Bioshock coming to PS3

  • Thread starter Thread starter Danny
  • 61 comments
  • 4,319 views

Danny

Code Red
Premium
Messages
24,133
United Kingdom
Scarfolk
Messages
Grim10
Messages
Are you kidding?
http://www.joystiq.com/2008/05/22/bioshock-officially-coming-to-ps3/

We've heard rumors of it for months and now it seems that the most recent one circulated by 1UP's Quartermann is indeed on the money: Bioshock is coming to the PS3. The news will apparently drop in the July issue of Electronic Gaming Monthly.

All we know at this point is that the game may get some graphical improvements, it's due in time for the 2008 holiday season and that the port is being headed up by new BioShock creative director Jordan Thomas, a designer on the original
 
Haha just found out and you beat me too it! :sly:

Thats excellent that one of the best 360 games is coming over for PS3 guys, I wonder how it will compare and also whether there will be any improvements or extra content.. Finally 360 fanboys will have to shut up for a change!:sly:

Heres what Gamespot had to say...

BioShock surfaces on PS3​

Following prolonged speculation, magazine cover confirms 2K's critically acclaimed undersea adventure is heading for Sony's console.

The writing has been on the wall for some time that Take-Two would be releasing its award-winning BioShock on Sony's PlayStation 3. Speculation that 2K Boston/Australia's praised dystopian shooter based on the literary stylings of Ayn Rand would land on both current-generation consoles was sparked by the game's initial announcement for "PCs and next-generation consoles." However, tangible evidence didn't come until the game's launch in August, when a reference to BioShock on the PS3 turned up in a demo for the PC game.

The possibility of BioShock zapping PS3s was further fueled in April, when BioShock 2 developer 2K Marin indicated that it was hiring level designers that had experience developing for Sony's flagship console. Today, confirmation of the game's PS3 debut has finally arrived by way of the cover of the July issue of UK-based gaming magazine PSM3. (The news on the cover was spotted by Computer & Video Games.)

Although details on the PS3 edition of BioShock have yet to surface, the cover of the PlayStation-centric magazine states, "Proof why Xbox's best shooter is better on PS3," indicating that some content additions will be made. Thus far, the only updates to the Xbox 360 and PC versions of the game were new gene-therapy-induced plasmid powers and stat-enhancing tonics, which arrived in December.

In March, embattled Take-Two CEO Strauss Zelnick officially confirmed that BioShock 2 was in development at the publisher's newly formed 2K Marin studio. No platforms for the sequel to last year's hit have been announced, but Take-Two expects the game to arrive during the fourth quarter of its 2009 fiscal year, which runs from August 1 to October 31, 2009.

Robin
 
Since it's using the same physics engine than Unreal Tournament 3, which already looks great on the PS3, I'll have no doubt the game will look even better on the PS3. 👍

I wouldn't buy the game again though, unless the additions are significant (like well-made multiplayer modes), since the game loses its appeal after completing it a few times IMO.
 
is Bioshock really that good. I saw the box for the game and it seems really childish, thats why i avoided the game
 
Childish?!?! the only thing childish is the small girl that steals blood or something from people and the teddy bears you can use as flaming weapons....
 
Childish in the sense it looks like a child's nightmare. Creepy looking game. But, it's a typical FPS and I probably wont get it.
 
If BioShock is a typical FPS, what do you define as game changing?

The actions and movements are the same as most other FPS games like Doom, even if it does seem like something innovative. And example of a non-typical FPS shooter would be Black or MGS in FPS mode, IMO.

Games that he likes. If he doesn't like it, it's typical.

Still trolling for more arguments, huh? Pathetic.
 
The actions and movements are the same as most other FPS games like Doom, even if it does seem like something innovative. And example of a non-typical FPS shooter would be Black or MGS in FPS mode, IMO.



Still trolling for more arguments, huh? Pathetic.

:lol::lol::lol::lol:

Oh god please tell me that's a joke.
 
:lol::lol::lol::lol:

Oh god please tell me that's a joke.

Still need to troll, huh? Why they haven't kicked you out of here for the second time boggles my mind. You bring nothing here and you cannot stop harassing me.

So, keep at it, and I'll watch them kick you out of here for the second and final time.
 
Still need to troll, huh? Why they haven't kicked you out of here for the second time boggles my mind. You bring nothing here and you cannot stop harassing me.

So, keep at it, and I'll watch them kick you out of here for the second and final time.

Let's start here:

Bioshock innovates gaming in general because it moves the medium forward for the delivery of narrative and story.

