+1Foxomaniac wrote:http://www.gametrailers.com/player/user ... 03130.html
Bioshock
Moderator: Moderators
I've played through it twice now. First, it's atmosphere isn't really that great, compared to other actually fun shooters. The main plot twist is way too obvious, and really isn't executed that well either.
Gameplay just plain sucks, mainly because of the mentioned total lack of difficulty, as well as other flawed gameplay elements everywhere.
It's a decent FPS, but not even close to one of the best.
Gameplay just plain sucks, mainly because of the mentioned total lack of difficulty, as well as other flawed gameplay elements everywhere.
It's a decent FPS, but not even close to one of the best.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOBTN67K0ZwCaydr wrote:Do they actually pay him though or is it like how JC was "hired" for Spring?
Edit: Also it seems the review was taken off youtube and gametrailers for copyright, but you can get it at the publication itself:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/article ... n-BioShock
-
SwiftSpear
- Classic Community Lead
- Posts: 7287
- Joined: 12 Aug 2005, 09:29
Open ended is hard to do, it generally means that you design and build alot of game the player never sees, it doesn't allow for the truely epic moments that linear games rely on without tonnes of work to make sure the player runs into them, or just allowing the player to pass them by entirely and miss the experience.
Personally, I neither want nor care about open ended games if it means I have to give up the stuff I like about linear games, and 99.9% of the time it does. FPS games shouldn't be open ended anyways, these are epic story based games, not the frigging sims.
Personally, I neither want nor care about open ended games if it means I have to give up the stuff I like about linear games, and 99.9% of the time it does. FPS games shouldn't be open ended anyways, these are epic story based games, not the frigging sims.
Deus Ex wasn't totally open-ended but it made you feel like your actions had a real effect. It also gave you the option of attacking an objective in any number of ways. It let you become completely different characters depending on your skill choices and upgrades.
That's what they said Bioshock was going to be... but it wasn't. What they did do - adding tons of areas that didn't need to be explored, that were just there for detail and hiding pickups - only made an easy game easier.
That effort should've been spent delivering on all the stuff they left out, like there being more than one way to approach a problem. You have exactly one way of making it through the game: killing everything that moves.
And the methods they used to make ammunition seem scarce, that is, making it so you can only carry a couple clips for most weapons and limiting how much cash you can carry, only made you feel like you should use lots of ammo so you wouldn't waste what you found. Crap, I felt like I was going to stumble upon a fountain somewhere and a fairy would pop out giving me a bigger wallet for more rupees.
They made another FPS, not the groundbreaking genre-buster they promised. It's got lots of personality, it's got lots of uncommon attention to detail, but it's just an FPS in the end. It really feels like they designed the entire game as some sort of Myst-clone, then at the end decided it should be an FPS so they threw in a couple enemies and a machine gun or two... not that I really care. It is a good game after all, just not what they said it would be.
It could've been made so much better with a better sense of urgency. Make the levels actually start to flood if you stay too long. Make dying cost you Adam, or reduce your inventory or something. What I said earlier about Deus Ex... sure your actions didn't have any real consequences in the end aside from the ending cinematic, but you FELT like things were happening. That's what Bioshock lacks. Nothing you do matters, there are no consequences to anything, even dying.
That's what they said Bioshock was going to be... but it wasn't. What they did do - adding tons of areas that didn't need to be explored, that were just there for detail and hiding pickups - only made an easy game easier.
That effort should've been spent delivering on all the stuff they left out, like there being more than one way to approach a problem. You have exactly one way of making it through the game: killing everything that moves.
And the methods they used to make ammunition seem scarce, that is, making it so you can only carry a couple clips for most weapons and limiting how much cash you can carry, only made you feel like you should use lots of ammo so you wouldn't waste what you found. Crap, I felt like I was going to stumble upon a fountain somewhere and a fairy would pop out giving me a bigger wallet for more rupees.
They made another FPS, not the groundbreaking genre-buster they promised. It's got lots of personality, it's got lots of uncommon attention to detail, but it's just an FPS in the end. It really feels like they designed the entire game as some sort of Myst-clone, then at the end decided it should be an FPS so they threw in a couple enemies and a machine gun or two... not that I really care. It is a good game after all, just not what they said it would be.
It could've been made so much better with a better sense of urgency. Make the levels actually start to flood if you stay too long. Make dying cost you Adam, or reduce your inventory or something. What I said earlier about Deus Ex... sure your actions didn't have any real consequences in the end aside from the ending cinematic, but you FELT like things were happening. That's what Bioshock lacks. Nothing you do matters, there are no consequences to anything, even dying.
-
SwiftSpear
- Classic Community Lead
- Posts: 7287
- Joined: 12 Aug 2005, 09:29
Sure there is! You can choose between being a flower child who loves all of gods shiny creatures or a cross between Hitler and Skeletor who's very piss is liquid malevolence!
[edit] This is why I liked the fallout games. There was no good and evil, the ending cinematic simply displayed the natural consequences for your actions on the world when you were done. If you killed important people, the towns collapsed, if you saved important people they succeeded, if you preferanced one people group over another they would reign supreme. Maby you're the kind of player who thinks to them selfs later "in retrospective I kind of would have liked the end more if I hadn't killed the town of gecko" or maby you'll love the fact that those bastards are all rotting... basically you get exactly the ending you deserve, you decide for yourself weather you like it or not. There's no shock in when you realize, "oh, killing all those children was evil! I never would have guessed!" The natural consequences are clear and obvious. If a game must be non liniar, I don't think there is any other successful way of doing it.
[edit] This is why I liked the fallout games. There was no good and evil, the ending cinematic simply displayed the natural consequences for your actions on the world when you were done. If you killed important people, the towns collapsed, if you saved important people they succeeded, if you preferanced one people group over another they would reign supreme. Maby you're the kind of player who thinks to them selfs later "in retrospective I kind of would have liked the end more if I hadn't killed the town of gecko" or maby you'll love the fact that those bastards are all rotting... basically you get exactly the ending you deserve, you decide for yourself weather you like it or not. There's no shock in when you realize, "oh, killing all those children was evil! I never would have guessed!" The natural consequences are clear and obvious. If a game must be non liniar, I don't think there is any other successful way of doing it.
-
Felix the Cat
- Posts: 2383
- Joined: 15 Jun 2005, 17:30
-
Pressure Line
- Posts: 2283
- Joined: 21 May 2007, 02:09
-
Felix the Cat
- Posts: 2383
- Joined: 15 Jun 2005, 17:30
Speaking of Deus Ex, I guess DX 3 is in development. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deus_Ex_3
-
Drone_Fragger
- Posts: 1341
- Joined: 04 Dec 2005, 15:49
Fragger, have you played against the SupCom AI very recently?
I admit, I don't really have a lot of experience with the game, I suck in general. I've just never found the time to get any practice.
Even so, I still have to say I think the AI in supcom is above average at least, especially in the more recent patches. Certainly way better than the TA ai, even if it still has the tendency to comm rush your attacks.
I admit, I don't really have a lot of experience with the game, I suck in general. I've just never found the time to get any practice.
Even so, I still have to say I think the AI in supcom is above average at least, especially in the more recent patches. Certainly way better than the TA ai, even if it still has the tendency to comm rush your attacks.