyer, but my gut feeling is that any potential developper should think long and hard about sinking any time into this or being associated with such a project and probably consult an actual IP lawyer before deciding anything.

Well, then you don't have any corporate entity touch the thing. You have a grassroots community of programmers each set up a gethub page and individuals contributing to that 'freeware' project. After some time, they compare notes and make a final compile available with their new improvements. The lawyers can't and won't shut them all down, and won't go after "poor" individuals because they don't have enough money to bother with. There's always a way to circumvent rapacious lawyers, and the software community can -- and should find a way. Reddit will help and so on. . . More power to those who want to improve this. They're not trying to "make money" (at least most of them), they'd be trying to make a much better game because it's begging to be done.

zyzzle wrote on 2022-05-15, 01:06:

Well, then you don't have any corporate entity touch the thing. You have a grassroots community of programmers each set up a gethub page and individuals contributing to that 'freeware' project. After some time, they compare notes and make a final compile available with their new improvements. The lawyers can't and won't shut them all down, and won't go after "poor" individuals because they don't have enough money to bother with. There's always a way to circumvent rapacious lawyers, and the software community can -- and should find a way. Reddit will help and so on. . . More power to those who want to improve this. They're not trying to "make money" (at least most of them), they'd be trying to make a much better game because it's begging to be done.

If you and/or others want to try your hand at that, suit yourselves, but AFAIK (and I am not a lawyer), not making money off of copyrighted IP does not shield one from from copyright infringement claims ( though penalties may be lower). This varies according to a given country's laws, in all likelihood.

Also, a copyright holder's intent is not necessarily to try to extract money from individuals who don't have much anyway, but also, for example, to prevent distribution of unauthorized derivative works that are felt to potentially negatively affect the original IP's value or simply compete with officially licensed products based on said IP. In other words, an IP owner usually wants to maximise both perceived value and profits from licensing. Admittedly, some rights holders are more tolerant of unauthorised derivative works than others but I, for one, will not be tempting fate .

Kerr Avon wrote on 2022-05-14, 15:41:

Why not? A huge community effort could result in a great game, and the Duke Nukem modding community are very devoted and able. It might all come to nothing more than a few stalled attempts and some minor improvements and badly judged attempts to populate the already existing levels, but it's certainly not impossible that we could end up with something really good.

Obvious legal issues and guilty consciences aside, you don't have the original design doc, script/story/plans, tech art specs, and JSJ certainly wouldn't want to go near such a prospect. It'll turn out like "we have DNF2011 at home" when attempted/finished.

Suggesting this is as bad as infering that "this will help emulators" when confidential materials about hardware get leaked, tainting the clean room goodwill of the experienced software engineers.

darry wrote on 2022-05-14, 17:41:

At best, something like that would probably get shut down from the very beginning by the rights holders. […]
Show full quote

At best, something like that would probably get shut down from the very beginning by the rights holders.

At worse, something like that would probably get shut down by the rights holders after plenty of people put in time and effort which will all have been wasted.

Then there is possible fallout from lawsuits linked to distribution of the originally leaked, assets, code and Duke Nukem derivative IP .

I am not a lawyer, but my gut feeling is that any potential developper should think long and hard about sinking any time into this or being associated with such a project and probably consult an actual IP lawyer before deciding anything.

But modders often ignore copyright. Lots of mods for games include copyrighted things, such as the player character being changed to Batman or Spiderman or any of the characters from the Resident Evil franchise, or whatever. The Unreal Tournament games alone have seen many (and I mean *many*) copyrighted characters made available, for you to play as or play against. In the Grand Theft Auto games, you can change the cars to all sorts of copyright cars, be they real world (Ferraris, Jaguars, Porsches, even the 1960's British Minis) or fictional (any of the Batmobiles, choose your favourite!, the Deloreon from Back to the Future, etc), and change both the player characters (you can even play as the Hulk, completed with insane strength and smash everything up if you like) and the NPCs.

Modders insert all sorts of copyrighted characters/vehicles/ideas/etc into games, and they seem to get away with it. Granted this is a little different, as the DNF 2001 build is leaked, and contains the source code, it's not like most modded games where the game itself has been sold to the players and the players are modding those games often using modding tools provided by the games' developers, but it's not like Gearbox can definitively put a stop to anyone playing or model the leaked build. If they tried, then I think that some of the would be modders would still continue to add and improve to the leak, under the cover of anonymity, then release the finished version quietly.

And Gearbox and Randy Pitchford definitely don't need more bad feeling from the gaming community, so Pitchford & co. might think "Well, we can't make any money from this build, so let's allow the community to enjoy it, and we'll try to look magnanimous".

Kerr Avon wrote on 2022-05-15, 12:32:

But modders often ignore copyright. Lots of mods for games include copyrighted things, such as the player character being changed to Batman or Spiderman or any of the characters from the Resident Evil franchise, or whatever. The Unreal Tournament games alone have seen many (and I mean *many*) copyrighted characters made available, for you to play as or play against. In the Grand Theft Auto games, you can change the cars to all sorts of copyright cars, be they real world (Ferraris, Jaguars, Porsches, even the 1960's British Minis) or fictional (any of the Batmobiles, choose your favourite!, the Deloreon from Back to the Future, etc), and change both the player characters (you can even play as the Hulk, completed with insane strength and smash everything up if you like) and the NPCs.

