Playing Bioshock?

[Dhruin]

Bioshock is dominating gaming like no other title has for some time, having cornered significant mindshare with players and critics alike. Will you be joining in?

[Corwin]

Minor point, but I wonder if we should have asked about BUYING, rather than PLAYING!! :)

[Acleacius]

ZOMG, whats a console! :)

[Corwin]

It's something you do to a person who is grieving I believe!! :)

[20mithrandir]

Consoles aren't that bad for "fun" games, but that's why I stick to my Nintedo products. Sony? Microsoft? Wouldn't have ever considered to buy their consoles. I already own a PC. I voted for PC version then ; - ) (asap)

[woges]

There hasn't been much in the way of good games recently as far as I'm concerned so i have it pre-ordered for my pc.

I like the style and the idea of the game at least - i like the shining.

[magerette]

It's not my kind of game, but I see no reason why you guys shouldn't cover it. I'd hate to see the site swing totally over to consoles but they are a fact of life, and as long as a game is also developed for pc, or falls very clearly into the rpg category(like D&D Tactics) I'm sure there will be people looking here to find out about it.

[Jaz]

Probably not in the near future, since most single player shooters made after '99 disappointed me. And I still have 5 1/2 JRPGs to play :).

[Gallifrey]

Voted "Maybe". While the game does look interesting, I do not have a system that can run it and I'm not about to spend the money to upgrade my computer for one game. Granted an upgrade would allow for more than one game to be played, but there's really nothing out there at the moment that makes me want to spend that kind of money.
Eventually I'll have a better system, and by that point games like BioShock and NWN2 will be super-cheap. I also haven't bought a game at release price in years, as every time I did, I wound up extremely disappointed. So now I see no point in spending more than I need to on a game, since it will be cheaper in 6 months, a year, whatever. And the game won't be any different. Seems really silly to me to buy games at release to be honest.

[magerette]

....I also haven't bought a game at release price in years, as every time I did, I wound up extremely disappointed. So now I see no point in spending more than I need to on a game, since it will be cheaper in 6 months, a year, whatever. And the game won't be any different. Seems really silly to me to buy games at release to be honest.

I agree. Did you see the post by Stanza in the HG:L thread where he linked to an eBay page showing someone had paid over $157.00 for a pre-release copy? That's enthusiasm!

I myself have learned patience after years of pre-ordering collector's editions and then realizing I had nothing special in hand but a big bill. I like to wait now for a patch or two, some post-release reviews(which are usually a bit more realistic) and some forum feedback before I buy.

[Gallifrey]

I agree. Did you see the post by Stanza in the HG:L thread where he linked to an eBay page showing someone had paid over $157.00 for a pre-release copy? That's enthusiasm!

That's just sad, really. The only reason a person would spend that much would be to obtain some bizarre sense of bragging rights that he had the game first.


I myself have learned patience after years of pre-ordering collector's editions and then realizing I had nothing special in hand but a big bill. I like to wait now for a patch or two, some post-release reviews(which are usually a bit more realistic) and some forum feedback before I buy.

Yep, exactly (though forum feedback can be tricky, you're likely to read spoilers). Mind you, this really only applies to the big major releases, not indies. Indies that I'm interested in I will buy on release (or as soon after as is financially feasible).
But big games, no way, it's wasted money. The price will drop, some games you just know will get expansion packs that will inevitably come in a bundle soon enough, reviews change as you pointed out, and so on.

[curiously undead]

for those who aren't getting the collector's edition, circuit city is $10 off the normal price for both pc and 360.

[xSamhainx]

Maybe.
a bit expensive right now for a shooter. I'll see what the 'Watch crew has to say about it before I decide.

[Sir Markus]

The last time I was actually able to be reasonably competent at a console type game, it had one handle and one red button in the corner; I think my favorite was a game called Adventure, on the Atari 2600. I've been pathetic at console games since Intellivision. I bought a Nintendo 64 from ebay a year or so ago so I could play the two Zelda games that came out for it, and I gave up after about 2 hours. Too many buttons.

[Acleacius]

Thanks, curiously undead it will be intresting to see what Best Buy, EB Games, Comp USA and Frys do here in the US with pricing. since I usually don't preorder.

[GhanBuriGhan]

Voted PC eventually. I am never gonna preorder again, so I will wait for the demo, but I am pretty sure I will get it then.

[txa1265]

for those who aren't getting the collector's edition, circuit city is $10 off the normal price for both pc and 360.

That is a fantastic deal that I wrestled with this weekend.

The thing that made me decide was the way the CD-key works:
If you buy Bioshock on Steam it is tied to your Steam account.
If you buy Bioshock on Direct2Drive it is tied to your Direct2Drive account.
If you buy Bioshock at retail it is registered directly.

For many this is a great thing. They don't want to be tied into Steam. Me? I love Steam and decided to pay $10 (well, minus a couple $ for gas and my time saved not going to Circuit City) in order to have no CD required and complete portability of installs.

[Guhndahb]

I'm buying it immediately, and the LE if I can get it (looking unlikely), but I won't be playing it until I build a new system in a few months. I want to buy it now and the LE mostly because I want to do my tiny part with my dollar vote for strong PC sales of a game with (I hope) some brains. Despite my planned delay for playing, I voted ASAP because I'm buying it ASAP.

