BioShock: A Defence

By Kieron Gillen Published 6 December, 2007

Would you kindly quit your whining?

A backlash was inevitable.

BioShock is amongst the most critically acclaimed games of the year. In terms of Metacritic average, its only peers are Super Mario Galaxy and Halo 3. You'll note, bar minor sniping, their status hasn't been questioned anywhere near as much as the adventures of a man with a wrench in Rapture's. This, also, is inevitable. They're known qualities. Everyone, to a lesser or greater degree, has made up their minds already. If you can't choke down the saccharine standard Mario world or aren't convinced that Halo's combat mechanics are anywhere near as elegant as its devotees make them out, you're highly unlikely to play them. There's much to hate in both games, but their fans simply don't care and those who aren't fans will never throw away forty quid for something that isn't to their taste.

In other words, a BioShock backlash was inevitable as it's new. People bought it on the strength of the reviews (and the hype - always, the hype) and then, when this random selection of gamers played it and compared their response to the ejaculate-smeared reviews, a larger proportion went "I don't think so" and pointed at the flaws.

But a game having flaws doesn't mean the emperor has no clothes, and the prevalent forum attitude to BioShock has wandered so far away from its merits to require a stern riposte. That I haven't done so yet saddens me a little.

You see, I was surprised to find BioShock's not my favourite game of the year. I'm also aware that perhaps the intensity of discourse around the game had something to do with it. When I think of BioShock, I have to wipe away pages of forum nit-picking and genuinely bitter pub-based rows before I can even start thinking about, at its best, how clever and elegant it is and how on its own grounds it makes everything else released in this incredible year for videogames distinctly second-rate. For most of this year, I've been too tired to actually do this.

But when the response to a patch with free new content is just a shrug and a bunch of whining over free stuff, I can't help but think we - as a community - need a good slapping and a reminder that we should be a little bit grateful. I'll start with more mechanistic stuff and head increasingly into the art, so if you want the fanciest ponce-words, get skipping. And, clearly, HEAVY SPOILERS FOLLOW.

A BioShock backlash was inevitable. As was a backlash to the backlash. So it goes.

"DUMBED DOWN SYSTEM SHOCK."

Yeah.

Okay.

'BioShock: A Defence' Screenshot 1

This is a difficult one, because I'm pretty much incapable of reading a paragraph with it in without immediately, out of hand, rejecting the person saying as having anything worthwhile to say. It's a buzzphrase that's just shorthand for "I haven't actually thought about this at all". But actually trying to engage with it... people who throw the "dumbing down" complaints seem to have two genuine issues.

1) It's easier to play.
2) A load of interesting options have been removed so it's a much simpler game.

The first one's true. BioShock is both a more accessible and easier game than System Shock 2. But "easier" doesn't have anything to with it being "dumber", and hating "more accessible" is just petty elitism from people who'd actually like videogames to be a ghetto consisting of them - especially when some of the things to make the game more accessible can be turned off. As long as point two's not true, then the former really doesn't matter.

And the second's not true. Mechanistically, you can do just about everything you can in System Shock. What was removed was either irrelevant, actual flaws or replaced with alternative methods to allow similar expression. For example, pre-patch PC fans were angry there was no option to walk on the PC. But - y'know - walking is about allowing you to move quietly. You can move quietly through the crouch, signifying creeping. In terms of the tactics allowed by your player, you can do the same. It's annoying when the Xbox has it, but it doesn't remove options. There's no leaning around corners but - really - if you're looking around a corner you're visible, and functionally a tiny strafe and back does the same thing.

(I'll concede losing the cover of a corner is regrettable, however.)

'BioShock: A Defence' Screenshot 2

But that said, some of the elements which have been critiqued by the purists are actually more complicated than Shock 2. The hacking isn't BioShock's strongest point... but in Shock 2 it was literally pressing buttons with no relation to player skill whatsoever. The photo-based research is, mechanistically, more interesting than Shock 2's system of just finding the right chemical and dragging it to the right bit of the User Interface. Hell - stuff like the invention and the weapon upgrade system has no parallel in System Shock 2. The formalised role-playing statistics are removed, but a system where you can create a build for your character allows you to vary the character in meaningful ways. There's also the added bonus of increased verisimilitude due to things like weapons degradation and the requirement for a player to have a certain level of a skill before they can use certain weapons being cut. These are elements of Shock 2 which, frankly, most people thought were a bit rubbish.

