Talk:Duke Nukem 3D

Rita Hayworth poster

The article in the "HUMOR" section doesn't reference the escape tunnel behind the Rita Hayworth poster ala Shawshank Redeemption.

True, but there's already a fair bit of referencing going on there, and the section's getting long. Furthermore, while it's completely relevant (well spotted by the way!) adding something about the poster would be a bit of a spoiler for Shawshank Redemption, so I'd be reluctant to add it myself. What do you think? Cheers, --Plumbago 13:08, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

You might use something like 'The imfameous poster on the wall of a cell in the movie Shawshank Redemption'. This way it's mentioned and nothing's spoiled. Indeed, maybe some organisation of the text might be good. 86.39.77.43 19:40, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Port to GBA

AFAIK, there is a port of Duke Nukem 3D to Game Boy Advance, called Duke Nukem Advance. The article does not mention it, though. --CrazyTerabyte 20:27, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Duke Nukem Advance is a different game, not a port, and already has its own article. - Stormwatch 06:57, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Going to add in an 'Episodes and Levels' section

Like in Blood, I'm going to list out the levels and their episodes, if that's alright (with a description for each, maybe someone can provide screenshots for a couple) Seriphyn 18:49, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Jean Luc's Toilet

In the Enterprise level you could find a toilet that was unflushed and Duke would say, "Hmm. The Captains log."

I tried to add it, but I couldn't work out suitable working and it's getting late. Perhaps someone else will have a go at fitting it in. Fracture98 07:09, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Archiving Discussion

Since this page was over 70 kb in size I archived all discussions with no responses since last may into three archive pages. The last archive page is over 40 kb. While not requiring further splitting (would be difficult to do anyway) I suggest that further archives go into a forth archive page (which I have already created a link to. Kc4 21:11, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Calendar

The picture of the calender also looks like it could read 'October 2007'. Are there any citations that it reads 'December'?

It pretty clearly says December, as can be ascertained by the absence of any glyph resembling the "t" that would be found in "October." TerminX 03:57, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

This calendar is pissing me off because people keep changing it. The calendar is just too pixelated to determine the date on it. I think it should just be removed unless an official word is given by the company. It can't keep being changed just because some people think what they think is right. Isn't that called Wikiality? Ideas/comments? Lilmul123 03:24, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

The reference to the date on the 3D Realms site is pretty clear. Although I was one of the people who edited the text describing the pixelated calendar, I'm happy to see it gone completely. You did the right thing. Cheers, --Plumbago 20:41, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I was going to readd the image but ater seeing this dsicussion I can see that the justificaion for remvoing it is farly good so it stays gone. Kc4 03:37, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I have added one from the hihg resolution pack which clearly reads "December 2007" Kc4 18:48, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

It isn't an official 3D Realms work, so it doesn't really add anything here. --Krótki 10:28, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. It's gone. The whole calendar thing is a bit silly really. It stems from a discussion about when DN3D is set. To address this, an image was added to the article showing the lo-res calendar from the original game. However, this then led to a further discussion about whether this indicated year "200X" or "300X" (which, to be fair, wasn't entirely clear from the pixels). Anyway, as 3D Realms described the setting as the "early 21st century", and since the setting is clearly present-day or close to it, further discussion is really rather unnecessary. And an image of the calendar (especially a non-canon one) redundant. Cheers, --Plumbago 10:44, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Please, let me add one point that will render every argument about this calendar moot. Whatever month and year it's showing... IT HAS 32 DAYS! Count them if you don't believe me! Devil Master (talk) 17:11, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

lol

Throughout the game, there are hints at a more specific time period, including a calendar which says "December 2007". Ironically, Duke Nukem Forever is unlikely to be released before that date.

This made my day. 58.179.26.139 13:54, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

While I laughed too, I'm glad the text is gone. Hardly encyclopedic. And, let's not forget, 3D Realms still have almost 12 months to beat the date on the calendar! As if!! Cheers, --Plumbago 20:43, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

HAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA -- Hrotovice (talk) 22:44, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

section regarding multiplayer

The section regarding multiplayer mentions that Duke 3d was based off of the IPX protocol. While this is true, it was possible to play Duke 3d online before Quake was even released as third party software could run the TCP/IP protocol while emulating it to IPX.