Usually I'm a patient person willing to wait for good deals and even more frequently the bargain bin, but if I'm going to complain about fewer games for the PC, and more of them being lackluster, I need to do my part to combat the trend. Early sales are, unfortunately, the key figures publishers seem to care about.

[Moriendor]

Early sales are, unfortunately, the key figures publishers seem to care about.

Why "unfortunately"? It's only logical :) . Based on empirical and statistical data, publishers can usually make pretty precise projections about a game's sales performance. That's why they naturally care very much about the number of pre-orders and the number of games sold in the first week. They need those numbers ASAP to be able to plan ahead. Marketing, support, patching, future expansions etc. all depend on those early forecasts and projections.
The early sales are for a publisher what the first projections are for election analysts. With very few exceptions, you will basically know within the first day of release whether you have a winner or a stinker (in terms of sales) on your hands.

[curiously undead]

unfortunately because-it's much nicer to stumble upon the lesser known games by chance or through a friends reccomendation than from the in your face, get this now, baby eating hype machine. are you aware of the term "sleeper" (possibly only an american word) and no not that one;) though even "sleepers" have now become a bit of a hype variant themselves.

[txa1265]

unfortunately because-it's much nicer to stumble upon the lesser known games by chance or through a friends reccomendation than from the in your face, get this now, baby eating hype machine. are you aware of the term "sleeper" (possibly only an american word) and no not that one;) though even "sleepers" have now become a bit of a hype variant themselves.

hehe ...

http://www.mikereger.net/ITP/images/woodyorb.jpg

Yeah ... I know ;)

The problem with 'sleepers' in the current market is that they simply aren't allowed to exist. It is not as bad as with movies .. yet.

[Guhndahb]

Why "unfortunately"? It's only logical :)That seems to be a bit of a non sequitur to me. I'm not suggesting that it's illogical, but that it is unfortunate.

I believe that if a significant chunk of people all wait to purchase a game 6 months or a year after it comes out, instead of when it comes out, it's going to make the game seem a failure, even if the total sales work out the same. And, obviously, people will be paying less for older or bargain-bin games and hurting sales figures that way.

I am as or more guilty of this than most. Because I could care less about playing a game when it comes out, I tend to, as I mentioned, wait until a game gets under $35 or even wait for $10 bargain bin deals. Every few months I raid a bargain bin and spend $80-100 picking up games I felt I wanted to play but didn't feel a strong need to support. _Unfortunately_ for the developers, my bargain bin purchase likely did little for the company.

And there's the long-held belief that quality RPGs, adventures, etc. sell better over the long-term, but I have no data to back that up so I'll leave that alone beyond this short mention.

So for certain games where I feel the developers did something special, I go ahead and buy it immediately, and get the special edition if I can (although I suspect special editions probably only benefit the publishers and not the developers, but that's just my uneducated guess). Bioshock is one of those special cases for me.

[Moriendor]

@Guhndahb: I see what you mean but as someone who has already bought games for years you are already part of the empirical and statistical data that I mentioned :) . It doesn't really matter all that much if you go all "radical" and deviate from your usual purchasing habits. Some others will join you and some won't... it doesn't really matter what individual people do unless you can somehow start a mass movement or something like that.
Anyway, it is, of course, very commendable that you are willing to support the success of the PC version of Bioshock :) .

[Guhndahb]

I agree that my efforts as an individual are largely pointless. And even if a few people agree with me and adopt my methods (something I find unlikely if they didn't feel that way to begin with) it's still not going to make a difference. Nevertheless, I do it because it feels right to me. I still like to believe that the my dollar vote counts for something. And, more to the point, I certainly don't have much right to gripe about the paucity of quality PC games if I don't take appropriate steps to support them when it really counts, which I would guess to be in the first few months of sales, at least as often as I can afford it. And I do so like to gripe about that subject. ;)

[magerette]

Griping is why we're here, isn't it? :)

[JDR13]

for those who aren't getting the collector's edition, circuit city is $10 off the normal price for both pc and 360.

I don't believe there is a collectors edition for the PC, is there?

[Guhndahb]

Griping is why we're here, isn't it? :)I'm sure it's in the mission statement somewhere. :D
I don't believe there is a collectors edition for the PC, is there?Indeed there is, although it's technically called a Limited Edition, just like for the Xbox360. Unfortunately, it's a Gamestop exclusive, and they removed it from their site about a week ago, without a word, just a couple days before I went to pre-order it.

From what I hear, which is hardly reliable, stores are getting between 1-2 PC LE copies to sell. I'm going to try to get one tomorrow morning, but I probably wont. I feel really stupid jumping through hoops for something so trivial, but I set my mind to it a while back and can be a bit stubborn. I don't like being thwarted. ;)

There's every reason to believe it'll be available for sale from their site in the future, perhaps they are just trying to deal with the broken figurine issue (2KGames announced their plans for replacing those, BTW, I read it here: http://news.filefront.com/official-big-daddy-figurine-announcement-bioshock/). But just in case I'll make one try for a store copy. *shrug*

[JDR13]

I just checked Gamestop.com and there was no mention or listing whatsoever of any kind of limited edition. I think it may have been canceled altogether.

I also checked Best Buy, GoGamer, Fry's, and NewEgg with the same results.