It's a different, quicker paced, easier game, sure... but in terms of allowable player expression, it's not in any way a dumber shock.

"IT'S JUST SYSTEM SHOCK 2.5."

This, funnily enough, is a much better argument. The plot is similar. The structure is similar. What you actually do is virtually identical - you move around, you look at logs, you explore, you try and collect bits and pieces, you follow orders of some mysterious voice in you head.

It even shares the primary fault of System Shock 2 - despite some merits I'll argue later, the final third is less compelling than it should be. Once you leave the Von Braun in Shock 2, the game loses a lot of its sense of place, and leaving you in levels far more linear than anything BioShock throws at you that late in the game. Except the escort mission, obv.

So, yeah, it's a lot like System Shock 2.

Fair enough. Shock 2 was one of the greatest games of its period. If only all games were crippled with that problem.

"YOU CAN WRENCH, DIE, RESPAWN, REPEAT THROUGH THE GAME."

In other words, it's too easy. They've got a point.

That said, the actual quoted argument doesn't really. On the surface, sure, but on closer examination it falls apart. Sure, if you abuse the Vita Chambers in such a way, eventually you'll complete the game. But why the hell would anyone want to do that? It's like noting you can hit Level 60 in World of Warcraft by just farming the lowest-level creature that gives you XP at any point. No risk to yourself, and you'll get there. Of course, it'll take bloody forever, in the same way our wrench/die/respawner does. The alternate in a relatively freely structured level game like BioShock - quicksaves - still means that any challenge in pretty much every game will be eventually overcome through growing player knowledge of the situation. In fact, in a normal play-through, the Vita Chambers mostly work fine. I'd have preferred them a little less common to make them more of a encouragement to stay alive, but...

The actual punishment is you losing the resources you spent in the engagement before dying. And it's here the game actually gets too easy. Or rather, can get too easy. I was going to start this piece with a line that this is this year's Oblivion - i.e. a relatively thoughtful game that was hailed by critics (and gamers, frankly) on release but a backlash grew... especially when they realised how its balancing was so easy to knock out of whack.

That's the problem with BioShock, to a lesser degree. It only sunk in when I was chatting to Dave McCarthy about it. He didn't really like BioShock and claimed he played through with just the pistol. Which made me blink - because I was constantly scavenging for ammo, working out what I should be using, being forced into unusual tactics due to a temporary shortage and planning routes to go and manufacture the right rounds, right to the final levels. And, frankly, Dave isn't that much better a gamer than I. I thrashed him at Naked War, though he's better at SingStar and has a very impressive Brain Training 20-sums time.

Talking further revealed the difference in play-through. It was the research. He'd researched everything as much as he could, pretty much as soon as he'd got the camera. I'd barely touched the thing, only doing a little when I first met a new monster and a little more if one of the baddies was proving too resilient (the Leadheads, primarily). Since most research gives a damage boost, he needed less ammo to kill people, which fed back into him using less ammo, so filled his ammo reservoirs and he could stick with his handy pistol. Meanwhile, I was enjoying myself scavenging and thinking because I had to. Dave's surfeit of resources presumably only made the Vita Chamber deaths - and the loss of resources before going back - even more negligible.

Of course, this is a fault in BioShock. But it's not a fault which you will necessarily hit, and it's a fault that's far more easy to avoid than the equivalent unbalancing in Oblivion. Just don't go crazy with the camera.

(And while we're at it, remember if you do research cameras to max you don't need to hack them anymore, if you want to sidestep the whole hacking game.)

'BioShock: A Defence' Screenshot 3

"IT'S TOO REPETITIVE."

This is a handful of associated points. It's partially a side effect of the research issue, partially the result of a psychological quirk of many gamers and partially a fact there's not that many distinctive bad people.

The first part's simple: When you find a tactic that works, many people stick with it. If they've got too many resources, there's not necessarily a need to experiment so they stick with it. And the game, logically enough, becomes really bloody repetitive.

