Optimize parsing more and more

I have the below C# code for parsing. Do you think this is most optimized or should I use a generic method in these functions themselves?

public static bool GetDBBool(object value)
{
    var result = false;

    if (value != null && string.IsNullOrEmpty(value.ToString()) == false)
        bool.TryParse(value.ToString(), out result);

    return result;
}

public static int GetDBInt(object value)
{
    var result = -999;

    if (value != null && string.IsNullOrEmpty(value.ToString()) == false)
        int.TryParse(value.ToString(), out result);

    return result;
}

public static double GetDBDouble(object value)
{
    var result = -999.00;

    if (value != null && string.IsNullOrEmpty(value.ToString()) == false)
        double.TryParse(value.ToString(), out result);

    return result;
}

public static DateTime GetDBDate(object value)
{
    var result = DateTime.Now;

    if (value != null && string.IsNullOrEmpty(value.ToString()) == false)
        DateTime.TryParse(value.ToString(), out result);

    return result;
}

public static DateTime? GetDBNullableDate(object value)
{
    DateTime date;
    if (value != null && string.IsNullOrEmpty(value.ToString()) == false)
        return DateTime.TryParse(value.ToString(), out date) ? date : (DateTime?)null;
    else
        return null;
}

== false is not very readable. Use ! instead.

If the "object value" is already of desired type (e.g. DateTime), it would be slower to convert it to string and then back again.

I would write instead

if (value is DateTime) return (DateTime)value;

I would not use var result = -999; as a return value.

If the conversion fails, you can either return Int32.MinValue (better than -999) or rather null.

Maybe also you would like to check for DBNull.Value?
So first I would check for null and DBNull.Value, then "value is DateTime" check and the last thing would be DateTime.TryParse.

StackExchange Code Review Q#56833, answer score: 6