Second streak of Bioshock reviews

Heh, well it does look nice, you could stare at it all day... but it's still a bloody FPS. Hopefully the story will be something to keep ya going, but still... :freak: Maybe the "shock" in the title makes wonders...
I guess it's a matter of time when they'll just screw the borders and go for "150/100" grades...
 
BioShock looks incredible. And I hope the above poster is joking about "turnbased."
Click to expand...

No I am not joking. I am sick of FPS games taking all of the dev dollars while turnbased RPGs die on the vine.

Did you see how many artists worked on that game and for how long? They could have made 5 quality RPGs with those resources. I am probably exaggerating but whatever...


Personally I didn't like one thing in the trailer - sheer amount of bullets that one has to put into a target to make it die - an annoying FPS cliché that IMO didn't fit the game's atmosphere.
I mean, everything looked so serious and so realistic and then that...
Click to expand...

Thats what got me. Visually the game is a work of art. But then you have this juvenile combat going on where everything is sped up to a ridiculous rate. You have hands pulling things out in front of your face, changing shape and colour and explosions going off left right and center and people flying backwards for what looks like 30 or 40 meters.

Its like walking through a fine art gallery, while masses of five year old kids run about the place and smash everything up.
 
Talked about that review on RPGWatch. About 80% of it is about the reviewer being pissed this is an Xbox game but not a PS3 game. It's purely an off-shoot of console wars and the site's childish reaction.

Amusingly, that seems to be getting that irrelevant nothing of a site into a point of linking and commenting. Good way to get hits.
 
Hah, you've got to love the logic of the people attacking the Sony Fanboy, though. "It's getting good reviews so it has to be a good game! How can you not like this game!!"

It's obvious that this a buttload of hype. The game reviewers have really outdone themselves with their idiotic rating now. I can't wait for Bioshock 2 (which is inevitably going to happen, or at least a spiritual successor is, with these rave reviews) to start having previews and the reviewers going 'The AI is much better than the flawed AI in Bioshock' or 'The action is more focused and less chaotic, which was obviously a problem in the first game'.
 
So, it's official now that the gaming press is just a big pile of c**p?
Or at least, most of the gaming press...
 
I wouldn't be surprised if Levine manages to use his money and new-found mainstream influence to nab System Shock, and make SS3 to finally transport his baby into the big public eye.

The rating system is obviously breaking down here. I can't possibly imagine it lasting much longer, but the gaming journalists have surprised me before in the depths they can stoop to, so we'll see.
 
Brother None said:
I wouldn't be surprised if Levine manages to use his money and new-found mainstream influence to nab System Shock, and make SS3 to finally transport his baby into the big public eye.
Click to expand...

That'd be awesome. Bioshock sounds fantastic, but I doubt Andrew Ryan is gonna be as memorable as Shodan. Still, I think EA has the System Shock brand, and since they've got more money than god they probably wouldn't wanna give it up.

And what the hell Davaris? That's the weirdest argument I've ever heard for not liking a game. "I don't enjoy FPS games" sure, but "I don't enjoy FPS games so I hate this game because they could have spent the time and money to make a turn based RPG but instead chose to make it a great FPS which the series (Not that there's a Bioshock series yet, but since they said time and time again it's System Shock-like I base it on that) has always been known for"

If that argument is acceptable, then "I don't like turn-based RPGs so I think Fallout 3 looks fantastic since they spent the time and money to make a real-time-first-person-shooter-RPG instead of turn-based like the series has always been known for" should be fine too, and not get you shanked in some dark alley somewhere by a NMA member.
 
Brother None said:
The rating system is obviously breaking down here. I can't possibly imagine it lasting much longer, but the gaming journalists have surprised me before in the depths they can stoop to, so we'll see.
Click to expand...
Err...
It was broken a lot of years ago.
It's still as broken as in the times of Baldur's Gate.
 
Sorrow said:
Good is 6/10.

Also, it lacks roleplaying.
Click to expand...
Well, depending on the reviewer good could be 6/10. But since most reviews tend to be on the high side I generally think of good more in the range of 9/10 10/10, though once in a while there's a good game they rate lower for mysterious reasons.

And how do you figure it lacks roleplaying?
 
I think it's a bit unfair to knock it just for being an FPS. It's not like it pretends to be something else. It's an FPS game, and it looks to bee a good FPS game and something the genre has been lacking for quite a while.


As for the rating system, it's always been broken. I don't see them fixing it now. The number rating is a nice tl;dr version of the text review that a good portion won't even look at.
 
And what the hell Davaris? That's the weirdest argument I've ever heard for not liking a game. "I don't enjoy FPS games" sure, but "I don't enjoy FPS games so I hate this game because they could have spent the time and money to make a turn based RPG but instead chose to make it a great FPS which the series (Not that there's a Bioshock series yet, but since they said time and time again it's System Shock-like I base it on that) has always been known for"
Click to expand...

