Bioshock interview @TTLG

[Morgoth]

Whatever. I haven't read the Character Bios. I was just refering to the funny name "Dr. Tannenbaum". You know, a fir tree.

Edited May 24, 2007 by Morgoth

[metadigital]

Christmas Tree.

[funcroc]

new gameplay video Edited May 29, 2007 by funcroc

[Morgoth]

New screenshots

 

 

Baley on Ice comes to mind...

 

[Pidesco]

I think "Cool!" is appropriate, here.

[metadigital]

I can't wait for the bees.

[Llyranor]

I saw the new footage on Gametrailers (which apparently is running on the 360 version). Looks nice enough, but it portrays the game as an elaborate FPS with more exploration and a RPGesque character system, but still a FPS. Though, to be fair, they only showed mainly combat.

 

I haven't played SS2, so I can't attest to how much more awesome that's supposed to be.

 

I'm glad they didn't overexpose the Big Daddy crap AGAIN. That's already getting old even before the game is out. Though at least this time that fight actually looks like it could be fun. They need to show more of the rest of the game, though.

[Morgoth]

Christmas Tree.

Now that would be a Weihnachtsbaum. While a Weihnachtsbaum is often made from a Tannenbaum, it doesn't always mean every Tannenbaum is a Weihnachtsbaum....you see?

 

I haven't played SS2, so I can't attest to how much more awesome that's supposed to be.

Do yourself a favor....

 

I liked how the girl pushed him "Kill him, kill him, KILL HIM!", while the fat boy always missed the player.... poor thing. Anyway, combat looks fun and intense, but I'm more inclined of the eerie and calm gameplay from Shock2. If Bioshock won't offer that, it won't become a classic in my book.

 

Pictures from July issue of EGM

 

One problem I have with Bioshock, or generally with almost every game today is the overuse of quirky colors. I rather liked the homogenous color palette of System Shock2, or the nicely gloomy Thief.

 

Please please dear Obsidian devs don't let that happen to your Alien game.

[Meshugger]

Pictures from July issue of EGM

 

"XBOX 360 Shooter"?

 

...suddenly distant nightmares from Deus Ex: IW comes to mind...

[Morgoth]

Pictures from July issue of EGM

 

"XBOX 360 Shooter"?

 

...suddenly distant nightmares from Deus Ex: IW comes to mind...

The times of 64MB limits are over. Besides, an entire team is committed solely for the PC changes (i.e. UI)

[Meshugger]

Good. I can sleep now

[Morgoth]

Good. I can sleep now

 

 

[Slowtrain]

System Shock 2 IS an FPS. As was System Shock 1. Both games do some genre blending: System Shock 1 made heavy use of adventure and arcade game elements; System Shock 2 made heavy use of rpg elements.

 

SS2 is more of an rpg than say STALKER because it does allow you to develop your character both through the spending of skill points (called cyber-modules in game) and also by finding and using sofware implants, but there is no dialogue, no alternate quest solutions, none of the other aspects of a crpg. Your goal in SS2 was the same as STALKER: kill everything that gets in your way. Ergo: FPS.

Edited May 31, 2007 by CrashGirl

[Morgoth]

Your goal in SS2 was the same as STALKER: kill everything that gets in your way. Ergo: FPS.

But that's the same goal in CRPGs too, but with the difference that I can avoid some bad guys in Stalker or Shock2 if I want.

[Slowtrain]

Your goal in SS2 was the same as STALKER: kill everything that gets in your way. Ergo: FPS.

But that's the same goal in CRPGs too, but with the difference that I can avoid some bad guys in Stalker or Shock2 if I want.

 

sorta, I guess. But not really. The role playing really comes in HOW you choose to obliterate your foes; not DO you want to obliterate them.

[Spider]

If Bioshock offers up similar gameplay as in Stalker, with an enhanced character upgrade system (it will be similar, I just hope there's more variety in how it works), a way to play stealthily that actually matters and some more options on how to progress through the game (ie sneak past the big boss rather than kill it etc) that could very well be the best shooter of all time. If they throw in a world that react to your actions in meaningful ways, it could be very well be one of the best games.

[Slowtrain]

If Bioshock offers up similar gameplay as in Stalker, with an enhanced character upgrade system (it will be similar, I just hope there's more variety in how it works), a way to play stealthily that actually matters and some more options on how to progress through the game (ie sneak past the big boss rather than kill it etc) that could very well be the best shooter of all time. If they throw in a world that react to your actions in meaningful ways, it could be very well be one of the best games.

 

 

Good lord, such postive thinking!

 

er, I am still on the internet, right?

[LadyCrimson]

One problem I have with Bioshock, or generally with almost every game today is the overuse of quirky colors. I rather liked the homogenous color palette of System Shock2, or the nicely gloomy Thief.

Just piping up to say I agree with the above.

 

Mostly, I don't like the overuse of pastels or neon-bright colors, and I feel like I see far too much of it in games these days. Kind of ... renaissance or Picasso painting palette oriented, perhaps. Which is fine in some cases, but it's an overall trend I haven't particularly liked.

[Pop]

Your goal in SS2 was the same as STALKER: kill everything that gets in your way. Ergo: FPS.