The second part's a little more complicated: I think some designers believe that players like to do interesting things in-game. BioShock is based around that - in that you're given a wide toolset, with lots of weapons and approaches and ways to improve your character and an environment to beat the baddies up with. Go have fun, says BioShock. But players aren't all - in fact, I suspect most aren't - wired to have fun in a world just because the tools are neat. They need to be pushed into doing neat things. Even if you haven't an excess of ammunition, there's simpler methods to taking people out rather than the more amusing ones. So they do them, and the game's repetitive.

This reminds me of Invisible War's air vents. Invisible War actually had a really rich set of possibilities of things you could do to get around problems. Problem was, there was mostly also a handy air vent. Rather than playing with the other things they could do, most players would just go down the vents, then complain they were spending all their time in vents. Because most players would rather be efficient than have fun. This is just the way many of us are wired, it seems.

The third part is entirely fair. Which BioShock's baddies have a lot of personality, and Splicers - even when they act the same - tend to be individualised considerably. But in terms of what they get up to, there's not that many sorts to deal with. Shame. My personal wish for the patch would have be the two other in progress-big daddy's put in.

'BioShock: A Defence' Screenshot 4

"THE FINAL THIRD GOES DOWNHILL."

While critics can't seem to agree where BioShock is at its best - they seem divided between the opening section and the middle third, depending on their inclinations - pretty much everyone seems to think it never recovers from the perfect f***-you moment. You've had the limitations of your existence exposed - and then, with this knowledge, you continue much the same as before, in less inspired levels. There's some truth to this. While it doesn't quite regain the intensity it previously managed, it does include some of the game's best-conceived sections (The Little Sister's indoctrination centre in the last level proper is on par with Fort Frolic, in terms of note-perfect conceptualisation). And - fundamentally - what it shows is absolutely essential to the narrative arc of BioShock.

The game's basically divided into three, broad sections. The first third is the introduction to the world of Rapture. Here, you're lobbed into this world gone mad at the bottom of the sea, progressing through an example of how the three pillars of the society have decayed. You'll have noticed Science, Industry and Art being the three inscriptions as you enter the bathosphere for the first time - which neatly ties into the medical lab, the fisheries and the debased stage-show of Fort Frolic. This is the world. This is how it is. The middle third, broadly speaking, is about your character. Who you are, what you're doing and - eventually - how you're being controlled. You're a slave, a meat-puppet murderer guided by a nihilistic force. Clearly, this grates. You want to get out of that.

The final third, primarily, is about how this is as true for everyone else in Rapture as you, one way or another. You move from the personal nature of control to how a society has been manipulated. The training of the Little Sisters - best personified by the Pavlovian electric shock machine that rewards you for rejecting the silhouette of a woman in favour of the hulking Big Daddy shape - is obvious enough, but how Fontaine manipulated society into revolt in his favour is key. Your first sight in Fisheries is a man strung up and torn apart, with the grim sign "Smuggler" to warn off anyone trying something similar. Looking at the discarded suitcase reveals what the contraband was - Crucifixes and bibles. People killed for trying to express faith? What manner of monster is Ryan? Except that's reversed in the final third. Fontaine's charities were everything that Ryan feared and loathed, using the cover of altruism to gain a power base and willing servants. After the final third, the nature of Rapture is made perfectly clear - Ken Levine's point of unquestioningly following any pre-set belief system being not the smartest thing in the world is made precisely.

'BioShock: A Defence' Screenshot 5

It also picks up on the Meta level. You being programmed to kill on order is a critique of every linear shooter the world has ever seen. The final third widens it to everyone else - if you're stuck in a videogame, so is everyone else and... well, that's a really horrible thing. Even the (inevitable, in retrospect, but I was laughing at myself when I didn't see it coming) Protect The Little Sisters Escort sequence, if you've been following the fiction, has a resonance. Of course the girls are going to stop by each corpse. They can't help themselves, and your awareness of how they're trapped makes you falling into the role of protector make a lot of sense - you're fighting, on both levels, to end this videogame. Hell, you could expand that to the final uninspired boss sequence - this is what we're trying to get away from.

Even that has merits which are being glossed over in the "it's just crap" response. There's the incredible visual reference - Atlas becoming Atlas from the cover of the most famous edition of Ayn Rand's novel - and the final image of the nihilist disappearing beneath a wave of syringe-wielding little girls is incredibly right. Even at its lowest ebb, BioShock has something worth talking about.

