Bioshock

Peet · Post by **Peet** » 10 Sep 2007, 23:25

Back on topic, Bioshock was well worth the 6 or so GB of download bandwidth it cost me

I might even pay for it after a few patches, the damn thing crashed while autosaving, putting me back 3 levels and angering me greatly.

Zoombie · Post by **Zoombie** » 14 Sep 2007, 05:37

Well, I'll just pop back to this forum to say that this game is one of my favorite shooters of all time.

<Might contain spoilers>

Here's what I like: Gameplay. Anyone who says a Plasmid is useful obviously isn't imaginative enough. I've found a use for every plasmid. My personal favorite being telekinesis. Using a corpse to block bullets, then crushing the enemies head with it at the same time...priceless.

Plot: I don't know about anyone else, but I was totally surprised by the twist in Bioshock. And yes, I played SS2, so I mistrusted everyone right up till the level after Neptune's Bounty. But that was a ruse too! DAMN YOU, ATLAS! DAMN YOU TO HELL! Also, the fact that it has loads of direct and indirect connections to Atlas Shrugged and has a very deep, interesting setting...well, I loved it.

Scares: Seriously, this game freaked the crap out of me. Respawning enemies, creepy voice overs, the dichotomy between the hopeful Art Deco and the horror around you, it works great.

<Spoliers end>

And to everyone who hates the Vita-Chambers, I'll have to go with you. But it's really, really simple: Don't USE THEM!

It's called Quicksave and Quickload, dudes. Hard + No Vita Chambers = Very hard game. Fun fun fun fun fun!

Muzic · Post by **Muzic** » 14 Sep 2007, 08:00

Zoombie wrote: Anyone who says a Plasmid is useful obviously isn't imaginative enough. I've found a use for every plasmid.

Im confuzzeld

Foxomaniac · Post by **Foxomaniac** » 14 Sep 2007, 08:44

Zoombie has a weak mind / easily impressed, I suppose.

Ishach · Post by **Ishach** » 14 Sep 2007, 09:36

I wrote a big post that got deleted by some retarded mod because it mentioned you meet ryan at some point :/

Anyway, the game is pretty fun until about 50% of the way through when all the guns you want to use are upgraded, all the tonics and plasmids you want to use are bought and you realise 99% of enemies require only a wrench to kill.

I kind of hope there is a sequel as has been suggested by Taketwo but i'm pretty sure they wont be able to match the same level of story or characters, cause they seem to have run out of steam half way through just one game

Post by **jcnossen** » 15 Sep 2007, 00:12

bioshock sucks imo.. only the atmosphere is nice.
Putting lots of random crap in a game doesn't make it fun.

BlackLiger · Post by **BlackLiger** » 15 Sep 2007, 07:22

Once you can have the bloodlust tonic, eh, you can take on a big daddy 1 on 1 in close combat on even the hardest, and if you're fast enough, you can BEAT the thing to death, since any damage it does do is healed by bloodlust.

AF · Post by AF » 15 Sep 2007, 12:55

They're easy to kill, fire armour piercing rounds with the machien gun and ti takes about 4 seconds to kill one?

Or 3/4 grenades?

Using the research camera might have made it so easy..

DZHIBRISH · Post by **DZHIBRISH** » 15 Sep 2007, 14:31

is the new unreal engine and hype!! wtf is it with all those reviews and people saying its amazing...there was nothng fundementaly new about its gameplay.. Has an old style shooter structure.Its linear and quit frankly boring.Boring enemies and all that littles sister is so dumb...seriously.. couldnt they have made something a bit more serious? I mean there is so much gore make the story for adults as well...they put so much into the atmosphere so why not make interesting enemies...take stalker,a bugfest.. but it was based on a book and a famous film...its not linear and has a fresh feel to it unlike any other shooter..its a first ettampt to change the static worlds of fpss ...bioshock on the other hand is nothig special...would never buy it...it doesnt even have multiplayer ffs...what kind of a lame ass game doesnt have a multiplayer when even games like civilization have a multiplayer mod...could at least make a deathmatch and than add some more options as patches came out..

Caydr · Post by **Caydr** » 15 Sep 2007, 17:02

Yeah multiplayer could've made the game sort of interesting. Would've been like Jedi Knight 4 or something, with all those powers you get.

Panda · Post by **Panda** » 15 Sep 2007, 21:45

I find the philosophy behind Bioshock and the soundtrack to be interesting. The plot seems to me as though it could use a bit more complexity and game play is alright.

Foxomaniac wrote:Zoombie has a weak mind / easily impressed, I suppose.

Just because someone is impressionable it does not mean that they have a weak mind. An impressionable person may still be quite intelligent and resilient, simply not weary.

SwiftSpear · Post by **SwiftSpear** » 15 Sep 2007, 23:02

DZHIBRISH wrote:is the new unreal engine and hype!! wtf is it with all those reviews and people saying its amazing...there was nothng fundementaly new about its gameplay.. Has an old style shooter structure.Its linear and quit frankly boring.Boring enemies and all that littles sister is so dumb...seriously.. couldnt they have made something a bit more serious? I mean there is so much gore make the story for adults as well...they put so much into the atmosphere so why not make interesting enemies...take stalker,a bugfest.. but it was based on a book and a famous film...its not linear and has a fresh feel to it unlike any other shooter..its a first ettampt to change the static worlds of fpss ...bioshock on the other hand is nothig special...would never buy it...it doesnt even have multiplayer ffs...what kind of a lame ass game doesnt have a multiplayer when even games like civilization have a multiplayer mod...could at least make a deathmatch and than add some more options as patches came out..

