Bioshock Infinite

cloud493

I played bioshock 2, before 1, great fun Get that cool drill weapon.

ShadowHearth

cloud493 wrote: »

I played bioshock 2, before 1, great fun Get that cool drill weapon.

of **** it was my favourite weapon.

if i am not mistaken you can get some spec later on in game, where you can use only drill, but it uses very little fuel!

marco_polo

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Heard the DLC campaign for Bioshock 2 was well worth playing. I must pick it up soon, just a pity it's not on PC.

You mean Minerva's Den?

http://marketplace.xbox.com/en-US/Product/Minervas-Den/00000000-0000-400e-80cf-00065454085c

Kiith

I've still not played Bioshock 2. Must get around to it before Infinite is released.

ShadowHearth

marco_polo wrote: »

You mean Minerva's Den?

http://marketplace.xbox.com/en-US/Product/Minervas-Den/00000000-0000-400e-80cf-00065454085c

Is it avelable on eu ?

I was prety sure they said that there will be no pc version of it.

Socialist_Pig

hooradiation wrote: »

I guess my scandalous language must make it hard for these people to read

it wasnt making it hard to read but you just came across as behaving like a dick for no good reason.Nobody had been rude beforehand to you so it was completely out of the blue for you to go off on a mad one.

ps..you're still behaving like a dick.

Socialist_Pig

EnterNow wrote: »

No at all, Bioshock 2 is a pretty damned good game. It just wasn't 'different' enough & I got a serious bout of repetition while going through it.

the first time I installed Bioshock I went wow..the story line,how creepy it was and the gameplay was decent.

bisohock 2 fixed all the faults but it was more of the same so you got a bit jaded by the end of it.

the new game looks good,the same dystopian future but a diffent setting Cant wait.

marco_polo

ShadowHearth wrote: »

marco_polo wrote: »

You mean Minerva's Den?

http://marketplace.xbox.com/en-US/Product/Minervas-Den/00000000-0000-400e-80cf-00065454085c

Is it avelable on eu ?

I was prety sure they said that there will be no pc version of it.

Yep they released it in may. This thread just reminded me to go get it myself Cost 400 ms points, pain in the nuts to install thanks to gfwl but got it going in the end.

cloud493

Bishock 2 is really good, and its only 7 euro in HMV.

Sephiroth_dude

A game employee was telling me this is coming out for the vita too,any truth to this?

marco_polo

Sephiroth_dude wrote: »

A game employee was telling me this is coming out for the vita too,any truth to this?

Its "something else" if that helps

Retr0gamer

marco_polo wrote: »

You mean Minerva's Den?

http://marketplace.xbox.com/en-US/Product/Minervas-Den/00000000-0000-400e-80cf-00065454085c

Thanks a million for that. Pity I didn't pick it up in the steam christmas sale. I just remember how the publisher wasn't planning to bring it to PC at all.

marco_polo

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Thanks a million for that. Pity I didn't pick it up in the steam christmas sale. I just remember how the publisher wasn't planning to bring it to PC at all.

Its only £2.90 on Amazon, I think the DLC actually works out slightly more expensive :pac:.

Kinski

Just to add one point to the 1999 mode debate, directed at anyone who doesn't like the sound of it: I think the difficulty of some games is a little overstated these days. The era of ultra-hard games that only really good gamers could ever finish (and which would frustrate the rest of us) is pretty much gone.

I'd consider myself to be fairly average at games, and yet I play stuff that other, more dedicated gamers I know would balk at - and balk at simply because of some preconception about them being "too difficult." When many reviewers describe a game as difficult, they really just mean you will die a lot, and have to master it to make much progress. But usually, any average player can master it if they put the time in. I love that kind of thing, because it leads to a much more satisfying experience. It adds a great deal to the longevity of a game when you go from getting whipped by a boss the first few times, then just about scrapping past it, to dispatching it with ease. The sense of achievement is is greater then with a game that raises the difficulty level so gently that you don't ever have to master a level, you just "play through" it.

And I thought that was a problem with the original Bioshock. Great game and all, but I played through it without ever being presented with a genuine challenge, and that was it. There was no motivation to revisit it. This 1999 mode promises a stiffer challenge, and the possibility of multiple contrasting playthrough experiences (depending on how you choose to specialise, rather than just finishing the game once, with all the skills maxed-out).

Retr0gamer

Have to agree with the above. A good example of this is the likes Demon's Souls and Dark Souls. According to the critics these games are the hardest things ever. According to most people that have finished them they are harsh but fair and only really require a little bit of patience and are perfectly managable for anyone. On another note I'm sure everyone has heard how Contra on the NES is impossible even with the 30 man cheat code. I decided to see what the fuss was and had it beaten in less than two hours I didn't even cheat. Also I'm far from an amazing gamer either. The media just blows things out of proportion.

I'm guessing a lot of this negativity about how 1999 mode is going to be way too difficult and could make the game unwinnable is down to how System Shock 2 has also gained this reputation of being extremely difficult, possible beginning with Yahtzee describing the difficulty curve being akin to running head first into a brick wall. Again System Shock 2 is more than managable and hard to paint yourself into a corner unless you are a complete idiot. Even the weapon degradation is more annoying than game breaking, just use the wrench until you get the maintenance skills levelled up enough. The only difference between it and newer games is that the levels and design of the game is non-linear until the final sections and you'll die a bit more.

