Bioshock - Review @ GameBanshee

chamr said:

Just to keep up the torrid pace of this thread, and to veer it dramatically off course...

Hogwash. There are certainly many cases where people aren't qualified to have an opinion. They may have it, but their lack of qualifications render it meaningless and easy to reject out of hand. Simple example: I may have an opinion on how a skyscrapper should be constructed, but I certainly wouldn't expect anyone to take it seriously, let alone pay attention to me at all, since I have no qualifications in building skyscrappers.

Click to expand...

Hogwash yourself: you're perfectly capable of having an idea about building a skyscraper. Of course, the likelihood that it's both good and original is pretty slim. I've had lots of ideas outside my field(s) of expertise, and quite often pursue them a bit. For example, I bounce them off an expert. It's a great way to learn things too, and it usually amuses the experts.

Most of the time, it turns out that my idea was either flawed or unoriginal, but there have been times I've beaten the experts at their own game -- admittedly in fields where the uncertainties are pretty huge to start with.

You missed the point of my reply with my personal connection of having seen the death of a person that actually means something more to me then a computer character. But I really can't be bothered to go on with this kind of conversation here. I think that your opinion can maybe have a point with people that have very little life experience, but not much more.

Could you provide some examples of games that you feel work well as games rather than interactive movies? Even better if some of these are FPS's. TIA.

Click to expand...

I could name a zillion games where that is the case, and I can name quite a few FPS or FPS-like games that work well as games:

Stalker
FarCry
System Shock
System Shock 2
Deus Ex
Thief
Thief 2
Thief 3

And others...

Some of those games share, to an extent, the cinematic approach, but none of them let it dominate the gameplay. In fact, the Thief games are possibly the best examples of difficulty level implementation in the genre.

DArtagnan said:

I think I've pointed out the exact difference, and that should sufficiently demonstrate how it's worse.

Click to expand...

But it doesn't -- it simply demonstrates that it's different, which we already knew.

Once more: I can't see how loading from a save (with the enemy returned to full health) is more challenging than reincarnating in a Vita-Chamber (with your resources still depleted).

Again, you assume I think quicksave abusing is a good thing. You also assume that I think that feature is ok.

Click to expand...

I assume nothing of the kind. I'm simply observing that almost all FPS's handle the "sudden death in a fight" situation by providing the possibility to quicksave -- and every FPS'er I've talked to uses it. Some impose additional restrictions on themselves -- like, one quick-save per level, or only quick-save after being beaten twice in the same battle, and so on.

Personally, I'm not a big fan of wading through ten minutes of level to get to the boss fight either.

The reason I don't complain about quicksaving is because I've gotten used to it.

Click to expand...

Bingo -- you're complaining about the Vita Chambers because they're *new*. IOW, pure conservatism.

I base this on my knowledge of the people I've interacted with regarding this issue, and I've had numerous discussions in the past related to quicksave abusing or overall difficulty level. Can I prove it? No, nor would I care to try. If you don't agree, say so, if you do then stop wasting our time.

Click to expand...

I don't agree.

I don't play a lot of them to be honest, but I did in my past. I seem to recall Farcry being quite challenging. Stalker also had a very satisfying level of challenge.

Click to expand...

FarCry was uneven. Much of it was satisfyingly challenging, but there were places -- especially towards the endgame -- where I found the only way to get through was by constant save-game abuse.

Stalker was highly satisfying, and I did enjoy it more than Bioshock on a gameplay level -- but I didn't find it any harder than Bioshock.

Maybe for you. I only compare games against standards I personally think make good points of comparison.

Click to expand...

Specifically...? Stalker and FarCry? Fine, that did clarify things.

I couldn't care less what the media thinks and the hype surrounding Half-Life 2 was ridiculous as far as I'm concerned. So is the hype surrounding Bioshock and Halo 3.

Click to expand...

Surely you're not reflexively dissing these games simply *because* they're hyped, rather than taking them on their own merits? Naawww... you wouldn't do that. Would you?

You seem to think that because Bioshock is too easy, there has to be a game that is not too easy. That's not a logical assumption. However, it is a reasonable thing to ask for a point of comparison.

Click to expand...

"Too easy" is a comparative term. Using it *does* imply that there exists a point of comparison that is not "too easy." If you're claiming that "everything is too easy," you're either illogical or snobbish.