External Links

Sorry for moving the source ones, I didn't realise what they were. Thank you for at least not restoring the fansite ones, because they really were spam. Do not add fansite links to this page because I'm watching it...haha. Cream147 _{Shout at me for doing wrong} 14:42, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I thought most of the fansite links were okay, because that's pretty much all that's left for Duke3D fansites these days. Whether or not that qualifies them as relevant links really depends on one's point of view. TerminX 18:00, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

So true. I understand people are expecting nice and official duke3d's web sites as references, but Duke3d is old. Good duke3d web site were written 10 years ago written in HTML with the notepad. A very few of them are still up. But those remaining are good. Of course they are not nice. Please DON'T discard those web sites. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.169.171.57 (talk) 11:32, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I think that a single fansite is fine, but one of those links was to a forum as a source, which is definitely a no-no. Ong elvin (talk) 13:51, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Tons of Original Research

This article makes a lot of claims about the gameplay, what is revolutionary, etc, yet cites a whopping two sources. There is a lot of Original research, and is hardly neutral. Needs major revision to trim the fat. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.251.129.187 (talk • contribs).

More discussion about Mega Drive port

"3D Realms claims that the port is not legal[citation needed], but Tec Toy maintains that it was licensed by now-defunct publisher GT Interactive[citation needed]."

You can find some discussion about this subject at archive page 2.

There was one guy (supposedly) from 3D Realms that said that port was not legal. It was written at a forum topic that does not exist anymore and is not available at Web Archive. So, I don't know if this statement should be kept at Wikipedia, since we can't find a citation to it.

One the other hand, there is a copy of a mail (supposedly) from TecToy and also a cartridge photo. I don't know if any of these are valid proofs for the second statement.

Since I'm not very sure about what to do, I'm bringing this to (more?) discussion. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by CrazyTerabyte (talk • contribs) 04:38, 16 April 2007 (UTC).

Were there a trial? If not then why maintaining such an uninteresting speculation? There are thousand of facts like this everyday. This just add noise. Forget it and stop the paranoia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.169.171.57 (talk) 11:39, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

As that link to the photo of the cartridge is dead, I found another. Here, and a backup. It reads:

© 1996, 1997 3D Realms Entertainment. All rights reserved. Published by SEGA under license from GT Interactive Software Corp. Distributed by Tec Toy.

And again: Tec Toy has been Sega's official representative in Brazil since the 1980s. It's far-fetched to believe they'd ever do a bootleg. On the other hand, knowing GT Interactive's shenanigans, I'll just assume they licensed it to Tec Toy, then failed to tell 3D Realms to keep all the money. --Stormwatch (talk) 08:29, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Kali

This article takes a jab at Kali by saying that you had a slim chance of having a successful game. Where are the sources? I have used Kali to play Duke 3d for years and have had no more problems then are expected with rare drops as claimed. 65.217.223.4 20:48, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Bruce Campbell Voicing

I thought the vocals were provided by Bruce Campbell of Evil Dead fame? I thought that was one of the most famous things about Duke Nukem 3D —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.108.73.47 (talk) 14:50, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

wow fail. obviously you didn't play it then. sounds nothing like him. that and the credits for the game have jon st. jon as the voice of duke nukem. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.42.212.146 (talk) 21:36, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Duke Nukem says various one liners that Bruce Campbell said in the Evil Dead movies. (Example. Duke picks up a weapon and every so often he will say "Hail to the king Baby" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.84.140.29 (talk) 07:51, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Yep, Duke does say a lot of Campbell lines. But he was and still is voiced by John St. John. Anyways, if any Build engine game was to have him voicing, it would have been Blood, as that game is a lot more like Evil Dead (and quotes more from it). Not that I would ever criticize Stephan Weyte's Caleb in Blood and Blood II: The Chosen. He is an all time video game voicing god! Comrade Graham (talk) 07:41, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Campbell wasn't happy when he learned that his lines were reused in a game, citing "they can't even invent their own stuff" or something along the lines. Hrotovice (talk) 22:45, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Team TNT