The truest critique of BioShock is that while it openly ridicules FPS conventions, it never finds a way from it. I'd say, so what? The argument needed to be posed, and BioShock is the first-person gamer working through its awkward adolescence. Hell, that it capitulates to the genre while seething at it probably might even make it some kind of gaming equivalent to Adaptation...

"THE CHOICE DOESN'T REALLY MATTER."

The game was built up as posing challenging moral decisions and showing the consequences. Now, Levine's backed off on some stuff - he's said that the multiple endings wasn't his idea, and they weren't too pleased with how they turned out... but that's irrelevant to what the game actually does. What does the resultant game say?

Some have noted the game's incredibly judgmental - that the ends are you being the Best Dad In The World or some guy who's going to go nuke-crazy.

Hmm. Let's put it in a sentence:

Is it acceptable to kill defenceless girls to stay alive, just because someone tells you do?

BioShock says no. The answer's just "No". It's not something with grey areas - if you do so, you're someone who prioritises your own existence over someone else's or an easily lead dupe. There's no moral excuse. You're an ethical monster, and are made of the same stuff of Fontaine. Or, alternatively, you're someone who treats it just as a videogame. You're not thinking about it at all, just the lovely Adam. In which case, yes, BioShock - a game that's furious that it's a videogame - doesn't think much of you either.

This isn't a problem with BioShock. This is the absolute message. Perversely, for all its claims of edginess, it's the most old-fashioned decent videogame of the year. Where others have teased the idea of good and evil options, pandering to your tastes, BioShock just glares at you. You killed some kids? What Kind Of Person Are You?

"PLOT HOLE X."

For this, file anything that's similar to "Why don't the baddies use the Vita Chambers?" In other words, things which are explained in the game which you didn't play - or think about - deeply enough to discover. Which is fine - it's a game that works on a visceral level - but in doing the equivalent of speed-reading a decent novel, assuming they've missed something isn't a terribly fair thing to do. And BioShock - in a more elegant way than Assassin's Creed - does nest most of its mechanics in its fiction.

'BioShock: A Defence' Screenshot 6

(And, no, I'm not saying that everything in the game ties off neatly. Just that more does than it's being credited with.)

Now, this kind of segues into the whole "BioShock isn't as smart as it thinks it is" argument. Having followed the threads, my position is pretty much the reverse. BioShock is a damn sight smarter than most of the people who don't think it's smart.

A completely unfair example: Games industry bible Edge were one of the few organs to not quite join in the review celebrations. One of their points was regarding the clunkiness of parts of the fiction. For example, if Ryan hated America so much, why did he make the currency "Dollars"? Which, as far as criticisms go, is a bit like wondering why Zelda doesn't include any obvious influences of the Indian subcontinent when its currency is the Rupee. Of course, Ryan's problem isn't with America per se - but New Deal democrats with their horrible back-door socialism. He's all for the laissez faire capitalism which characterised a slightly earlier era of the US - which the dollar embodies too. Generally speaking The Dollar is the absolute icon of modern capitalism - of course Ryan was going to use it. This requires a knowledge of politics and social movements in the first half of the twentieth century which the reviewer - and this is a reviewer for the most highly thought of games mag in the world - simply didn't either have or apply. It just thought it was smarter than the game.

I was recently reading an interview with Harlan Ellison in a recent issue of splendid sci-fi magazine Death Ray. He was relating an anecdote about speaking in front of a room of intelligent, educated students. One of them asks a question - it's about a word she doesn't know he used in a metaphor. Eventually, after some back and forth, they manage to work out what it is.

It's "Dachau". When pressed, it seems that about half the students in the room don't know either.

BioShock is a game that knows what "Dachau" is. This is not a thing to damn a game for.

"IT'S JUST MEDIOCRE WITH NOTHING TO REDEEM ITSELF."

I suspect I've managed to alienate everyone, even the people who clicked the link thinking that BioShock was the game of the year. But - y'know - I had to (And Tom offered me cold hard cash). I'm not convinced that hitting criticisms straight on is the way to defend BioShock. At best, you sound just as anal as the people you're arguing against. At the worst, you end up, as I did above, just calling some people ignorant. But sometimes people's positions are ignorant, and when you are, you've got no recourse but to say so.

