<em>Duke Nukem Forever</em> sold 376,000 units in the US in June

Despite taking a critical pounding, <em>Duke Nukem Forever</em> sold 376,300 units in its first month of release across all three platforms.

<a href='http://meincmagazine.com/gaming/news/2011/07/duke-nukem-forever-sold-376k-units-in-the-us-in-june.ars'>Read the whole story</a>

 

[Mortus]

And people wonder why publishers and developers keep making gamers put up with more and more shit. We happily pay for it even after complaining (and boycotting (lol)) it.

 

[Raptor]

Does anyone want to guess how long it will take before the sequel is announced? My money is on next E3.

No worries there. By the time they get DNF2 out the door we'll all be dead anyway.

 

[Sulla]

Surprised CO BO is still in the top 10.

 

[JeffK.]

With sales data, It seems like *customers* love Duke. I guess sometimes we want greasy hamburgers instead of caviar

Oh, go screw yourself. Not only does first month sales data not prove what you purport it to prove, and not only are you weirdly crowing about your product being subpar, but you're being a douche about it.

 

[TommySch]

DNF wasn't nearly as bad as the b*t* h**tin* reviewers were trying to portrait it. Yeah, I know, this was a vendetta over the blacklisting PR firm and stuff but really? At least have some honesty about it. It was clearly sub-par but getting 3/10 on gamespot was just pathetic. If you are not a raving feminist the first play through is fairly entertaining. It reminded me of the early 2000s.

Plz let CoD die already!

 

[SgtCupCake]

I bet half of those sales were preorders. The other half were sales in steam when it was 50% off. I mean.... could it really be that bad?

 

[bittermann]

DNF with just 376,000 games sold across 3 platforms is actually pretty terrible! Wow what a waste....serves them right no matter how Pitchford tries to spin it!

 

[L4t3r4lu5]

The question you're not asking (and which you won't get anything more than straw poll stats for) is:

How many of us 376k wish we could return it for a refund?

Put "+Refund" at the end of your post if you agree.

 

[IHATENAMES]

Only a minority of people cares about reviews. Most people noticed something is popular and follows the stream, its herd instinct. Look at transformers 2 and the likes.

 

[bojesphob]

I guess we'll see what happens in the next few months. If history has shown us anything, something with that much hype tends to do well right off the bat because people want to try it out. But, if it is as bad as critics have said, the sales are going to drop off drastically after that initial onslaught. A lot of movies have done that, done well the first weekend, but by the next weekend, enough people knew how bad it was from hearing others talk about it, and the attendance falls through the floor. If it is better than reviewed, it will stay right there with sales, so it may end up continuing to do well.One month sales isn't enough to know if it's going to be considered a success or failure.

 

[helel ben shachar]

Rants on either side aside, I hope the game was bought knowing that wrapping it up and selling it as is was going to cause a ruckus. Recoup you costs with the release and put the franchise in competent management/programmers hands and make a real sequel fitting the name.

I'm yet to play the sequel since I've too much emotional investment in the memories of playing Duke 3D when if first came out. But if they make a modern title, not some 12 rework of the same damn thing, I'd buy it.

 

[sea]

Critical reviews are meaningless? Not really. There's a difference between "so bad it's good" and "just bad", Randy. Duke Nukem Forever is most definitely the latter.

 

[Falien]

"I guess sometimes we want greasy hamburgers instead of caviar," Gearbox CEO Randy Pitchford tweeted in response to the game's critical lashing.

True, I sometimes fancy a greasy hamburger. However, when I order caviar and receive a greasy hamburger instead, I tend to get disappointed (especially if the waiter takes 10 years to deliver the hamburger and then tries to convince me it's really caviar, charging me accordingly).

 

[Pryopizm]

"I guess sometimes we want greasy hamburgers instead of caviar," Gearbox CEO Randy Pitchford tweeted in response to the game's critical lashing.

True, I sometimes fancy a greasy hamburger. However, when I order caviar and receive a greasy hamburger instead, I tend to get disappointed (especially if the waiter takes 10 years to deliver the hamburger and then tries to convince me it's really caviar, charging me accordingly).

Or, stated another way: I don't want to pay $60 for a greasy hamburger and I don't want to take 5 hours to eat it.

 

[Maltz]

Yes, the jokes in the game were a little dated sometimes, and the engine was not nearly as ground-breaking as Duke 3D was in its day. But the game almost exactly met my expectations. It was Duke Nukem, in all his crude, misogynistic glory.

What did the Ars expect?

 

[nehinks]

I bet half of those sales were preorders. The other half were sales in steam when it was 50% off. I mean.... could it really be that bad?

