Bioshock interview @TTLG

[alanschu]

The only ones I can remember being that bad are Squaresoft's games.

[Meshugger]

The only ones I can remember being that bad are Squaresoft's games.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Not even Squaresoft (Square-Enix?) does it like that. I think that he referred to the Xenosaga-series.

[Morgoth]

With the "5 min cutscenes, 2 min gameplay" I didn't refer to any particular game, but there're some that gave me the feeling it's like that extreme.

[metadigital]

1UP interviews Irrational's Ken Levine

And I've got a message for game writers who put in unskippable cut-scenes: I hate you. You suck. Go write a graphic novel and leave us gamers alone.

 

That's bold, but that's the reason why I'm such a fanboy of him.  :cool:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

:cool:

Didn't Sartre say it best? "Hell is other people"? See, Mom--four years at Vassar was worth something. The reason Psycho had such a huge impact on people is because it brought horror home. Gone were the gothic castles and angry villagers. Horror was just down the street. There's a reason games like SS2 and BioShock use very "realistic" characters and believable settings. I'll take The Shining over Hellraiser any day.

[Hassat Hunter]

I still say that the game design of SS2 and DX has certainly not become passe.

 

Which is (once again) something I didn't say or even agree with AT ALL...

 

Most shooters now days seem to be relatively on a rail, dealing heavily with scripting with little deviation in multiple playthroughs.  The game experience is relatively static.  Not that this is a bad thing.  As I said, I'm a Half-Life fanboi, and Call of Duty is a phenomenal experience.

 

IMO I think that is a bad thing. I find the Half-Life games suck, and MoH and CoD are simply HORRIBLE. That doesn't mean that they divert from what BioShocks creators mean from hallway fights and lack of good AI. Go play F.E.A.R and say it has bad AI. It hasn't. Doesn't make it (IMO) fun to play, but it simply does not have said things.

 

So when Serious Sam says they are going "old school," I see it more a deviation from those types of games.

Which is IMO a good thing. I prefer Painkiller above all the above mentioned "populair FPs"; and SS2/DX above that. But they don't really make them anymore like that. So why would the BioShock devs. have to claim all the games are like that (and I have to say PK doens't even have that much hallway kind of stuff either )

[Morgoth]

Apart from Valve and Monolith, I still see the same Old school concept in new shiny dress getting released.

The FPS market is still dominated with either WW2 crap or some silly Demons-with-rocketlauncher-on-back-you-have-to-save-earth nonsense.

 

Oh, and btw, can anybody tell me the difference between Doom3, Quake4 and Prey?

[Xard]

Names?

[Hassat Hunter]

Then please point me to a game that has similar gameplay and is as fun to play as Painkiller. I have been lacking fun like that in FPS since 2004...

[Dark_Raven]

O RLY?

[Morgoth]

Then please point me to a game that has similar gameplay and is as fun to play as Painkiller. I have been lacking fun like that in FPS since 2004... 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You completely missed the point. We talking about genres and it's possibilities, not mere "woah that's fun hoho" stuff.

You're indirectly claiming that a FPS like Painkiller delivers the same experience as DX or Shock2, right?

I don't see anything that different playing Painkiller than Doom or Quake or whatever, but I've yet to see a game in the veins of DX or Shock2. As I said, I'm pleased we get Bioshock, because it's NOT a clone of something currenty existing, therefor I think the claims the devs made are completely valid.

[Musopticon?]

Could you try to add somehting to the discussion Raven, I mean, for once?

 

 

For the topic, am I the only one that thinks how HL 1 wasn't really the revolution that so many hailed it for? Have fps games somehow changed from the "pistol-smg-rokkit and caverns full of aliens"-shtick? Sure, there was Rainbow and Delta Force and their legacy of "realistic" shooters, but apart from that, we still get mostly the same crap with the rare Far Cry or Undying that changes the formula a bit.

Edited September 1, 2006 by Musopticon?