Now Ninja Gaiden on the NES, that's a real whore of a game.

hooradiation

Kinski wrote: »

Just to add one point to the 1999 mode debate, directed at anyone who doesn't like the sound of it: I think the difficulty of some games is a little overstated these days. The era of ultra-hard games that only really good gamers could ever finish (and which would frustrate the rest of us) is pretty much gone.

And for this I am thankful. I don't have the luxury of spending hours and hours playing sections over and over until I eventually pass them and even if I did, that's not fun.

I recently managed to finish metro 2033, it took me nearly nine hours spread over two weeks and that was on medium. If the 1999 mode ever becomes standard again, I won't actually be able to finish games.

I have no really worry that it will, because I think it's a terrible way to design and play a game and I'm certain I'm part of a sizeable majority who feel the same, but honestly, I like that we've moved away from not to be able to experience the content you've bought because a third of the way in the game goes "nope. You made a choice way back at the start that wasn't the right one. fuck you, the game is impossible now" or "you've run out of 'lives' and thanks to this hangover from the days of the arcade, you have to do it all again".

Retr0gamer

If a game is designed well enough it will make some parts of the game that are tough and some that are made easier due to your decisions. It will never be impossible. If it does make the game impossible then it's just bad game design. In the best designed games what you choose will open up new routes and options in how to beat the game rather than make the game impossible. For a good example look at the original Deus Ex where how you upgrade yourself will determine how you approach each level or situation. Focusing on stealth will mean you will play the game much differently than if you focused on speech, fire arms or explosives. It's more about giving the player more options than screwing the player over. If 1999 mode really does paint you into a corner then it will have failed in my eyes. I know they say you can do that in the interviews but tbh I think it's just a warning to not be an idiot.

I don't mind games being too easy. However it's nice to play a tough game now and again and it's good that Irrational are giving the player the option to both players.

Monotype

What's the worry about having an extra option in a game? It's not going to become a standard and it's for people that like an extra bit of difficulty.

Games were more difficult in the past because people bought far less and expected them to last a long time. There's games everywhere now and for extremely cheap (thinking of digital distribution etc) so there's less time to allocate for the gamer who wants the next shiny thing on the market. Plus publishers want to make more sales so there's no fear of mainstream games being too difficult, out of reach of a majority and they want people to buy more and be looking at the next big title.

Personally, I think a lot of games make it very easy. I was stunned by Bioshock's regen chambers. I played through it by just reloading if I died. I think there was a patch with with an option to disable them iirc? That said, I have no interest in cutting my wrists and pouring on vinegar with hardcore and realism modes that require you to eat, sleep, p1ss, fill in tax forms and lace your shoes ingame. It's a game!!!
But, options are good. I love Nightmare modes with respawning monsters and you have a knife to fight them off, just for a laugh and a quick go.

hooradiation

Retr0gamer wrote: »

If a game is designed well enough it will make some parts of the game that are tough and some that are made easier due to your decisions. It will never be impossible. If it does make the game impossible then it's just bad game design.

Wait, so all the crazy hard games people champion as being "the good old days" are just badly designed?
Who knew we'd agree on something....

Retr0gamer

hooradiation wrote: »

Wait, so all the crazy hard games people champion as being "the good old days" are just badly designed?
Who knew we'd agree on something....

I don't know which games you are referring to? If anything had the problem whereby you could get yourself into an unwinnable situation it would be labeled a crap game. Hard doesn't necessarily mean bad. There's a balancing act, if it's unfair to the player they get frustrated and it's bad game design. If the player see's that the problem was a fault of their own then it's not frustrating. The original Super Mario Brothers is one of the hardest games you'll ever play, you wouldn't suggest that it's crap?

Sephiroth_dude

marco_polo wrote: »

Its "something else" if that helps

Ah I See :-P

mystic86

UK released date just been announced as October 19th

cloud493

October! Thats ages away :mad:

cloud493

Just to go with my other post, this has now been delayed to february 26th, 2013!

2K Games has delayed the release of BioShock Infinite from this October to February 26, 2013. Irrational Games creative director Ken Levine said: "When we announced the release date of BioShock Infinite in March, we felt pretty good about the timing.

"Since then, we've uncovered opportunities to make Infinite into something even more extraordinary. Therefore, to give our talented team the time they need to deliver the best Infinite possible, we've decided to move the game's release to February."

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/346933/bioshock-infinite-delayed-to-2013/

ShadowHearth

Well **** this sideways.... I guess I will be still on crack, I mean Diablo.

tok9

Ah ****e, probably the only game I was really looking forward to this year. Well if they can make it more extraordinary then all the better

readyletsgo

Prob moved the date as there is a lot of big names out from Aug this year, RE6, NSML2, Tomb Raider, Darksiders II, they might miss out on a lot of sales maybe.

But jaysus, I want it now. Bet they are just working on co-op.

marco_polo

readyletsgo wrote: »

Prob moved the date as there is a lot of big names out from Aug this year, RE6, NSML2, Tomb Raider, Darksiders II, they might miss out on a lot of sales maybe.

But jaysus, I want it now. Bet they are just working on co-op.

Bit cynical no?, I'm perfectly willing to give the co-creator of Thief, System Shock 2 and Bioshock the benefit of the doubt.

If Ken Levine says the game needs more development time, it probably because the game needs more development time.

God damn it, grrrrrrrrrrrrr

Somnus

I wonder is it actually to add more features, or if it's just a big problem they need to sort out?

Co-op would be cool, but I dunno how they'd implement it well since Bioshock is very story driven.

Either way, shame about the wait, but I'm sure it will be worth it