[GhanBuriGhan]

I actually finally managed to get my copy of System Shock two installed under Windows XP, applied two texture and mesh mods, upped the resolution - it looks pretty good now, and tell you what, its still such an awesome game. I never finished it last time (ran out of ammo and gave up, I believe). So I am looking forward to getting through this time. So I am gonna play that, then the Bioshock demo, and then, if the word is still good after the hype train reached main station, I am gonna get Bioshock. That might be enough shock to last through the next few months...

[Moriendor]

I just checked Gamestop.com and there was no mention or listing whatsoever of any kind of limited edition. I think it may have been canceled altogether.

I also checked Best Buy, GoGamer, Fry's, and NewEgg with the same results.

There is a limited edition but it looks like it's really limited this time ;) (at least in the US... over here it can be ordered rather freely - still). Here's part of the original announcement from 2K:The BioShock Limited Edition will be available to US and Canada exclusively at GameStop and EB for US$59.99 (PC LE) and US$69.99 (Xbox 360™ LE). The Limited Edition will also be available in other territories and details about ordering a copy will be coming soon.

[Moriendor]

Forgot: There's also a difference between Collector's Edition and Limited Edition. Check here (http://www.game.co.uk/lowdown.aspx?lid=6890) at GameUK. They have all versions listed for PC and X360. Maybe you can import a copy? Or just try your luck at retail today/tomorrow :) .

[txa1265]

I never find the value in the CE editions, but that is me .. the only thing I occasionally miss is soundtrack CD's and you can find those after a bit separately, at least on eBay.

[vrok]

I don't see an option for "Yes, but it shouldn't be on RPGWatch."

[Guhndahb]

I never find the value in the CE editions, but that is me .. the only thing I occasionally miss is soundtrack CD's and you can find those after a bit separately, at least on eBay.I actually quite agree, but for me it's a bit of sentimentality I think. Once in a while I pick a game I consider important to me and I cough up the dough for a collectors edition. Beyond the reasons I mentioned earlier in this thread, I really get little out of it. Generally I find the goodies in CEs to be pretty worthless.

Maybe a little bit of me wants for the days of (nice) cloth maps and little ankhs rattling around in my new purchase again like I had as a lad. :)

[wahwah]

360 version for me, PC wouldn't be able to run it in higher quality settings.. also the projector and 5.1 sound are a major argument for it, I want my room to shake when a Big Daddy walks by ;)

[mogwins]

I actually finally managed to get my copy of System Shock two installed under Windows XP, applied two texture and mesh mods, upped the resolution

Cool, I've been meaning to try this myself. Care to talk me through how you managed it?

[curiously undead]

sorry JDR:)
http://i117.photobucket.com/albums/o44/mjfossum/751a2447.jpg

a game set in the sixties sitting in a car from the sixties...

[Guhndahb]

Good show curiously undead, I'm happy to say I managed to get the one and only PC LE copy one of the many local Gamespots (they are like Starbucks around here!) received.

I took some pics of the contents for anyone that is interested:
http://www.bitspring.com/greg/gaming/games/bioshock/

[txa1265]

Cool stuff ... all I'll get is Steam ready to run the game in an hour or so ;)

[magerette]

Boys and their toys. :) He is a cute little sucker, tho.

[JDR13]

Strange how people seem to be finding it at the actual retail stores more easily than online.


I don't know if a figurine and a soundtrack CD make it worth $59.99 when I can get the regular version for only $39.99.

[curiously undead]

they actually were sold out of both editions and that was an hour after they opened. had i not preordered...well could of got it at circuit city but i like soundtracks. apparently there were a bunch of figurines that supposed were broken around the country and the guy at the store said if you go to a url you can have them (2k) send you a new one when them make them as well as an art book (i don't know if he was referring to a hard copy or a digital copy of the pdf. i'll look into it. i'm beyond words with the game and haven't been let down at all. the big daddies are mean sobs. i'm glad the respawning isn't as frequent as in system shock 2. suprisingly the game is running like a champ with everything turned on at 12_ _ by 9 _ _. my p4 3.0 came in the mail today but hell if i'm going to be greedy and deal with that. i'm not sure what the demo includes but if its only the first entry level than there is so much more gameplay that people won't be seeing. so for all the people unimpressed...sucks to be you!

[JDR13]

I'm in no rush to play the game. I've been working a lot of hours lately and haven't had much time for gaming so I'm way behind on my replays of SS 1&2. I'm having so much fun playing SS1 however, that it doesn't bother me at all that I'm not starting on Bioshock right away. I rarely start on a game right away anyways because there's usually a patch released in the first 2 weeks to correct\change something.

[Guhndahb]

I'm glad you're enjoying SS1! It's such a superb game that gets too little attention in my eyes. And I agree that $20 for the figurine isn't worth it, but as I mentioned before, that's not the reason I personally bought the Limited Edition. If anything, the pics I put up flatter the figurine a bit. He's a cute little guy but the craftsmanship (if such a word can be applied to an mass-produced resin figurine made in China) is pretty poor. Nevertheless, he now protects my servers with an iron fist... err... tunneling bit?

I should mention that lil' Big Daddy stands quite well on his own, balanced by what feel like weighted tanks on his back, but is heavy and has a pretty high center of gravity, so I wouldn't set him somewhere where he or the surface he is on is going to get bumped.

[Maylander]

They sell it all over Norway now, pretty much every store that sells games. I've bought it and tried it, got quite an atmosphere for an fps, and a solid story, but don't think it's a cRPG - you will be dissappointed if that is what you expect.