There's no logic in my comments, just emotion.

What disappoints me most, is this game could be so much more than what it is. Turn based or not, in the right hands it could be a classic RPG (of course my preference is for turn based iso).

I'm also angry that something of this quality, is being wasted on an audience that won't appreciate it. What does your average FPS player care about art or art deco? Do you think they are admiring the scenery, while they are running around blowing everything up?

Also as I said above, I'm angry that these games are sucking up most of the dev dollars. Did you see the number of artists that worked on it? 25! That is crazy.
 
Davaris said:
What disappoints me most, is this game could be so much more than what it is. Turn based or not, in the right hands it could be a classic RPG (of course my preference is for turn based iso).
Click to expand...
Well... Yes. It could be a great RPG. It's an interesting setting. Basically any interesting setting could be a good RPG in the right hands though. Irrational tends to develop primarily FPS titles however (Closest to an RPG being the Freedom Force games) so it's probably best that they stuck with their strengths, though they might've done a cool RPG. Who knows.


I'm also angry that something of this quality, is being wasted on an audience that won't appreciate it. What does your average FPS player care about art or art deco? Do you think they are admiring the scenery, while they are running around blowing everything up?
Click to expand...
That's kind of an unfair stereotype. Yes, there'll be FPS gamers who just zip through it ignoring the audiologs and setting entirely and just having cool boss battles with big daddies, but I know there'll be just as many if not more who actually take their time and soak it all in. I've got a pretty shallow view of art, but that doesn't mean I won't enjoy seeing the sights and exploring the game's world, just because it puts a fake gun in my fake hand doesn't turn me into a slobbering idiot who gets an erection over rocket launchers. I quite calmly get erections over rocket launchers thankyouverymuch.

Also as I said above, I'm angry that these games are sucking up most of the dev dollars. Did you see the number of artists that worked on it? 25! That is crazy.
Click to expand...
Again, it's sucking up dev dollars from a developer that leans heavily toward FPS games. You could say that it's soaking up publisher dollars that could go towards RPGs, but odds are Bioshock is going to make 2K money so they'll have more to blow on upcoming games. Theoretically if a publisher does well it's good for any developers who are looking for one.
 
Davaris said:
I'm also angry that something of this quality, is being wasted on an audience that won't appreciate it. What does your average FPS player care about art or art deco? Do you think they are admiring the scenery, while they are running around blowing everything up?
Click to expand...


That is an entirely unfair and biased statement,
Saying that enjoying first person shooter games somehow correlates to not having a cultured appreciation of art is among the most asinine things I have ever heard.

So you basically just want developers to make what YOU like, not what other people like?
How delightfully selfish.

One could understand saying "I do not like this and will not play it", but feeling anger because 'the inferior console kiddies' get to appreciate fine art in a game geared towards them is just ridiculous.
 
Sorrow said:
Err...
It was broken a lot of years ago.
It's still as broken as in the times of Baldur's Gate.
Click to expand...

Err...
No it wasn't, because broken things don't function. It has been breaking down for years.
 
Jiggly McNerdington said:
Are you implying the Baldur's Gate games are not good RPGs sir? I take offense at that. PISTOLS, AT DAWN.
Click to expand...
Hah, reminds me of a great Simpsons Episode.

In any case, the Baldur's Gate games are not great roleplaying games. Baldur's Gate 1 specifically lacks a lot of choices and consequences. Generally, you don't have a choice whatsoever outside of 'do I accept this quest or not' (the sole exception being the Dynaheir/Edwin/Minsc thingie). Baldur's Gate 2 suffers from the same problems, although the NPC interaction is a lot better and the game is less drawn out than Baldur's Gate 1. Also, the combat system is shit.

Davaris: stop being silly, please. Yes, it's a shame that there are not as many RPGs (or any at all) as before. But to blame what is likely one of the best games of the FPS genre, and certainly artistically a great game for that is ridiculous.
Yes, we all want RPGs. That doesn't mean that every game that isn't an RPG is suddenly shite and should've been a completely different game. If you honestly think that, it simply shows that you're narrowminded in vision and cannot appreciate that different people have different tastes. I for one highly enjoy both FPS games and RPGs, but you have to realise that they are different kinds of games.

EDIT: Whoa, the IGN reviewer mentioned Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment. It's a good review, although it does fall for the 'Finally a game that does it right'. Which begs the question as to why every other game that apparently did it wrong got 8/10 or more.
But ehm, 20 hours is 'lengthy' now?
 
I also disagree that RPGs are the best way to tell a story in a great setting like Bioshock *by definition*

cRPGs are often favoured for storytelling because the gameplay can compliment the story so well, but it depends fully on what kind of story you have to tell and how you want to tell it to decide which genre is ideal with it. Consider how good Levine is at doing this, I have no issues with him picking his style of deeper FPS to tell this story

I don't see the mention of Dostoevsky, by the way
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top