IGN AU has interviewed Jon Chey, project lead of Bioshock, on the game. The interview goes over the developer's priorities, genres, sandbox environments, development evolution, and a comparison to System Shock 2.<blockquote>IGN AU: What does BioShock do that the System Shock games didn't?
Jon Chey: Oh God. Well, start by go taking a look at a BioShock screenshot. And put a Shock screenshot next to it. I love Shock 2 but it's kind of hard to claim it was pushing the visual boundaries of game development. I think that is a claim we can make with BioShock.
And then there's physics and environmental simulation. BioShock lets you set people on fire. And then if they bump into something flammable that catches on fire too. Or you can light pools of oil and watch the fire spreading down the hallway. And AIs that are on fire can jump into a pool of water and extinguish themselves.
And what about AI? Big Daddies pick up Little Sisters and carry them around on their backs to keep them safe. Splicers run to health stations to heal themselves when they get damaged. I don't remember that stuff happening in Shock 2.
But perhaps more than anything else, these just aren't the same games. System Shock 2 was an FPS/RPG hybrid and it felt that way when you played it. BioShock is a deep shooter. It just feels different. We have designers and programmers just focusing on movement and aiming, getting the feel right. It's the same thing that every great shooter has to do but we didn't have time for in Shock 2. It's probably not clear from screenshots or movies but it's pretty obvious when you pick up your mouse or controller and start playing.</blockquote>The unasked question being if they can manage to replicate the intense atmosphere of System Shock 2.
Link: Bioshock interview at IGN AU.
Spotted at Blue's News.
Jon Chey: Oh God. Well, start by go taking a look at a BioShock screenshot. And put a Shock screenshot next to it. I love Shock 2 but it's kind of hard to claim it was pushing the visual boundaries of game development. I think that is a claim we can make with BioShock.
And then there's physics and environmental simulation. BioShock lets you set people on fire. And then if they bump into something flammable that catches on fire too. Or you can light pools of oil and watch the fire spreading down the hallway. And AIs that are on fire can jump into a pool of water and extinguish themselves.
And what about AI? Big Daddies pick up Little Sisters and carry them around on their backs to keep them safe. Splicers run to health stations to heal themselves when they get damaged. I don't remember that stuff happening in Shock 2.
But perhaps more than anything else, these just aren't the same games. System Shock 2 was an FPS/RPG hybrid and it felt that way when you played it. BioShock is a deep shooter. It just feels different. We have designers and programmers just focusing on movement and aiming, getting the feel right. It's the same thing that every great shooter has to do but we didn't have time for in Shock 2. It's probably not clear from screenshots or movies but it's pretty obvious when you pick up your mouse or controller and start playing.</blockquote>The unasked question being if they can manage to replicate the intense atmosphere of System Shock 2.
Link: Bioshock interview at IGN AU.
Spotted at Blue's News.