The article links to the Wikipedia page for the Doom modding team "Team TNT", claiming that they are responsible for the game "WWII GI". In fact, it was the similarly named "TNT Team" who were the Build engine modding team. They produced the "Platoon" amateur add on that then evolved into the commercial game "Nam". "Team TNT" and "TNT Team" are not the same. "TNT Team" (The Build Modding team) evolved into a team with a different name "Reactor4" and they make mods for the Unreal engine. "Team TNT" also still exists and they still make mods for the Doom engined games. As to whether "TNT Team", responsible for "Platoon" and "Nam", were also responsible for "WWII GI", I'm not sure (as far as I can tell, they were) but "Team TNT" (The Doom modders) certainly were not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.69.101.90 (talk) 13:13, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

The title of the first episode of LameDuke

is Mrr Caliber, with two Rs. Here is the proof. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Devil Master (talk • contribs) 21:00, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Technology

The technology section of this article is in need of a serious rewrite. It is heavily biased in favor of Doom and DN3D, completely ignoring all of the games that introduced most of the "revolutionary" features seen in DN3D. This article exists in some alternate universe where Doom was the first FPS and DN3D was the second. Marathon included free look. Slopes and moving platforms were certainly not new to DN3D; Dark Forces had these, and it probably wasn't the first. Some guy (talk) 09:41, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Port to Amiga

There was an Amiga port in 2003 called Duke Nukem 3D: Atomic Edition for the A1200. Christopedia (talk) 14:36, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

quote in the article

i think it should be mentioned that the quote makes duke3d out to be an different game that it is. the game like others of the time lacke score keeping. the game rates kills and hidden rooms found but does not have a wolf 3d score kept. also the game will spawn Troopers if you kill a babe. you are not rewarded for that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.193.174.9 (talk) 20:38, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Army of Darkness

There is often the reference to one liners from the movie, "Army of Darkness". Lines such as "Come get some", "Groovy" and "Hail to the king, baby!" are used throughout the game as the character acquires weaponry, items, or accomplishes some great level of destruction.

--Imwithid (talk) 07:50, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

iPhone / iPod Touch Port

You can now get Duke Nukem 3D as an app for the iPhone / iPod Touch —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.152.96.140 (talk) 22:44, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Reverting bad edits

Comrade Graham, please redo your edit to the Game.com section. Undoing a section-blanking edit(or in this case, a page-blanking edit) and creating a regular one(the Game.com addition) should be done as seperate edits. Otherwise, for all we know you're simply camouflaging a controversial edit.--24.60.220.148 (talk) 14:28, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Screenshot

The article needs a screenshot of the actual game itself, instead of a crappy port and an early build. Some guy (talk) 09:46, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Legacy

Hey. I think somewhere towards the end of this article mention should be made of Duke 3D's legacy. You can argue a lot about how revolutionary or not the game may be, but there is no question that the legacy was massive. That such fanboyism continues to exist so many years after the game was made, with fans so eagerly awaiting a sequel, is testament to the fact that the impact of Duke 3D was huge. A little info on sales and continued interest in the massive time gap between launch and sequel would do well. Financial success was great, but mindshare was amazing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.9.133.253 (talk) 10:56, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Story

I think the "story" section needs organization; it should summarize each episode (including the Atomic Edition), paragraph-by-paragraph. I find it's too circuitous to lump it all into one, like it presently is. Jonay81687 (talk) 01:50, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Release date

http://www.3drealms.com/profile.html "Next came Duke Nukem 3D in early Jan. 1996 (shareware only, with the full game releases in May)."

The Official Apogee FAQ v7.2 "Version 1.0 of Duke Nukem was the first shareware version of the game; it was released on January 29, 1996. On February 20, 1996, version 1.1 was released, and on April 24, 1996, the final shareware version of the game, 1.3d, was released. (There were no versions released between v1.1 and v1.3d." "v1.3d was the final version of the shareware edition of the game. It was also the first version produced in registered form, there was no registered v1.0, 1.1, or 1.2."

The Official Duke Nukem 3D FAQ Version 1.0 - May 31 1996, 9:00 am "2.6. Where's The Registered Version? It began shipping on May 7. To order call 1-800-3DREALMS. Also, the game first appeared in stores on May 16."

