What will be Bioshock's impact on the cRPG?

[Alrik Fassbauer]

http://www.blizzard.com/diablo2/wallpapers.shtml

He's is down there somewhere.

Ahh there he is: http://www.blizzard.com/diablo2/wallpapers/wall13.shtml

Oh, I always thought this was a microphone !!!

 

[Alrik Fassbauer]

The "Fu** you" Arpygee response is lame, impotent and childish.

"Fuel you" ?


Besides, just today it occurred to me that I don't actually know a simgle fantasy adventure ...

Is fantasy limited to RPGs and strategy ?

 

[Jaz]

Um, no fantasy adventures? Kyrandia I, II and II come to mind. Aren't you playing Hand of Fate right now? Then there are Zork Nemesis and Zork Inquisitor, there's Keepsake (to name a more recent adventure) and there's Nemesis: the Wizardry Adventure. There's Redguard: An Elder Scrolls Adventure.... well, those were the first ones that came to my mind, but i bet there are others.

 

[Korplem]

The "Fu** you" Arpygee response is lame, impotent and childish.

Thank you, Captain Obvious.

As for fantasy adventures, the first that comes to mind is Eric the Unready. I got it off of HotU. I'm sure you can find more there, although they will be dated.

 

[xSamhainx]

cool, I'd never seen that Diablo vs Warcraft one before.

That Andariel one is still my favorite on the page tho!

I know i'm coming to this one late ='.'=

I dont think Bioshock is going to further any type of rpg revolt, I do think it will be influential to FPS's of course. If it did so happen to skew the game settings away from traditional fantasy tho, i wouldnt be too averse to that. I dont have a problem with first person RPG, as long as I have the option to go 3rd when I want! I'm not thinking that this 3d FP trend has anyting to do with any one game or games, it has to do with the technology being available now to do it. First person means people feel immersed, and immersion is supposedly what the whole thing is about.

 

[Dez]

speaking of twin peaks..you should check out Alan Wake...i heard one of the inspirations was the twin peaks. Hopefully it will be as remarkable as Twin peaks was to tv

 

[DArtagnan]

If Bioshock will have an impact on the RPG genre, it will surely be based on the setting and level of immersion. Those are the main strengths of the game, and supposedly those are what will be most remembered.

As a big fan of the original System Shock and the sequel, I'm finding it hard to be particularly impressed with the game overall, as I consider the gameplay several steps down from what had gone before. The aesthetic level is a lot higher, but that's to be expected for a game released 8 years later than the last one.

The original System Shock used an engine Looking Glass developed themselves (an evolution of the one in Ultima Underworld), and I have to say that impressed me a lot more than what people can do with a licensed engine, with a licensed physics engine on top of it. More than that, I'm guessing the team is probably 3-5 times larger than the Looking Glass team ever was, so that's something to consider.

The level designers are to be commended, no doubt, but I can't pat the design team on the back for redoing what was done 14 years earlier without significant signs of evolution.

** possible spoilers **



Ken Levine, the lead person, is a capable writer but Bioshock is extremely derivative of what he did with System Shock 2, and the "twist" he already did twice (Thief and SS2), so I'm personally not that impressed. Besides the level of pretentiousness of the story and its premise is so high, that no resolution could really match it, and a terrible resolution like the one in the game, only serves to further lower the overall impact.

** end of possible spoilers **

So, while I'm sure marketing people are brainstorming on how to copy the elements responsible for the high number of sales, I'm not convinced many designers of worth are doing much to copycat the game.

 

[mute]

After the somewhat dissapointment of Bioshock (great Action game but not what i wanted) i have retaken my quest of completing System Shock once again. (YEARS has gone by ... )

It has been very interesting replaying system shock after bioshock. Mostly because it really strikes me how great this game is (system shock). The vita chambers ruined everything for me in bioshock and it became a movie instead of a game.

In system shock, the chambers has to be activated before use, which really have you be careful with the medics and 1st aid kits. In Bioshock not so.

And of course, since System shock does NOT use any stats at all, Bioshock is more of a rpg in that respect. But its a lesser experience. I am so glad i bought the CD version of System Shock so many years ago. Its feels great replaying it and it feels really modern.

And the Audiologs in System Shock really do bring something to the game. In bioshock it was just "meh, not another one..." - They gave the game atmosphere in bioshock, but in system shock, they are vital.