[aries100]

Minor point, maybe.

If for some reason, you have AVG, then un-install it using the add/remove feature found in the Control Panel. AVG will currently flag this game's .exe as a false positive.

AVG are currently working on a fix for this and may already have fixed this problem.
Untill further notice, please use another anti virus program like Aviri or Avast.

[aries100]

Just to add to my last post :)

I do think it is a shame that all this DRM trouble have taken focus away from the fact that Bioshock really is an amazing and incredible game :)

[xSamhainx]

The authentication thing annoys me. I dont know if it would keep me from buying it if I really wanted it (of which I apparently am a very small bunch), but it annoys me. If I buy a game, I want to put it on my home pc, but also might want it on my laptop. My work pc for screwing around on my lunch break. Maybe my Mom's pc, for when I'm stuck over there doing laundry or something. Ok, maybe her pc couldnt quite handle it, but you get the point i'm making.

I know, this is fantasy-world thinking, and totally flies in the face of the EULA that I mechanically accept without reading so much a word of, but it's how I feel. The pirates have ruined it for the rest of us legit gamers, and moreover, people in general. Pisses me off.

[Acleacius]

Isn't it odd, that the choice of " No. And it shouldn't be on RPGWatch" got 39 votes yet not one person is willing to back this up in the community.
Here we have people trying to actually define the content of RPGWatch with no foundation or fundamental basic position.

All I can say is they do not even deserved to be mentioned in the poll results and would remove the their results immediately, if they are willing to try to change the content without the slightest consideration of the rest of the community, since its evidently not important enough for them to make the case on any level.

[txa1265]

But why should they have to 'make a case'? Bioshock is a shooter *only*, definitely not a RPG on any level, is a twitch game, and is being covered *to death* by every game site on the internet. If there wasn't the System Shock tie-in would it be here?If so, then where are the Crysis previews? Why hasn't anyone been reporting on the awesome controls of Metroid Prime 3?

Because they are shooters and don't belong here. Bioshock has gotten a 'pass' due to the people and the lineage.

[Maylander]

That is true, it is definetly not an RPG. It's certainly a deeper fps than most, and with a much better atmosphere, but it's still an fps.

Edit: Voted "Maybe, I'll see" by the way, as I wasn't really sure it was a game for me. I've tried it and I was right - it's far more fps than rpg, so I have decided to fire up PS:T again instead. :)

[YellowWing]

If it gose to platform=PC... ill wait till the price of it settles down no need in throw good money for what might be just another Shooting up Game.. not that i dont mind it just that my taste as change since my Quake2 Died or Clan i was in :disappointed:

[Acleacius]

Bioshock is a shooter *only*, definitely not a RPG on any level

I missed this and have had to not read most topics and threads to avoid spoilers, since the day picked up Bioshock my video card failed. :'(
So until my card is repaired, returned and/or I go crazy and buy a nice mid level card till my is returned. ;)

However I have been able to read non story spoiler reviews and I can talk about what little I know, if everyone could avoid Story spoilers, I don't mind other types like we get the nuke catapult in chapter 3. :)

First of this comes down to what you call an RPG and (iirc) you consider something like Diablo an RPG, but not Bioshock, confuses me.
Diablo has rudimentary stats, (3 or 4 at the most), quest and inventory.
Bioshock has deep and diverging story which is effected by player choice(s) in the game(even if it's based on one choice it's an optional ending), quest, tonics (which instead of stats, is used for the same purposes, only a different method of application) and inventory (maybe not accessible like Diablo but not necessary in the same sense, of constantly upgrading weapons and armor isn't needed).

Because they are shooters and don't belong here. Bioshock has gotten a 'pass' due to the people and the lineage.
Well maybe for you, but so far you haven't provided any substantial reasoning for your position, which was the point I was trying to make, is not a good idea for the community, imo. :)

it is definetly not an RPG
How about you got any non Story spoiler examples of this? :)

Maybe I missed a non spoiler Bioshock thread about why this is or is not a RPG?
Or if you guys would perfer starting a non spoiler thread about this that's fine too. :)

[Hindukönig]

First of this comes down to what you call an RPG and (iirc) you consider something like Diablo an RPG, but not Bioshock, confuses me.
Diablo has rudimentary stats, (3 or 4 at the most), quest and inventory.
Bioshock has deep and diverging story which is effected by player choice(s) in the game(even if it's based on one choice it's an optional ending), quest, tonics (which instead of stats, is used for the same purposes, only a different method of application) and inventory (maybe not accessible like Diablo but not necessary in the same sense, of constantly upgrading weapons and armor isn't needed).

The tonics aren't something like stats, because you can change them anytime if you want. They are upgrades just like weapons, and you don't call a shooter an RPG just because you get stronger weapons, do you?
The "quests" are for storytelling only, just like every shooter has mission descriptions. The inventory isn't anything more than that of other shooters.

The "deep" story of Bioshock isn't that deep (IMHO), and Jedi Knight offers choices, too, but nobody would call it an RPG.

Really, Bioshock is not an RPG.

[Acleacius]

The tonics aren't something like stats, because you can change them anytime if you want. They are upgrades just like weapons, and you don't call a shooter an RPG just because you get stronger weapons, do you?