Wait, you haven't played the game and you're criticizing enemy design? Or atmosphere? Linearity in FPS is also a good thing TBH. Farcry played like shit, and STALKER, while good, certainly didn't revolutionize the industry. The lack of linearity makes an FPS game that would be compelling and interesting boring and slow, it takes alot of work and brilliance on the part of a dev team to make it click, most FPS dev teams should avoid it.

DZHIBRISH · Post by **DZHIBRISH** » 16 Sep 2007, 01:33

I am corrently playing it and i played the demo.I also saw the list of enemies.I personnaly think any linear fps is shit by now.
It's Primitive.
If you would have played stalker sufficiently you wouldnt say that about it.
In stalker you get a feeling you dont have in any other game.It's atmosphere is not worst and I would say better than bioshock's plus its open and much less linear.With mods Stalker became even better.Anyways i think bioshock is pure hype and has nothing to offer for its price except for pretty looks..nothing special about the gameplay at all..
By the way the story and theme are kind of stupid as well.Im not sure how many of you are femilier of ayn rand.She got some publicity afer publishing a few books about absolute capitalism.a World in which everything is in private hands.She was famous during the 50s-70s i think.
It wasnt so much a philosophy as a way of life...like a pseudo religion..
To take that and abuse it...kinda lame imo(did i say there is no multiplayer).

Neuralize · Post by **Neuralize** » 16 Sep 2007, 02:34

Haven't played Bioshock. Played System Shock 2, and that was tight. Scared the shit out of me. I bet the whole lot of you haven't even played that game.

Stalker does suck though. It feels like a bad MMORPG without real players.

Peet · Post by **Peet** » 16 Sep 2007, 02:45

SS2 is epic win all around.

SwiftSpear · Post by **SwiftSpear** » 16 Sep 2007, 03:04

A: I'm not saying stalker is worse than Bioshock, I'm just saying that stalker alone doesn't invalidate the entire market of Linear FPS games. The vast majority of my favorite FPS are linear. Stalker doesn't change that in the slightest. Linearity in FPS games is fine, linearity in any game is fine. This whole movement that makes this ridiculous assumption that non linearity in games is some sort of brilliant advancement is ridiculous, especially for story based games, ala Bioshock. It's not a bad thing that they are linear, in most cases it's a good thing. Dropping the linearity would require ridiculous things in terms of the game universe. Every game shouldn't take place in a field, mountain, or expansive town you explore infinitely. Non linearity would have made half life unplayable.

B: I agree, Bioshock is hyped to shit, but it does some things very well, and it certainly isn't a terrible game. It's also not a good flagship for linear FPS games however. HL2 is probably better.

Panda · Post by **Panda** » 16 Sep 2007, 04:37

I think that Bioshock is a good game for the reasons I stated in my previous post. They seem to outweigh the bad points of the game.

ZellSF · Post by **ZellSF** » 16 Sep 2007, 13:50

Zoombie wrote: And to everyone who hates the Vita-Chambers, I'll have to go with you. But it's really, really simple: Don't USE THEM!

It's called Quicksave and Quickload, dudes. Hard + No Vita Chambers = Very hard game. Fun fun fun fun fun!

No. It's still way too easy. You would have to do a camera only run for it to be very hard.

Also, if you're telling people to play a game that way wasn't supposed to be played, that's not defending the game at all. Besides, "not using them" isn't that easy, once you die you are forced to watch the animation anyway.

DZHIBRISH · Post by **DZHIBRISH** » 16 Sep 2007, 15:06

swiftspear.Non linearity is an attampt to allow the player to make up his own stoyry insted of being spoonfed.I didnt say all games should take place in a field but bioshock takes place in a city...basiclly linear games are one big corridor.. yuou start at a cerain pint and you walk thjrough that corridor the entire game.half life wasnt linear cause valve or whoever developed it knew that in order for it to seel well they wont have to be innovative in any way.The knew that all the needed to do was a regular but polished shooter and the name,marketing and hype would do the rest.Bioshock is the same only much worse.To the guy who said stalker is like a bad mmo.That is nonsens.An mmorpg is basiclly you running from x to y and kill creatures on the way,there is no change no unexpected events no individuality whatsoever.All that you do in an mmorpg is something everyone else did before you in exactly the same way.In Stalker especially in a modded stalker each time you play the experiance can be completly different.Its not a living world but it sure feels like one.About bioshock.The good things about it deffinetly do not outweigh the bad things.I still cant believe it got such high scores.If you try and examine bioshock from an objective point if view you have to give it say a 7.8 out of 10.Mostly cause of good graphics and design.The gameplay is monotoneous,there is no multiplayer(i know i know...) story is childish no innovation...its more of a showcase of unreal engine 3.like doom was showcase of its engine.

Panda · Post by **Panda** » 17 Sep 2007, 02:21

DZHIBRISH wrote:... I personnaly think any linear fps is shit by now. It's Primitive. ... In stalker you get a feeling ... nothing special about the gameplay at all ... story and theme are kind of stupid as well ... She was famous during the 50s-70s i think ...

DZHIBRISH wrote:... good things about it deffinetly do not outweigh the bad things ...

An intelligent arguement would provide explainations and examples.

Spring RTS Engine

Bioshock

bioshock

Re: bioshock