BioShock: The Collection

J. Marston

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtFzTsJTmVM

1, 2 & Infinite with all single player DLC and Ken Levine commentary on Bioshock. Out in September.

People seem to be pretty tired of remasters but I don't mind this one. Loved these games and would gladly play through them again.

nix

You can currently buy the three games in the steam sale for €10.50, my friend said they are gonna upgrade the old games for free on PC. Anybody else hear this?

Retr0gamer

They're probably just the PC versions with a few bells and whistles. It's been confirmed that you get the PC versions free if you own them already.

Loved Bioshock one at the time but when I go back to it now I get sick of it very quickly. Same with the second although Minervas Den was excellent, probably due to being the right length.

Infinite... I did not like at all. Story was stupid and the combat boring. The second DLC chapter was at least fun even if the story was equally as silly.

This is a remaster I won't be picking up.

Robert ninja

Dear lord it never ends.

I could maybe stand to play the first one again but no urge to play the others again despite enjoying them.

Pickpocket

I've been wanting to play this series having listened to the Cane and Rinse podcasts, so it's perfect timing for me.

I only played 3 or 4 hours of the first one and I remember being very impressed with the art design and overall tone of the game. I also put a couple of hours into Infinite but I'm afraid I did not enjoy the setting or those sky hook things. Far too 'gamey'.

Overall I'm very interested in these remasters but I understand people's cynicism, both about this project and the countless other re-releases. There's definitely a lack of quality triple-A games for this current generation of consoles.

Kirby

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Infinite... I did not like at all. Story was stupid and the combat boring. The second DLC chapter was at least fun even if the story was equally as silly.

This is a remaster I won't be picking up.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrjwaqZfjIY

Retr0gamer

Kirby wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrjwaqZfjIY

They can put as much interdimensional time travelling into the game but ultimately M Night Shyamalan twists don't impress me and it handled it's themes really poorly.

A game that wants to make a statement about how dull FPS games are while being one of the dullest FPS games last gen has pretty much failed.

The biggest crime was the awful retconning of one of the worst character U-turns in the main game in the DLC. Kevin, you done f-ed up. Don't try to hide it in the most ham fisted way possible.

gizmo

Yup, confirmed existing owners get the updated collection for free.

With Infinite not being touched I do wonder what kind of lick of paint the original games get on the PC. Either way, I'm definitely interested in Levine's commentary and the Museum of Orphaned Concepts content from the first entry, that game had a pretty intriguing development history after all.

Robert ninja

The only thing the original Bioshock needed was to fix the 30fps ragdoll physics.

I stopped playing Bioshock 2 because there's an audio issue where sounds are really quiet compared to some others, mainly gunshots being a mere patter.

It's kind of sad that we had to wait for an 8th remaster before these near decade old issues are possibly going to be fixed. It would be a comedy if they weren't.

Bioshag: Trinity not being included with the bundle was a missed opportunity

Infinite had a great story - to me, it made up for the repetitive shooting of the rest of the match.

Generic Dreadhead

I heard we were talking about Bioshock, I got here as fast as I could.

*clears throat*

Bioshock 2 was better than Bioshock Infinite

The actual gameplay in Infinite was just awful, really awful, and while the story was good while playing it, the ending was just like mashing 4 cliche plot twists together. I agree with Retro, it was not impressive.

I need to replay #2. I played it too soon after #1, so it just paled in comparison.

Generic Dreadhead

Deleted User wrote: »

I need to replay #2. I played it too soon after #1, so it just paled in comparison.

The reason I liked 2 was it was just the right amount of "More of the same but slightly different" for me to get my sequel jollies off

They didn't mess with the formula too much.

That whole sthick with Infinite only being able to hold 2 guns overall and every gun having a Blue and Red version that both upgraded separately and the fact only 3 vigors were of any actual use just really made me dislike the gameplay and it's flow

OhHiMark

Damn, I was hoping they'd update Infinite. I tried to replay it recently but came to a point where it crashes to desktop every time.

ERG89

I wish they released the Infinite they talked about when it was revealed seems development went to hell in it.
I might pick this up eventually when it's on sale. Never played the DLC or BioShock 2.
Bar Mass Effect & Red Dead there isn't anything much left to "remake".

Icaras

I liked #2 too, the different fight tactics made sure it wasnt more of the same, my big complaint was you never felt like a fully powered big daddy.