It also moved the genre forward through it's interesting use of weapons and powers which can be combined to approach every situation differently.

The fact that you think Black was 'non-typical' more than boggles my mind.

I'd discuss my problems with your personality here, but I'm not like you.
 
Let's start here:

Bioshock innovates gaming in general because it moves the medium forward for the delivery of narrative and story.

You're suggesting this makes Bioshock a non-typical FPS? The narrative and story? Ridiculous. When it comes right down to it, the game play makes this game a typical FPS.

It also moved the genre forward through it's interesting use of weapons and powers which can be combined to approach every situation differently.

So? A flaming teddy bear doesn't mean it's unique or 'innovative.' Hell, MGS let you kill people or just knock them out and the end story was determined by what actions you took during your gameplay.

The fact that you think Black was 'non-typical' more than boggles my mind.

Black made you use tactics and think which is the best course to take. Bioshock I see does them same, but so what? Black came first and most 'typical' FPS are follow a rail and shoot whatever pops up. Black had those types of moments, but it didn't always and went a lot further to make you approach each situation differently. Again, typical FPS don't do that.

I'd discuss my problems with your personality here, but I'm not like you.

Finally, I agree with you. You as sure-as-hell ain't nothing like me.
 
It also moved the genre forward through it's interesting use of weapons and powers which can be combined to approach every situation differently.

Actually this was all in System Shock 2, which was released in 1999. The main thing Bioshock did is add great graphics.
 
I would say that Black hardly was innovative at all. All of the things it brought to the table had already been done before in FPSs (being a console game rather than a PC game doesn't make it original), and that Black was just a really pretty and stylized version of a typical FPS. Yes, Black had opened ended gameplay, but not in any game changing way.
ROAD_DOGG33J
Actually this was all in System Shock 2, which was released in 1999. The main thing Bioshock did is add great graphics.
True, but also an example of a very narrow audience preventing a games major features from being noticed by the gaming public and benefiting the industry as a whole. How many reviews of GTA 3 were there that called the game an entirely new type of gameplay style and possibilities when Shenmue came out and did essentially the same thing 2 years earlier?
The fact that BioShock sold and System Shock 2 didn't makes BioShock the more influential and game changing game.
 
Actually this was all in System Shock 2, which was released in 1999. The main thing Bioshock did is add great graphics.

I have always agreed to that. This game looks very purty.

Innovative, not.

I don't want to get involved in this argument, but I would say that Black hardly was innovative at all. All of the things it brought to the table had already been done before in FPSs (being a console game rather than a PC game doesn't make it original), and that Black was just a really pretty and stylized version of a typical FPS. Yes, Black had opened ended gameplay, but not in any game changing way.

You're right, and I wasn't trying to suggest Black was innovative. Just different from most FPS.
 
Actually this was all in System Shock 2, which was released in 1999. The main thing Bioshock did is add great graphics.

Yes, I am aware of this, your crusade to defend Solid Lifters can stop there.

Bioshock took it significantly further, and was much more in depth. I can count the similarities to system shock on both hands, there are quite a few.

But citing Black, which is by far more typical than Bioshock, as an example of a 'non-typical' first person shooter is a joke. Even bringing MGS, a stealth action game that is focused more on approach and avoiding encounters, into a discussion about first person shooters ONLY because it has a first person aiming mode...is ridiculous. Absolutely asinine.
 
You're right, and I wasn't trying to suggest Black was innovative. Just different from most FPS.
By those standards, BioShock is easily the more atypical FPS when it can only be directly compared to a single game, one that was widely regarded as something no one ever played anyways.
Black is equivalent to what Duke Nukem 3D was in 1996 (though perhaps a closer parallel would be to Red Faction): Different, but evolutionary and easily connectible to other games of the time.
BioShock is equivalent to what GTA 3 was when it came out: A major difference in design and style to the point that there are practically no equivalents for it to even be compared.
 
By those standards, BioShock is easily the more atypical FPS when it can only be directly compared to a single game, one that was widely regarded as something no one ever played anyways.
Black is equivalent to what Duke Nukem 3D was in 1996: Different, but evolutionary and easily connectible to other games of the time.
BioShock is equivalent to what GTA 3 was when it came out: A major difference in design and style to the point that there are practically no equivalents for it to even be compared.

But BioShock was neither innovative or different from previous FPS games. Want proof? Here's what somebody just PM to prove JR wrong.

