I think the problem was that I never got a chance to see detail up close. So at a mid range distance (which is the majority of the game) it hard to see too much detail. Going through Google upclose images, there's a lot more detail then what can really be seen in game. So yeah I'm fine now... sorry for the disruption there ^^;

What, do you never use the wrench? Seeing gashes ripped open by a nicely placed wrench to the head is one of the most satisfying experiences in the game.

Sure ya are. Just taking a quick glance at your Gamercard. I can see your still in Neptunes Bounty/Smugglers Cove on the 360. Which is only the 25% marker of BioShock.

Given that the 360 version is also the higher rated version of Bioshock and the one that is unanimously cited as being the better looking version. I think your full of bullshit.

I also still maintain that your complaining just to complain as everyone i've talked to who has played this game on an HDTV has commented on how beautiful and detailed everything is in the game. Your the only person i've heard complain about the game having ugly characters. Also, given your past charades of degrading non-PS3 games, I take everything you say as bullshit.

Like all FPS based games, BioShock has a zoom function that easily makes it able to zoom in on enemys faces and enviroments to see the level of detail and i'm sure you would have known this if you weren't just complaining for the sake of being a jackass.

Okay, now that you're done assuming I'm retarded and have had the wrong setup for years, I'm quite certain that this is an actual issue. The problem with the big daddy spawns isn't in a lack of them, I said its a lack of LITTLE SISTER being there.

Only 25% done eh? More to this game then I had expected.

Like I said, it's hard to see character detail when they're a distance away, in the dark, while being on fire or being electricuted. But hey, in comparison to the water effects I don't think that any game to current date has "good graphics".

@Lukage
Like I'm supposedly a PS3 fanboy who will never say something bad about a PS3 game. Iwata is about the 360. So don't take it too personally. For if there was a largely complained about issue with the audio in the game when you search about it in google, he'd never admitt it.

I've Beaten the game twice and have yet to experience the problem you are complaining about. If I'm missing a little sister and a find a Big Daddy without one. All you do is follow it till it bangs on the hole-in-the-wall and a little sister comes out of the hole.

It is as simple as that.

Iwata, first source I looked at said that the DX9 PC version looks the same as the 360 version and that the DX10 on PC was better.

Insider: Head-to-Head: BioShock

Yes, they don't want you to know it. *gasp Insider*

So, before I check another source, should we say unanimously minus IGN? Or are they biased against something they rated a 9.7?

Bioshock is a long game and there are numerous occasions where you think it is close to the end, but it is actually far from it.

My original playthrough took me 30+ hours which is the longest i've invested into any FPS.

30+ holy fuck. Most reviewers clocks on the hardest difficulty, collecting all 122 audio logs came to a bit over 20hrs. You must have taken your sweet time to admire every corner of the game. Nevermind to then go back and play it again.

Additional Post:
In case you wanted to dispute my PC's ability to perform in the manner I claimed.
BioShock Hardware Performance Guide - Features at GameSpot

Dude I probably logged close to 15-20 and I was at the end of fort frolic. Until I ran into a THe CURTAIN glitch and now i have to start over a couple levels back.

Yes, why wouldnt you admire every detail, when they deserve observing. I go around trying to find every item imaginable.

I might not in the levels I have to replay over again though =(

Just finished it.
And I have to say, I haven't been this disappointed by a game since Unreal 2.
Yes, Bioshock has a nice, deep story, which is pretty unique in video games.
Yes, it also has incredible art direction and very good audio.
But that's about all good things I've got to say about it.

The gameplay is System Shock 2 with more combat and a diffrent experience system, namely that whole Adam thing instead of Cybermodules. And research is now vital to survival, if you don't take a lot of photographs of the enemies, the game balancing flies out of the window, making especially later levels near unplayable.
Yes, there are some differing powers, but ultimately the gameplay doesn't offer anything innovative or new, nothing that hasn't been done better by others before.
The actual level design also isn't that great. The overall mood is good, yes, but the level layout and design just lacks a certain something to really elevate it.
Regarding the respawn tubes - vita chambers - it is explained later why only the player resurrects. Still I think they're a rather sucky gameplay device, taking away very, very much of the tension. But I admit that without them, the game would be a real quicksave fest. Maybe they didn't wanted to do too much game balancing. Which doesn't really shed good light on the devs.
Then there are quite a lot of scripted scenes, which to me are quite bad game design decisions. The worst examples are the instant enemy spawns when the player has achieved something. If they had to borrow gameplay devices from Doom3, why not the slick in-game user interfaces? Why this?

So overall, it's a nice, shiny piece of candy with an exquisite wrapper that tastes surprisingly fishy.
It's still a good game. Just not the exellent masterpiece it seemed to be, and sadly not the "piece of art" it's praised for everywhere. Because as it's the GAME part of it that is the really weak spot. Everything else is pretty top notch.

Because those things, and being like System Shock 2, are indeed terrible. How could anyone not agree that despite looking and sounding great, having a brilliant and involving story, and somewhat being based on the game mechanics of a well revered game, despite those minor things, it really isn't great at all. Seems so obvious now. Clearly all that enjoyment I thought I was having was a lie. Touché 2K Games, touché.

Good story and looks/sounds don't make up for mediocre gameplay / leveldesign. Because "System Shock 2 with focus on action" doesn't work as good as it might sound. The gameplay mechanics are 8 years old, and it shows...