Speaking of #2 - when you listen to the Splicer quotes by themselves, they add a whole new level to the game. You start to realize that these are just normal people that have been corrupted.

Pigskin, especially, is heartbreaking.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8JZVycs2jgM

recyclops

i love the whole series and lore that levine build between infinite and 1, the kindle book was a nice little addition before infinite came out and the DLC for infinite was excellent.

agreed with most on 2 being more of the same which necessarily isn't a bad thing but it just didn't add anything to the story above to have it reach the levels of the other two. That being said Minerva den was a a spectacular DLC and one of the most enjoyable ive ever bought

Kindle book? Are you referring to BioShock: Rapture, or is there another one?

recyclops

Deleted User wrote: »

Kindle book? Are you referring to BioShock: Rapture, or is there another one?

no it was this one, its a short story no more than a half hour read but sets the scene for the game told as interviews with daisy. I bought it before the game was released so i enjoyed it, no idea how it would hold up after playing the game, im sure there is a pdf online of it somewhere below is a link if ya wanna pay the 2 euro

https://www.amazon.com/BioShock-Infinite-Revolt-Joe-Fielder-ebook/dp/B00B2SO7NU#navbar


For what its worth, i really enjoyed Bioshock: Rapture as a book as well and from looking online there is a further 3 books since i read rapture so i will pick them up.

The whole idea of rapture as a setting for books, games, tv or movies is one i think could be used alot better

Retr0gamer

I prefer the writing in Bioshock 2. Ken Levine has a thing for creating apocalyptic worlds and making every character in them irredeemable bad or selfish (which also isn't very realistic). The characters in Bioshock 2 are a lot more human and believable.

The problem with Bioshock 2 is that it's just too long. It can be exhausting to play. However on replaying Bioshock 1 I got the same feeling of exhaustion from it as well. Perhaps the newness of it at the time cancelled that out.

K.O.Kiki

ERG89 wrote: »

I wish they released the Infinite they talked about when it was revealed seems development went to hell in it.
I might pick this up eventually when it's on sale. Never played the DLC or BioShock 2.
Bar Mass Effect & Red Dead there isn't anything much left to "remake".

Bioshock trilogy is in the Steam summer sale for a tenner.

The Smircher

I return to Boards after almost 8 years to find people talking about Bioshock. It's like I've never been away
Loved Bioshock and Bioshock 2. Thought Minerva's Den DLC was outstanding.

Mixed feelings about Bioshock Infinite. Some of it I liked, some of it wasn't so great. I did enjoy the DLC for it.

muppetkiller

I think I have spare copies of this for the PC is anyone wants a key. Came in a bundle some time ago.

muppetkiller

I mean the first two games that is...

TheZPPanda

muppetkiller wrote: »

I mean the first two games that is...

I would be interested if they're still going please?

Beefy78

Only just heard about this release. I played the three games for the first time about 18 months ago and really enjoyed the first two (the second one just as much as the first weirdly). Infinite I could take or leave, tbh. I've got them both on PS3 and PC so I'm glad to hear I'll get the PC update for free.

I get the backlash re remastered editions of things but this is one I'm interested in. Give me this, Arkham and Red Dead and then I'll be be done.

TrustedApple

Can't wait to pick this up myself now 3 fantastic games in one bundle you just can't go wrong.

I still remander getting bioshock 1 when it 1st came out on the 360 back in 07 and just played it for the week going Omg this is just epic.

Bioshock 2 I got it for the ps3 when it came out in 10 I remander games stop done a mess up with there trade in deals where you could trade any game in for it and pay 5 euros so I bought a copy of fifa 08 for 5 euros ha ha. But game wise it was a very underrated game and I do not get the hate for it.

Bioshock in fantastic all round remember getting it the Friday and it was done on the Sunday when I was post to be doing college work.... Just way to much fun to play.

Played all 3 games at different stages of my life and remind me of the fun and bad times at them times and when I be replaying them that's what I will be thinking about .

TerrorFirmer

A re-master of the first game will be something special, the introduction to the game and it's world is an experience that has rarely, if even, been done better before. For a game almost ten years old now it's held up very well.

I agree that Bioshock 2 was also a brilliant game, obviously not as knock-your-socks-off as the original but basically did an excellent job of innovating while sticking with the 'if it's not broken, don't try and fix it' mantra.