Duke Nukem Forever extras "May, 1996 - Version 1.3d of Duke Nukem 3D (Retail) is shipped to game retailers worldwide."

Zeebo

Does Duke Nukem 3D really exist for the Zeebo platform? I was on Zeebo's Brazil (http://zeebo.com.br/?page_id=4966) and Mexico (http://zeebo.com.mx/?page_id=4966) websites--Duke Nukem 3D is NOT in the list of purchasable games. There's a video on Youtube of Duke Nukem 3D running on Zeebo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2CHsvl1wLo), but several comments claim the video is a fake.

If Duke Nukem 3D on the Zeebo platform is vaporware, it should be deleted from the "Platform(s)" field of the Infobox in this article. ProResearcher (talk) 00:25, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, Duke Nukem 3D isn't listed on the Zeebo section of GameFAQs either, not even as a cancelled title. Looks like someone finally deleted it from the "Platform(s)" field, so that's taken care of.--NukeofEarl (talk) 16:13, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

The Zeebo port is legit. In the April 2009 edition of QSound Labs' newsletter, they claim that the Ripp3D engine developed by their company was used by MachineWorks Northwest to port Duke Nukem 3D to the Zeebo. Yes, it's true that the YouTube footage appears to use assets from EDuke32 (which is why its authenticity is questioned), but for perspective, MachineWorks Northwest has also been accused of lifting assets from Duke Nukem: Manhattan Project when creating Duke Nukem Mobile 3D, which no one doubts is real. --Smiiikes (talk) 15:15, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

I don't think a promotional newsletter from the company behind the game engine used for the supposed port qualifies as a reliable source that the port was released, or even was in development. Even if it did, the newsletter doesn't actually mention Duke Nukem 3D anywhere, only shows the PC version box art. The actual text says only "Duke Nukem", which could refer to almost any game in the series. This post here, in fact, suggests the game the newsletter refers to was probably Duke Nukem Arena. The lack of a listing for Zeebo Duke Nukem 3D on major games databases like GameFAQs or Mobygames is also suggestive, and searching online I can't find any reviews, announcements from the publisher, or even previews.--Martin IIIa (talk) 12:15, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

By any chance, did you read the post that you're quoting against me? :) If so, then you'd know that *I* was the one who made that post. And if you'd bothered to read the post, then you'd see that thread actually says the exact opposite of what you're claiming it says. The developer told me he recalls making a Duke Nukem game for the Zeebo, but he changed his mind and realized that it wasn't Duke Nukem Arena. Second, I don't see how you can lightly dismiss inside information from a company that *says* they licensed their engine to be used in "the popular Duke Nukem" and then shows an image of cover art for what anyone with common sense would understand to be cover art for a Zeebo port of Duke Nukem 3D (for context, the cover art appears alongside the cover art for Prey: Evil, which is the name of the Zeebo port for Prey). You can't say that "Duke Nukem 3D" doesn't appear in the article; it plainly does in huge letters in the cover art! Third, you give absolutely no account of why we should discount *actual video footage of the game in question* from a Latin American media channel. To review: 1.) the developer says he made a Duke Nukem game for the Zeebo 2.) a software company says they licensed a game engine to be used to make a Zeebo port of Duke Nukem 3D 3.) we have actual video footage of the game. A lack of documentation on English-speaking websites isn't evidence that a Latin American video game doesn't exist. Smiiikes (talk) 07:42, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I just found another contemporaneous news source that says Zeebo (the company) at GDC 2009 included Duke Nukem 3D in a list of games that would be available on the console. This is a legitimate news organization based in New Zealand: source and about the site --Smiiikes (talk) 16:09, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

• I would be cautious about this. We have two sources (and more) that say the game was to come out as a downloadable title for platform, but we have not a single one that confirms whether it has actually come out. There are several archived versions of Zeebo Brazil's games page,[1][2][3][4] yet none of them lists Duke Nukem 3D, unlike all other games mentioned in the press releases. Zeebo Mexico's has not been archived sufficiently, but what is there also does not look promising. Furthermore, MachineWorks Northwest announced the iOS port of the game, but no Zeebo port. Note also that QSound's press release does not actually say that the company developed the Zeebo port, it only mentions the company in connection with Prey Evil. This would leave us with only the supposed YouTube footage, which certainly is not reliable. I would think that it is much more probable that the Zeebo port for Duke Nukem 3D was cancelled, though of course, we have just as little proof for that as for the release.