Anyway, yes, there are games where challenge wasn't a problem (lack of it) and I could bring up the original System Shock 1 and 2, which were both much more challenging.

Click to expand...

Well, let's hear about them. Why so coy?

@woges: OK. But to be perfectly clear, I made no value judgment on whether your tragic experience meant more or less than the experience of having a child. I certainly would not wade into those waters

@PJ: Ah, but opinions and ideas are different, no? They have similarities, but the connotation is very different indeed. Also, whether someone's "allowed" to have an opinion and whether an opinion has any value at all is purely semantics to me.

DArtagnan said:

Stalker

Click to expand...

Loved the game, but didn't find it any harder (=more challenging) than Bioshock.

DArtagnan said:

FarCry

Click to expand...

Found most of the game very sweet, but a few bits were too hard for me -- the carrier top deck, storming the fort, and some of the end levels, for example.

DArtagnan said:

Deus Ex

Click to expand...

Loved the game, but didn't find it any harder (=more challenging) than Bioshock.

DArtagnan said:

Thief 3

Click to expand...

Mostly hated the game (other than Shalebridge Cradle), and found it pretty easy overall; certainly not harder than Bioshock.

Some of those games share, to an extent, the cinematic approach, but none of them let it dominate the gameplay. In fact, the Thief games are possibly the best examples of difficulty level implementation in the genre.

Click to expand...

You think? I disagree, but interesting nevertheless.

chamr said:

@PJ: Ah, but opinions and ideas are different, no? They have similarities, but the connotation is very different indeed. Also, whether someone's "allowed" to have an opinion and whether an opinion has any value at all is purely semantics to me.

Click to expand...

You're the one who brought up skyscraper design, friend.

And while your position may have some merit in the larger scheme of things, it's patently ridiculous in the current context -- "if you don't have children, you're not allowed an opinion on Little Sisters [unless the opinion is the same as mine]."

But it doesn't -- it simply demonstrates that it's different, which we already knew.

Once more: I can't see how loading from a save (with the enemy returned to full health) is more challenging than reincarnating in a Vita-Chamber (with your resources still depleted).

Click to expand...

Ok, I'll repeat this one last time.

Vita chambers = Enemies retain loss of health ensuring their inevitable defeat.

Quicksave = Enemies full health not ensuring anything unless you actually manage to kill them from full health to no health.

The reason quicksave is less of a problem is particularly obvious during boss fights, where you're typically challenged for a while until you figure out a strategy or approach. Vita chamber solution has no such challenge.

The resources argument would be sound, if only Bioshock didn't shove ammo down your throat every 2 steps.

The reason I don't complain about quicksaving is because I've gotten used to it.
Bingo -- you're complaining about the Vita Chambers because they're *new*. IOW, pure conservatism.

Click to expand...

No, you're missing the point.

I don't like the quicksave solution and I don't like the Vita chamber solution. I don't complain about the quicksave solution because I've gotten used to it, but I still retain my dislike for it.

Furthermore, I complain about the Vita chamber solution because I dislike it A LOT more than the quicksave solution.

Conservatism would be if I actually liked quicksaving because it's a tradition, which I don't, meaning I'm not conservative in this case.

I don't agree.

Click to expand...

Ok, it can't be proved either way, so let's forget it.

FarCry was uneven. Much of it was satisfyingly challenging, but there were places -- especially towards the endgame -- where I found the only way to get through was by constant save-game abuse.

Stalker was highly satisfying, and I did enjoy it more than Bioshock on a gameplay level -- but I didn't find it any harder than Bioshock.

Click to expand...

Interesting, but you asked for examples and I gave you some.

Surely you're not reflexively dissing these games simply *because* they're hyped, rather than taking them on their own merits? Naawww... you wouldn't do that. Would you?

Click to expand...

I'm not dissing the games. I'm dissing the level of hype. Two VERY different things.

We were talking about established standards, and I don't consider Half-Life 2 a standard of comparison that's useful for me, regardless of the media hype.

Well, let's hear about them. Why so coy?

Click to expand...

What do you want to know?

Loved the game, but didn't find it any harder (=more challenging) than Bioshock.

Found most of the game very sweet, but a few bits were too hard for me -- the carrier top deck, storming the fort, and some of the end levels, for example.