Infinite I didn't overly enjoy. It wouldn't be fair to call it a bad game but it simply did not grip me at all like the previous games and I felt it meandered and tried to be too clever far too often. Burial at Sea was excellent DLC though.

Doodleking

The only new thing in this collection is a documentary, that's all. I don't think it's worth paying $60 for something I already have

TrustedApple

Doodleking wrote: »

The only new thing in this collection is a documentary, that's all. I don't think it's worth paying $60 for something I already have

Only a silly Billy be paying 60 euros for it.

Seen must present orders at 33 pound so about 40 euros posted bargain if you tell me.

Nathan G

I think you can pick up each game individually for cheaper. especially on steam sales. within saying that, if they fix the countless bugs in the first game it would probably be worth it

This is out Friday

One of the most memorable setting I can remember in gaming for me personally.

Love how they have added the clips with Ken Levine into the game as collectables in the game

Really excited to play Survivor difficulty

Just to expand on this;

There has been nine trailers for the commentary which has been placed as collectibles in the game

Here's the first one but you can see all nine on the 2K YouTube channel.

I'm going to keep this thread going myself :P

Not many talk about Bioshocks amazing soundtrack.

Introduced me to this gem

BlitzKrieg

Infinite I think got somewhat better with the DLC (also applies to bioshock 2)

but it was a victim of its own storytelling in terms of gameplay. Infinite is designed that for almost the entire game you are on the run because thats what the narrative demands and its gunplay directly reflects this, all the changes made between the prior bioshocks and infinite reflect a gameplay designed for a character who is the focus of an all out assault.

Bioshock and bioshock 2 though is territorial, you arrive after the big event and are essentially crawling through the remains and everyone you run into is much more territorial, (Big Daddies being the most blatant example) but you are not what everyone is after so the combat is designed to be much more open to let you approach in different manners.

And these two designs are purely dictated by the story. Bioshock is disaster aftermath, Infinite you are the disaster. You can see this also later in infinite when the narrative shifts away from the status quo the gameplay shifts with it.

TrustedApple

I am still very on the wall of buying this. I have it pre ordered on Amazon i think for 28 pound so about 34 euros.

But i am not sure do i really wont to re play the 3 bio shock games from the start again ?. Yes there fantastic games but i am not sure at all about them as i have so much to play at the moment and i like at bioshock and go meh been there done that.

Other then the new paint job is there anything else that has been added to the games ?.

TrustedApple

TrustedApple wrote: »

I am still very on the wall of buying this. I have it pre ordered on Amazon i think for 28 pound so about 34 euros.

But i am not sure do i really wont to re play the 3 bio shock games from the start again ?. Yes there fantastic games but i am not sure at all about them as i have so much to play at the moment and i like at bioshock and go meh been there done that.

Other then the new paint job is there anything else that has been added to the games ?.

I don't like the industry practice of "Remasters" etc
But the industry has a tendency to live on past glory at the moment.
Doom was the only memorable game released this year IMO

However these games hold a special place in my heart. I can count with one hand the types of games that had such an effect on me, and this is one of them.

What has me exited is that the FPS associated with in-game animations has been increased not just the overall FPS and resolution as well as some texture rework which in turn effects the game-play in a positive way from what I have watched so far. Survivor mode is supposed to be a real test also.
And that's just the Original game.

The collection is actually well priced at 40 - 50 Euros retail for anyone who happened to miss out. The amount of content when you lay it out on the table is staggering.

For new content there is feature length commentary placed into the original game (about 10 - 15 in total featuring Ken Levine and the team). Nothing added game-play wise which hasn't already been released. See trailer above.

super_furry

One of those that I'll pick up in a half-price sale in a few months I reckon. Only seems like yesterday that Infinite came out.

Retr0gamer

I'm more interested in hearing how the original lives up. It still looks amazing but when I went back to it a few years ago it didn't grab me at all and I got bored of it fast.

Retr0gamer

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I'm more interested in hearing how the original lives up. It still looks amazing but when I went back to it a few years ago it didn't grab me at all and I got bored of it fast.

