By Alec Meer on July 30th, 2008 at 7:45 pm.
Kieron’s currently out at the Develop conference for us, so expect exciting missives soon. Or, more likely, incoherent booze-addled rambling about Kenickie. So, while he struggles manfully to work out what a wireless internet is, we can instead harken to reports from elsewhere in gamingdom. Specifically Videogaming247‘s coverage of Ken Levine’s bravely-named “BioShock and Awe: Immersing the Gamer in an Alternate World Without Drowning Out the Gameplay” lecture and some quotable interview gobbets they tickled out of him afterwards. Tempestuous Mount Bioshock never quite goes dormant, it seems.
He’s not giving away much about whatever his next game is, beyond calling it “pretty crazy ambitious” – though it seems increasingly unlikely it’s the rumoured X-COM revamp.
“I’ll say this about it. It’s important to us that whatever we do has the same impact on the gamer that BioShock did. And so, I think that the company’s position on us and what we do is that we’re going to be breaking down barriers and breaking down doors.”
He does so like his breaking, that man.
So there’s that, but there’s also confirmation that he’s pretty much done with Bioshock now. The PS3 version and its extra content is nowt to do with him, and he reiterated that he’s got little to do with Bioshock 2. Which is good or bad news, depending on your take on the rumours that he’s difficult to work with. Which he also addressed:
“Maybe I’m the nicest guy in the world, maybe I’m the biggest asshole. I couldn’t tell you. I think people choose to work with me because I can work with them and make a game called BioShock. Do you like to see people say you’re inconsiderate? No. When it comes to hiring, does it really matter? No.”
Finally, there’s a lengthy transcript of his preceding speech, packed with Making O’Bioshock nuggets, thoughts on the upcoming movie adaptation and his claims that it’s a game that can change people’s lives. Cripes.
Oh – apparently Mrs Ken does get upset about the name-calling, though. Aw.
30/07/2008 at 20:12 a-scale says:
That’s a crying shame. I would be most offended if the sequel to Bioshock ends up ruining the good name of that franchise for me.
30/07/2008 at 20:28 Deuteronomy says:
No wonder Bioshock turned out the way it did.
30/07/2008 at 21:04 Dracko says:
a-scale: At this point, BioShock would need a masterful sequel to give it a good name in the first place.
30/07/2008 at 21:08 Leeks! says:
If Kieron uses the internet to talk about Kenickie broad-wave, does that mean we’ll all be raped with magic?
30/07/2008 at 21:17 Turkish Superman says:
BioShock was good, but hardly the masterpiece so many made it out to be.
30/07/2008 at 21:17 uppi17 says:
How come this page looks all fancy on my iPhone, but the rest don’t? Is it due to the mention of Emmy-Kate Montrose? (EDIT: Bah now the rest do as well)
I also agree with Mrs Ken about the name. Bioshock sounded more like a new type of yoghurt than a game.
30/07/2008 at 21:27 Subjective Effect says:
I used to care about Levine’s ideas but now who really does?
All the gaming greats fall. Warren Spector and his awful Thief 3, Ken Levine and his terrible BioShock. If you need to know what is wrong with BioShock just watch the Yahtzee review.
When he says “pretty crazy ambitious” does that mean “not like BioShock and more like System Shock 2″? Because if it doesn’t, who cares?
30/07/2008 at 21:46 Vagrant Farce says:
Wow, I didn’t realise we had moved on to calling Bioshock terrible now.
[edit] also, didn’t Yahtzee like Bioshock?
30/07/2008 at 21:53 KingMob says:
I was going to say something negative here about Ken Levine getting a big head after Bioshock, but this comments thread has turned me 180 and now I have to say:
Bioshock was a great game. Not as good as System Shock 2, but then what is? Leave off bagging on Ken Levine and Bioshock, it only makes you look small minded.
30/07/2008 at 22:04 Razor says:
I agree with KingMob.
It would take alot to best System Shock 2. You’d have to drop the consoles completely for one thing. That’s pretty unlikely to happen with Bioshock 2.
30/07/2008 at 22:16 Funky Badger says:
Up is down, black is white.
Whisper it, but BioShock is a wonderful game – that slightly runs out of puff in the last segment.
Intraweb revisionism is the new black, apparently.
30/07/2008 at 22:19 simonkaye says:
You didn’t give this the obligatory ‘staring eyes’ tag.
30/07/2008 at 22:24 Pidesco says:
BioShock is System Shock 2 with a lot of cool features removed or nerfed and turned into a shallow, circle strafing FPS.
It’s System Shock 2 made deliberately worse for the wider appeal. What’s there to like about this approach to game design?
30/07/2008 at 22:38 sbs says:
That’s da bidness.
30/07/2008 at 22:46 rocketman71 says:
Bioshock’s endings weres ridiculous. The fact that you got the bad ending if you harvested a single girl was ridiculous. In fact, anything after meeting Ryan was ridiculous. And the more ridiculous thing of all was its DRM (nowadays finally defunct).
BTW, has Levine finally made up his mind on whether story is important in a game?.
30/07/2008 at 23:10 Dorian Cornelius Jasper says:
Leeks:
… Yup.
30/07/2008 at 23:17 MetalCircus says:
ITT: people who like to look elitist.
Sorry, but Ken is a great guy – every interview i’ve seen with him he has been pumped and enthusiastic, in a good way (i.e. not in a Jade Raymond way) and honestly, his heart is in the right place and I really believe that.
People bag on him because Bioshock was dumbed down, compared to SS2, but there is something you guys are going to have to accept; there will never, ever be another game like System Shock 2. It’s over. Time to move on.
People just don’t want to admit that despite the changes, Bioshock was a fucking great game, and a great experience too. Shame on you, internet.
The games industry is facing increasing commercialisation in the face, and we’re seeing more faceless money making toss-bags take over and making dull dross for the masses; in an industry where this is being tolerated (especially by many people here posting on this site!) Ken Levine is at least on the good guys side. Come on, lay off him a bit.
30/07/2008 at 23:22 Saflo says:
Uh oh, now you’ve done it.
30/07/2008 at 23:22 Funky Badger says:
Umm… and let’s not forget, the last third of System Shock 2 was unplayable nonsense. From the Rickenbacker onwards was poor (at least in comparison to what went before).
30/07/2008 at 23:26 Josh says:
I can’t tell you people how much it warms my heart to see so many express the opinion that while Bioshock was great, it was no System Shock 2.
I agree completely that the move to develop the game as a console title first ruined any possibility of it being as incredible as its spiritual predecessor.
30/07/2008 at 23:28 JonFitt says:
Quit the Bioshock hating, it had its flaws, but it was a great game.
An X-COM remake would be awesome, but Cenega are doing an ok job as it is.
At this point for a variety of reasons, I don’t think a true X-COM remake would be able to live up to expectations while attracting a new following, think Phantom Menace.
So my suspicion is that Ken is working on the real sequel: HolyShock and or MeteorShock.
30/07/2008 at 23:34 MetalCircus says:
You guys amaze me sometimes, honestly. You are happy to flap your gums about Halo 3, yet when something like Bioshock is released, an honest attempt at something GOOD, you take a shit on it, and associate anyone with it, no matter how good thier intentions to make a great game, is also dumped on. You people amaze me. Typical elitist gamers. Enjoy your endless stream of half arsed ropey sequals.