Afaik, Tonics boost stats in the same since as an RPG but you can change them out, so is an RPG not an RPG to you because you can change shuffle your stats as you want?
Weapon upgrades are no different than player stat upgrades, are they?
It's usually a progression of benefits with some possible negative side effects.

Both these bring to mind DX2, which was one of the first to use changeable upgrades, unless I am missing something. :)

The "quests" are for storytelling only, just like every shooter has mission descriptions.

So you mean there are no side quests, RPG is not an RPG without side quest?
I love doing side quest but not sure they are necessary to be an RPG, if your telling a story and you are able to build everything around your story, small are loarge quest shouldn't that be enough?

The inventory isn't anything more than that of other shooters.

Really trying to understand here, but I don't see an inventory as necessary, sure it can be a fun element, afaik this was sort of an experimental game design.
KLevine has mentioned they are trying to listen to suggestions, which they seem to have done in the past games, so no reason to doubt him, atm, imo.

The "deep" story of Bioshock isn't that deep (IMHO), and Jedi Knight offers choices, too, but nobody would call it an RPG.

Yes I did hear that it seemed dumbed down and as all most every title developed on the PC and console has suffered this horrible fate. :(
Console gamers are previewed, rightly or wrongly as not very demanding gamers and as long as m$ is trying to build up it's portfolio by dumping millions if not 10s of millions in the hands of PC developers to make console or console exclusives, I don't see this changing. :(

I can only hope KLevine did this to help insure the success of the game, which Irrational has long deserved a major success.
I hope it gives them the strength to make more and better games, think I can live with a watered down Action/RPG/Adventure hybrid game.

JK didn't have any type of Stat boosting system, nor did it have any upgrades only a few powers, iirc.

[JDR13]

Bioshock might not be an RPG by definition, but I thought it did a great job of immersing you in a role.

[txa1265]

Well maybe for you, but so far you haven't provided any substantial reasoning for your position, which was the point I was trying to make, is not a good idea for the community, imo. :)
I wasn't of the opinion that the game shouldn't be covered here. I was merely stating that folks who thought that had some amount of reasonable defense in the fact that the game is a shooter and that the focus of the site is RPG. It isn't even a matter of trying to define RPG's and say that the Deep-Shadows stuff doesn't belong here due to the balance of RPG-to-shooter being off. Bioshock has a lineage in shooters with RPG elements, but it is a shooter.

[DArtagnan]

Ken Levine has said, VERY clearly, that Bioshock is a shooter and not an action/RPG like System Shock 2.

I'm not saying the guy is a genius or anything, but he should know the genre of his own game.

[Thaurin]

How is it so difficult to just classify Bioshock as a shooter? It doesn't make it a lesser game. It's not an RPG because the core gameplay is a FPS. You point and shoot. Stuff dies. No dialogue options. No inventory management. No mapping. No stats to determine initiative/hit/miss/crit/etc. To put it more clearly, Bioshock was designed as a shooter, as per developer's choice. It is not an RPG.

Nor is it "watered down" because it was developed for PC and console. It's as watered down as Half-Life 2 was for PC.

[DArtagnan]

Nor is it "watered down" because it was developed for PC and console. It's as watered down as Half-Life 2 was for PC.

In actuality, we can't know that.

We can believe what we will, though. I'm personally convinced that the perceived console audience, is responsible for many "watered down" aspects of Bioshock. How many exactly, and to what extent they were watered down, I can't say. But the Quest Arrow, Glowing interactive items, No death penalty whatsoever, Highlighted items, Lack of inventory or even stat screen, are all among things I strongly suspect would have been done differently if this was a PC exclusive title. I'm not saying they wouldn't have been there at all, I'm just saying I strongly doubt they would have done those things in the same blatantly nurturing manner.

It's a mature game balanced for 7 year olds.

I base my opinion primarily on the legacy of System Shock and System Shock 2. None of those games felt compromised to fit the mass market, and it's obvious they were determined to reach a larger audience this time around, and in my opinion they went over-the-top to achieve that. I hope they realise that, and give console gamers a bit of credit. They're not stupid, they're just different.

Finally, before you mention it, yeah I realise that the PC audience is not immune to this effect. Naturally, games have changed on all formats, and many PC exclusive titles are "dumbed down". This is definitely also part of what happened to Bioshock, and indeed I see the overall problem as platform independent. But once you've had sufficient years of experience with this tendency, you will notice that multiplatform games are handled particularly bad in this regard.

[Thaurin]

The point is, the game was designed like this from the beginning. "Watered down" makes it sound like it was supposed to be this real awesome hardcore PC experience, but they took that out because they "had to" release it on console, too. That's just reverse thinking. This is the game they wanted to make and no one forced them to do it.

I agree that were it a PC-only title, things would probably have been done slightly differently, because of course there's another market to be had there. I don't think it'd be that crucially different, though. I like playing on both platforms, but I liked the quest arrow, actually. I don't see how aimlessly wandering around constitutes any form of fun in this type of game (like one would have to do in some of the older FPS games). This isn't an RPG, after all. ;) ;) There's no real sense of exploration in the game other than finding out more of the events leading up to Rapture's fall.

I do see how modern games (on all platforms, PC-only titles included) hold hands more than classic titles. This is most noticeable with adventure games and role-playing games. I don't see that as game developers catering to a console crowd at all, but a necessary result of an explosive gaming market. Games are mainstream now and cost a bundle to make. That's going to affect how games are being designed. At the same time I think that the niche of gamers that will put up with (or prefer) the more hardcore and more reasonably priced games has shrunk. So it's bad business to do retro on a big budget today.