[Hassat Hunter]

You completely missed the point. We talking about genres and it's possibilities, not mere "woah that's fun hoho" stuff.

You're indirectly claiming that a FPS like Painkiller delivers the same experience as DX or Shock2, right?

Actually I am talking about genres here. IMO FPS can be sectioned into 4 different types (and DX and SS2 are not in the same as PK). I like the first 2 and dislike the second two:

1. Loads of monsters and lack of AI shootfest ("old-skool"); examples of these are Serious Sam and Painkiller.

2. FPS/RPG combo's with less attention to combat and more on story. Examples are System Shock 2, Deus Ex and the subject of this thread

3. Railer-FPS. Not those you play in arcades with lightguns but those who force you onto a VERY linnear path to succes. Examples are Call of Duty and Medal of Honor. I very much dislike the lack of replayability and the linnearity in those. Even games in 1. mostly have more freedom to choose ones path. These are the worst types of FPS IMHO (atleast a lightgun-type one can be fun).

4. The "populair" FPS. Mostly including a very thin storyline and alot of combat sequences that fully use the skill of the player to complete. Most FPS fit into this boring group of clones (sorrowly) including Half-Life (2), Doom 3, Far Cry, F.E.A.R and the sort. And yes; I don't think HL is any advantagement from the games before at all. There have been other games before and after (SS2, DX, Thief) who did that alot better; but for some reason didn't get that public appease that HL get for reasons unknown to me...

 

Edit; actually there is also a 5th type. The online variation (Q3 Arena, RtcW:Enemy Territory and UT's and others).

Depends on what they add wheter or not they are fun. They all mostly go about either pure deathmatch or a teamgoal; just the way how they do it is what makes one fun and others not. I have noticed so far vehicles are usually a MAJOR gamekiller for me (UT2K4) the odd exeption; and since vehicles is the new "hot" for online FPS I really stopped following this franchise much after UT2K4...

Edited September 1, 2006 by Hassat Hunter

[Morgoth]

You completely missed the point. We talking about genres and it's possibilities, not mere "woah that's fun hoho" stuff.

You're indirectly claiming that a FPS like Painkiller delivers the same experience as DX or Shock2, right?

Actually I am talking about genres here. IMO FPS can be sectioned into 4 different types (and DX and SS2 are not in the same as PK). I like the first 2 and dislike the second two:

1. Loads of monsters and lack of AI shootfest ("old-skool"); examples of these are Serious Sam and Painkiller.

2. FPS/RPG combo's with less attention to combat and more on story. Examples are System Shock 2, Deus Ex and the subject of this thread

3. Railer-FPS. Not those you play in arcades with lightguns but those who force you onto a VERY linnear path to succes. Examples are Call of Duty and Medal of Honor. I very much dislike the lack of replayability and the linnearity in those. Even games in 1. mostly have more freedom to choose ones path. These are the worst types of FPS IMHO (atleast a lightgun-type one can be fun).

4. The "populair" FPS. Mostly including a very thin storyline and alot of combat sequences that fully use the skill of the player to complete. Most FPS fit into this boring group of clones (sorrowly) including Half-Life (2), Doom 3, Far Cry, F.E.A.R and the sort. And yes; I don't think HL is any advantagement from the games before at all. There have been other games before and after (SS2, DX, Thief) who did that alot better; but for some reason didn't get that public appease that HL get for reasons unknown to me...

 

Edit; actually there is also a 5th type. The online variation (Q3 Arena, RtcW:Enemy Territory and UT's and others).

Depends on what they add wheter or not they are fun. They all mostly go about either pure deathmatch or a teamgoal; just the way how they do it is what makes one fun and others not. I have noticed so far vehicles are usually a MAJOR gamekiller for me (UT2K4) the odd example; and since vehicles is the new "hot" for online FPS I really stopped following this franchise much after UT2K4...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's fine. But I still miss the point why you think a "living, unique and unpredictable FPS experience" became passe?