Well different people are easier swayed by certain games then others. This is nothing new and something that I'm sure you're already aware of. However I am kind of between you two. I love the ambiance and characters of the game, however I do not have the burning passion for the game like so many western gamers currently do.

To tell the truth it's easy to get the Western public excited about any good looking FPS with a solid story and gameplay... it doesn't have to be groundbreaking. So don't take it too personally, it's still the games that have a world wide appeal that make advences in the industry, not the ones that solely do good on one continent. Therefore while BioShock may not reinvent how we play games of the FPS genre, it's still a very well rounded and easy to enjoy game.

Well, I mean, with how far past us the Eastern world is in matters of both intellect and creative design, it's really no surprise!

I must be enjoying the game because I've never played System Shock 1 or 2. It's the only explanation!

Nor has 99% of the population playing it. Same was in Oblivion and other series from the PC that got ported to the 360. Its like playing an expansion to a game you've never played. Of course its all new and cool and stuff.

Dammit, stop using your British sarcasm. I was about to punch you in the face for a minute. :mad:

On a related note, why is it that there are always people that come out when any game that gets universal praise from a wide variety of gamers and game sites comes along and goes "No seriously, this game is terrible, because it's derivative and boring and the graphics aren't anything special", even when if you use your brain that's clearly not the case?

Hey guys, BioShock is way too similar in gameplay to Wolfenstein 3D, I mean shit, it's in 3D and you shoot things and you can even use a melee attack! And the story is about the downfall of a society led by a warped guy who has mutants serving him in a huge self-contained dungeon! They totally ripped off the story from Wolfenstein.

Wow, that was actually quite possibly ammunition for the people I'm trying to parody.

Why is there always someone to put down a game. That's simple, because not everyone can like everything. Thoes who believe that their likes and dislikes are the "ultimate" opinion that trumps everyone else is just as unrealistic as thoes who give hell to thoes for not liking a game that they covet. Both camps are living in unrealistic dream worlds that can't rap their heads around reality. There is no right answer... period. Which is why even if you like or dislike something, the only way not to come off as a complete ass about you opinion is to still be open to the opinion of others, or just simply don't say anything.

As for your wolfebstein thing. I know it's supposed to be sarcastic... it's just badly done so no comment.

What the fuck gave you the notion that you needed to step in and get on a high horse about "why do you not let people have opinions omg"? Oh wait, it's because you're still butthurt over other people yelling at you earlier in the thread, and you're now taking it out on me for some reason, as if my post was designed to call you out, which it wasn't. My entire issue is with people going into threads DEDICATED to the game and derailing a conversation by not saying "I think the game is flawed" but saying "I think this game is TERRIBLE."

You never hear these people come in and talk about a game that isn't getting major hype and major reviews and pick it apart in the same way. These people don't come in and go "I don't like this game, but I can see why others do." They instead come in and go "I know everyone else in the world likes this game, therefore I'm going to find reasons not to like it just to be different." And then they proceed to tell us about those reasons, ad nauseam, even when people point out that half of their points are either wrong or a result of tunnelvision specifically LOOKING FOR bad things.

Yes, BioShock's save system makes the game easy. That's one of the main complaints I see. However, it allows ANYONE to experience the well-executed and dense narrative. If you were spending half your time worrying about dying, you wouldn't want to pay attention to the story. But talk to some people, and they'll say "I think the game is too easy, therefore there's no reason to play it and you are all idiots for wanting to play it."

As for your crusade to somehow pull yourself out from the hole you've dug... it's just badly done so no comment.

You are retarded. I wish you would



So guys, how is the camera in Bioshock? It didn't really get along with me during the demo, so is it like that in the full game, does it continue the same way etc ?

The camera is.. I dunno, quite useful. It awards you with some nifty plasmids along the way. However, I wished that it resulted in some proper research, like some files you could access and read about the enemies. That would have been nice.

Sorry, I wasn't clear before. I meant like, the actual visible screen during play. Like, the screen movement was kind of, I don't know, dizzying during the demo.

Just to comment on the 5.1 issues, they're not made up. Sound effects and voices periodically will come from what appears to be a very close proximity, but no one will actually be there. I'm pretty sure it's an issue with your vertical placement, as it usually happens [to me] when there's someone on the next higher/lower floor of the building.

Sorry Mo0, I'll try to remember my British sarcasm tags next time. I think I left them in my other trousers (or pants if you must).

Ha ha, awesome. And so true. iD should sue.

But seriously, this whole point about a game being derivative can't be any fun is complete bullshit. If that were the case there'd be no sequels, ever, and 99.9% of EA's catalogue wouldn't exist. Hell, 99% of games wouldn't exist. Most things are derivative on some level these days, music, films, TV, games... the whole lot of 'em. Look hard enough and you'll find a wealth of things that something could be based on, or is similar too. The whole point is people take bits of ideas and inspiration and combine it into something new, something a bit different. Certainly not too different, then we wouldn't know what to make of it and would most likely ignore it. We like things that are familiar, we can understand them, make sense of them and place them in the world. So things being somewhat derivative is always going to be the case, and that's not a bad thing.

Equally, the crap about a game mechanic being 8 years old equating to being bad, also bullshit. Most games today are still based on game mechanics of 10, 20 years ago. One only need to look at retro games appearing on stuff like XBLA and getting good reviews, or indeed, games like New Super Mario Bros. on the DS, which is very much based on an old game mechanic.