"Balanced for 7-year-olds" is a bit harsh. It may just be figure-of-speech, but more importantly I think that the casual gamers just outnumber the hardcore by a large margin, with the (for the gamers that long for less simpler times) unfortunate effect that gamers get... to invoke this inverse thinking mode again, watered down games.

[DArtagnan]

It may or may not be reverse thinking.

The making of a game is not a simple process where you necessarily start out with "we want a casual game, where we nurture the player". I believe the game was much more a concept and less tangible in the early stages, and I don't think they thought about baby level difficulty back then. When I said 7-year old balance, I meant it. You can't die, you can't run out of resources (unless you REALLY REALLY want to), the game is linear enough to be called on-rails, there is no mental challenge anywhere in the game that you need to solve, and the map reveals everything secret should you miss it, and if that isn't enough the hint system will explicitly tell you to melt ice with fire. Anyone could complete it, and I'm pretty confident that a 7-year old could do it comfortably if you changed the horror setting to a My Little Pony wonder research lab.

I've followed development of Bioshock since way before it was announced, and since it was merely called "the spiritual successor to System Shock 2". It wasn't all that long after System Shock 2 was released, actually.

I'm sad to say I can't find the earliest articles anymore, but there are some from 2004 or so (IGN / Gamespot) where Levine's talking about what the game will be like. Now, it can't be proven that the original vision was different, but I personally believe the game was changed along the way to make it more accessible, and I actually believe they overstepped the mark even for the average console gamer. Not that such a person would notice anyway, but I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have a problem with a more meaningful death system, for instance.

In any case, what I got from Levine early on changed radically from inception to release, but it might have been my own wishful thinking. Maybe I'll never know, and I don't care at this point.

The fact of the matter is that Bioshock, in my opinion, is a good-to-great shooter but it's MILES behind what it could have been - and it's devastatingly lacking in challenge. I'm not saying they made bad financial decisions, but I tend to believe developers and publishers generally underestimate their audience, and in this case they could have made Bioshock better without hurting sales in a significant way. That said, I would have bitched about something else all the same, because the core concept of what it ended up being, is too far removed from what I would have done that I wouldn't have been happy anyway.

They basically took System Shock 2, reduced complexity and depth, and enhanced the cinematic qualities, making it so easy as to basically play like an uninterrupted interactive movie with an average story. That sort of thing obviously has an audience, but it definitely isn't what I want from a computer game. If I want a good movie, I'll go watch one.

[Arhu]

The point is, the game was designed like this from the beginning. "Watered down" makes it sound like it was supposed to be this real awesome hardcore PC experience, but they took that out because they "had to" release it on console, too. That's just reverse thinking. This is the game they wanted to make and no one forced them to do it.

As far as I'm concerned, self-censorship, proactive censorship or whatever you want to call it is still censorship, it's just a little subtle in comparison. Likewise, "watered down" can be proactive too. You know you are targeting a console audience too (or even mainly) - you make concessions.

That said, hand-holding seems to be a general trend in games these days.. cf. the thread Older games = harder games? (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2270) It may be just the way it is...

[Thaurin]

Concessions-- not necessarily. I like what Greg Zeschuk of Bioware said about it in a recent interview:

The market for gaming has expanded so much in the last couple of years. What impact, if any, do trends like the Wii and casual gaming have on your development process?

We do agonise over this a bit. We (Bioware) know who we are and what we do. Sonic RPG has a different audience as does our other title Dragon Age. I mean people say WoW is a mainstream game, but is it? It's clearly a phenomenon but 9-million people playing it out of the full potential population total is still small percentage. I mean how many people are playing Hearts online? It is very difficult though, it's like we are speaking different languages. We never want to dumb down our games though. You can still have a complex core, but the way you touch that has to be done right. I'd love to see a really complex game on the Wii with the ease of use that their controller gives. I don't want to play party games; I want something that makes me go wow. Maybe Mario Galaxy could be the one. We'll see.

(Emphasis mine)

[DArtagnan]

I'm sure developers tell themselves all kinds of things to make it appear otherwise than what it is. Denial is one of the most common human reactions, and I see no reason it wouldn't apply to developers as well.

The fact of the matter is that making games has become a huge industry, and I have no problem understanding why they're changing their games to match as large an audience as possible. What I have a problem with is that cop-out "it can be deep without being complex", because that can be used for any game, at any time. I've heard developers claim that for ages now, and it's no more convincing today than it was when Warren Spector straightfaced claimed that Deus Ex 2 was not really less complex than Deus Ex, and that gameplay was more advanced in many ways. You can't prove this one way of the other, because anything can be anything given "a certain point of view."

I don't know why people think that what developers claim must be true, simply because they're in the industry. They're human beings, and they don't like compromising their vision any more than the next person, and as such they will do what they can to deny that - to themselves and to the public.

Look at Oblivion. It's the exact same thing. They go out of their way to avoid confusing the casual gamer, and they remove all those "complex" things because they were really no use to anyone, and in the end the game is just as deep and meaningful, right? Of course it is.