It may be that lot's of devs claim such things but never deliver, but in Bioshock's case I'm optimistic it will deliver a living, unique and unpredictable FPS experience. That's not passe at all. It's about time that somebody pushes that concept forward.

Edited September 1, 2006 by Morgoth

[Hassat Hunter]

"passe" might have been a bad choiche of words in that case.

 

What I meant to say in that post (now a few pages back) is that while the BS (that sounds so bad... but it should do) dev's make something different their advertising of breaking out of a "AI-lacking, corridorrunning" loop of FPS is kind of misleading; especially considering many FPS-games no longer hold such goals highly. They actually have some changes, like F.E.A.R's AI; or HL2's whatever makes it great to the public that I still don't get... not so major as BS changes, but still; they did break out of that loop.

 

Hopefully BS dev's are not in such a shortsighted viewpoint that SS2/DX not happened and that all the major improvements announcent will be actually medicore compared to todays gamestock and we will get "Daikatana 2"...

 

[/worst case scenario just based on bad PR]

[Hell Kitty]

For the topic, am I the only one that thinks how HL 1 wasn't really the revolution that so many hailed it for? Have fps games somehow changed from the "pistol-smg-rokkit and caverns full of aliens"-shtick? Sure, there was Rainbow and Delta Force and their legacy of "realistic" shooters, but apart from that, we still get mostly the same crap with the rare Far Cry or Undying that changes the formula a bit.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Was HL the first FPS to make heavy use of scripted sequences?

 

The best thing I remember about the game was that the marines acted in a way I had never seen before in an FPS.

 

The game that drew me into FPS was Duke Nukem 3D, as it ws the first to let me play in a game world that was actually made up of realistic ( and wonderfully interactive) places. Before that all I got was rooms and corridors painted with a different flavoured texture.

 

Oh, and did I just see the spambot Gabs criticise someone for spamming? BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH! *dies*

[metadigital]

Then please point me to a game that has similar gameplay and is as fun to play as Painkiller. I have been lacking fun like that in FPS since 2004... 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Check out all the Doom and Quake mods. And how about the "Last Man Standing" games of Max Pain (2)?

[alanschu]

I still say that the game design of SS2 and DX has certainly not become passe.

 

Which is (once again) something I didn't say or even agree with AT ALL...

 

Well, you did specify those two games specifically, so it can be hard to look past it. Especially when Bioshock is going to most be compared to those two games.

 

IMO I think that is a bad thing. I find the Half-Life games suck, and MoH and CoD are simply HORRIBLE. That doesn't mean that they divert from what BioShocks creators mean from hallway fights and lack of good AI. Go play F.E.A.R and say it has bad AI. It hasn't. Doesn't make it (IMO) fun to play, but it simply does not have said things.

 

F.E.A.R. is also an excellent game. Too bad for you you couldn't enjoy it. Since you were criticizing the quote, I don't think it's a stretch to say that these games DO have "run and gun corridors" as well. The FPS genre is still very much shoot first, ask questions later. And this includes games from Half-Life, CoD, and FEAR, as well as games

 

Which is IMO a good thing. I prefer Painkiller above all the above mentioned "populair FPs";

 

That's nice. Lots of people like Painkiller. Lots of people like CoD, FEAR, and Half-Life as well.

 

So why would the BioShock devs. have to claim all the games are like that (and I have to say PK doens't even have that much hallway kind of stuff either  )

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

They didn't claim that all games are Painkiller style. Games like CoD and Half-Life are still on a rail games, and still quite run and gun. As for the AIs, perhaps Ken feels that the AI in a game like FEAR is still subpar, and that what they have in Bioshock 2 is much improved over it.

 

 

 

Then please point me to a game that has similar gameplay and is as fun to play as Painkiller. I have been lacking fun like that in FPS since 2004... 

 

I found Half-Life 2 (and FEAR) much, much more fun than Painkiller. I also prefer both the Serious Sams to it. You can't ask one of us for a game that is "as fun" as Painkiller as some sort of evidence.

 

 

On a final note, you're making a mountain of a molehill. Not surprisingly, Ken Levine is excited about the game he is working on and thinks it's going to make a significant impact on the gaming world. He's excited about stuff like the AI, and feels it's significantly better than other FPS games.

[Hassat Hunter]

On a final note, you're making a mountain of a molehill.  Not surprisingly, Ken Levine is excited about the game he is working on and thinks it's going to make a significant impact on the gaming world.  He's excited about stuff like the AI, and feels it's significantly better than other FPS games.

 

Just preparing the worst (then it can only be better than expected, no?). I have people give such promises before; and these games are LESS than avarage in quality (hence the "Daikatana 2" comment).

Ofcourse they made SS2... which should give a bit more faith than those others that promise stuff like this but are total newcomers; but that doesn't say they can screw up (see DX and DX:IW)

Edited September 1, 2006 by Hassat Hunter

[alanschu]

I don't believe in the "expect the worst, so you can be pleasantly surprised" school of thought.

 

If that's what you want, more power to you.

 

 

I took Levine's comments with the usual "Hey, he's trying to hype his game" perspective, so I'm not too concerned about my expectations being insanely high.

[Morgoth]

Gamespy Q&A with Ken Levine :cool:

[Pop]

"Was HL the first FPS to make heavy use of scripted sequences?"

 

I think System Shock used scripted sequences, it's been awhile so I really can't say (I must have played that game 12 years ago) Half-Life was compared a lot it, which is pretty high praise. SS was an amazing game, really ahead of its time.

[alanschu]

Unfortunately, the original System Shock also sold about 12 copies.

 

The only reason I ever heard of it was because System Shock 2 came out.

 

Even Warren Spector admits he had a tough time promoting it. When he was first showing it off, Warcraft and Command & Conquer (when RTS games were fresh and new) were also out on display. He admits to wanting to leave his own booth to check them out. In addition to having to go up against, Doom and Doom II, it also had the upcoming Dark Forces to worry about.

 

I could see Dark Forces maybe having a bit more of an impact on Half-Life's development, but I didn't follow Half-Life's development so I don't know what games it was compared to.

[Darque]

Speaking of System Shock... I bought a copy on ebay a while back...

 

How the heck do I get a game this old to run?

[Hassat Hunter]

Use on newer operating systems

System Shock was designed for MS-DOS. As the source code was never released, getting the game to work on modern operating systems is not as easy as, say, Doom, for which many source ports have been released. It will work, most often with little to no tweaking, on most systems running Windows 95 or 98 (based on DOS). Windows 2000, XP and Server 2003 (based on Windows NT), however, can require more work, and success is much more random. Some people have reported success with little work, while others have invested considerable time in the matter, with little or nothing to show for it. Most often the simplest solution is to use an emulator such as DOSBox, but this often requires greater than average (for 2006) computing power. The System Shock series forums on Through The Looking Glass contain a topic dedicated to issues regarding 2000/XP/2003

 

In Windows 95 or 98, most users will find that System Shock terminates to the desktop with an error message ("Can't create email cursor") when they start a new game. To solve this, simply right-click on the CDSHOCK.bat or CDSHOCK.exe file/s in the System Shock install directory, select the Memory tab, and then set MS-DOS Protected Mode (DPMI) memory to 16384 via the drop-down list.

 

Additionally, an installation that appears to be getting close to functioning will often fail to start; reporting the error The system cannot open COM1 port requested by the application. If the user then clicks the default Close button, System Shock will always fail to start. Clicking Ignore instead will often allow the application to run without further errors.

Source;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_Shock

Edited September 7, 2006 by Hassat Hunter

[alanschu]

I tried playing it, but it just felt so dated.

 

Had I actually played it back in the day, it'd have the nostalgia factor (I can play the old school games that I enjoyed playing while growing up, but not so much the other games).

 

Good luck.