So, i think i stand by my point i made earlier. The one thing that Bioshock can bring to the table is doing the games more simplistic and action oriented. Seeing the score and success.

I urge everybody that missed the System Shock (because you was to young) to replay it today. Have you played through Bioshock you really got the feeling how that game should have been made and some parts in bioshock just feel strange to include.

Hm... I agree with every point you make Dartagnan.

Ps.
Guess this post was more to make people play System Shock instead of wasting time with Bioshock!

 

[JDR13]

Ps.
Guess this post was more to make people play System Shock instead of wasting time with Bioshock!

I agree with you that the SS games are better than Bioshock, but on the other hand Bioshock is definitely not a waste of time. I'm still not finished with it yet and the game is still getting better as I go through it.

 

[mute]

Like I said elsewhere. Bioshock is one of the few shooter i ever finished. But i do see problems with Bioshock, now when i replaying System Shock. Heck, i even see problems with System Shock 2...

I guess i just wanted to "Dramatize" my statement.

 

[curiously undead]

and i see problems with the original system shock because it didn't have ken levine

 

[DArtagnan]

For the record, I'm not saying Ken Levine made Bioshock worse.

I think his limited Hollywood background is helpful in generating a more cinematic experience. I'm just saying the story of Bioshock promised a lot more than it delivered in my opinion. Also, the twist was simply too derivative to make an impact on me, but judging from many other responses, I guess I'm in a tiny minority in that regard.

All I'm hoping for is that Bioshock will help pave the way for more games of this structure and hopefully some of them will, at least, attempt to take the genre further instead of reducing complexity to suit the mass market. It worked fine as a movie, but we have theaters and DVD players for that kind of thing.

 

[mute]

Thanks for that information Curiously undead. I thought Ken Levine was participating in System Shock and was Lead designer in System shock 2. Now i see he joined Looking Glass 95, one year after SS was done.

No wonder i like System Shock so much ...

I hade problem to in the story of bioshock. It was to similar to System Shock 2, and the twists, wasn't really any twists. Shodan in SS2... That was a shock. Still like the game, but it was too much of a shooter. And, one thing that Bioshock might contribute is to really make sure - jumping puzzle don't belong in a FPS game. In that aspect they really did great!

 

[curiously undead]

for me i like the cinematic experience as long as the gameplay itself isnt' bad, and i can't recall playing any games that had a well scripted story and in game cutscenes that didn't also have enjoyable gameplay. and i watch very few "action" movies as they are usually dreadful, on top of which unlike a game you can't be a part of the action. the cinematic action games or many first person shooters usually don't have an intriguing story or setting for me to ever try in the first place so i can't comment on those. i guess growing up as a kid and having books like the choose your own adventures i was spoiled into wanting more from a story, that books and movies simply can't offer. its why i don't play sandbox games rarely at all. i want to experience the game much like a dream, where i have choices to make but there is also a flow to it that pulls you through it with a bit of sense. bioshock may be a shooter. it may not be the best game ever. but i'd stand by that it is one of the best gaming experiences ever that IS original in its execution of its creative style, direction, and ecology. while peoples experiences and opinions may vary, anyone who denounces that statement either hasn't played it all or is merely interested in killing things.

overall i think system shock 2 is a better game but i really have a very hard time ranking any of the games i think are superb. to me they are both solid A games.

i spend about 8 times as much time gaming as i do reading a book, and the same goes for movies/tv combined. music is the only other medium i spend a significant time with besides gaming which is another high importance in gaming to me as well. to me that's one of the biggest wedges that seperates the bioshock and system shock 2 experience for me. besides the annouces and audio logs, futuristic spaceship electronica (which i love) provided a more on edge/heightened experience that bioshocks music which a much more "deranged" and "dystopian" feel that conveyed a different type of horror that was far beyond (not necessarily better) the lonelyness feelings in system shock 2 or other survival horror games. the fact that the "slicers" were still alive and carrying on conversations really creeped me out at times.

 

[SALZHERZ]

Call Me An Old Asshole !

Sure, i am old. 45 years.

THIS DOESNT MATTER. But what IMPACT your are talking about ?
Its only the way the gaming industrie is going. MAINSTREAM, simple game fundamentals, big selling numbers. More games like this will be follow.
Bioshock has nothing to do with cRPG. NOTHING. Its a FPS, thats all. I play System Shock 2 again, this game is much better.