BioShock will not stand the test of time as an example of the best the first-person-shooter genre has to offer. Because titles like that deserve to be reserved for genre-changing games like Planescape Torment, Diablo, or Half-Life. These games moved their respective genres forward; to its credit, BioShock is a fine game. But it doesn't innovate. It entertains almost as much as it makes you think, but it does nothing that hasn't already been seen ad nauseum. The fact that it combines a number of motifs into one game isn't innovative, considering first-person-shooters have been doing this since pixilated Imps tossed fireballs. Would you kindly consider the bitter truth:

Plasmids
Reviewers are talking about BioShock's "not really magic but come on, it's magic" system as if they're unfamiliar with the idea that first-person-shooter games can be more than just virtual trips through Guns & Ammo magazine. Well, it's been done. It's been done in shooters, it's the lifeblood of role-playing games; heck, you could even consider super-weapons in real-time strategy games to be a form of magic (and there's always Dungeon Keeper). Yes, you can use plasmids in a variety of interesting ways. But having a magical element make your gaming life easier through ingenuity isn't innovative. It's common sense. Heck, it was Deus Ex.

The other quasi-plasmids you receive in the game come in the form of Tonics, which you never directly use per se. You equip them and reap from their benefits, but they're as integrated into your real-time experience as magical plate mail on 48th-level warrior. Tonics are no more innovative than an inventory system, which has been a mainstay of video games since Mario and his Tanooki Suit.

Enemy Types
When I think of innovative baddies, a lot of games come to mind: the sprawling bosses of Serious Sam, the lightsaber fights in Star Wars Jedi Knight: Dark Forces II, the ever-creepy Alma from F.E.A.R. In contrast, BioShock has only two kinds of enemies. The default grunts are splicers -- genetically modified humans that are completely and absolutely nuts, for lack of a better phrase. They wear little masks, talk and sing in an almost lunatic fashion, and try to kill you in different ways depending on their type and the stage of the game you're at. In early BioShock, they beat you with pipes. Once you hit the late-game, they're tossing Molotov cocktails, riddling you with machine guns, and teleporting around the map.

While you also fight mechanical turrets, in the sense that they rip you to pieces if you stand in front of them, the only other true enemy of BioShock is the Big Daddy. Without going into the back-story of the character, a Big Daddy is BioShock's equivalent of Halo's Scorpion Tank. They're big, lumbering, and they hurt. They hurt real good.

And that's it. You start the game fighting splicers; you end the game fighting splicers. Aside from their presumed trip to the ammo depot somewhere around BioShock's middle, that's all the "innovation" present in BioShock. And if this is "innovative," then the palate-swapping technology of Scorpion and Sub-Zero is the Alexander Graham Bell of video games. BioShock's plenty creative in its level design and presentation. So why do you have to fight exactly the same guys for the entire trip through Rapture?

The Puzzle Game
To open locks and futz around with electronics in BioShock, you play what amounts to Pipe Dream. For those too lazy to Wikipedia this one, Pipe Dream was created in 1989. There have been countless spinoffs, adaptations, and retoolings of this classic puzzle game. But in the end, Pipe Dream is Pipe Dream. BioShock could have created its own puzzle game for the hacking sequences; Bioshock could have added different puzzle games for different devices; BioShock could have changed up the puzzle games as the difficulty progressed; BioShock could have made a random sequence of puzzle games to inject some new life into the game.

Did BioShock do any of this? No. The benefits of modifying the game's items are great, but somewhere around the middle of your Rapture adventure, you'll start doing what I did -- eschewing the puzzle games entirely, or just using a ton of autohack tools to avoid yet another game of... you guessed it. Pipe Dream. Earth to 2K games; gamers have been solving classic puzzles for years.

The Quests
No first-person shooter is devoid of lame questing elements. The worst examples of such often involve a lot of jumping and airborne maneuvering. BioShock doesn't make you leap across floating platforms of any sort. But from a gameplay perspective, the quests the game offers are standard and unremarkable. Every single major mission in the game is a FedEx quest -- you get a mission, chug across the map to get x of x components for super-special thing y, and that's it. The game will sometimes offer you a "defend this location" mission, but that always tends to occur right after the completion of said FedEx quest.

BioShock has no bonus missions or secondary quests. It gives you no incentive to do anything but follow the HUD's large, objective-pointing arrow, save for whatever personal desire you might have to explore Rapture. While you're occasionally rewarded with an errant weapons upgrade station, a substantial part of your Rapture life consists of rooting through trash bins for nothing. Or if you're lucky, materials for the U-Invent machines.