@Smiiikes: Since Wikipedia should build on verifiability, saying that a game has come out because it was announced that it should come out is incorrect, and could be deemed original research. I will revert your edit, both due to these issues and with respect to WP:BRD. If the game was really released in 2009, there must be at least one reliable source (not limited to English-language ones; most likely it'll be in Spanish or Portuguese) that says so. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 18:23, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

@IceWelder: Hmm, OK, I think that's a reasonable summary. The archived games pages are especially relevant. We have multiple sources that agree a port was in production, but we have no verification that it was actually published, despite the fact that the Zeebo catalog is relatively well-documented. I agree with your decision to remove it from the article. --Smiiikes (talk) 18:50, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Quick update: The Zeebo footage on YouTube is fake. I asked the uploader whether he still believes it to be real, and he told me it's fake and was meant as a joke. He just now clarified in a comment beneath the video. Smiiikes (talk) 19:26, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

A belated response, but Smiikes, with regard to the unprovoked hostility of your post and your demand that I prove a negative, I refer you to Wikipedia:Civility and Wikipedia:Verifiability. Wikipedia is intended as an encyclopedia of verifiable fact, not a compendium of rumors that have yet to be conclusively disproven.--Martin IIIa (talk) 02:41, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Budget Was About $300,000

I currently don't have time to add this information to the article, but the budget for this game was about $300,000. Source is at 17:23 in an interview with Apogee founder Scott Miller here. --82.171.13.139 (talk) 00:42, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

You gotta be careful about using YouTube as a source, though. In most cases WP: COPYVIO comes into play.--NukeofEarl (talk) 14:39, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

I don't see how WP:COPYVIO applies here. You cite the source (Armchair Arcade via YouTube) and post the fact. There's no need to copy/paste any transcriptions. --Teancum (talk) 15:57, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Unless "blacklily8" is Armchair Arcade's official Youtube channel (which seems unlikely), it might be a copyright violation for the video to be on Youtube, in which case we shouldn't use it as a source or link to it. EDIT: I stand corrected, it looks like that is the host's (poorly named IMO) official Youtube channel. Some guy (talk) 19:44, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Cool, there seems to be no problem with adding that then. But yeah, Teancum, 95% of all usable, reliable information which appears on YouTube was posted there by someone who doesn't have the copyright to it. In such cases it doesn't matter how much or how little you transcribe/quote from the source; simply linking to it is violation of copyright. Probably a better link to explain this is WP: YOUTUBE.--NukeofEarl (talk) 14:38, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I should have specified that I knew it was the original video on the correct channel. --Teancum (talk) 23:51, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

I think the article still doesn't mention the budget... --82.170.113.123 (talk) 12:03, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Odd, I thought Teancum would have added it by now. I've gone ahead and edited it in myself.--NukeofEarl (talk) 17:22, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. --82.170.113.123 (talk) 12:09, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Screenshot

It is in principle good to have a screenshot of the game, but imho there could be a better one than this one:

- The resolution si too high, which means that it will be resized by a bot which makes it worse than a screenshot that was already taken at a low resolution like 640x480.
- It contains the "improved" status bar of the Windows port, not the original status bar of the DOS version.

Maybe I will take a 640x480 DOS screenshot at some time and replace this screenshot with it, but I don't know when I will have time for this. --MrBurns (talk) 04:21, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

I replaced the screenshot with an unedited 640x480 screenshot. I hope this resolution is low enough, it was actually the lowest resolution at which you could play the original DOS version without getting artefacts. It also includes the original DOS graphics, not the slightly improved graphics of the Windows version (especially the HUD was improved for the Windows version). --MrBurns (talk) 00:21, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Would it be okay were I to add that same image under the "PC Releases" section for the Megaton Edition area? I did add that image for that edition, and it does have a reason to be there: it has re-polished graphics. Is there a point, or would that be too not very big of a deal? Gamingforfun365 (talk) 06:59, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