Then we have Dungeon Siege, where Chris Taylor was utterly convinced that removing any kind of burden from the player was undeniably the right choice for the game, because why would a game ever need to require work. That's his overall design philosophy. It didn't matter to him that the game largely played itself. Why have skill trees? That's not necessary, let's just have 1 skill for each "class" called "Melee, Archery.....". Much more efficient.

I could go on, but you take my point.

In the end, all I really want from developers is the truth. PLEASE don't give us that tired old song "it's just as deep, but more accessible", because it's bullshit. Just tell us you compromised the game to make it sell, because that's truth and I can accept truth.

Oh, and note:

Yes, I DO believe it's possible to streamline a game without losing depth. Yes, I HAVE seen examples of that, but they are few and far between. Yes, SOMETIMES, reducing complexity is good. What I'm talking about here is a general trend of fitting the LARGEST audience, not removing annoyances for the sake of progress. There is a BIG difference.

[txa1265]

Yes, I DO believe it's possible to streamline a game without losing depth. Yes, I HAVE seen examples of that, but they are few and far between. Yes, SOMETIMES, reducing complexity is good. What I'm talking about here is a general trend of fitting the LARGEST audience, not removing annoyances for the sake of progress. There is a BIG difference.

Can you provide examples of this? I think of Civilization IV, which is a game that I could have my kids play a few years ago when they were very little , still play now with greater challenge, and that I can get all levels of challenge out of.

[DArtagnan]

Can you provide examples of this? I think of Civilization IV, which is a game that I could have my kids play a few years ago when they were very little , still play now with greater challenge, and that I can get all levels of challenge out of.

Yes, I think Civilization is a good example of reasonable evolution.

I also think that the developments in UI design are often for the best, especially if you compare something like System Shock with its sequel. Popular genres like RTS games have many good developments involving streamlining the experience, like multiple waypoints, gatherer automation etc. But it's always a fine line to walk, and sometimes you take away too much for the sake of simplicity. But the main issue is really what motivates the change. Is it a change for the better game, or is it a change for the larger audience. When I look at Oblivion, Bioshock, Deus Ex 2, and many other "big titles" I see changes for the sake of sales, not for the sake of the game (as in the art). I don't blame developers/publishers for those changes, because it means they're simply interested in money/popularity and that's understandable, but I loathe the fact that they can't be straight about it.

[Thaurin]

In a way, they are straight about it; they want to make it more accessibly so that more people can enjoy it, hence sell more units. Gothic's controls come to mind. A niche (compared to the larger group of gamers at large) really enjoyed those controls and think it was a step down to make them more "accessible" in Gothic 3. While I don't question their good intentions, it's still a consequence of growing too big to please everyone. Can there actually be a successful mainstream release today that manages to do it all right? I would like to suggest that some genres like strategy and RTS games might be easier to pull off than action games or RPG's.

[DArtagnan]

Well, I never had a problem with Gothic controls (ok, maybe the first 5 minutes I was a bit confused), but then I found the game as a whole amazingly well done, so I was willing to learn the UI. Of course, I've been gaming for 25 years, so I've been through a couple of UIs here and there. However, I found that the control system in Gothic 3 was better and more acccessible without hurting the game in any way whatsoever. Gothic 3 had many issues, but the basic control system was definitely not one of them (combat system was another story, though), as far as I'm concerned. That's another example of what I would consider a legitimate evolution.

In a way, they are straight about it; they want to make it more accessibly so that more people can enjoy it, hence sell more units.

Yes, they are. But that's not the core of what I'm saying. They're constantly dancing around the fundamental issue of what the changes mean for the GAME itself. Not the accessibility, not the popularity, but the game itself as an artform. Is the game better for it, because more people can enjoy it?

Is the typical blockbuster Hollywood movie better than it could have been without the sappy ending or the comic sidekick?

Would Lord of the Rings movies be better without the stupid Legolas skateboarding, or the reduction of Gimli to a fart-joke dwarf?

They can easily say "we made it more accessible, and how can that be bad thing". Of course they can, but they never go in-depth about what consequences that accessibility might have in reality, and what the game itself must suffer for being popular.

Can there actually be a successful mainstream release today that manages to do it all right? I would like to suggest that some genres like strategy and RTS games might be easier to pull off than action games or RPG's.

It's hard to say really. But that's not necessarily what I'm asking for, I'm just asking for honesty (primarily towards themselves). Be honest about what you're doing, and don't think you're making great art by appealing to the masses, because true art must originate from the individual, and hence become objective only through having started subjectively.

That is what they must trust, that their own vision is enough to sell. That being true to the vision and being competent about it CAN sell. System Shock was a revolution (if you ask me) but it didn't sell. But why didn't it sell? Was it too complex or was it too "good"? No, I don't think so. It suffered from an overly complex UI and a confused audience expecting another FPS ala Doom. That doesn't mean that System Shock couldn't have sold well if done differently, and maybe (just maybe) it's possible to have a largely uncompromised game be a hit.

[Acleacius]

I decided to wait till I actually play it but finally got to play and I can certainly see why many say it's a shooter and I can certainly agree it's at the most very borderline. :)

txa1265
I wasn't of the opinion that the game shouldn't be covered here. I was merely stating that folks who thought that had some amount of reasonable defense in the fact that the game is a shooter and that the focus of the site is RPG
True enough, like I mentioned at least to that point I had not seen an example of why, it wasn't an RPG.
Admittedly I avoided at least 5 reviews due to them containing spoilers, so I could have missed some reasonable explanations.