I’m a bit tired, and quite hot and flustered at the moment, so I could just be in a mood anyway, and I apologise in advance if I seem harsh but I just wanted to get a rant off my shoulders, and I feel like I should be calling people on thier attitudes, because what I see, honestly, is bull crap. I’m sorry. *shrugs*
30/07/2008 at 23:36 Dan (WR) says:
Sorry Metalcircus, but your reasonableness isn’t welcome around here.
All videogames are created in Happyland with endless bags of money, time, understanding and development-team harmony, and there’s no execuse whatsoever for developers not to spend their time crafting games for one platform to the exact demands of the awesome and loving interwub. It’s not like they want much. Just something exactly the same as some game that was made a few years ago and is therefore flawless… but not completely the same because they’d moan about it…. but not different or they’d moan about it. No. Just the same, but with the awesome dial turned up to ELEVEN.
After all, it’s not like System Shock 2 had respawning enemies and an overzealous weapon-degrading system. No. It was perfect. PERFECT.
Now I’m off to murder a little girl. It’s not like God will mind just the one. Hell, I should get props for not blowing up a busload of them.
30/07/2008 at 23:40 JonFitt says:
@Dan (WR)
Eee-gad, my sarcasm detector just blew a valve.
That’s exactly why an X-COM remake could not work.
30/07/2008 at 23:45 Abe says:
Who the hell said anything about Halo 3?
30/07/2008 at 23:49 Muzman says:
I’ve often thought Ken’s writing is the only factor that really changes between Thief 1 and 2 (ie he’s missing from two) and could be the difference in over-all cohesion. SS2 was well written and the writing of the various characters and the general moral murkiness of Bioshock is one of its few faultless aspects.
Ken not being involved with B2 is interesting. It’d be funny if it was this brilliantly open and adventurous thing in all the ways Bioshock wasn’t, but with bog standard limp computer game writing.
(and surely the proper sequel to Bioshock is Geoshock. Sedementry vs Igneous. Fight! “Back to the magma with you, nihilist. I was born of the holy spurting mountain god!”
30/07/2008 at 23:51 MetalCircus says:
That was some top notch sarcasm there!
Sorry to dissagree with people in such a vehement manor, but I feel like it should be said. Some people expect the world, and surprise surprise, when they realize life isn’t like that, it’s unnacceptable.
And Abe, is there a point you want to make or are you going to gripe? Because I was using Halo 3 as an example to prove a point. Do I really have to explain this concept?
30/07/2008 at 23:56 Stu says:
uppi17: You know what? Fuck Montrose; thanks to her hopping onto the tour bus as soon as possible after a gig, I only got three out of four signatures on the inlay of my Punka radio promo CD. Three fucking signatures! I might as well have not bothered. Besides, Marie was always my favourite; she could take me to Burger King any day, anthrax-laced Coke or not.
Sometimes I wish it was 1998 again: before Kenickie split up, before Dubstar went shit, before Hefner fizzled out; before the extent of my financial worries was how much of my beer money I should spend in Vinyl Exchange that week; before the hangovers came quicker and hit harder.
Shit, I’ve just realised — ten years since they split. Maybe it’s time to forgive myself for missing that last tour.
31/07/2008 at 00:22 Subjective Effect says:
“… there is something you guys are going to have to accept; there will never, ever be another game like System Shock 2. It’s over. Time to move on.”
Perhaps you have chosen to accept mediocrity as the new excellence, but others have not.
BioShock is deeply flawed, and for no good reason. It sold on the marketing of something it wasn’t and if it WAS what Ken claimed it would be it would still have sold as well. But have been better. There is no doubt that the writing is good. It’s just that apart from looking, feeling and sounding good it’s pretty trite. Can you blame the consoles? Perhaps.
31/07/2008 at 00:48 yutt says:
It is hilarious to me when people use nothing more than their feeling of nostalgia to measure the quality of a game.
Just because you have fond memories of playing DOOM when you were a child doesn’t mean it is, in fact, the greatest game ever made. The joy you found playing those games had to do with the fact you weren’t a bitter, hateful cynic when you were 12.
Try *enjoying* a game for once in your adult life, and you’ll find they are a whole lot more enjoyable. Don’t compare every fucking game you play to some Glory Days event of your childhood.
What I am saying is: System Shock 2 isn’t that great. Bioshock is higher quality, more coherently designed, has a more intricate and well told story and mythos, is more enjoyable, and more accessible. It is better in every single way.
The only thing Bioshock can’t do is clean the filthy cesspool where your sense of joy used to be.
31/07/2008 at 00:52 Muzman says:
A tad presumtuous to assume nothing more than nostalgia goes into such opinions isn’t it? How is your way of making the exact same time disperate comparison so much better?
31/07/2008 at 00:56 shinygerbil says:
It’s a real shame to see so many people react so badly to Bioshock. How many of you played it all the way through? How many of you stopped and looked around you at the scenery, and just generally admired the place?
How about this: Ever watched a film, or read a book which you find absolutely perfect in every way? Perhaps it fits your personality, or you really like the setting, or a particular character, or just about any part of it – but however it happens, you feel connected with its creator on some special level? You feel like you really know what that person was thinking, like they made that especially for you. It earns a “special place in your heart”, so to speak.
I know I’ve read a fair amount of books which make me feel that way, and I’ve seen such movies, and I’ve heard such music. I’ve played such games, too. One of them was Bioshock.
I find it highly depressing that, because of the fact that “Bioshock is not System Shock”, people are willing to climb the nearest soapbox and shout “BIOSHOCK R SHIT, ALL GAMES R DUMBD DOWN.” Well, I thought you guys didn’t like it when people made the same game over and over again. (John Madden’s System Shock 2008, anyone?)
I also thought Bioshock was a genuine attempt to do something different, to branch out and be creative. (Note that creativity and innovativity are two different things here. There is room for both, independent of each other or not, in a game.) So, yes, I can see that not everyone will like it – and I think it’s better off that way – but when people dismiss it without weighing it on its own merit, I can’t understand. Honestly, I think some people would rather have just had System Shock 2 with a re-skin. Or, perhaps, no skin at all, just blank textures and placeholder story. It would make no difference, really, it seems. Most people don’t really want what they think they want.
edit: holy crap, rant-a-riffic :O
31/07/2008 at 01:01 SenseiJinx says:
Bioshock 2 is being directed by Jordan Thomas, the guy who was responsible for the Cradle in Thief: Deadly Shadows and Fort Frolic in Bioshock. Those credentials give me quite a bit of faith in him!
31/07/2008 at 01:10 Scandalon says:
But, but…I was 15, and Doom *IS* still the greatest game ever made.
:P
31/07/2008 at 01:34 James T says:
I forget, what is it the road to hell is paved with?
And actually, apart from the runaway-awesome art department, I’m not all that sure about 2k’s saintly, pioneering intentions; under that A-grade gloss, the game brings less to the genre than Far Cry, and I don’t even like Far Cry.
Oo, my favourite — “making [insert media here] is hard work and involves compromise, therefore it’s okay if [the output in question] sucks!” In that case, I’d love to know what heaven-sent miracle allows any decent game to ever be made. If you have a job to do, you should do it well, and you’re open to criticism if you don’t. Welcome to the working world.
(Gamers being disappointed by the mediocrity of a mediocre action-shooter is actually them being really bizarrely specific (“I dislike the game because the walls were red instead of purple!”) and has nothing to do with the actual game under the gloss being tedious as fuck.)
Actually, Bioshock did exceptionally well in this regard (cf. Doom 3).
And he’s gone for the trifecta, with a false dichotomy! Sorry sweets, I couldn’t give a hurtling fuck about System Shock 2; Bioshock easily achieves inadequacy without it.
The final resort for someone with no justification for their blather — references to ‘joy’!
31/07/2008 at 01:48 redrain85 says:
@shinygerbil:
How could I, when I was being attacked by Splicers every 20 seconds or less. The incessant spawning totally ruined the immersion and atmosphere. I wanted to admire, but those damn pests wouldn’t let me.
And it’s not like I could ignore them, either. I remember Joe McDonagh at 2K Australia saying I’d be able to do more than “just shoot” at all the characters I met. Well, what other choice did I have? It was either kill, or be killed.
31/07/2008 at 01:52 James T says:
Nownow, you could also bash them!
31/07/2008 at 02:14 MetalCircus says:
See. Alot of people are using generic “Oh, you’re just accepting anything given to you!” type arguments to make guys like myself, who enjoyed Bioshock, seem like inferior neanderthals. Really, it reeks of the kind of stuffy elitism that is special only to the PC gamer crowd. Also it’s a ludicrously false statement to make. Most mainstream games, at least the ones i’ve played have often made me weep acidic tears as I play them (this is also why I mentioned Halo 3 which was stunningly boring on all accounts) so to say i’m just a bottom-feeding consumer, hoovering up any old discarded tat developers fart out is a bit of a stretch. I picked up and enjoyed Bioshock because it was a world away from the generic horsecock that developers have been making recently.
Don’t get me wrong, I love games like SS2, Deus Ex (acctually, I love them immensely), etc, and of course, I have fond memories playing them. But guys, they were special for a reason – because they’re the only games of thier types. They’re unique. If we start mass producing these games, like developers do with your cookie cutter space marine explosion fest 2008 then we’d be sitting here moaning about the lack of “fun shooting games” out on the market.
And it’s not to say liking something like Bioshock will spell the end of all complex and well made games – what about Stalker? Clear Sky’s coming out soon. If liking games that people see as dumbed down is bad, why are great games like Stalker still being made?
31/07/2008 at 02:22 Gorgeras says:
We’ve been calling Bioshock awful since October of last year when on the 2K forums a rep said that we were not being ignored and they were seriously looking into the “Physics capped at 30fps at second” issue which spawned the biggest thread on that forum and it’s still alive now.
We never heard back from the pleb and we are sure they are not going to fix the physics issue. But just abandoning this still-alive thread without saying “we’ve decided to just leave it as it is” was enough. I’m one of many who have pledged not to buy Bioshock 2 just because of this one fairly superficial issue. We’re petty.
Bioshock is now unofficialy a ’70%’ game. They’re even worse than ’60%’ games.
31/07/2008 at 02:37 SanguineLobster says:
*Ahem*
I think it’s time, children, for me to tell you the story of the bunny who mistook his opinions for fact.
Once upon a time, Bun, the bunny rabbit, was eating carrots with his brother under the big maple tree. Bun took a bite out of a big carrot and said “Ew, this carrot is poorly made and has bad graphics!”. His big brother took a bite and said “Mmmmm, I enjoy this peculiar taste and the graphics seem charming.” “Well that’s because you’re stupid!” Yelled Bun angrily, and he ran off away from his brother.
Bun then met up with the elder rabbit who was eating some lettuce. Bun tried the lettuce and immediately spit it out. “Yech!” he said “This lettuce is too old and is doesn’t have enough flavor.”. The elder rabbit turned to face Bun and spoke in his deep grumbly voice, “I enjoy it because lettuce is my particular favorite and I like to concentrate on the texture more than the flavor.”. “For someone so old, you sure are stupid!” Replied Bun and ran away again.
Then Bun came across a piece of celery sitting in a trash heap, that everyone had discarded, because it was so disgusting. Bun was very hungry at this point, so he took a small bite. “Wow!” he said to himself “This is the best piece of celery ever!” Just then it occurred to Bun that different people have different opinions about everything, and just because they have different ideas, that doesn’t make them stupid.
The End
Moral: Just because you think Bioshock is Good or Bad doesn’t mean it’s true. Move On.
31/07/2008 at 02:43 Sum0 says:
@Stu – please stop referencing the female indie bands of my childhood, you are scaring me
BioShock was a rough diamond in an ocean of … polished turds. Does that make any sense?
31/07/2008 at 03:09 MaximumFish says:
Jesus Christ. I didn’t realize we’d all started hating Bioshock. When did that happen, and why didn’t i get the memo?
31/07/2008 at 03:45 James T says:
Circus, you’re not the focus of the conversation; if our criticism of a game you like implies anything about you, then that’s a shame, but it’s purely incidental. And, well, I don’t want to get into the ‘my side is better-behaved’ crap, but there’s been a lot more ‘whingeing about critics’ from the likes of you than cogent defenses of the game. I love what they did with the veneer of Bioshock, but if you think the game beneath it is not ‘generic horsecock’, please, explain what it brings — even after adopting a wilfully obscure and developer-indulgent playstyle on my second run through (‘only use the most idiosyncratic plasmids’, that sort of thing), all I experienced was a nerfed, stultifyingly crude corridor shooter, lacking even the environmental challenges that give one’s trigger-finger a rest in the Half-Life series (apart from, oh… Kyburz’s office?). Not to mention the weapon balance, or rather, complete lack of it. If a game’s going to be nothing but run-and-gun, it should at least succeed at that!
…Or don’t defend it at all; but in that case, don’t expect critics to rein in valid complaints if you’ve got nothing to say (apart from “you’re ELITIST for not liking Bioshock”).
31/07/2008 at 03:52 Alex says:
That started happening juuuust after it was released, because people got bitten by the big bad hypemonster and then the game wasn’t Jesus-Christ-in-a-box, so people went all sour on it.
I don’t care, I think it’s a wonderful game. I actually think the story isn’t all that impressive but I loved the mix-n-match gameplay and the “storytelling through architecture”.
Mr. Gillen actually wrote an article for Eurogamer end of last year to battle against the tide of BioShock-hat0rz:
http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=88881
Rereading it now, it’s fun to see how many of the same arguments that pop up in these comments are mentioned in his article.
So, BioShock is and was great.
Kenickie, on the other hand, were and are SHIT. I mean, fully paid-up lifelong members of the Fucking Dreadful Music Club. Lauren Laverne single-mouthedly ruined singing. FOREVER.
31/07/2008 at 04:22 Dracko says:
It’s worth noting that System Shock 2 is rather shoddy too, as is that defence article (“Kieron Gillen said so, so it must be true!”).
It’s not even a matter of hype at this point: The game is astonishingly facile and full of poorly implemented ideas that date back to the 90s. It doesn’t need to be the Second Coming, but it’s really not noteworthy in any other way either. Far, far better has come out of the industry before it reared its ugly head and got reviewers all wet and sticky because “oh wow water effects and ayn rand! tickle me nutsack, levine!”.
FOR CREDIBILITY’S SAKE, I PLAYED THROUGH IT TWICE OKAY AND IT WAS JUST AS BAD THE SECOND TIME AS I HAD ASSUMED WAS UTTERLY ACCIDENTAL THE FIRST!
People go on about the setting and the environment and being captivated by them, but never once seem to stop for a moment to realise how hokey, contrived and ill-designed they actually are. The game – let alone the plot – is chock full of ridiculous holes that break any sense of immersion and reveal it for the tedious corridor massacre it actually is. Ironic, considering the masses of people spitting on “shootum games”, yet fail to recognise one because the characterless antagonists, superfluous weaponry and powers and utterly illogical object placements (Don’t get me started on the sales machines) are all hidden under glossy textures and water effects.