Deus Ex
Loved the game, but didn't find it any harder (=more challenging) than Bioshock.

Thief 3
Mostly hated the game (other than Shalebridge Cradle), and found it pretty easy overall; certainly not harder than Bioshock.

Click to expand...

You seem to think I was talking about difficulty.

I was talking about games working well as games, in direct response to your question.

Incidentally, I think they were all more challenging than Bioshock.

chamr said:

Hogwash. There are certainly many cases where people aren't qualified to have an opinion. They may have it, but their lack of qualifications render it meaningless and easy to reject out of hand. Simple example: I may have an opinion on how a skyscrapper should be constructed, but I certainly wouldn't expect anyone to take it seriously, let alone pay attention to me at all, since I have no qualifications in building skyscrappers.

Click to expand...

People may feel free to ignore you, txa should feel free to ignore us, but nobody has any right to tell you that you shouldn't have an opinion on a subject.

Besides, in your example, there's an objective level of professionalism involved. txa's determination has to do with some kind of arbitrary qualifier that he somehow deems objectively true. In your example, I could see how it'd frustrate people, in txa's case, he has no right to look down his nose at people.

Prime Junta said:

But that's not it! Let me try to put it another way: emotional manipulation is the bread-and-butter of any art, especially games, right? You do this with a "hook" that engages your emotions, and then you pull a "string" to make them do what you want. The "hook" is your device of choice -- a damsel in distress, a puppy, a child -- and the "string" is what you do with it, and how.

For me the string broke precisely *because* the hook is so strong. If the Little Sisters had been something emotionally charged but less so than children, like puppies or something, the string probably *wouldn't* have broken. Conversely, the string would have had to be much stronger to reel me in with the hook being used. As I said earlier, some games I've played do manage to pull this off; Bioshock didn't. I experienced it by having the game go flat in that particular scene, and consequently went "Uh, harvest, I guess" without any particular wrenches in my gut. I suspect you experienced the same thing, only a bit differently.

Click to expand...

Fair enough, but that sounds like it's highly personal.

Emotion is highly personal, it isn't much else.

DArtagnan said:

Ok, I'll repeat this one last time.

Vita chambers = Enemies retain loss of health ensuring their inevitable defeat.

Quicksave = Enemies full health not ensuring anything unless you actually manage to kill them from full health to no health.

Click to expand...

I disagree: quickloading guarantees that you'll *eventually* beat the boss exactly the same way as spawning at a vita-chamber ensures you'll wear him down with your wrench. Might take a hundred tries either way, but the end result is the same.

(OK, unless you totally screwed yourself by quicksaving at 0.1 health or something.)

The resources argument would be sound, if only Bioshock didn't shove ammo down your throat every 2 steps.

Click to expand...

But my argument was precisely that you're barking up the wrong tree here -- I agree with you about the ammo/money/other resources; I even agree that the vita chambers make it worse, BUT... that's a different design problem.

No, you're missing the point.

I don't like the quicksave solution and I don't like the Vita chamber solution. I don't complain about the quicksave solution because I've gotten used to it, but I still retain my dislike for it.

Click to expand...

OK, fair enough. You would've saved us a lot of time by mentioning that to start with.

Furthermore, I complain about the Vita chamber solution because I dislike it A LOT more than the quicksave solution.

Click to expand...

Yes, but *WHY?* So far, all I'm receiving is "'cuz I'm used to quick saving." I.e., conservatism.

I'm not dissing the games. I'm dissing the level of hype. Two VERY different things.

Click to expand...

Could've fooled me, esp. about Half-Life 2.

We were talking about established standards, and I don't consider Half-Life 2 a standard of comparison that's useful for me, regardless of the media hype.

Click to expand...

And I'm not saying it should be; I just wanted to know what your standards of comparison were. Now that you've provided them, I have a much better idea of where you're coming from.

DArtagnan said:

You seem to think I was talking about difficulty.

I was talking about games working well as games, in direct response to your question.

Incidentally, I think they were all more challenging than Bioshock.

Click to expand...

Ah, right, I see. Come to think of it, I agree with you on most counts (re games as games, not about the challenge).

(Again, my point being that I don't see "reload until you beat the fight" as fundamentally different challenge-wise from "respawn until you beat the fight.")

Brother None said:

Fair enough, but that sounds like it's highly personal.