And thats the shame, only indie developers like Basilisk or Spider Web will be produce games i would like to buy. Look at the hype for Fallout 3. I love 1&2, but this one ? Come on, think about Oblivion, WUAH ! (autoscaling.... WUAHAHAHAH !)

Yes, call me an old idiot. Give me names..... but where the hell is my rescue from brain dead gaming concepts like Bioshock ? I have to play old cRPGs again and again, and the new ones couldnt deliver the same quality like BG2, or Fallout 2 or...... (think about your own list of great cRPGs).

I said it in my previous post, i will say it again..... cRPGs are DEAD, buy a WI and play Mario Tennis. OMG.

HELP ME, please give me hope........

 

[DArtagnan]

** possible spoilers **



I see your points undead, and I agree with them in many ways.

Luckily, we can't be right or wrong about this. It's all entirely subjective, and obviously we get different levels of enjoyment out of different things.

Personally, I was VERY intrigued by Bioshock during the first few hours of play. I was completely absorbed by the whole introduction and the first couple of levels. I felt this game was going to blow my mind, but to me it just fell far short of that. I will admit that the setting is quite unique, and not only that, it's fantastically engaging and disturbing.

But the problem is that I don't think the gameplay itself supports this setting all that well, nor do I agree with a lot of the design decisions made. Some of my primary criticisms are (don't read if you can't handle serious criticism of Bioshock ):

Vita Chamber implementation

They were too abundant and they were forced upon you, since you couldn't disable them in any way. It's true that you could simply quick-load whenever you died, and indeed that's exactly what I did, but I was constantly aware that I simply couldn't die no matter what I did. I don't like having to meta-game to avoid this kind of problem, and the tension is severely reduced as a result.

Ammo/Health/EVE/Money carry limit

Let's rule out realism being the reason, because I can obviously carry a LOT of weapons including rocket launchers, flame throwers, etc. So this is a balance design decision. The main problem is that you eliminate the incentive to scavenge the levels for extra stuff and to hack vending machines, because you can only ever carry 9 kits and a similarly low amount of ammo. This is an essential change from System Shock, and a change which directly punishes the careful and deliberate player, by catering to the cowboy shooter guy. The resources are SO abundant in the game, that you will NEVER feel you're running short except for the first couple of levels. Before every single fight of importance, you will find more than you need and you can easily stock up on everything.

General difficulty level

I completed the game on medium, because that's the difficulty that generally suits me the best I find. But in Bioshock I found that every single enemy could be killed with more or less the exact same plasmid/weapon combo from start to finish and they were EASILY killed. Yes, the first 1-2 big daddy fights were challenging, but it doesn't take long to figure out safe strategies for them either. This is a significant problem, because with 70 plasmids to play with you're facing a game where you only need a couple of them to succeed. Never ever give the player a million toys without giving him a need for them. The whole premise of what the gameplay was supposed to be about - namely creative ways of killing splicers - is more or less totally destroyed by having them be a joke to kill.

Severe lack of replayability

First of all, the oh-so-advertised moral choice in the game is a JOKE. First of all, you get nearly exactly the same amount of ADAM (overall) for freeing the girls as you do for killing them. Secondly, you get extra plasmids AND you get extra random goodies. On top of that, you get a somewhat more meaningful ending sequence. So, do you want to be EVIL and stupid, or do you want to be GOOD and smart? Complete cop-out and it contains nothing even remotely close to a grey area, which means it brings... yes... NOTHING to the game. This pathetically black/white vision of morality is getting very old and it has been handled much better in other games.

Oh, this was about replayability. Yes, the reason I brought that up is that I, to my great dismay, found out that taking the "evil" route has... wait for it... 0.001% influence on the experience as a whole. Apart from less resources overall as I mentioned (great incentive to go that route for a replay), you get a few different words from Tenenbaum about how nasty you are and you get a different totally insane ending sequence about you bent on taking over the world or something. Other than that, there is no difference (I hear) which nullifies this aspect as a reason for replaying the game.

But it's worse.

By omitting character generation and RPG elements, you remove the possibility to experiment with different character builds. But as if that wasn't enough, you get every single plasmid, weapon, weapon upgrade, ammo type, handed to you during your very first run-through. If you research on your first playthrough, you can also easily get all the relevant plasmids gained from there. Meaning you will have seen all there is to see on the very first run-through.