31/07/2008 at 04:31 Caiman says:
These comment threads are starting to look more and more like NeoGAF forums every day.
31/07/2008 at 04:35 Dracko says:
We presumed to be better?
31/07/2008 at 04:51 RichPowers says:
NeoGAF? Take it that’s not a good comparison?
RPS’ discussions are always spirited and entertaining. I’ve yet to play Bioshock but as far as I’m concerned, the game’s a success if discussion about it elicits phrases like “Jesus-Christ-in-a-box” and “oh wow water effects and ayn rand! tickle me nutsack, levine!”
31/07/2008 at 05:24 James T says:
Yeah, if that pissweak article’s back from grave, I may as well refer to the big ole post I made in its comments thread (see ‘samadriel’.)
Hype-monster or no, the game was sold as something which it thoroughly was not (and which was not outside of the realms of possibility; I wasn’t expecting the fucking Second Coming, but I did expect better of them than ‘Doom 3: Ressurection of Art Deco’; what an ogre I must be), and then failed at what it actually was.
31/07/2008 at 07:48 Mr. President says:
Aww.. This reminds me of one of Bioshock’s early press releases. Back then, the game’s main feature seemed to be that there would be tons of enviromental puzzles that could be solved in different ways, depending on the magicks you wield.
After the game’s makeover it was revealed that the game would be about bigdaddy-killing rather than physics-based exploration, but I still hoped there would be something. Well, we ended up with only a few physics puzzles in the beginning of the game, and they were all pretty basic :(
31/07/2008 at 07:55 yutt says:
“The final resort for someone with no justification for their blather — references to ‘joy’!”
So referencing joy when discussing video games is off-limits. No wonder I can’t relate to your dismal critique of modern gaming.
If you don’t enjoy Bioshock, and upon playing it feel the need to go on some ridiculous tirade about the end of gaming and the amazing superiority of games in the 1990s; you need to return to the primordial pre-Internet cave that spawned you.
31/07/2008 at 08:18 Vivian says:
If you don’t enjoy bioshock you live in a cave..? Yeah, good one.
31/07/2008 at 08:27 Larington says:
Heh, I’m there at Develop atm, I particularly liked Ste Currans session at the end yesterday. (I’d score it a 7/10, though only journo’s and attendees will probably get that joke)
I still find it dissapointing the way people have to judge a game by comparisons rather than on its own merits, I loved System Shock 2 as well and still do, but I think its important to remember that Bioshock wasn’t trying to do the same things as SS2, its focus was elsewhere.
31/07/2008 at 08:30 James T says:
‘Joy’ in this context inevitably means “I have absolutely nothing to back up my idiot assertions about people who dare to dislike my pet game, so I’ll just make another — they’re jerks for not having heads full of nitrous oxide”. ‘Joy’ only ever seems to come up once a given piece of entertainment needs significant suspension of one’s critical faculties to pass muster — I see it all the time with, for example, Doctor Who fans, but I can’t say I’ve ever seen proponents of Deus Ex or STALKER or Half-Life or Thief or Hitman or Psychonauts or The Witcher or TF2 or [insert good game here] yapping on about their chosen game requiring ‘joy’ to work (nor moonbeams, rainbows or starlight); a game is supposed to elicit enjoyment, it shouldn’t have to coast on a player’s preexisting sense of directionless whimsy. You’re certainly not doing much to change my mind on that one — I mean, look at this load of crap:
‘End of gaming’? ‘superiority of games in the 1990s’? I’m sorry “yutt”, but I can’t take responsibility for posts you make up in your head.
31/07/2008 at 08:36 Vivian says:
Well, the reason people a lot of people get so irked about it is that in the beginning it was pushed as exactly wanting to do the same things as SS2, ‘spiritual successor’, ‘unofficial sequel’ etc, Levine showed up and TTLG and said all that stuff himself, IIRC. So everyone who had been (and still is) pining for something of that nature and quality raised their hopes to ridiculous heights by imaging the all the spine-tingly-ness of SS2 set to the gorgeous screenshots they were seeing, and when it came out and well, it wasn’t like that at all, everyone’s hopes came down with the appropriate force. So while Bioshock may well have been a great game if I had come at it without any preconceptions and been pleasantly suprised, I’ll never get to see that because the overwhelming sense I got was one of dissapointment.
31/07/2008 at 09:01 Rob says:
Hypothetically if RPS could work both piracy and Bioshock into the same article, would it be the largest and most vitriolic comments thread ever?
31/07/2008 at 09:05 Jetsetlemming says:
@Subjective Effect
Thief 3 was the best game of the Thief series… and Warren Specter had little to do with it.
I’m still holding out for a Ken Levine X-com game, and will until he specifically says “It’s not Xcom”, and then I will hate him forever for saying so after the internet got my hopes up so much.
31/07/2008 at 09:51 MetalCircus says:
Final thought on this because this has gotten stupid and is entering the holy internet realms of name-calling…
Basically, my whole point is, i’m not a chest-beating, knuckle-dragging gorilla for liking Bioshock. There. I thought it was a good romp. I personally don’t give two flying farts if you like the game yourself or not, but I think shitting on those who do as being somehow stupid is just… kinda wrong. Sorry? And hey, if you don’t like the state of games then why not make your own game? There’s plenty of means to do so.
31/07/2008 at 09:53 gaijin says:
Gillen’s tinkering with the wireless interweb has clearly caused some kind of DNS short-circuit , cos I typed the RPS URL and it seems ended up on the Eurogamer comments thread…
31/07/2008 at 10:08 Gap Gen says:
Looking at that Bioshock defence article, my main issue was one that Kieron mentioned: that the designers didn’t succeed in making you do fun things. There was an article on Gamasutra about this, how to manipulate the player’s psychology to remind them that they can do fun stuff (and even force them to do it), rather than giving them a wrench and letting them use that instead of doing interesting things. Bioshock had a lot of interesting things in it, but it needed to nudge you towards them a bit more often.
31/07/2008 at 10:16 Ian says:
Just to clarify, are we arguing about the quality of Bioshock here or arguing about people saying “I like/dislike (delete as applicable) therefore you are stupid!”?
I’ve sort of lost track.
I need to get back to Bioshock, I started playing it at the end of last year and then went on holiday and didn’t get back to playing it when I got back because it hadn’t really grabbed me. For me it didn’t help that the Little Sisters just became a power-up with a Yes/No option followed by a fancy effect rather than them making you look at the consequence of your decision as originally planned.
I’ll not talk too much on it until I’ve at least played further into it, but people seem to be getting awfully het up about things on here recently.
31/07/2008 at 10:29 gulag says:
I gotta tell you, I’m replaying STALKER right now, and man, is it ever sweet. So much stuff I hadn’t seen before, what a great game.
Sorry if this has nothing to do with the above newspost, but then again neither do most of the comments that precede it…
(Still have to play Bioshock. I hear it’s a good game, but not the saviour of mankind.)
31/07/2008 at 10:30 theapologist says:
Me and my mate Dave had fun. We liked the story and the sound and the pretty environments, and zapping people with electricity.
Does for me.
31/07/2008 at 10:48 CrashT says:
rocketman71: Are you saying you should have been allowed to get away with killing “just” one little girl? I’m a little worried about you now.
Gap Gen: Did System Shock 2 really encourage you to do fun things? I loved it but it really was hard work at times, spending twenty minutes looking for a particular chemical just seem like effort for efforts sake.
I adored System Shock 2, and that’s not going to change. I also think BioShock is one of the best titles of the last few years. Sure it’s not System Shock 2, nothing ever will be.
It’s interesting to see how many complains about BioShock are about what it was “supposed” to be when they were first talking about it. At which point did we start accepting anything said in previews? O, that way madness lies.
31/07/2008 at 10:49 Paul Moloney says:
I’m going to be a complete contrarian (dons Hitchens garb) and say that I started off loving the Bioshock demo and buying getting the game, getting annoyed with after a while, and coming back to it 6 months later and completely loving it. So at one point I would have been one of the naysayers, but gradually I fell in love with it all over again.
As for System Shock 2 – you know, I want to love it too. But after yet another unsuccessful attempt to fend off 10 zombies with nothing but a wrench, I gave up. Am I missing something?
P.
31/07/2008 at 10:51 ape says:
I was never into the hype of bioshock and I never finnished SS2. I did however enjoy SS2.
I think there is serious criticism to be leveled against Bioshock that has nothing to do with fanboyism or some state of gaming nostalgia. In fact I think a huge flaw with Bioshock was that I was playing a very outdate game model in a somewhat pretty package. Besides, the story was very average, with occasional peaks of good writing and never shied away from that game design crime of trying to be Hollywood. A little play of Pathologic might help illustrate what a game can do with narrative.
Bioshock on the other hand seems like a simple critique of an irrelevant hack novelist and a seriously failed critique at game plot devices. From the cheap moral choice presented to you, to the fact that after killing Ryan you are free, yet the only mechanism available to progress remains killing, to the main way the story is developed. It is delivered through tape recorders which effectively reduces any interaction you might have with someone to that only option of murder. Yet, I am told it is actually advancing narrative in gaming.
I’ts around that mechanism that I found the flaws really acumulated in terms of immersive gameplay. Time and time again you find yourself under siege by Play-Doh faced caricatures of the mentally ill. Quickly it becomes aparent all you will be doing is killing or running away, so, they give you a large toolset. Only they give you almost all of it off the bat. This does give you the possibility to pull of some very satisfying tactics. Add in the camera, hacking and “inventing” and you get to a point where you have to saturate the game with enemies to justify all the options. Oh, gotta hack this turret, but first I have to take a picture, use telekinesis on a propane canister and set a wind trap before finnishing this other guy with a shotgun. Had encounters been more sparse you would have less chance of exploiting these possibilities, but they would have had a lot more impact as they would mesh into the narrative and you might really remember your experience more. At that point I was just tired of doing it for X hours straight. I find much of the immersion, enjoyable dynamics and (at first) interest in Rapture were sapped by the absurd amount of copy-paste momments and hostile inhabitants roaming around (not to mention a questionable script and voice acting, Suchong anyone?). This is my main problem with the game although I could go on.
All that said, I am still very satisfied with the scene where you meet Ryan. Too bad it falls apart in the context of the last act of the game.
But maybe I should replay it, it has been a while.
31/07/2008 at 10:51 phuzz says:
I still have yet to play Bioshock, but I have picked it up for £16 from Steam, so I guess I’ll make up my own mind.
Never that bothered by Kenickie, but Lauren Lavern singing on Don’t Falter by Mint Royal is one of my favourite song, plus, she does have a good line in nice frocks on the culture show.
and from Warren Ellis the other day:
Lauren Laverne and Tim from Ash agree that Kieron Gillen’s a psychopath, on national radio, hahaha – @phonogramcomic #
?!?
31/07/2008 at 11:06 John Walker says:
All of you, behave.
31/07/2008 at 11:22 Riotpoll says:
I picked up Bioshock a month or two ago when it was super cheap (£12!) and I’ve still to finish the thing. The problem being the downright terrible gunplay means I can’t actually be bothered to kill stuff anymore!
Just noticed the tick this box thing to recieve email, I hope nobody in this comments section ticked it!
31/07/2008 at 11:33 Ian says:
“Just noticed the tick this box thing to recieve email, I hope nobody in this comments section ticked it!”
It’s because of threads such as this and the Oblivion one and others that have gone into the 100+ reply zone that I’ll never tick the box. :D
31/07/2008 at 11:41 Jaxtrasi says:
Smart notification systems limit the number of mails they spam you with. I have no idea how smart this one is, and I’m not taking the risk in order to find out.
31/07/2008 at 11:51 James T says:
To be fair, on your first playthrough, you don’t know that Bioshock’s ‘moral dilemma’ is going to be so unbelievably obvious, not to mention inconsequential (“They really are just kids? Okay, let’s see, child murder vs the enhancement and scarcely-perceptible rearrangement of my powerup timetable…”). And Gap Gen didn’t even mention SS2, so why bring it up?
As for ‘what it was supposed to be’, well, it’s perfectly legitimate to be put off by a company claiming ‘clever new things’ and then outputting what might charitably be described as ‘retro’ (if we forgive Peter Molyneux for it at all, it’s only because we’re used to it, and Irrational don’t have that paltry excuse; judging by Bioshock, they don’t even have his excuse of overreaching ambition!) but even after overlooking that, the corridor shooter we got instead is, well… what Riotpoll said.
31/07/2008 at 11:53 kuddles says:
It’s hard to find the article now that Next Gen rebooted it’s site, but I recall them writing an article about how the rumors Ken Levine is hard to work with is bunk.
31/07/2008 at 12:06 Dan (WR) says:
Pithy sarcasm and name calling aside (and I apologise for helping put these comments on this track), I am curious as to which games have met with the approval of those who are vitriolically opposed to Bioshock. If you haven’t enjoyed either Bioshock or System Shock 2, perhaps it suggests as much about the way that you approach playing games as to the quality of the games themselves. If you treat every game element like a measurable, tactical commodity and play games with an overcritical eye I would imagine that it’s hard to enjoy something like Bioshock. A game’s atmosphere and writing can only suck you in as much as you let it.
It’s not that I’m opposed to criticism of Bioshock. It has holes that you can drive a bus through and most of the criticisms are quite valid. But I am pertrubed when games of its ilk are dismissed as shit or mediocre.
It’s probably an irrational misundertanding of the industry, but I worry that too much critiscm of people like Levine or Spector, or games like Bioshock, will simply lead to less investment in games with any ambition. Levine said that Take-Two took a leap of faith with Bioshock, and it’s not even that Bioshock is so revolutionary. If that’s the attitude, then I worry that those with the cash to splash will ask “Why bother making any attempt at creativity or interesting writing at all when it results in such wild criticism? Let’s just make another Timeshift or Fracture”.
31/07/2008 at 12:11 Gap Gen says:
Gap Gen: Did System Shock 2 really encourage you to do fun things? I loved it but it really was hard work at times, spending twenty minutes looking for a particular chemical just seem like effort for efforts sake.
Never played it, unfortunately. Thing is, a lot of Bioshock was very subtle (for example, I totally missed the moving statues in the opera house). Didn’t help that I played it while I was ill, mind. Maybe it’s the kind of thing that improves if you replay it – I’ve played SMAC several times and missed several things that really define the game (like the social models) until the second or third play through.
Kieron puts it well in saying that given the choice between an easy method and an interesting method, most people will choose the easy method and get bored. Bioshock needed just a little bit more prompting to get gamers like me to explore alternatives to just wrenching everything not wearing a diving suit.
31/07/2008 at 13:06 Kris says:
I stopped reading the comments a 3rd of the way down and I’ll end up repeating others comments from after that, but oh well.
Bioshock was a fantastic game for me. For some of you it seems it wasnt.
However I find the not SS2 argument lazy. SS2 has flaws that Bioshock doesnt. Part of that is the SS2 did this – great, Bioshock did that instead – bad. Well I glad Bioshock did that, I like many others prefer it.
BTW, being a PC fanboy, doesnt mean you’re better than any other fanboy. How is Bioshock dumbed down for consoles? How would being PC only improve any game beyond interface (and not for all games) and the graphic’s on high end machines for a small user base?
While I’m at it, whats marks this as mass market and dumbed down? Because it hasnt got something you wanted, that you think makes it complex. Well in my opinion, dumbed down describes virtually every RTS as the majority have a distinct build order for maximum productivity leading to some form of appropriate ‘tank’ rush / weapon deployment. Must mean PC owners are dumb, cause tarring with brushes seem to be the rule here.
But hey, I’m going critercise SS2 for needing to use computer logs and 3D to create an immersive atmosphere when Super Metroid achieves as much or more without them. Ah I’m fitting right in with you guys now.
Oh, bad ending for just killing one innocent girl – why would that be? Is that because killing one innnocent person is a bad thing to do? Damn, I’d better scratch that one per hit list of mine, I thought you were allowed to kill one innocent person and police only got involved 2nd time around. Sorry, but whoever thought they should still get the good ending is being a doofus.
31/07/2008 at 14:18 Tom says:
“The only thing Bioshock can’t do is clean the filthy cesspool where your sense of joy used to be.”
Those are exactly the words I was looking for! Well said.
Anyone who says Bioshock is a bad game or even has criticism that they believe make it a bad game overall is a moron, imho – and completely missing the point. Just look at it for gods sake! Almost every aspect of that game shines and i think it’s an exceptional game despite it’s flaws. Most of the negative comments i hear seam to come from typical angry internet men. If you want another perfect example of this check out the Mass Effect forums – Bring down the sky update thread.
Because some of these prats haven’t gotten exactly what they were expecting, they’ve started saying shite like Mass Effect has zero re-playability!
LOL!
Oh god.
If only we could round them all up and pack them off to an island with no internet OR PCs. Keep them in solitary for a week, then release them and set them on themselves.
That would be awesome. And would be doing the ol’ gene pool a huge favour… and the WWW
31/07/2008 at 14:23 Wurzel says:
Um… just to throw something in here, I killed about 2 little sisters in my solitary playthrough and got the good ending. I thought it worked on what you did for the majority?
31/07/2008 at 14:36 James T says:
Wurzel: 2′s the limit, I believe.
I reckon Tom was taking the mickey. Let’s start a pool!
This is begging the question a bit; now, maybe in the initial stages of Bioshock, Take Two really were taking a gamble (all I know of Bioshock’s early days is a few pages of concept art) but 2k were… extremely accommodating in bringing down their game’s common denominator to make up for their ‘unorthodox’ artistic choices — indeed, anything remotely ‘new’ or idiosyncratic to the game had been scythed clean away by release time. Even the abovementioned aesthetic couldn’t have had Take Two sweating too much — there’d been a decade of horror games beforehand, and Resident Evil had proven that spookiness was (to say the least) no impediment to success. The only thing ‘different’ about Bioshock was its milieu and the care with which it was rendered, and few-to-no people are complaining about that — if anything, the criticisms (which are about the actual game, ie, what you and your avatar do) discourage corporate conservatism in gaming, not encourage more of it (of course, I say ‘if anything’ for a reason — it’s sales that publishers listen to, and Bioshock sold just fine.)
If the criticism of Bioshock puts developers off from adopting its gameplay elements, then games will have lost nothing whatsoever — after all, Bioshock doesn’t actually have any gameplay elements of its own. Even its aesthetic accomplishments could prove a pretty harsh double-edged sword, influence-wise — Bioshock has spawned the most outspoken “slickness can replace gameplay” attitude I’ve ever seen among gamers, critics and punters alike, since I started playing in ’86. And the disparagement that Bioshock is copping isn’t going to put off any artists or writers inspired to work harder by the visuals they saw — what sense would that make? (“Man, these guys were dead impressed by Bioshock’s look and story, but hated the combat — I think I’ll just write a space marine thing.” “Good idea, I’ll draw some shoulderpads.”)
31/07/2008 at 14:45 RPS says:
Right – any comment containing a insult, no matter how mild, gets insta-killed from now on.
31/07/2008 at 14:54 Riotpoll says:
@Tom; I think you’re missing the point of why people are saying Bioshock didn’t deserve all the praise it actually got. The art and story (compared to other fps) are very good, it’s just that the game is an fps. And it misses the whole point of fps games, that killing stuff should be fun. Even the Halo games have better gunplay than Bioshock does! When the actual meat of the game (the gameplay) gets boring, tedious and becomes a neccesary evil to progress the story you know that something is wrong. Some people seem to like wanking over nice effects, but a lot of people actually like some decent gameplay in there too.
31/07/2008 at 15:09 Tom says:
@Riotpoll
But I find most FPS’s boring. Games that mix it up a little rather than sticking to the tried and true mechanics are far more interesting/compelling games for me. Hence my love of SS2, the Thief series, etc. They had FPS shooter mechanics in them, along with some RPG stuff etc and a very different pacing/story telling style. And I personally don’t think there’s anything boring about the combat in Bioshock. It just rolls along at a different speed.
I would say, and i mean this in the least offensive way possible Riotpoll (because a large part of yours and my opinions a based on personal taste), that it’s you who missed the point. Yes, Bioshock is a FPS, but it came from a very different vision of what a FPS could be.
Personally I hate the idea of “genres” – thus giving people expectations and preconceptions. If only there was one genre called “An Amalgamation of Ideas”.
No one would know what to expect then and I think would remain considerable more open minded.
31/07/2008 at 15:10 shinygerbil says:
I think the first-person perspective was necessary for the purpose of immersion. Just think back to the “big reveal”/spoiler. You know, the big one. It would have had absolutely no effect on me, if I was just watching my avatar’s reaction on the screen. It would have felt completely different.
And for the record, I found the actual gameplay (shootan, runnan, fightan) perfectly acceptable. I have it on PC and 360; I completed the 360 version, mostly because it looked better, but also it seemed to handle better.
31/07/2008 at 15:36 Riotpoll says:
@Tom; If you enjoyed FPS you would know why I don’t like Bioshock because of it’s gunplay. My point is that Bioshock is primarily a traditional style FPS, it has the same pacing as a lot of other FPS, it just has some RPG-lite stuff bolted onto it. If the RPG bit was actually more than “Level up your guns/lightning powa and decide whether to kill children or not” it might have been more interesting.
My point was that you (now I see due to your tastes) didn’t understand why some people say Bioshock is not a great game. Calling them morons probably wasn’t a good idea either.
I’d just like to point out I’ve only ever finished one FPS (HL2+ep1), because I get bored. With Bioshock I got bored a lot sooner than most of the others ;-) ( I enjoy mp a lot more on an fps)
31/07/2008 at 15:37 cyrenic says:
Can’t wait till next year when we’ll be having the exact same arguments over Fallout 3!
31/07/2008 at 16:14 dhex says:
i thought fallout 3 comes out in the fall…out? out, fall. or something.
If the criticism of Bioshock puts developers off from adopting its gameplay elements, then games will have lost nothing whatsoever — after all, Bioshock doesn’t actually have any gameplay elements of its own.
this is really the heart of the matter, isn’t it?
anyway, bioshock was 3/4ths a good game with 1/4 not a good game at all slathered on, mostly near the end. it was certainly a fairly straightforward fps game with a smattering of genre hybridity mixed in there. (i call these games “fps ” because it looks cool when you type it out, and calling some of them rpg hybrids is overstating the case tremendously.)
the “moral choice” was about as morally engaged as choosing what to have for lunch, but such is the nature of our modern age / blame it on teh consolez. i generally blame it on the modern age of our consolez in the interest of striking a middle path.
it’s also hard not to love a game that features an evil walt disney telling you how he burned down his forest rather than letting those fucking cocksuckers in washington take it from him. when was the last time you played a game that said eminent domain is lame?
and if you did, it was some indie thing where the socialists who made it have you playing as a community lobbyist who wants to make sure the state steals property from its owners to build a park or perhaps a homeless shelter rather than some giant big box retailer. i’ll take evil walt disney any day of the week!
i hope the sequel features g. gordon liddy:
“”They’ve got a big target on there, ATF. Don’t shoot at that, because they’ve got a vest on underneath that. Head shots, head shots…. Kill the sons of bitches.”
(this is, coincidentally, great advice in most fps games.)
31/07/2008 at 17:22 GeorgeR says:
@dhex That is one terrifying final quote. Haha.
But yeah, I’m more interested in the unknown project than Bioshock 2. Because a sequel/prequel will not be able to live up to the original.
31/07/2008 at 17:37 Gorgeras says:
I’m way more contrarian than all of you. I don’t just wear Hitchens garb; I have his skin glued on like Hannibal Lecture when he escaped.
And just in the manner of the great Hitch, I loudly proclaim that you have all failed to tackle MY criticism of Bioshock. Prepare for smug in 3…2….1…../smug.
Bioshock was awesome. The issue that spawned the biggest and most ignored thread on the 2K forums is not. I freely admit that I am petty for basing my decision to buy any sequel on the pre-emptive factor of the physics engine being capped and then 2K ignoring the large outcry about it. You can’t criticise me for that because I’ve beaten you to it.
31/07/2008 at 17:44 Smitty says:
I guess some random comments…
I loved Bioshock, and I didnt listen to any of the hype. I just saw the teasrer trailer and fell in love. I played it, I loved it, then I moved on. I go back every now and then, and still enjoy it.
The constant respawning wasnt bad at all, I always looked at it as more loot to make better ammo with. Stay still, go invisible, wait, kill, loot.
SS2 will always be good, but it is like every game, a little flawed, but still…a wonderful game.
Nice to see at least a few other people like Thief 3 as well as I do.
I wonder how everyone would compare the immersive qualities of Bioshock and SS2 to something such as Call of Cthulhu: Dark Corners of the Earth? A very wonderful game, incredibly immersive.
Always a joy reading the comments section everyone, keep up the good work.
31/07/2008 at 20:00 dhex says:
@dhex That is one terrifying final quote. Haha.
why?
i really wanted to get into cthulhu or however you spell giant spaghetti squid face’s name, but it’s frickin’ hard!
31/07/2008 at 22:22 DraconianOne says:
Smitty: the immersion of DCTOE was broken by a) buggy crashing gameplay b) console derived save points and c) tediously hard sequences that did not allow for a moment of hesitation, deviation or repetition (i.e. the escaping from the hotel where you had to be note perfect in your actions). But it’s still not a bad game although possibly appeals more to people who are into the Cthulhu mythos than those who don’t know anything about it.
Back on topic: I loved Bioshock, so much so that as soon as I’d finished, I had to restart it. I had no problems with the gunplay, had plenty of time to look around and appreciate the environment and find little things which just delighted me (Wild Bunny; Tchaikovsky; The Dancers to name but a mere fraction) The fact that I played it through to completion is one thing because that rarely happens. Not even with SS2 (although that’s at least on my “I’ll get around to it some time” list).
01/08/2008 at 02:21 Subjective Effect says:
BioShock has certainly split the opinions of gamers hasn’t it? It has a lot going for it, to be sure, but even the worst fanbois have to admit it is flawed. System Shock 2 vs BioShock is a case of Alien/Aliens vs Alien Resurrection. Some people like the poorer one better, but if you really want to dissect the issue it comes down to having a taste for something deeper or liking the ohh shiny. Each to their own I suppose.
01/08/2008 at 03:37 Saflo says:
Oh, is that what it comes down to.
01/08/2008 at 06:46 Systemkok2 says:
Bioshock would have been at least 3 times more awesome if they had replaced Andrew Ryan on the intercom with a girl robot. Also, instead of big daddies they could make you fight monkeys (monkeys are wacky and hilarious in any setting) and the same zombie five hundred million times.
i hope in system shock 3 weapons sometimes just explode or disintegrate into dust as soon as you pick them up, altho I’m not sure i can handle a game that DEEP, so you guys will have to tell me how great it is.
01/08/2008 at 07:23 Subjective Effect says:
Just shows us all how you’ve missed the point completely.
01/08/2008 at 12:19 shinygerbil says:
Well, Bioshock’s certainly made your mind up, like all good art does.
(oh snap)
01/08/2008 at 12:39 Jaxtrasi says:
“That you don’t like it proves that it’s art!” is my new favourite argument.
01/08/2008 at 12:54 EyeMessiah says:
Everyone is wrong.
01/08/2008 at 13:08 Chris says:
“System Shock 2 vs BioShock is a case of Alien/Aliens vs Alien Resurrection. Some people like the poorer one better, but if you really want to dissect the issue it comes down to having a taste for something deeper or liking the ohh shiny.”
No-one can possibly prefer the nonsensical aborted-gimp-mask Alien Resurrection. It’s not even that much shinier – particularly that utter utter utter pile of shite hybrid thing at the end: I’ve seen 50s B-Movies made on a budget of $20 with better conceived and executed monsters.
I find it’s best to just not acknowledge the existence of it. It’s not even the red-headed stepchild of the family, it’s the stinking web-footed, one-eyed, mouth-breathing, sociopathic child of the incestuous union between violently-hated distant cousins, unwillingly-inherited after they won themselves a Darwin Award.
Oh, Bioshock? S’alright.
01/08/2008 at 13:35 Gilzor says:
I still maintain that Alien Resurrection has a great script, ruined by the director. Which is a strange thing to say given he also directed Amelie, possibly my favourite film. You can still find the original untouched script online, before the director and producers lowered the budget, scrapped things and added others like the human-like hybrid. At the very least, Resurrection could have been a really fun, somewhat tense actioner. instead, turned out like turd.
02/08/2008 at 00:04 Vivian says:
I would venture that the script is also shit, and that maybe firefly has clouded your judgement.
02/08/2008 at 01:48 Funky Badger says:
STALKER: flawed implementation of a classic genre, few innovations, *nothing* not seen before in terms of gameplay, semi-botched final third moving away from the strength of the earlier part of the game, magnificent atmosphere. Loved by the in-crowd.
Bioshock: flawed implementation of a classic genre, few innovations, *nothing* not seen beforein terms of gameplay, semi-botched final third moving away from the strength of the earlier part of the game, magnificent atmosphere. Hated (now) by the in-crowd.
Am I missing something?