A lot of this is more about trademarks, likenesses and IP than copyright infringement, as a lot of those old models and skins fall under fan art often being their own creative work under non-commercial personal use only. (though there is a lot of direct copyright infringement since Gmod normalized asset theft as many chase clout with conversion tools, often violating the usage rights provided with them - it wasn't like this before then).

Not the same thing as an unauthorized leak of a unfinished game with confidential materials getting out and hacked.

Kerr Avon wrote on 2022-05-15, 12:32:

Modders insert all sorts of copyrighted characters/vehicles/ideas/etc into games, and they seem to get away with it.

"Foxed"

It's just me or has anyone else noticed how the leaked version source code includes Unreal Engine from let's say 2000 or early 2001?:

As far as I know, Unreal 1 engine hasn't been open-sourced to this day. Probably the reason why DNF2001 wasn't released too, even unfinished.
But as I stroll the source code, it got me wondering. Why was this version/build abandoned? It had to be a lot of money for engine licensing and there is pretty much lot of a progress, so why it was abandoned and not finished?

https://www.pcgamer.com/former-3d-realms-owne … -nukem-forever/

From my perspective at the time the delays were always because they were constantly redoing the game to keep up with the latest FPS developments why they never realized that what they had with the duke games was great and in alot of cases exceeded other games is a mystery.

Grunt wrote on 2022-05-22, 13:09:

Why was this version/build abandoned?

Allegedly the final build's still on UE1. At least the menu in DNF2001 somehow still remained by the time of the Jace Hall show teasing.

DosFreak wrote on 2022-05-22, 13:11:

https://www.pcgamer.com/former-3d-realms-owne … -nukem-forever/

From my perspective at the time the delays were always because they were constantly redoing the game to keep up with the latest FPS developments why they never realized that what they had with the duke games was great and in alot of cases exceeded other games is a mystery.

From what I've read, the problems were mainly down to one man, George Broussard. He was the project leader, in effect (and a key financial contributor, later on, as apparently he blew much of the millions of dollars he'd made from Duke Nukem 3D on Duke Nukem Forever), and from what I've read, every time he saw something new (or at least new to him) that he liked in a new first person shooter, he insisted that that that feature be incorpoerated into DNF, thereby not only adding to the list of things to be contained in DNF, but also taking people away from their current tasks and forcing them to become involved in planning/programming/testing/whatever the new feature. There was never, if what I've read is true, even a remotely finalized list of what the finished game should be, at least not when George was involved in it. He was constantly changing what the end product should be.

If this is true, and it does seem to be at least the accepted explanation for the looooong delay of the game, at least going by what I have read on in various forums and online articles, then you have to wonder why no one on the DNF team ever seems to have told George that they have to stop adding to and altering the game that they were working on, and just get the damn thing finished and out the door. Surely the 3D Realms bosses/owners must have told him that, but I've never seen this mentioned anywhere.

And I have to ask, why is the finished game (the one released in 2011) so generic and utterly lacking in great, even if second-hand, features or spectacle? Even if the 2011 game (the one that commercially released) had been released in 2001 (but still been the 2011 game), then it wouldn't exactly have been original or innovative. And many of the same people who worked on DNF had worked on DN3D, a game that was innovation and has some great (especially at the time) features.

Two other problems were the afore-mentioned game engine switches, where apparently the time and trouble that would be needed to get the game back to it's present state but in the new engine was massively underestimated, and the decision to move the game from PC-only to also have console releases (for the XBox 360 and PS3). This necessitated making the game run in 512 MB of RAM, the consoles' limit, which resulted in George and co. apparently downsizing the levels considerably, even though other companies managed to have much larger levels/sections/open worlds/etc on these consoles.

And apparently it was George who decided that DNF should have a two weapon carrying limit. Originally, when the game was intended only to be published on the PC, DNF had the traditional carry-every-weapon-you-find mechanic, but when it was decided, mid-way through DNF's development, to port DNF to the XBox 360 and PS3, George decided to implement the two weapon carrying limit. Even though console first person shooters have always been able to cope with letting you carry and use any weapons you can find. Even the console ports of Duke Dukem 3D (on the N64, Playstation and Sega Saturn) let you carry and use every weapon, and they worked great.

It really is amazing how much seems to have gone wrong with DNF's development. All the more so considering how, in the first few years, the preview screenshots and videos they released looked so good and promising. I'd love to read a detailed and accurate write up of the game's gestation, and learn what really happened, and how such a talented team, such a massive amount of time, and so much work, came together to create what turned out to be a tedious, unimaginative, very badly judged game that had none of the brilliance at all of it's predecessor.

Grunt wrote on 2022-05-22, 13:09:

It's just me or has anyone else noticed how the leaked version source code includes Unreal Engine from let's say 2000 or early 2001?:

I suppose it's too much to hope that this could enable modders to create a new compiled build for Deus Ex (another Unreal engine 1 game)?Deus Ex with modern engine features would be fantastic.