Bit of broad comment but it all depends how invested you are in the game setting IMO

Some critic certain aspects of the game-play but I actually love it. It' a perfect blend of an FPS with RPG elements

Infinite pissed me off in that regard because it stripped out alot of what I loved about the original

It deserves to be played on the hardest difficulty with vita chambers off to really appreciate this however

Retr0gamer

Well I had played System shock 2 in the interim and Bioshock is a very dumbed down version of that game. SS2 might have spoiled me, it's the much better game. But still I don't think the combat held up when I played it and it was the least interesting aspect of the game. As for RPG elements, there wasn't enough there to keep me interested as opposed to SS2 which has dodgy combat but excellent RPG mechanics.

Also got pretty sick of playing pipemania when hacking.

I got the same feeling from Bioshock 2 as well.

I don't think the combat is good enough to sustain the length of both games, both are very long by modern standards. I say this because I adored Minerva's Den and the shorter length meant it didn't outstay its welcome like Bioshock 1 and 2. As for Infinite, the focus on combat that is even worse than the original 2 games makes it just a poor game in my eyes.

That comparison is that of what is essentially a stat driven game. This is making you feel like it's a dumbed down version of SS2
Bioshock is not that nor do is set out to be a stat driven game
If you watch the documentary released in 2007 the dev team of Irrational clearly state this. An FPS with RPG elements

super_furry

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I'm more interested in hearing how the original lives up. It still looks amazing but when I went back to it a few years ago it didn't grab me at all and I got bored of it fast.

Even at the time I thought it was a weak shooter. The fundamentals of it being an FPS were behind what other games were doing at the time, it was just that the story and setting elevated it and held your interest.

super_furry

super_furry wrote: »

Even at the time I thought it was a weak shooter. The fundamentals of it being an FPS were behind what other games were doing at the time, it was just that the story and setting elevated it and held your interest.

I don't agree

Powers in one hand and customzied weapons in the other were not something other FPS games were doing at the same time

Retr0gamer

M!Ck^ wrote: »

That comparison is that of what is essentially a stat driven game. This is making you feel like it's a dumbed down version of SS2
Bioshock is not that nor do is set out to be a stat driven game
If you watch the documentary released in 2007 the dev team of Irrational clearly state this. An FPS with RPG elements

System Shock might have had stats but it was hardly a stat driven game, it was a systems driven game. The RPG elements came from how you could approach the game in a variety of manners. You had the choice between hacking, psychic powers and guns. It allowed you to min max in one area or focus on a different set of skills. That's what added the role playing, you were building the role of your character as you played and owning it.

Bioshock in comparison is a straight up shooter with some looting elements. There's a few RPG elements, items and upgrades that give slight stat boosts, but you always have access to all the powers and aren't making difficult choices in regards to forgoing abilities. No matter how you play you are approaching the game in the same way. The upgrades make very little difference.

M!Ck^ wrote: »

I don't agree

Powers in one hand and customzied weapons in the other were not something other FPS games were doing at the same time

Dual powers like how bioshock did them were in PC games for years at that point. Clive Barker's Undying is an early example. Bioshock did add a bit more nuance though in the interplay between powers and guns.

Retr0gamer

Retr0gamer wrote: »

System Shock might have had stats but it was hardly a stat driven game, it was a systems driven game. The RPG elements came from how you could approach the game in a variety of manners. You had the choice between hacking, psychic powers and guns. It allowed you to min max in one area or focus on a different set of skills. That's what added the role playing, you were building the role of your character as you played and owning it.

Bioshock in comparison is a straight up shooter with some looting elements. There's a few RPG elements, items and upgrades that give slight stat boosts, but you always have access to all the powers and aren't making difficult choices in regards to forgoing abilities. No matter how you play you are approaching the game in the same way. The upgrades make very little difference.




Dual powers like how bioshock did them were in PC games for years at that point. Clive Barker's Undying is an early example. Bioshock did add a bit more nuance though in the interplay between powers and guns.

I disagree. And SS2 is a game that I love. However, yes it was most certainly a stat driven game.

Bioshock has more variation than you may think, it was up to the player to decide this however. Putting your Adam into different type of plasmids allowed for the player to decide what way he wanted to approach a given situation.
It wasn't supposed to be a game where you want to play as a marine so you invest heavily in this stat. Or you want to be hacker so you primarily invest in that stat.

But again that's not the point of this Bioshock nor did they ever elude to it being this type of game.
The comparison is an apple to an orange.