02/08/2008 at 02:52 James T says:
(‘In-crowd’ indeed…)
Quite apart from STALKER not having the ‘semi botched final third’, the ambition shown by GSC positively dwarfs that of 2k, and for all people’s talk of instability (I’ve never had STALKER crash of its own doing, although I suspect it’s not very well optimised) it overwhelmingly succeeds. Bioshock’s a pissy corridor shooter with nice decor; STALKER combines the benefits of ‘sandbox’ action games (exploration/treasure hunting, multiple vectors of approach, and a sprawling battlefield available once you do approach), FPSes (the shooty stuff) and RPGs (side-quests, divergent paths, and the possibility of doing stuff with some NPCs other than killing them), plus, unlike Bioshock, it’s a bit challenging. If they didn’t both have guns in, they’d have bugger-all in common.
02/08/2008 at 03:45 Erlam says:
I’m with James on this one.
Also, nothing not seen before in games? Show me the game preceding this where the NPC’s did anything besides: A) stand [often invulnerable] and sell stuff, or B) die. I’ve never seen a game with a world that actually feels like one. NPC’s stripping corpses, dogs tearing/moving corpses, hiding from blowout, raiding eachother, using found weapons, etc, is something that (especially put together) no game has ever done well. Not to mention you can really go wherever the fuck you want, and do a lot of missions in totally different ways. My favourite is to lure the Military into the Stalker camp, get them to fight, and then strip the corpses for the AK-74U. Find me other games that do this.
I’m not going to say Stalker is the best game ever, but Bioshock was just a corridor shooter. It was a GOOD corridor shooter, yes, but it wasn’t some fantastical triumph of FPS design. I liked a lot of the art, but I felt like I was literally running down the same corridor over and over. I basically ended up using the same weapon the entire game because the biomods were useless on their own, and I may as well just take less time and headshot the guy.
I hope there’s a sequel, but I’m sad because I know it’ll be on consoles, and I know that in-order processing will again rue my day.
I think it was a good game. Not awful
02/08/2008 at 12:11 Funky Badger says:
Erlan: Fallout?
It seems the crux of your argument is “shooters innna sandbox >> shooters inna corridor”. Actually, that’s more of an opinion than a argument.
My point is that great atmosphere makes for great gaming. And Bioshock and STALKER both have great atomosphere.
02/08/2008 at 16:17 James T says:
You said one game was more popular than another, asked what you were missing — apparently implying that’s all down to ‘fashion’ — and I told you. Saying “THAT’S JUST OPINION” rings pretty hollow when people’s opinion is exactly what you asked about… not to mention that the breadth of experience STALKER offers over Bioshock isn’t a matter of opinion, it’s a matter of game design. That’s why I was able to type all that stuff — if STALKER is actually proving more popular, it’s because it offers far more, and does so to gamers’ liking; all that “it’s fashionable to hate Bioshock” talk (or indeed, the idea that people rag on any game because it’s in ‘fashion’ to do so) is a load of crap.
02/08/2008 at 19:39 Funky Badger says:
Popular in that arch interweb mass hysteria kind of way, rather than the sell millions of copies (a la Sims) way, but yes. And you preferring one design element (sandboxes) to another (corridors) really is a personal preference.
Also, angry interweb men don’t rage about things because the herd is doing the same? Darn, I’m reading the wrong threads.
Erlam’s point about the NPC interaction does intriuge though and it adds a lot to STALKER (although the same behaviour crops up in Bioshock, not to the same extent, but splicers will attack Big Daddies all by themselves)
03/08/2008 at 02:55 MetalCircus says:
As much as I love and enjoyed Bioshock, I have to say I personally prefer Stalker because of the reasons Erlam mentioned; the mood, the atmosphere, and the general game in itself is currently unmatched in any platform at the moment.
The thing with Stalker is it’s general lack of polish and sloppy code, but I suppose this will be (hopefully) fixed in Clear Sky :)
But sometimes I can’t help but wonder what a bit of a higher budget would do for the game; would it be the same, but with all the code and graphics finely tuned to perfection? Or would it “sell out”?
03/08/2008 at 05:56 James T says:
FB: (STALKER has sold very well, as it happens). Calling STALKER ‘a shooter in a sandbox’ the way Bioshock is ‘a shooter in corridors’ ignores the variety of genre elements STALKER employs, and which Bioshock doesn’t. Which one you prefer is your opinion — the breadth of experience available in STALKER over what is available in Bioshock is not. And this depth needn’t be completely hobbled by ‘corridor’ design vs a more open world. Even with its extremely linear format, Bioshock could’ve done a hell of a lot more than it did — for variety of experience, any Half-Life game dwarfs Bioshock, and they’re as linear and ‘pure’ a series of action-FPSes as you’ll find anywhere.
Some people prefer a game which provides more (heaven forfend). That’s what ‘you’re missing’, which is why you’re still trying to characterise Bioshock and STALKER as being remotely alike. In fact, the glaring dissimilarity of STALKER’s handful of very brief Bioshock-esque monster-dungeons to the rest of the game illustrates this pretty starkly.
And no, ‘angry interweb men’ don’t ‘rage about things’ because ‘the herd is doing the same’ (I’d love to know what makes you think you’re above this alleged ‘herd’). Criticism comes in waves because when the prevailing opinion is overwhelmingly in favour of something, critics (including a lot of professionals, unfortunately) may not feel entirely comfortable airing their dissatisfaction on their lonesome (and vice versa for something overwhelmingly unpopular). Thoughtlessly dismissing praise or condemnation as a momentary whim based on ‘fashion’ is just an ad hominem.
18/10/2008 at 17:57 CorwinTheLost says:
Hmmm… The only thing I would have preferred was if Bioshock had been an RPG. Another spiritual predecessor to this game might be Fallout – Bioshock and Fallout share a very “end of the world” sort of feel. I would not have minded seeing Bio replace Fallout as the “end-times” purveyor if there had been more choice possible and maybe some co-op multiplayer functions.
I do agree with some – games today do lack the plot-based scope of yester-year. Too often, sub-plots and side-quests are used to fill out a game because the writers couldn’t (for whatever reason – time, money, lack of creativity) advance the plot to full depth. I also tend to think this merit badge achievement system most games have started using is just a cop-out – the artificial creation of replay value where little or none exists.
That being said, you have to take every game for what it is and judge the effect and presentation without every other game you’ve ever played being the yardstick. Diablo 2 was better than Diablo – Fallout 2 was worse than Fallout 1. Restricted Area was worse than both, but amusing in its own right. And don’t tell me everyone on this list doesn’t have a favorite RTS game they’d say is the ultimate in the industry regardless of the age of the game.
The fact is truly innovative games are few and far between. Bioshock was not innovative, but it was a very good rendition of a lot of standard gameplay and mechanics effects set in a gritty world with good writing and much better than average voice acting.
We all want our perfect game. But that doesn’t mean we need to crush anything else that comes along like a beer can. Some people set standards – or create new ones. Some people follow them. That’s as true in gaming as in any industry. Bioshock was a well-followed standard that created an above average title – a monument to those standards, in fact – but it was not new, or innovative, or the greatest EVAR :-P.
I enjoyed it for what it was. I’ve played it several times and will probably play it again. That’s better than most, right there.
31/01/2009 at 22:38 dont know why im doing this says:
ive never heard of this AMAZING”system shock 2″ but i think 90% of you have your heads up your asses.
if you have played this game and completed it then i guarantee (even though you bash it now) that you will buy the sequel.
and for everyone who is complaining about the respawning enemies-unless you didnt figure this out yet this is a shooting game and you are expected to kill many things during the duration of the game.