'BioShock: A Defence' Screenshot 7

I suspect the smarter way would be to just ignore the nitpicking and hit the big thrilling chords.

Because BioShock gives back for everything you're willing to put back into it. On every level. It only was really hammered home when I watched a friend playing - I talked them into having a crack on the demo, despite primarily being into Nintendo stuff. And they cheerily arrive in Rapture and walk along, not glancing left or right or down at those banners or... anything. It felt a little like I'd just tossed someone The Wire on DVD, and they were watching it with in x32 fast-forward or something.

With BioShock, the more you look, the more you see. The more you see, the more you have to think about. The more you think about, the more you understand the bloody thing. It's created, by far, the most novel setting for a mainstream videogame this year. Most importantly, while its narrative is of enormous importance to it, it never once betrays the medium. It doesn't - say - present Rapture in cut-scenes. It puts you in a room and puts things in a room and, by induction, you come to understand the place. This is what's most novel about games in relation to narrative - i.e. setting as narrative - and BioShock does it as well as anything ever has.

People who are - say - against BioShock and in favour of Super Mario Galaxy (For the record, I love both), argue Mario is a purer game. It's not true. Mario, by dumping you in cut-scene after cut-scene you have to click tediously through, features an element which is a complete sidestepping of what games can and perhaps should be. I'd accept someone making an argument that Mario's a better game - but a "purer" one stinks of some kind of misplaced fascism. BioShock is nothing but game.

BioShock believes in videogames and what videogames can be, and - if you go along with it - it'll take you to places we've never really been before.

Also: it's the only game which had a soundtrack and ambiance so splendid we started planning a BioShock party where we could all dress up fancy and dance to Under The Sea until midnight, at which point it morphs into a ZOMBIE PARTY.

That's enough. I'm going now. Bye.

"WHAT TENNENBAUM IS UP TO NEVER REALLY BECOMES CLEAR, DOES IT?"

Okay. Got me on this one.

Picture of Kieron.

About Kieron Gillen

Kieron is one of the founders of the lovely Rock, Paper, Shotgun and nowadays writes comics for Marvel starring characters that even his mum has heard of.

Read more articles from Kieron by visiting the Kieron Gillen archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (324) Latest comment 1 year ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • phAge #1 4 years ago

    Ooh - teh bitterness!

    RAWR! :)

  • TheDudesRug #2 4 years ago

    I havent read the article as it doesnt interest me, I just wanted to post a benign comment.

  • Dizzy #3 4 years ago

    No worries... The emo kids just like to hate the good games. It makes them feel special.

  • Lukus #4 4 years ago

    Oh dear.

  • hula hoops #5 4 years ago

    what with EG and SMG? I clearly can't see anything special from that game at all.

  • gregdrapes #6 4 years ago

    I think my main problem with this game is that I cant get it to work on Vista64. Spent £40 on a game where the sound doesn't work!!!!

  • Lukus #7 4 years ago

    This re-review is incredibly smug. I can't face reading past page two.

  • Charroux #8 4 years ago

    Blimey, that was... defensive.

    Well, I think we know what the Eurogamer staffers' GOTY is, then ;)

  • silentbob #9 4 years ago

    Dear lord. What a lot of piffle. :)

  • pjmaybe #10 4 years ago

    What he said.

    The only people who are digging into Bioshock are people who couldn't bond with the storyline and wanted a straight-line FPS. Hell, the biggest moan they have is probably that it didn't have multiplayer deathmatch. That alone marked it out as more important than most of the FPS games of this year.

    Peej

  • Royal Fool #11 4 years ago

    "A backlash was inevitable."

    Hmm, really? I never noticed.

  • welshben23 #12 4 years ago

    Apart from Peej, the rest of you are proving the reviewer right and are completely missing the point as usual.

  • miiiguel #13 4 years ago

    With all the merits of a good text, which this is, I don't really understand the reason for it to exist.
    These kinda detractors always spawn, in a crave for atention "look at me! look, I don't like the critically accalimed game! look, am I not the cool huh?".
    They stick to a punch-line - like Halo 2.5 (it's getting old though, everything nowdays is X.5) - and scream, oh how they are damn noisy...!

