Translate Duke4.net
GB Quotes
"Duke is an ego maniac and embraces the spotlight and any chance to kick alien ass. He thrives on it."
Search
Poll
Is Gearbox doing a good job handling the Duke Nukem IP?
Yes
No
Sep
15
Our Exclusive Duke Nukem Forever Interview with Scott Miller
Thanks to our news-sniffing community member Mr. Green, we've been able to gather up some QAs with 3D Realms CEO Scott Miller, who was one of the original guys responsible for the Duke Nukem franchise before the intellectual property rights were transferred over to Gearbox. Enjoy!
> Q1. I read recently that Duke Nukem Forever was actually being developed on
> the build engine at one point, if this is true how much was done on the
> build engine?
> Q2. What would you say caused the long development time of Duke Nukem
> Forever?
A few things. First, we were always short-handed with developments
because our background was that of using very small, but super
talented teams. We were slow to adapt to an industry in which team
sizes were growing almost 50% each year. We were ALWAYS behind the
curve, and always under-staffed. Only in the final year or so of
development did we finally correct this issue.
We lacked a true Project Leader. George Broussard is a creative
leader, and not a good project manager. Everyone knows this, but the
problem was finding a project leader with a strong enough personality
to take over the project and drive it forward, without always getting
bogged down with creative issues. Again, we finally had this critical
person in place during the final year of development, when we hired
Brian Hook in this role.
Lastly, as odd as it sounds, our success with Duke Nukem 3D and Max
Payne bought us way too much time to pursue perfection. DNF was an
entirely self-funded project, with no financial help from our
publisher. No one is self-funding triple-A games anymore, or in the
last 10 years. We did, because we could, and we wanted absolutely
creative authority. In the end, we gave ourselves too much freedom to
pursue the perfect game, and we never could get there.
> the build engine at one point, if this is true how much was done on the
> build engine?
I don't think we ever started the game on the Build engine. That
engine had a lifetime window of only 2-3 years, and after Quake came
out and set the new bar for 3D engines, we didn't want to make DNF in
anything less than the best engine possible. So, in the beginning,
Duke was being made using the Quake engine, and we first demo'ed this
version of the game at E3 '98 I think, after just 3-4 months of
development.
engine had a lifetime window of only 2-3 years, and after Quake came
out and set the new bar for 3D engines, we didn't want to make DNF in
anything less than the best engine possible. So, in the beginning,
Duke was being made using the Quake engine, and we first demo'ed this
version of the game at E3 '98 I think, after just 3-4 months of
development.
> Q2. What would you say caused the long development time of Duke Nukem
> Forever?
A few things. First, we were always short-handed with developments
because our background was that of using very small, but super
talented teams. We were slow to adapt to an industry in which team
sizes were growing almost 50% each year. We were ALWAYS behind the
curve, and always under-staffed. Only in the final year or so of
development did we finally correct this issue.
We lacked a true Project Leader. George Broussard is a creative
leader, and not a good project manager. Everyone knows this, but the
problem was finding a project leader with a strong enough personality
to take over the project and drive it forward, without always getting
bogged down with creative issues. Again, we finally had this critical
person in place during the final year of development, when we hired
Brian Hook in this role.
Lastly, as odd as it sounds, our success with Duke Nukem 3D and Max
Payne bought us way too much time to pursue perfection. DNF was an
entirely self-funded project, with no financial help from our
publisher. No one is self-funding triple-A games anymore, or in the
last 10 years. We did, because we could, and we wanted absolutely
creative authority. In the end, we gave ourselves too much freedom to
pursue the perfect game, and we never could get there.
> Q3. Now that 3D Realms has sold the Prey and Duke Nukem IP what is planned
> for the future of 3D Realms?
We have a lot of options, especially with the resurgence of smaller
platform games, which goes back to our roots as the leader of indie
games 20 years ago. Making smaller games on a short time line is a lot
of fun, so we will be pursuing that, for sure. And through Radar, a
company we co-own, we will be developing several other projects,
including film projects. We'll be staying busy, there's no doubt of
that.
> Q4. Any updates on the Duke Nukem movie?
I love the story. That's all I can say.
> Q5. How much % wise of the game was completed in the 2001 trailer?
Probably 20%.
> Q6. What has 3D Realms have planned for the future and what current projects
> is 3D Realms involved in or are underway?
Already basically answered this one.
> Q7. Would 3D Realms ever consider releasing the versions of Duke Nukem
> Forever seen in the 1998 and 2001 trailers?
These are hacked demos, not real games. They are VERY misleading to
the public, because it makes it look like a lot more is finished than
really is. Most early game demos are very much hacked together like
this.
> Q8. How many different storylines has Duke Nukem Forever had? There are
> clear differences seen between the 2001 trailer and the most recent PAX
> footage.
Mostly, the story just kept evolving. But, essentially, it has always
been the same.
> Q9. What happened between 2001 and 2007?
A lot of work. But without proper focus.
> Q10. Any plans for sequels for older titles such as Shadow Warrior and Rise
> of the Triad?
Absolutely.
> Q11. 3D Realms major IP was Duke Nukem, do you believe that at any point in
> the future (be it far or near) you'll re-obtain the Duke Nukem IP?
Unlikely. It's in great hands now, and I look forward to several
decades worth of Duke console games released in a timely way.
> for the future of 3D Realms?
We have a lot of options, especially with the resurgence of smaller
platform games, which goes back to our roots as the leader of indie
games 20 years ago. Making smaller games on a short time line is a lot
of fun, so we will be pursuing that, for sure. And through Radar, a
company we co-own, we will be developing several other projects,
including film projects. We'll be staying busy, there's no doubt of
that.
> Q4. Any updates on the Duke Nukem movie?
I love the story. That's all I can say.
> Q5. How much % wise of the game was completed in the 2001 trailer?
Probably 20%.
> Q6. What has 3D Realms have planned for the future and what current projects
> is 3D Realms involved in or are underway?
Already basically answered this one.
> Q7. Would 3D Realms ever consider releasing the versions of Duke Nukem
> Forever seen in the 1998 and 2001 trailers?
These are hacked demos, not real games. They are VERY misleading to
the public, because it makes it look like a lot more is finished than
really is. Most early game demos are very much hacked together like
this.
> Q8. How many different storylines has Duke Nukem Forever had? There are
> clear differences seen between the 2001 trailer and the most recent PAX
> footage.
Mostly, the story just kept evolving. But, essentially, it has always
been the same.
> Q9. What happened between 2001 and 2007?
A lot of work. But without proper focus.
> Q10. Any plans for sequels for older titles such as Shadow Warrior and Rise
> of the Triad?
Absolutely.
> Q11. 3D Realms major IP was Duke Nukem, do you believe that at any point in
> the future (be it far or near) you'll re-obtain the Duke Nukem IP?
Unlikely. It's in great hands now, and I look forward to several
decades worth of Duke console games released in a timely way.