I had the same thought actually, then realized that the steam sale wasnt actually in June (Edit: assuming you were talking about the sale during their Summer Sale last week - if it was on sale earlier I didnt notice), so it's doubtful those numbers are included in the sales figures. Personally I tried the demo on steam and was extremely unimpressed. At a minimum they could've not done a stupid 2 gun limit like all modern games, since a lot of the rest was retroish.

PS- for that old school feel with more awesome and less crap, I'm looking forward to Serious Sam 3

 

[gwguy]

Meh,

From their perspective this has to be a success. They got the IP (the real prize), put out DNF (the game that would never be finished), and actually made some good numbers in their first month. Not an insignificant accomplishment. All the investors will take away from this is that as long as it stars the Duke they can literally shit in a box and people will buy it.

Clearly this will give them significant momentum toward make Duke 5. My guess is that the marketing and development strategy will be as follows: Start working on a proper AAA title starring the duke and this is now one of Gearbox's flagship IP they can't release something terrible again and then market it as 'the game DNF should've been'.

Can they do it? Who knows, but I wouldn't write them off.

 

[BigDragon]

"With sales data, It seems like *customers* love Duke. I guess sometimes we want greasy hamburgers instead of caviar," Gearbox CEO Randy Pitchford tweeted in response to the game's critical lashing.

Did Randy Pitchford just compare Halo, Gears of War, or Call of Duty to caviar? I am offended! Rawr!

 

[sword_9mm]

"I guess sometimes we want greasy hamburgers instead of caviar," Gearbox CEO Randy Pitchford tweeted in response to the game's critical lashing.

True, I sometimes fancy a greasy hamburger. However, when I order caviar and receive a greasy hamburger instead, I tend to get disappointed (especially if the waiter takes 10 years to deliver the hamburger and then tries to convince me it's really caviar, charging me accordingly).

duke nukem was never caviar.

some of your rose tinted glasses are just waay too dark or something.

duke 3d was funny enough but after the first few levels was fucking boring. duke forever is entertaining for about the same amount of time. i'll pick it up when i get a pc that will play it but it'll be cheap then so no skin off my scroat.

 

[eXceLon]

I waited for the demo to become available on Steam, at which point I confirmed that it did in fact suck and lost all interest.

 

[Ars Moriendi]

Look, they put a billion dollars in to advertising this because they knew it was somewhat of a stinker. Advertising works.

 

[omf]

+refund

Anyone want to take bets on how well a sequel that doesn't have decades-worth of expectations and hype behind it does?

 

[repatch]

And people wonder why publishers and developers keep making gamers put up with more and more shit. We happily pay for it even after complaining (and boycotting (lol)) it.

Exactly. Our local hockey team hasn't won the cup in nearly half a century. Most seasons we're near or at the bottom. Yet, almost every single home game is sold out hours after tickets go on sale.

People ask why they don't play better, why they don't build a better team. My answer? Why should they? If they can be lazy, play horribly, and still sell out every single game, where is the motivation to improve? Why try harder and play better if you get no benefit out of it? Many union jobs are the same, as long as they do the bare minimum, they get their paycheque. Doing more gets them nothing, so why bother?

DNF is in this class. The game is barely enough to qualify as a game, yet it sold like crazy. So why should the publisher try hard and spend money to make a better game? If people buy crap like crazy, they are fine with that.

I understand their position, and I'd probably do the same. I'm just disappointed DNF wasn't any good. I was actually planning to buy DNF; then I saw some of the gameplay and decided against it.

 

[Goofball_Jones]

I bet half of those sales were preorders. The other half were sales in steam when it was 50% off. I mean.... could it really be that bad?

You have a point, i bet a lot of it was pre-orders. Will be interesting to see how quickly the numbers die off when people see or hear or read about how bad this is. And yes, it's pretty bad.

 

[nehinks]

Oops

 

[repatch]

Yes, the jokes in the game were a little dated sometimes, and the engine was not nearly as ground-breaking as Duke 3D was in its day. But the game almost exactly met my expectations. It was Duke Nukem, in all his crude, misogynistic glory.

What did the Ars expect?

I don't know about Ars, but I know what I expected: a fun game.

Duke3D was crude, was nasty and was really bad in certain ways. But what it had was FUN. It was FUN playing Duke3D. I just played a few levels a few days ago and even though I pretty much still knew the levels by heart, it was STILL fun.

DNF doesn't have that. It's a very linear game, the fun isn't there. Duke3D really had a sense of exploration to it. It didn't feel like you were in a movie script. DNF does, it feels scripted, like you're just going with the flow, that's not fun to me.

Fancy graphics are nice and all, but if the game isn't fun then what's the point?