The game gives you a linear progression and repeats the same quest pattern using different materials, depending on the context of the level. How this could be at all innovative is a mystery to me.

The Activities
Aside from the archaic Pipe Dream game previously mentioned, BioShock only includes one additional activity for your trip through Rapture. At some point in the game, you're given a camera and tasked with conducting "research" on the baddies of BioShock. The game kind of sluffs off on the entire point of doing so, plot-wise, but that's neither here nor there. Every time you take pictures of Splicers, Big Daddys, or mechanical-stuff-that's-shooting-at-you and the lot, you get a form of experience (research). Take a "better" picture, and you get more. With each subsequent level of "research" you attain, you get some kind of bonus -- either in the form of more health for you, or more damage you do to that particular enemy class, or a new tonic, et cetera.

Sound familiar? Oh, right, it's a rip-off of the XBox 360's Dead Rising. BioShock isn't the first game to offer some kind of reward for putting down the pipe and picking up the photo camera, and yet, Dead Rising's system is still more feature-packed and character-applicable than BioShock's! Impressive innovation indeed -- for Dead Rising, that is.
 

BioShock is equivalent to what GTA 3 was when it came out: A major difference in design and style to the point that there are practically no equivalents for it to even be compared.

I would say it's closer to GTA IV, but that's just me.
 
Wow. Solid Lifters has lost it.

So now someone has PM'd you and that proves me wrong?

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/9491.html

That's as typical as they get Joe Six Pack. Black was nothing special, at all. Tactics? What, is black the ONLY first person shooter you have ever played? Get real man, Socom was more tactical than Black. Get real dude!

Maybe you actually need to PLAY Bioshock before you enlist the assistance of your forum buddies to crusade against me on something you both clearly know nothing about. You don't even PLAY first person shooters. I'd love to hop online sometime and crush you in a game of CoD or Resistance, hell even TF2. Your powers are weak old man.

Look, it's quite obvious you've had a grudge against me, since I've always called you out on your BS constantly, and that seems to rub you in the wrong direction, but you're ignorances here, calling this game 'typical' when there is really only ONE game on the market that even comes close, is nothing short of retarded.

Edit: Further more, Black has a metacritic score of 77 and 79, for PS2 and Xbox, respectively.

Bioshock? 96.

I'm sure all those folks thought it was 'so damn typical'.
 
Wow. Solid Lifters has lost it.

So now someone has PM'd you and that proves me wrong?

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/9491.html

That's as typical as they get Joe Six Pack. Black was nothing special, at all. Tactics? What, is black the ONLY first person shooter you have ever played? Get real man, Socom was more tactical than Black. Get real dude!

Maybe you actually need to PLAY Bioshock before you enlist the assistance of your forum buddies to crusade against me on something you both clearly know nothing about. You don't even PLAY first person shooters. I'd love to hop online sometime and crush you in a game of CoD or Resistance, hell even TF2. Your powers are weak old man.

Look, it's quite obvious you've had a grudge against me, since I've always called you out on your BS constantly, and that seems to rub you in the wrong direction, but you're ignorances here, calling this game 'typical' when there is really only ONE game on the market that even comes close, is nothing short of retarded.

Edit: Further more, Black has a metacritic score of 77 and 79, for PS2 and Xbox, respectively.

Bioshock? 96.

I'm sure all those folks thought it was 'so damn typical'.

This post is nothing more than a childish, defensive, immature rant.

Bring a 'real' response to the table, and I'll respond.

More proof that BioShock is FAR from innovative.




BioShock
Irrational/2K | Xbox 360/PC | FPS, more or less

You know, it's funny to hear that BioShock's story was something that came together only at the end of development, something that evolved radically from its original concepts -- a cult deprogrammer on an island of Nazis or some such -- because it suggests that Irrational (or 2K Boston or whatever they've been forced to rebrand themselves as) spent most of its effort developing BioShock's gameplay. And let's be frank: the gameplay ain't really that great. It's good, no question about it. But overall the action sits uncomfortably at the intersection between pure first-person shooting, Metroid-esque exploration, PC adventuring and role-playing. It's a little of each, but not enough of one to offer any sort of satisfying revelations or innovations.

In fact, BioShock is the furthest thing from innovative, since by all accounts it's pretty much System Shock 2 meets The Little Mermaid -- Shodan goes by another name, and you're Under the Sea, but everything from the plot to the AI hacking is basically the same. Of course, most people haven't played System Shock 2, myself included, so maybe it doesn't matter.
 
