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.
Related Stories:
I would venture that the script is also shit, and that maybe firefly has clouded your judgement.
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?
(’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.
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
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.
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.
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)
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”?
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.
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.
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.