  • n3rdh8r #14 4 years ago

    Seriously, this game requires no defence.

    This is just feeding to the haters.

  • Physically_Insane #15 4 years ago

    Bioshock is a 8/10 game max. Stop trying to save face EG. I think EG gave it 10/10 because there was no good games all summer, and this was the first hyped game to be released in a while.

  • Rev.StuartCampbell #16 4 years ago

    "Cutscene after cutscene"? Are you playing an entirely different version of Super Mario Galaxy to mine?

  • Uncle_Fishboy #17 4 years ago

    Blimey. You lot REALLY need to pull your heads out of your arses. And that includes you Eurogamer. Get a life.

  • penhalion #18 4 years ago

    Gotta agree this is a stupidly smug re-review and what's more the reviewer seems to think he understands the game more than the gamers who complained about it's flaws.

    BioShock is inferior to System Shock because it does indeed dumb down a lot of the puzzles, interactions and story. What you are seeing here Mr reviewer is that gamers no longer care about a game that consists almost solely of flash graphical effects. They want consistency and story. The last third of the game is rediculous.

    As for your moral high ground about killing little sisters. They go around extracting adam from corpses and have bodyguards that quite happily kill people in fromt of them. Innocent kids they are not! Genetically manufactured collection units is what they are. They are constructed in much the same way as the hero himself. The fact that they look like kids shouldn't give them leave to be monsters!

    Hopefully there will be a bioshock 2 and a lot of the complaints will be addressed.

  • welshben23 #19 4 years ago

    Quote "BioShock is nothing more than Manhunt using a 3D engine that everyone is supposed to believe moves gaming forward in some way"

    That's the biggest load of tosh I've seen written in my life as an internet user. Manhunt and Bioshock are like fire and ice. Totally different games.

  • Katsumoto #20 4 years ago

    You know KG is a freelancer, right? He isn't trying to "save face" for his team.

    +1 to welshben.

  • systems #21 4 years ago

    The art direction and audio on Bioshock are fantastic. Those opening scenes are one of my favourite gaming moments. I can't think of many better games off the top of my head (Baldur's 2?). But it's not a "classic game". I played through it once, completed it, will never play it again.

    Yes, it was nice to get a free content pack, but all of those features should have been in the game from the off. The tonics were already in but disabled (as seen from the Windows config files), the widescreen fix was to stop everything being so zoomed in, the difficulty option should have been there already (personally I think the vita chambers should have cost loads of cash and not been free). I don't think I should be thankful for them patching what I paid them for and they cut out because it wasn't ready.

    I don't know how anyone can need to scavenge for ammo. I had so much ammo I was having to leave it on the ground in front of the invent stations.

    If we're going to talk scores it was certainly a solid 8/10.

  • mkreku #22 4 years ago

    Holy crap, Kieron Gillen really needs to replay System Shock 2 if he thinks Bioshock is anywhere NEAR the aforementioned game in complexity. And NO it's not because of "flaws". Geez, that's the most uninformed opinion I've read this year I think!

    Sure guns broke too quickly. But by having degrading guns, the game forced players to think ahead, to save good weapons for tougher enemies, to utilize whatever was at hand to win in combat. Bioshock removed all that. They even removed all difficulty by not punishing death!! Great progress there.

    You began System Shock 2 by choosing one of three different characters to play. Then you went through a sort of school to fine-tune that character. The choice you made had an impact on the game you played. Bioshock removed all that, removed all skillpoints, removed all consequences.. and replaced it with plasmids (basically just another weapon) and "tonics". A cheap replacement as everything in the game was available for the player and changeable, no matter what you did.

    And YES, it is f-ing repetitive (Bioshock that is)! FIVE enemy types that come in pre-determined waves, move the same way, die the same way. You died? Resurrect and go at it again!! NO COST!! Like Pipe Dreams-mini game? GOOD! BECAUSE YOU'LL SEE IT 452465243 TIMES. Unless you cop out and just buy your way through. No problem since the game hands you cash like it was candy.

    I will end the rant here, but for f-s sake, THINK before you write an article like this again.

    You, Kieron Gillon, should replay System Shock 2 (if you even played it before. I suspect you've just READ about it..) and fess up to having been caught in the hype. We all were. The problem is that the game itself insists we were wrong.