If someone where to ask me, I would have to say the weakest RPG element is you don't have a choice on how to do quest, which is why I don't consider hack & slash like diablo style games RPGs.
Everyone whom plays the game has to do the same things the only difference seems to be how you kill and there is only one guy you Don't have to kill, afaik.

DArtagnan
Ken Levine has said, VERY clearly, that Bioshock is a shooter and not an action/RPG like System Shock 2.
I'm not saying the guy is a genius or anything, but he should know the genre of his own game.
OF course he would, but I have never heard him say that, only "they are focusing on the Shooter aspects, because at it's base it's a shooter", but obviously that doesn't mean it can't have RPG elements.

Thaurin
How is it so difficult to just classify Bioshock as a shooter? It doesn't make it a lesser game. It's not an RPG because the core gameplay is a FPS. You point and shoot. Stuff dies. No dialogue options
I don't recall reading or anyone here saying there were no dialog options, that's why. :)

Nor is it "watered down" because it was developed for PC and console. It's as watered down as Half-Life 2 was for PC.
I would disagree, it's clearly water down, many aspects many you just listed, like no inventory.

Afaik, they had so many false starts and finally had to sell out to 2K to get the game made, I am sure 2K had some effect on certain aspects, especially made for console.
I think they had to cut things like Inventory out and other RPG aspects out as they would have never had time to get them implemented and tested, so the game is extremely streamlined (watered down or what ever you want to call it).

RPGs are the hardest game to make and they needed a hit and this was the quickest way to achieve those goals.

[JDR13]

How could anyone say Half-Life 2 was watered down??


....Or was that sarcasm? :)

[DArtagnan]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4508664361400518462

If you have the time and the inclination, there's an in-depth and lengthy video of a Bioshock developer (programmer), going through the actual development of the game, from inception to release.

I noted, late in the video during the Q/A session, that he kinda slipped up (my personal perception) and said something to this effect (paraphrasing a bit):

"RPG elements are kinda nerdy things, and if you want to make a game that many people like, you're going to have to make some compromises."

Yes, he really says that, and I doubt it's the official line. Levine has talked about it being just as deep and bla bla, just more accessible. Which doesn't exactly jive with calling the removal of RPG elements a compromise. Why would it be a compromise if it is just as deep, only better?

It tells me what I already suspected all along, that the game WAS, at least semi-consciously, compromised to make it sell. Of course, it's not a huge surprise to many, but to actually hear the developers say it makes me feel better when I criticise the otherwise good game.

[Dusk]

How is it so difficult to just classify Bioshock as a shooter? It doesn't make it a lesser game. It's not an RPG because the core gameplay is a FPS. You point and shoot. Stuff dies. No dialogue options. No inventory management. No mapping. No stats to determine initiative/hit/miss/crit/etc. To put it more clearly, Bioshock was designed as a shooter, as per developer's choice. It is not an RPG.

Nor is it "watered down" because it was developed for PC and console. It's as watered down as Half-Life 2 was for PC.

Have you read some comments at major game sites and amazon? Some pure FPS fans seem to be unhappy with the game-play finding the guns are not as effective as using plasmids. Talking of game-play only, as I agree with Dartagnan that the designers could have been more bold in leaving RPG elements, though. For hacking mini-game does seem to be unpopular among both RPG and FPS players. If I'd like to play mini-games, then, I buy them. I'd rather like to put points on hacking skill and save my time. Plasmids offer magical abilities and I wonder whey the designers refrained themselves from hacking ability.

The game being too easy is, I think the legitimate criticism but, seeing the plenty of bugs in S.T.A.L.K.E.R. and Gothic III, I cannot but admit that they made a right choice by reducing the possibility for the players to be screwed (Of course, the copy protection issue is another story, though). Overall, I have an impression that the designers placed their ambition in terms of the story over that in terms of the game-play. Whether console or PC, FPS or RPG players, the majority seem to be happy with the story (except it's rather linear nature), which I find great, personally.

[JDR13]

Some pure FPS fans seem to be unhappy with the game-play finding the guns are not as effective as using plasmids.
.

Of course they're not, Plasmids are your secondary(special) weapon in Bioshock. That's why they drain ammo(Eve) so much faster then regular weapons.

[Dusk]

It was not mentioning the balance issue but about the game-play. Plasmids are special abilities to deal with environments and the main game-play of Bioshock is focused on working with changing environments rather than shooting precisely and quickly, which put off some purist FTP fans. HL series are not a pure FTP, too. The main game play is to let the players play with physics engine rather than shooting. Valve's Portal seems to be expanding the aspect.

The simulationist tendency is not unfamiliar with RPG at all. In fact, one of Doom designers is Sandy Peterson, who is one of the founders of Chaosium, especially known as a designer of Call of Cthulhu and trolls in Glorantha setting (I was surprised by the details...he used his knowledge of zoology effectively here). Peterson worked in various genres in computer games including Quake, Age of Empires and Sid Meier's Pirates! RPG has various aspects and conventional CRPG reflects only a part of them. I think a broader sense of RPG elements can be used to expand game-play of computer games. I am still interested in rule sets and looking forward to new Basic Role-Playing from Chaosium but it's still just a part of RPG.

[JDR13]

Ftp??

..........

[Dusk]

Ops...they should have been FPS, of course. It is so obvious that I was tweaking my firewall setting. :biggrin: