Bioshock: Here there be spoilers

[Zoma]

I have to agree also.

 

Its just a FPS game which has a similar combat system as Undying. Undying on the other hand, is classic.

[Musopticon?]

*wants a sequel to Undying*

[Slowtrain]

Well, I finally got around to playing it and after being careful to avoid spoilers since the game was released, I have to say I'm pretty disappointed.

 

 

The first 2 levels were promising. The big daddy/little sister interactions were fun to watch, the underwater levels felt reasonably fresh and interesting. All the aspects of SS2 that I loved so much were there. The graphics were pretty good.

 

 

But by the time I was playign through Arcadia, a vague feeling of this all being rather tedious had set in, and by the time I hit Haephestus, I was bored on a level I haven't experienced since the Ice Temple in IWD2. I've currently halted while looking for the antidote to plasmid mind control. I want to keep playing, but I find the tedium difficult to bear.

 

 

My main knock on this game is that it is amazingly repititve after the first 2 levels and the FPS combat is hideous. AT this point i just run around with the machine gun shooting everything, buy medkits at whatever vending machine I come across and then continuing. All the enemies are the same, have been the same since the 2nd level. The weapons haven't changed. The upgrades suck. I stopped hacking anything because I got sick of it and it was totally pointless. The level design is insanely tedious.

 

 

I wasn't expecting Bioshock to be better than SS2, but this is really a let down. The whole survival horror/creepign menace of SS2 has been replaced by a laughably easy and unsophisticated FPS bang fest. I remember creepign around the dimly lit cargo bays in SS2 with about 8 bullets in my almost broken pistol while listenign to the howl of psychic monkeys all around me and almost wetting myself the whole time. Nothing like that in Bioshock sadly.

 

 

ANd fer chrisskaes if you are going to make a game that focuses on FPS combat, make the combat GOOD. I went and played some Crysis after almost passing out from Bioshock tedium and got my ass hammered at first and was like: "Oh yeah, FPS combat is supposed to be kinda challenging and thrilling. I forgot about that." (Then I threw an outboard motor at a North Korean soldier and jumped onto a roof! But that's a different story).

 

And speaking of story where is the bioshock story that is supposed to make me change how I see games? PLease. Between the ridiculous Oblivion reviews and now the ridiculous Bioshock reviews, my opnion of the gaming media is at an all time low. The only way any reviewer could say either Oblivion or Bioshock are "greatest ever" level games would be if their entire gaming experience goes back only a year or two. I could list 100 games of all different types better than either of those 2 games without even trying.

 

Argh. Deus Ex invisible War was better than Bioshock. I am so disappointed.

[alanschu]

In my game, enemies went for medstations all the time. However, I usually killed them before they got to them.

 

 

I enjoyed booby trapping the medstations.

[Pidesco]

In my game, enemies went for medstations all the time. However, I usually killed them before they got to them.

 

 

I enjoyed booby trapping the medstations.

 

 

I did it at first, but after a while it became pointless, as the splicers just weren't worth the trouble. They're just too easy to kill.

[Slowtrain]

In my game, enemies went for medstations all the time. However, I usually killed them before they got to them.

 

 

I enjoyed booby trapping the medstations.

 

 

I did it at first, but after a while it became pointless, as the splicers just weren't worth the trouble. They're just too easy to kill.

 

 

That's my whole problem with the game. EVerythign is kind of pointless. There's never any reason to make hard choices. Why bother hacking a turret when you can just run around the corner and blast it with the machine gun and take almost no damage. And medkits are infinite and super cheap so who cares how much damage you take anyway. MG ammo is also infinite so why bother using any other weapon? How cares which weapons you upgrade since there enough pttp stations to upgrade them all fully, or close to it anyway. And you can carry all the weapons so no choices there either. Even a lot of generic shooters these days don't let tyou carry all weapons a la the early days of FPS since it lessens the tactical significance of your load out. Addtionally I've got about 400 units of unspent adam cause I have no reason to spend it and I haven't even rescued the little sisters on the current level because there's no reason to bother. I'll do it eventually just for gameplay sake though.

 

At this point I'm just running around with my non-upgraded pistol and a hypnotized Big Daddy letting him stomp anybody who gets in my way just to save me the annoyance of having to do it. Of course that's also annoying because he tends to stand right in my way and doesn't initiate combat with enemies on visual detection alone. So I have to shoot splicers with my pistol to "target" them and then scuttle out of the way while my Big D smooshes them like a grape.

 

And the level deisgn is just terrible. First you run to the bathysphere, then something happens that cuts of access to the bathysphere, then you have to run al the way to one end of the level to find something, then you have to run to the whole other end of the level to find something else rinse and repeat until you are allowed access to the bathysphere again. At this point I'm just resigned that every goal I accomplish is going to send me to another goal all the way on the other side of the level through the exact same infitely respawning splicers that I've been fighting since the SECOND level.

 

And the big relevelation that ATlas was Fontaine might have been more shocking if it wasn't telegraphed from the start of the game AND if Levine hadn't used the exact same trick in ss2 where in exactly the same way you find out the good Dr. Polito who has been helping you so generously is actually SHODAN.

 

How anybody could refer to Bioshock as a great game boggles my mind.

[Pidesco]

It has great art direction. You have to give them that.

[Tale]

How cares which weapons you upgrade since there enough pttp stations to upgrade them all fully, or close to it anyway.

I've heard this line of reasoning before, not in reference to Bioshock but other games, and it's redonkulous. Unless you can upgrade them all RIGHT AWAY, the ability to eventually upgrade them all does not negate the choices of what to upgrade first.

 

Overal though, "tactical choice" isn't the only thing that makes games fun. In fact, I'd go so far as to say it makes game intellectual, which is different from fun. When I want "tactical choice," I play Puzzle Quest. When I want action, I play a shooter.

Edited December 8, 2007 by Tale

[Slowtrain]

How cares which weapons you upgrade since there enough pttp stations to upgrade them all fully, or close to it anyway.

I've heard this line of reasoning before, not in reference to Bioshock but other games, and it's redonkulous. Unless you can upgrade them all RIGHT AWAY, the ability to eventually upgrade them all does not negate the choices of what to upgrade first.

 

 

If that was the only problem surrounding the significance of chocie in the game then I woudl agree with what you are saying. The problem is that NONE of the small choices that are in the game really matter, so you get a lot of little issues adding up to one big issue. Even your plasmids and tonics are infinitely swappable. I don't have to make any decisions that I have to live with for the rest of the game. Even rescuing the little sisters instead of harvesting them doesn't really "hurt" your adam collection since you get the little present from Tenebaum for every three sisters you rescue, which is way more than enough ADAM to do whatever you want.

 

Overal though, "tactical choice" isn't the only thing that makes games fun. In fact, I'd go so far as to say it makes game intellectual, which is different from fun. When I want "tactical choice," I play Puzzle Quest. When I want action, I play a shooter.

 

 

In a shooter, tactical choice is what makes the game fun. Tactical choice can involve how you equip your charcacter, how you approach a tacitical sitiation, the mechanics of the in game combat system (moves parries etc) and so forth. Crysis is at the moment a great example of a great way to give infinite tactical choice in a shooter by combining a fairly open approach to combat situations along with the nanosuit.

 

 

Since Bioshock is a FPS and very linear in its approach and its combat system is not very robust or complex it is pretty much dependent on making the choices on how you outfit your character to keep the combat interesting. In the early levels I didn't realize how uttery inconsequential those descisons really were, but it didn't take long to realize the machine gun was all I needed adn everythign else was meaningless window dressing.

[Tale]

How cares which weapons you upgrade since there enough pttp stations to upgrade them all fully, or close to it anyway.

I've heard this line of reasoning before, not in reference to Bioshock but other games, and it's redonkulous. Unless you can upgrade them all RIGHT AWAY, the ability to eventually upgrade them all does not negate the choices of what to upgrade first.