  • n3rdh8r #23 4 years ago

    Wait, it's written by Kieron Gillen?!

    This is his worst piece ever..

  • MasterNameless #24 4 years ago

    Most of the people posting comments here are so stupid it actually makes me angry. With all this hatred I lose a little more faith in humanity day by day, which I get a lot from other mediums anyway, but when it's concerns one of my favourite pastimes, it's a little depressing.

    Grow up children, or would you kindly fuck off.

  • miiiguel #25 4 years ago

    Don't like it don't eat it, or eat less... dude. Complex narratives are clearly not for you whiners.
    Go read Harry Potter. Go watch Fanstatic 4. Go listen U2.

    mkreku: so what you really wanted was to play SS again. Grab a copy from the attic or something, old-dude.

    In a nut-shell, I dare to quote haters:
    "We hate the game, because you like it... a lot! The more you like it the more we scream! SYSTEM SHOCK, or something old and annoying"
    Edited by 2 at 06/12/07 @ 11:58

  • PearOfAnguish #26 4 years ago

    "or story (F.E.A.R. told a far more unique tale)"

    Er, what? Bioshock can be criticised for a lot of reasons, but the story isn't one of them. And what is so unique about F.E.A.R?

  • Freek #27 4 years ago

    Now do one for Assassins Creed, no wait, do one about gaming in general.
    The whining about tiny little things is getting a bitt out of hand.

  • mkreku #28 4 years ago

    miiiguel: I don't expect an Xbot like you to try to understand that a game can be more complex than Bioshock. Go play Halo, noob.

  • Killerbee #29 4 years ago

    I confess I haven't read the whole article for fear of spoilers, and that, obviously, is because I haven't finished the game yet.

    But from what I have played (and I'm yet to form my own opinions on the latter third pf the game, okay?), Bioshock is undoubtedly one of the finer games released this year. Rapture is beautifully designed and wonderfully atmospheric. The Plasmid abilities are a tad predictable (ice, fire, electricity etc) but then you get something like telekenesis which is perhaps no less predictable since we first played with a gravity gun, but still seems to work wonderfully as a gameplay mechanic.

    The story (so far) is great and whilst the gameplay might well be typical FPS fare, for me it's actually refreshing to find a FPS game that's focussed on the single player experience and doesn't waste 50% or more of its time offering up yet another deathmatch-based multiplayer effort that I'll never bother to play more than once.

    So whilst my own personal juror may be undecided right now about whether this is a 10/10 game, it certainly doesn't deserve the kind of backlash it's had from some quarters.

    So in that sense, I'm in favour of this response from Kieron. Give me a game like Bioshock over something like Halo any day.

  • Lukus #30 4 years ago

    "Complex narratives"? - Perhaps if you're a fucking chimp.

  • Katsumoto #31 4 years ago

    You, Kieron Gillon, should replay System Shock 2 (if you even played it before. I suspect you've just READ about it..)
    Kieron Gillen not only played SS2, he did the original PCGamer review of it back in 1999.

    I think he knows what he's talking about in this respect.
    Edited by 1 at 06/12/07 @ 12:01

  • Phattso #32 4 years ago

    An interesting article which, despite being a little too one-sided and waffly, I quite enjoyed reading. :)

    But I'd take issue with the dismissal out of hand of the elements that System Shock 2 still has to offer Bioshock. I'm still convinced that a more rigid 'class' system that limited avenues of research would have done wonders for the replay value, for example.

    Bioshock is a wonderful game, with an atmosphere second to none, but robbed of the surprises of the first play through it is diminished to a significant degree on repeat plays. For me, at least.

  • dudefella #33 4 years ago

    I think Bioshock is pretty grand. I sort of forgot how good it is because I hadn't touched it since I finished it a week after it came out, but I downloaded the new DLC and started again on Hard, and I'm in love with Rapture all over again. None of the criticisms matter to me, Rapture is amazing.

  • beep #34 4 years ago

    I look forward to the more of these "defence of games Eurogamer staff like" articles in the future.

  • GamesProgrammer Verified Games Team Programmer, Eutechnyx Ltd. #35 4 years ago

    I personally loved bioshock even tho it is rather buggy, but this article is completely unnessesary and just smells a bit of fanboyism or being paid to defend it in some kind of attempt to boost xmas sales.