So the single reason to play it again, would be to hunt for some potentially missed audio logs, which is pretty pathetic compared with the replayability of System Shock 2.

Lack of UI feedback

Why in the world can't I see what passive plasmids I have? Why can't I have a screen from which I can plan ahead and decide what to go for? Why must I find a station to actually figure that out? That's incredibly weak design.

How can it be that when I "invent" stuff, I can't see what I'm already carrying, so I don't accidentally invent more than I need. I can't tell you how many hack tools I bought that I didn't need, but it was quite a few.

Where's my inventory? Come to think of it, why can't I carry any of those goodies I find lying around, like pep-bars etc.? Oh, it would be too complex for the console crowd. I see. Bullshit, they're not that stupid.

Weak design that does nothing to enhance the game.

---

Ok, I could go on, but I think you see my point.

I know this all sounds immensely negative and like I enjoy putting it down or something. Fact of the matter is that I DID enjoy the game as a cinematic experience on par with an above average sci-fi movie with a fantastic premise and visual aesthetic - and a horrible ending.

But as a game, it falls FAR short of the previous Shocks and I'm quite disappointed after having waited 8 years for something in this genre.

That's probably the main reason I'm bothering to lash out like this, because it's a genre I hold dear to my heart. After 25 years of gaming, I still find System Shock one of the strongest contenders for best game of all time. Definitely in my personal Top-5, and I've played literally thousands of games.

 

[curiously undead]

i'm still confused how people can be upset with the u-invent (inventors are supposed to be smarter than the average bear) and then say that there is more than enough items/ammo and money to go around. its not like when you invent the stuff it vanishes into thin air. it just drops to the ground where you can handily pick it up. system shock 2 did this is well but apparently people forgot. when you had the limit of a stack it would simply fall to the ground when you purchased something that theres wasn't room in your inventory. so in that case you had to check your inventory first. its no different in bioshock, taking the same amount of time just a bit more brain power, since you have to subtract (which an inventor should have no problem doing).

and it doesn't make sense to have a genetonic inventory since this its not in the present or future where a cybernetic implant would be able to be "accessed" in a self diagnostic kind of way. again i think this adds realism and difficulty to the game.

as far as the vita chambers are concerned i think it could have added a bit to the game if they did have to be activated (though that could have been tricky will the plot), but they surely could have had some kind of cost in either credits or a weakened or slowed state for a brief gaming period. 95% of the time i reloaded as well.

nevertheless i enjoy reading your well thought out opinions on the game DArtagnan.

 

[txa1265]

as far as the vita chambers are concerned i think it could have added a bit to the game if they did have to be activated (though that could have been tricky will the plot), but they surely could have had some kind of cost in either credits or a weakened or slowed state for a brief gaming period. 95% of the time i reloaded as well.

I honestly don't think I died even once. I probably should have played on Hard.

 

[xSamhainx]

that vita chamber thing sounds bad. It's like the checkpoint system in some games, where unless there's a long time between checkpoints, there's no real fear or thrill. It's like turning you into a quick-save abuser whether you like it or not. Sometimes I just want to save, then suicide and go back thru a particular jaunt and see if I can do it without incurring any damage, Im obsessive like that at times. I found some areas for example on Tomb Raider Anniversary where it's like "excuse me, I WANTED to go back and fight those creatures or that boss again because it was fun" (for example the Trex), but once the fight ends and that autosave fires that's it. Pisses me off!

But yeah, that vitachamber deal sounds lame, Ive read some other people griping about that too

 

[magerette]

I can relate, Sammy. I think I've reloaded a lot of epic battles and dialogue events over the years to obsessively get them RIGHT, use the best combination of spells, position everybody in the optimum spot, etc-whatever....I don't know what that says about my mental processes, but I am of the ilk that would rather die and reload than have everybody jump up like nothing happened and move on, as in KotOR. Dieing is a mistake in tactics, I'd like to rectify it myself, not pretend I actually played just swell.

Of course, I die a lot in games(and tutorials, demos, Tetris, Mavis Beacon,etc.) so maybe I've perversely adapted to it.

The little I played of Bioshock I was quite surprised I actually didn't die, especially with no shooter experience. I got the feeling that the game was meant to be quite forgiving (possibly too much so for some people.)