Click to expand...

What's more personal than emotions anyway?

Bottom line: Bioshock failed to manipulate my emotions as intended in the Little Sister scene. It's interesting to me to note that Bioshock succeeded to varying degrees in this manipulation with most other people. It's also interesting to me to speculate why this is the case.

Prime Junta said:

And while your position may have some merit in the larger scheme of things, it's patently ridiculous in the current context -- "if you don't have children, you're not allowed an opinion on Little Sisters [unless the opinion is the same as mine]."

Click to expand...

Fair enough. But that wasn't where my comments on opinions were directed. I was reacting to BN's claim:

"you were telling people what they're qualified to have opinions on. You don't have that right. Ever. Nobody does."

Since he was speaking in such absolutes, it's like telling a skyscraper architect that he/she can't tell me that I'm not qualified to have an opinion on how a skyscraper should be built. To use your words: patently ridiculous.

I disagree: quickloading guarantees that you'll *eventually* beat the boss exactly the same way as spawning at a vita-chamber ensures you'll wear him down with your wrench. Might take a hundred tries either way, but the end result is the same.

Click to expand...

Ok, let me be fair and state clearly that this is all about the illusion of challenge. There has never been a game I felt I couldn't beat eventually, nor do I suspect there ever will be. If there was, it wouldn't sell many copies anyway.

The quicksaving method, precisely, does NOT guarentee anything. Because you have to figure out a strategy from 100 to 0. Maybe it ALWAYS happens eventually, but the fact remains that you have to. That could be considered the illusion of challenge, and if it is it's a MUCH better illusion than the Vita chambers one.

The Vita solution ENSURES without fault that you will win because you can ALWAYS damage your enemies.

If you can't appreciate the difference, then ok, let's just agree to disagree.

But my argument was precisely that you're barking up the wrong tree here -- I agree with you about the ammo/money/other resources; I even agree that the vita chambers make it worse, BUT... that's a different design problem.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure what design problem you're talking about. I'm talking about several design problems, one being Vita chambers, another being overly abundant resources.

OK, fair enough. You would've saved us a lot of time by mentioning that to start with.

Click to expand...

Maybe, I think stating everything at first is hard to do. I guess it's as hard to do as not assuming standard stuff about people you don't know.

Yes, but *WHY?* So far, all I'm receiving is "'cuz I'm used to quick saving." I.e., conservatism.

Click to expand...

It's becoming increasingly obvious that you won't understand my problem with this. I can ask only this of you, believe that I really mean what I say and accept that we just don't agree.

Could've fooled me, esp. about Half-Life 2.

Click to expand...

I'm not surprised. People tend to assume the worst because I don't articulate myself in a traditional manner apparently.

And I'm not saying it should be; I just wanted to know what your standards of comparison were. Now that you've provided them, I have a much better idea of where you're coming from

Click to expand...

That's ok, and I'm glad.

Wow, this suddenly took on a life of its own.

For what it's worth, I have mixed feelings about the VitaChambers; I also thought the little sister thing was fairly trite - and, no, I don't have kids.

There is some small but different sense of achievement between wearing an enemy down through respawn-attrition-respawn vs reloading (even a hundred times) and finally getting it "right": taking down the enemy from beginning to end in one go.

That said, I'm one of the first to agree that an alternative mechanism to reloading is worth exploring - hence why I'm one of the few that seems to like the new BioWare party-members-are-only-unconscious method.

On the little sisters, I found it too obvious and manipulative with little gameplay relevance.

Neither of which means the game wasn't great but I did find my initial great enthusiasm was a little ameliorated and I haven't finished the game because my attention was caught by other stuff.

Wow, what a useless thread this has turned out to be, it's the same 3-4 idiots just trying to counter-point each other over and over again.

If you didn't like Bioshock then don't f***ing play it again, it's that simple.

JDR13 said:

Wow, what a useless thread this has turned out to be, it's the same 3-4 idiots just trying to counter-point each other over and over again.

If you didn't like Bioshock then don't f***ing play it again, it's that simple.

Click to expand...

And I apologize for my part as one of the idiots. When will I learn the whole "mud-wrestling with pigs" thing ...

I actually think there are some good points in this thread, diversions aside. Save game mechanics is an important design debate worth having and whether the little sisters in BS are poignant or pointless is also worth talking about.