I am sorry for my edit, for I had probably placed it in the wrong area in this article, but I thought that I had tagged the image's description as Megaton Edition. I am sorry for my mistake there as well. Gamingforfun365 (talk) 07:01, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

I think it is a good idea to place your screenshot in the "PC versions" section. --MrBurns (talk) 07:07, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Done. Gamingforfun365 (talk) 07:26, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Sexual content

I've got too much to do on other WP gaming articles alone to look into this myself, but the "Reception" section seriously needs to be beefed up with info that isn't about the game's sexual content. It presents a very warped picture of how critics actually responded to the game; the review in Maximum that I just cited, for example, doesn't even mention the sexual content.--Martin IIIa (talk) 20:07, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

On that same topic, apparently there was an attempted ban in Australia for 'sexual violence'. I have no idea what that could refer to, ideas anyone?2001:8003:1301:BA00:9179:32CC:1DEB:9596 (talk) 16:43, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Duke Nukem 3D. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121014095704/http://www.ugo.com:80/games/history-of-online-gaming-1993-1994 to http://www.ugo.com/games/history-of-online-gaming-1993-1994
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101203140923/http://www.gamespot.com:80/news/2447352.html to http://www.gamespot.com/news/2447352.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:07, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Duke Nukem 3D. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150106095359/http://www.bestinclass.com/about/ten to http://www.bestinclass.com/about/ten

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:26, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Source

• https://web.archive.org/web/19980204093039/http://www.next-generation.com:80/news/111897l.chtml
• https://web.archive.org/web/20000815063304/http://www.gamecenter.com:80/Features/Shoot/Quakeduke/
• https://web.archive.org/web/19961018190516fw_/http://www.nuke.com:80/cgr/news/9603/shander.htm
• https://web.archive.org/web/19961018193457/http://www.nuke.com:80/cgr/news/9605/duke.htm
• https://web.archive.org/web/19961018193512/http://www.nuke.com:80/cgr/news/9605/dukess.htm
• https://web.archive.org/web/20140517184705/http://www.thefreelibrary.com/GT+Interactive+Ships+More+Than+500%2c000+Units+of+Duke+Nukem+for+N64...-a019987938

Maintenance templates discussion

The template about reliable sources was put up 2 1/2 years ago, and I'm not seeing why. Also, the expansion template for the Reception section seems like it's unnecessary now. Turbine2k5 (talk) 01:49, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Agreed about the reliable sources template; I took it down a few days ago. Looks like the expansion template has also since been removed.--Martin IIIa (talk) 17:11, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Reviews

• The Duelist #15

207.229.139.154 (talk) 02:09, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

References

Not just GPL

Although Duke Nukem/eduke32/etc are licensed under the GPL, it is combined with the build license which is strictly non-commercial:

https://icculus.org/BUILD/downloads/LICENSE.txt

https://www.eduke32.com/buildlic.txt

This is worth mentioning in the article somewhere. 2406:3400:210:73A0:9C55:D8D1:EEF9:4462 (talk) 22:49, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

1997? Duke Nukem

Hello, kam Duke Nukem 3D nicht 1993 oder 1994 Heraus? Ich könnte Schätzen dass ich die Demo 1994 Gespielte, vielleicht Irren Ich Meinerselbst Auch, sollen ja keine Feststellungenen, aber bin vielleicht Fast Sicherlich.

Lg Sven Balzer 2A02:3033:605:7D53:5D04:DE1E:947C:EA4D (talk) 21:29, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello, didn't Duke Nukem 3D come out in 1993 or 1994? I could guess that I played the demo in 1994, maybe I'm wrong myself, but I'm almost sure.

Hi Sven, the game came out in 1996. The previous entry, Duke Nukem II, was only released at the very end of 1993. Duke Nukem 3D entered into pre-production in 1994 (according to this source) and the engine it ultimately used, Build, did not exist until late 1995, so you most likely did not play a demo in 1994.

P.S.: When communicating on the English Wikipedia, please use English as much as possible.

Regards, IceWelder [✉] 16:31, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

"Pig cop" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Pig cop has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 18 § Pig cop until a consensus is reached. Jay 💬 19:52, 18 August 2024 (UTC)