The fact that BioShock contains pieces from many different games of the past presented in interesting new ways rather than completely coming up with brand new material for every section does not make it a typical FPS. Like it or not, 95% of FPS games on the market today have less gameplay strategy than Doom. I fail to see how any of what you said above makes BioShock anything but an atypical FPS; because regardless of if all of the new things critics went crazy over is all brand new, the large majority of FPS games don't have anything in the way of gameplay variation. Something cannot be typical when it does many things the majority doesn't.

ROAD_DOGG summed it up pretty well: System Shock 2 with really damn good graphics. The problem with using such a statement as ammo (as you have been trying to) is that even today System Shock 2 would be a revolutionary title because the FPS genre simply does not evolve as a whole. Black is an example that does a few things that the majority of first person shooters don't do, but pretty much all of the notable ones have been doing for years.

Furthermore, you have still failed to quantify your reasoning for why Black is a far more notable game than BioShock in a cluttered sea of FPS. All you have said is:

Black made you use tactics and think which is the best course to take
I played that in 1995 on a Sega 32X. It was called Doom, which had a neat gameplay option called "Monster Infighting." Hell, taking it more modern, I played that on my PS2 7 years ago. It was called Red Faction, which had a neat gameplay option called "Geo Mod." I played Black. It was a good game. I liked its non-linearity, and it was pretty fun. But a game is not against the mold based on non-linearity alone, and it didn't nearly have enough gameplay strategy going for it as you seem to think it has to make up for it.
And the truly scary part is that I have so far agreed with nearly all of Jeremy's points, this isn't opposite day, and I'm not drunk. The fact of the matter is, if BioShock isn't an example of a game against the mold, there is no definition of what a typical FPS is that makes Black anything less than a Doom clone.
 
The fact that BioShock contains pieces from many different games of the past presented in interesting new ways rather than completely coming up with brand new material for every section does not make it a typical FPS. Like it or not, 95% of FPS games on the market today have less gameplay strategy than Doom. I fail to see how any of what you said above makes BioShock anything but an atypical FPS; because regardless of if all of the new things critics went crazy over is all brand new, the large majority of FPS games don't have anything in the way of gameplay variation. Something cannot be typical when it does many things the majority doesn't.

ROAD_DOGG summed it up pretty well: System Shock 2 with really damn good graphics. The problem with using such a statement as ammo (as you have been trying to) is that even today System Shock 2 would be a revolutionary title because the FPS genre simply does not evolve as a whole. Black is an example that does a few things that the majority of first person shooters don't do, but pretty much all of the notable ones have been doing for years.

Furthermore, you have still failed to quantify your reasoning for why Black is a far more notable game than BioShock in a cluttered sea of FPS. All you have said is:


I played that in 1993 on a Sega 32X. It was called Doom, which had a neat gameplay option called "Monster Infighting." Hell, taking it more modern, I played that on my PS2 7 years ago. It was called Red Faction, which had a neat gameplay option called "Geo Mod." I played Black. It was a good game. I liked its non-linearity, and it was pretty fun. But a game is not against the mold based on non-linearity alone, and it didn't nearly have enough gameplay strategy going for it as you seem to think it has to make up for it.
And the truly scary part is that I have so far agreed with nearly all of Jeremy's points, this isn't opposite day, and I'm not drunk.

It looks like you fail to see what I've been saying. BioShock just isn't innovative or new. All it did was do things a little bit different, but it was the same package. Just another FPS.

And again, I'm not saying Black was innovative or special enough to eclipse BioShock from what they both are, a FPS. To me, and obviously a bunch of others, I don't see BioShock as something more special, unique or innovative over what has already been offered. In that case, a typical FPS.
 
This post is nothing more than a childish, defensive, immature rant.

Bring a 'real' response to the table, and I'll respond.

More proof that BioShock is FAR from innovative.

Really? It was childish? Maybe you really can't come up with anything to counter what I've said, which is more than likely the case. You harp on MGS giving you the option to kill, and how it can effect the outcome of your story.

Guess what? BIOSHOCK DOES THE SAME.

You harp on using 'tactics' in Black, guess what buddy?

BIOSHOCK DOES THE SAME (and better).

In black, can you combine any custom options to create your own methods of attack? No. You can carry two weapons and some grenades.

Basically, you haven't PLAYED Bioshock, and you must be 'hating on it' because it's not your 'style'.

Dude, get real, you even ragged on GT5P for 'technical issues' and MGS4 because it was 'too yellow'. You're by far the definition of a silver spoon gamer.
 
Back