 

[Cristiano]

According to steam, I already have 7 hours played time and I have had a blast. I enjoy the boss fights a lot even if they are rather simple. I enjoy the humor that most reviewers seem to hate.

The game is extremely stable and I had not have any glitch or bug whatsoever on release. I can not say the same about any Bethesda game and others.

 

[Panick]

Clearly DNF can't be selling that well on PC if Gearbox and 2K gave it up for a daily deal at 50% off for the Steam summer sale. I'm just saying, you don't discount a product to half price if it's selling well at full price. Of course after seeing some of the gameplay vids on YouTube I didn't even want it at $25. And I'm fairly sure it's not even worth $5.

And someone needs to go and punch Randy Pitchford in the nuts. What a douche.

 

[Falien]

duke nukem was never caviar.

some of your rose tinted glasses are just waay too dark or something.

duke 3d was funny enough but after the first few levels was fucking boring. duke forever is entertaining for about the same amount of time. i'll pick it up when i get a pc that will play it but it'll be cheap then so no skin off my scroat.

Not my fault, that's the word Mr. Pitchford used.

But your argument is interesting: are you saying that the new game being crap is OK since the old game was crap as well? Rose-tinted glasses notwithstanding, aren't games, as well as standards by which they are judged, supposed to evolve over time?

 

[ZeHa]

So...

is 376,000 units good? Not good? How can I tell?

It might be a good idea if the article could put the number in relation. Because I have absolutely no clue whether that number is a big one or not, i.e. how much other games manage to sell in a month (or overall).

Would be nice to clear that up!

 

[erikb]

How many of those were preorders from a decade ago? (I'm wondering sarcastically...)

Sequel? Yeah, right. What would that be subtitled, given that "Forever" took nearly than long to come out? Duke Nukem: After Eternity?

 

[FreezeWarp]

Meh, I have a strange feeling it's still 10× better than a Ke$ha song...

Also, chalk me up for $10 that a sequel is released in 2040.

 

[Raptor]

DNF is in this class. The game is barely enough to qualify as a game, yet it sold like crazy. So why should the publisher try hard and spend money to make a better game? If people buy crap like crazy, they are fine with that.

While I generally agree, we're talking about DNF here. It was the stuff of legend in the gaming industry. It didn't have to be good, It didn't really even need to run. It just had to come out.

That alone assured throngs of people would buy the thing just to see firsthand what the hell took 12 years to produce.

Anyone with any sense knew it was going to be terrible. Most of us were saying that 5 or more years ago with the proviso "if it ever actually comes out". Yet a lot of these same people bought it anyway. To be honest, as much as I don't do FPS games I did really enjoy Duke3D, and once I heard DNF was coming out I was seriously considering picking it up. I expected 'greasy hamburger', and if that's what had been delivered I'd have been happy with that.

But all the press and videos I saw related to DNF convinced me they delivered a turd on a paper plate, so I quickly dropped it from my list. It went from a "probably eventually" to a "probably not, unless I can get it for under $5 someday. Maybe."

Anyway, my point is that DNF was a special case here. They could have skipped advertising entirely and it could have been an even worse game and it still would have sold very well for what it was. And that's because it was DNF.

I seriously doubt they'd see even a fraction of the same success if they kick out a DNF2. Maybe if they knock one out of the park with DNF2 and maintain that they could see a rebound with DNF3, but people bought in to DNF for the spectacle of it - not because they really cared about the quality of the game.

 

[TheCrackLing]

Yes, the jokes in the game were a little dated sometimes, and the engine was not nearly as ground-breaking as Duke 3D was in its day. But the game almost exactly met my expectations. It was Duke Nukem, in all his crude, misogynistic glory.

What did the Ars expect?

Duke being able to hold >2 weapons at a time

 

[MonkeyPaw]

DNF was heavily promoted at game stores. My local gamestop had a life size cardboard cut out where you could stick your head in a whole and have your picture taken with Duke. With that much promotion, I'm sure lots of people preordered thinking it was the next big game.

 

[jandrese]

Honestly, I fully expected it to show up at 50% off on Steam in a few months anyway, and I've waited 10 years for it, I can wait a few months more.

Paying full price for a game that was almost certainly slapped together from the detritus of a decade of development hell seemed like a bad idea to me, but I'd be totally willing to play it just to see how bad it is at at sub $20 price point.

Plus, it's not like I always agree with the critics. I liked Doom 3 for instance, not so much its expansion (which was reviewed better).

 

[jandrese]

Edit: Moonsharked!

 

[Naame]

I bought it. I played it. I loved it. I don't know why the reviews were as bad as they were. Opinions are like a-holes I guess.

 

[Raptor]

I think what I find most disappointing about DNF is that it is probably THE poster-child representation of what the gaming industry calls a "Mature" title.