I don't think that's the point of STALKER so much as survival is. The point isn't to kill ****, it's to prevent your own death, which usually entails killing ****. You've got limited amounts of everything and you have to make the best of it, and there's no sport in killing, it's all tactical. I'd say it shares more with Resident Evil than it does with Doom. All it really needs is a severe deficit in the quantity of ammunition and playing FPS-style, guns blazing, would no longer be a viable option. In your average FPS, such a deficit would effectively break the game. That it wouldn't break STALKER (since conservation and planning are already a part of the game) indicates to me that lumping it together with Half-Life or Halo would be rash.

Edited May 31, 2007 by Pop

[Slowtrain]

Your goal in SS2 was the same as STALKER: kill everything that gets in your way. Ergo: FPS.

I don't think that's the point of STALKER so much as survival is. The point isn't to kill ****, it's to prevent your own death, which usually entails killing ****. You've got limited amounts of everything and you have to make the best of it, and there's no sport in killing, it's all tactical. I'd say it shares more with Resident Evil than it does with Doom. All it really needs is a severe deficit in the quantity of ammunition and playing FPS-style, guns blazing, would no longer be a viable option. In your average FPS, such a deficit would effectively break the game. That it wouldn't break STALKER (since conservation and planning are already a part of the game) indicates to me that lumping it together with Half-Life or Halo would be rash.

 

Good point, I agree.

[Spider]

Good lord, such postive thinking!

 

er, I am still on the internet, right?

 

Yeah, just on a slight detour.

 

I'm just one of those people who likes to see possibilities rather than problems. At least when there is no evidence either way. What the developers have told us about Bioshock is that it's going to be fairly free form (exploration wise), that there won't be any experience points, but a genetical upgrade system and that while going through the game guns blazing is one way to progress, it isn't the only way. So based on that, my hopes could come true, at least the first part. The reactive world could still be a pipe dream, but I'd rather be hopeful than cynical. I tend to be cynical enough in regards to other matters as it is.

 

(for instance, I was kinda cynical in regards to Stalker, although that was more I never thought it'd see the light of day in a playable fashion. That turned out to be a fantastic game, armor degradation notwithstanding)

[Morgoth]

One problem I have with Bioshock, or generally with almost every game today is the overuse of quirky colors. I rather liked the homogenous color palette of System Shock2, or the nicely gloomy Thief.

Just piping up to say I agree with the above.

 

Mostly, I don't like the overuse of pastels or neon-bright colors, and I feel like I see far too much of it in games these days. Kind of ... renaissance or Picasso painting palette oriented, perhaps. Which is fine in some cases, but it's an overall trend I haven't particularly liked.

Exactly. I usually like the use of the complementary concept (i.e. Cyan-Orange) or overuse of atmospherics in paintings and concept arts, but it barely works in-game. Colors don't convey an interesting message if they're overused (call me old-fashined, but I still like to watch B/W classics).

I always thought Leon Boyarsky (Art Director on Fallout, Vampire:Bloodlines) got it right. Like the room of Voermann and Jeannette, the furniture and tapestry already said much about the person, or the overall moistly, decaying look of the streets. Everything looked very natural while remaining expressive in a non-forced way.

 

Bioshock looks too much of a circus place. But maybe it's also part of the X360, I heard MS enforces developers to increase the saturation so that people can say "Ohhhh and Ahhhh!!!!".

 

That's what Ken Levine had to say in the TTLG forums to those who seemed to be worried about the quality and the somewhat questionable marketing push.

Playing some of the roughly 40,000 words of recorded audio from logs/radios doesn't exactly sell the game to a larger market.

 

Going into detail on the dozens and dozens of stat changing gene tonics doesn't exactly move the larger market.

 

Talking about the details of the research system doesn't exactly move the larger market.

 

Elucidating the hacking and invention system doesn't exactly move the needle with the larger market.

 

Showing movies of min/maxing decision making doesn't exactly draw the eye of the larger market.

 

But those things, to me, are a lot of what makes BioShock Bioshock.

 

As I always said, BioShock is a shooter. I considered Shock 2 a shooter. I would wager BioShock is as deep as Shock 2. The shooting is about 1000 times better. Why? Effects, AI, and most importanly environmental interaction and physics, which your Plasmids, gene tonics and weapons give you incredible amount of control over.

 

So, yes, we're not hard-selling the geekier aspects of the game. I've said this before. But you know what? People are taking notice. BioShock is tracking to be very, very big.

 

I have no interest in making games that nobody plays. I also have no interest in dumbed down monkey fests (unless, of course, there are actual monkeys)

 

We're making a shooter with min maxing character growth, moral choices, a detailed enconomy and upgradeable weapons...oh, yeah, and it's a period piece set in a failed capitalist underwater utopia with a novelistic background...

 

Games like that don't spring from market research. They spring from the guts of game developers who want to break a bunch of rules.

[Slowtrain]

<3 <3 <3

 

Ken Levine is my HERO. yes. I have great faith in the man!

[Morgoth]

Indeed. He has balls and vision, that's why I have so much faith in him.

[mkreku]

I hope he can hit a balance between the shooter and the RPG in BioShock. So far all I've seen is the shooter aspect. So far all I've heard from someone I trust (a Swedish game journalist who got to play the game) is that the game is a shooter. I hope Ken isn't doing the Bethesda hype thing.