 

 

If that was the only problem surrounding the significance of chocie in the game then I woudl agree with what you are saying. The problem is that NONE of the small choices that are in the game really matter, so you get a lot of little issues adding up to one big issue. Even your plasmids and tonics are infinitely swappable. I don't have to make any decisions that I have to live with for the rest of the game. Even rescuing the little sisters instead of harvesting them doesn't really "hurt" your adam collection since you get the little present from Tenebaum for every three sisters you rescue, which is way more than enough ADAM to do whatever you want.

 

Isn't that true of all FPS games? Crysis, which you go on to praise, doesn't even have a pretense of temporary choices. You can choose to make your suit this or that, but then switch right back on the fly. You can choose how to set up your gun then switch it right back on the fly. What decisions do you have to make in that game that you live with for the rest of the game? At least in Bioshock you have to live with your choices right now, unlike Crysis where you live with your choices never.

Edited December 8, 2007 by Tale

[Slowtrain]

Isn't that true of all FPS games? Crysis, which you go on to praise, doesn't even have a pretense of temporary choices. You can choose to make your suit this or that, but then switch right back on the fly. You can choose how to set up your gun then switch it right back on the fly. What decisions do you have to make in that game that you live with for the rest of the game? At least in Bioshock you have to live with your choices right now, unlike Crysis where you live with your choices never.

 

 

Crysis though is very specific about how it wants to entertain the player:

 

1) Give the player a fairly open playing field when approachign tactical combats.

2) Give the player the nanosuit.

3) Give the player the ability to walk run sprint jump lean strike crouch hide crawl prone grab throw

 

 

Then let the player put those pieces together as they see fit. But how they choozse to put those pieces together is quite consequential because if they do it badly they die (and now vitachamber to bring them back either!).

 

 

Bioshock wants to entertain the player by giving them the ability to add the plasmids and the mods and weapon upgrades and create something. WHich is fine. I have no problem there. SS2 did the same thing (although it had more of the Crysis pieces as well). The problem is that how I put those pieces together appears inconsequential.

 

Sure I can buy up all 5 tonic slots for engineering and make myself a hacker that's awesome at turrets but why bother when its quicker and easier just to grab my upgraded MG and blow the crap out of them. Well, you answer, because if you hack it you get a turret that will kill splicers for you. But splicers are so easy to kill, (as Pidesco pointed out above) why should I bother not doing it myself. Well, you answer, becasue then you can save health damage and ammo usage for yourself. But MG ammo and medkits are infinite and cheap and there are vending machines that sell both every ten feet, why should I care if I burn some extra medkits and ammo. Well, you answer, you can save wear and tear on your special upgraded weapon by letting the turret fight for you. But, the wapon will never degrade and I wil never lose it and I can upgrade all the other ones, so why should I care if I use it all the time? Well, you answer, if you make yourself a hacker you can hack all the vending machines and get things cheaper. But money is infinite and things are so cheap anyway (a regular medkit costs 20, a hacked medkit costs 16) plus there a tons of free ones all over the place, plus enemies drop them when they die, so why should I bother hacking to save an utterly inconsequential amount of money? Etc and so forth ad nauseum.

 

Do you see what I am getting at here? The choices that bioshock sets out as being significant, aren't.

[Tale]

nm

Edited December 8, 2007 by Tale

[Hurlshort]

I agree that Bioshock is a mediocre shooter, but I sure wish more developers spent as much time on atmosphere, character development, and overall mood. It's got a fascinating story in a fascinating setting. Games like Halo bore me to tears five minutes in, Bioshock kept me interested for about 15 hours.

[Musopticon?]

Games like Halo bore me to tears five minutes in

 

Games with interesting gameplay?

[Pop]

Games like Halo bore me to tears five minutes in

 

Games with interesting gameplay?

Interesting? Back on the crack, I see.

[Hurlshort]

Games like Halo bore me to tears five minutes in

 

Games with interesting gameplay?

 

I'll be honest, gameplay isn't that big of a concern for me. I mean I want adequate gameplay, which Bioshock has. But I don't care about the challenge of it. At some point in my life, I stopped enjoying challenging games and started looking for games that entertain me. I play almost everything on easy, and I love every minute of it.

[Cantousent]

Games like Halo bore me to tears five minutes in

 

Games with interesting gameplay?

 

I'll be honest, gameplay isn't that big of a concern for me. I mean I want adequate gameplay, which Bioshock has. But I don't care about the challenge of it. At some point in my life, I stopped enjoying challenging games and started looking for games that entertain me. I play almost everything on easy, and I love every minute of it.

 

For a long time, I've played my first game on easy and then replayed on the next higher setting. To be honest, I like games that don't have or require difficulty settings. I still like a challenging game, but I've grown tired of super difficult games. The game should be just hard enough to create a pleasant gaming experience. For some games, like beating the score on minesweeper, the difficulty is part of the fun. For other things, like Bioshock, it isn't. Bioshock wasn't a hall of fame game, but it's certainly not as dismal as our Crashgirl friend claims. :Cant's broad grin icon:

[Hell Kitty]

Games like Halo bore me to tears five minutes in

 

Games with interesting gameplay?

 

I also dislike games with interesting gameplay, apparently. I guess I'll just go back to playing crap like Deus Ex, Thief and System Shock.

[Slowtrain]

I should just point out that I don't think Bioshock is a horrible game. Mostly it was just disappointing. I felt terribly crestfallen when I realized all the choices I was making on the first 2 levels, which seemd important at the time, later turned out not to be.

 

I actually think Bioshock might be a more fun (for me, personally) if played it as a straight shooter with no ADAM or plasmids or tonics or hacking or research or vending machines. Just running and gunning and using health and ammo pickups. I may give it a try that way since I don't think I'm going to finish the game as is, and I'd like to get my money's worth out of it.

 

If I were trying to give it an objective grade (such as I can) I would say its a "B" grade. Its a solid game that the developers obviously spent a lot of time on, and it was mostly bug free (before the patch anyway). For me that downsides are character development choices that don't really matter and a great deal of repetition as you move pass the second level. The story so far hasn't been enough to interest me to the point where I can ignore the lack of meaningful choice and the repetition.

 

I do think that the grades of 9.8 and whatnot for Bioshock are ludicrous, however.

[Slowtrain]

I also dislike games with interesting gameplay, apparently. I guess I'll just go back to playing crap like Deus Ex, Thief and System Shock.

 

Just reading those names makes me sad.

[Pidesco]

I actually think Bioshock might be a more fun (for me, personally) if played it as a straight shooter with no ADAM or plasmids or tonics or hacking or research or vending machines. Just running and gunning and using health and ammo pickups. I may give it a try that way since I don't think I'm going to finish the game as is, and I'd like to get my money's worth out of it.

 

I'd advise you against it. The moronic AI and the unchallenging gameplay really make it a pretty bad straight shooter. Really, circle strafing is the only thing you need to deal with 99% of the enemies. Also, because the story is, in many ways, a critique of the straight shooter design paradigm, everything about Bioshock just becomes extra painful.

[Pop]

If anything, Bioshock is an unassailable thematic work. The mechanics just happen to be weak.

[Pidesco]

If anything, Bioshock is an unassailable thematic work. The mechanics just happen to be weak.

 

Not really, because thematically, the gameplay is completely disjointed from the rest of the game. And as it is a GAME, I'd say that's a pretty huge dent in its thematic armour.

[Slowtrain]

I actually think Bioshock might be a more fun (for me, personally) if played it as a straight shooter with no ADAM or plasmids or tonics or hacking or research or vending machines. Just running and gunning and using health and ammo pickups. I may give it a try that way since I don't think I'm going to finish the game as is, and I'd like to get my money's worth out of it.

 

I'd advise you against it. The moronic AI and the unchallenging gameplay really make it a pretty bad straight shooter. Really, circle strafing is the only thing you need to deal with 99% of the enemies. Also, because the story is, in many ways, a critique of the straight shooter design paradigm, everything about Bioshock just becomes extra painful.

 

 

That's a good point. I was thinking though that if I played it straight without all the extra stuff then using all the weapons and finding all the hidden health and ammo would become much more important, sort of like a scavenger hunt of death, and might make the game more interesting from a survival horror perspective.

[Pidesco]

Everything will still be the same, though. It will just take longer to deal with the enemies.