Comparisons to both games can me muddled anyway as Levine took inspiration for the story elements and collectibles like driving the story using collectible radios, However the game did not set out to be a direct squeal to the game-play of SS2.
They wanted it to be a story driven FPS with elements of RPG, and they call this out in multiple interviews prior to it's release.

Would be nice to see other examples of games that did allowed for both gunplay and powers. Clive Barkers Undying was released in 2001. I can't think of any other in the time period that Bioschock was released. I was addressing super-furrys comment but I don't see any facts to back it up.

super_furry

M!Ck^ wrote: »

I don't agree

Powers in one hand and customzied weapons in the other were not something other FPS games were doing at the same time

It was just window dressing though, sure you could shoot bees at someone or electrocute them if they stood in a puddle of water but your main weapons were guns and they didn't feel good. For me the core shooting was poor, it felt floaty and imprecise and lacked a punch with splicers soaking up bullets. It was well behind the shooting mechanics of other FPS games of that era.

Retr0gamer

Well you can say System Shock 2 was more stat driven and that you can play Bioshock is multiple different ways. All I know is that I found the System Shock 2 systems hugely satisfying and really aided replayability while I found Bioshock rather mundane where the choices you made made very little difference in how you played the game. Putting stats into different plasmids might make them a little stronger but not enough to make much of a difference and you always had access to that power, whereas locking yourself out of a power in favour of another was a legitimate choice the player had to make in SS2, and for me a more compelling on since every stat increase had consequences, consequences that Bioshock removed. Hell, even choosing to save the little sisters wasn't a hinderance since you go the Adam you missed out on back as presents from the little sisters. Without those RPG system hooks all that was left was the rather mundane combat. And while the combat was arguably better than System Shock 2, the fact it actually let you role play made it a far more compelling experience for me.

As for other games with dual wielding different weapons, Halo 2 and Wheel of Time are two others that come to mind. It really wasn't anything new and kind of built on what Halo did with the dichotomy between energy and ballistic weapons.

super_furry

super_furry wrote: »

It was just window dressing though, sure you could shoot bees at someone or electrocute them if they stood in a puddle of water but your main weapons were guns and they didn't feel good. For me the core shooting was poor, it felt floaty and imprecise and lacked a punch with splicers soaking up bullets. It was well behind the shooting mechanics of other FPS games of that era.

Not sure where we go with this one but I thoroughly enjoyed all the weapons and variation in each type. Especially when upgrading them. Nothing more satisfying than getting a splicer to hit a tornado trap then launching a homing rocket at him.
It was up to you to combine that creativity. If you chose to use the weapons on there own then this was maybe where you lost out.
And in response to weapon feedback...different ammo types allowed for variation in impact.
Take the Shotgun for example. Upgraded with Flame rounds was very satisfying.

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Well you can say System Shock 2 was more stat driven and that you can play Bioshock is multiple different ways. All I know is that I found the System Shock 2 systems hugely satisfying and really aided replayability while I found Bioshock rather mundane where the choices you made made very little difference in how you played the game. Putting stats into different plasmids might make them a little stronger but not enough to make much of a difference and you always had access to that power, whereas locking yourself out of a power in favour of another was a legitimate choice the player had to make in SS2, and for me a more compelling on since every stat increase had consequences, consequences that Bioshock removed. Hell, even choosing to save the little sisters wasn't a hinderance since you go the Adam you missed out on back as presents from the little sisters. Without those RPG system hooks all that was left was the rather mundane combat. And while the combat was arguably better than System Shock 2, the fact it actually let you role play made it a far more compelling experience for me.

As for other games with dual wielding different weapons, Halo 2 and Wheel of Time are two others that come to mind. It really wasn't anything new and kind of built on what Halo did with the dichotomy between energy and ballistic weapons.

But you didn't always have access to those powers. Unless you unlocked 6 plasmid slots. This was further towards the end of the game when you had enough adam which opened up the combat even more. Sure you could switch them out put that was only at the plasmid stations.
Did I hold on to telekenisis but get rid of electro bolt?
I could use chairs as weapons with prox mines stuck to them or I can grab loot from a distance or up high in areas previously in-accessible but at a cost because I couldn't access a secret room without electro-bolting the lock or electrocute splicers in water.

Dual wielding weapons and dual wielding weapons & powers are not the same