    Just get over it even the best game in the world not everyone is going to like it, im sure its fairly easy to find a mob of people that hate Orange Box and Super Mario Galaxy but no ones going to expect an article defending the game. Its not like it needed defending cos it sold shit it sold millions.

    If you want to defend something thats good do it on something that was a flop sales wise and deserves to be brought back to peoples attention so that it might increase sales and thus get more quality titles like it in the future.

  • morriss #36 4 years ago

    I love and still love Bioshock. (on my second playthrough, going for the BALLS OF STEEL! Ach.)

    I really can't fathom how the game doesn't completely immerse the user as it does me, although we're all different I suppose. Even small things like Arcadia Merlot make me smile.

    I'd re-read your article Keiron if I were you as they're type-o's a-plenty but otherwise well written. It's very difficult defending something you feel passionate about. You should try reading through a few halo 3 threads and read my 5 pages worth of apologies in there!

  • miiiguel #37 4 years ago

    Lukus, I bet you didn't even get the main character name, nor who is his mother, or everything else. Even the ppl who aren't into this kinda games admit the story is rich and interresting.

  • Lukus #38 4 years ago

    Haha! Bet away Miiiguel. Yes, better than the typical videogame fare, for which it should be applauded, but hardly complex in a wider context or reference point.
    Edited by 1 at 06/12/07 @ 12:06

  • morriss #39 4 years ago

    Oh and as for Bioshock's status - I'd say they've raised the bar. The world you're immersed is like no other I have experienced before. Not just in design, but in execution.

    Put it this way, I'm 10 hours or so into Mario Galaxy, then the new DLC comes for Bioshock, I replay on hard and I haven't look back since. Mario can wait. People need me.

  • Inquisitor #40 4 years ago

    I agree with the sentiment, but there are some badly worded points.

    The little sisters for example, you've been told by your only friend in the world that they are nothing but mindless monsters and you've seen their protector smash someones face in.

    You also know that without the Adam they contain you will probably die. If anything mindlessly saving them is as much a video game attitude as harvesting, you're not fully taking into account the situation you're in. Besides, you've just smashed through splicer after splicer without regard once you come to harvesting the little sister, you're already a monster.

  • morriss #41 4 years ago

    The little sister's don't attack you like Splicers do.

  • Katsumoto #42 4 years ago

    I can't believe people are getting genuinely angry because someone liked a game that they didn't and felt like writing an article, defending some of the criticisms levelled at it. Argh! EG comments thread in more-embarassing-than-usual shock.

  • Der_tolle_Emil #43 4 years ago

    Great and interesting article. I haven't played Bioshock yet - didn't like the demo enough to buy it despite having loads of unplayed games at home anyway. This article surely has raised my interest again though.

    The only thing I would like to point out is that Super Mario Galaxy is definetly not tossing you from one cutscene to another. There is the intro and the story (which you don't even have to watch at all) and nothing else. As well written as the article is it's exactly such false statements which serve no purpose other than to prove an entirely different point which make me question wether to believe anything at written at all. It's the exactly the same low level like all the statements about Bioshock that get discussed in this article.

  • gaijin #44 4 years ago

    "Thought the point of journalism was to remain unbiased! "

    best comment evaaah.

  • morriss #45 4 years ago

    Comment and opinion are always biased. How on earth could they not be?

  • welshben23 #46 4 years ago

    Killerbee said "Give me a game like Bioshock over something like Halo any day"

    I'd watch out there mate, you're going to get some rabid fanboys coming to your house after saying something so TRUE as that. :)

  • morriss #47 4 years ago

    I'd like more games like Bioshock and Halo 3, tbh.

  • septimus #48 4 years ago

    Very enjoyable game. You'll just never play it again, it has zero reason to do so. The alternate endings aren't really worth going back through again for, just YouTube the ones you didn't see.

  • miiiguel #49 4 years ago

    "Thought the point of journalism was to remain unbiased! "

    No it's not, you have opinion articles. Which this one is.
    And I, although don't feel like an art piece like Bioshock needs this kind of thing, do like it.

    Maybe you're mistaking with your sports newspaper? you know, a football match is a footbal match, can't opinate much (not without Mourinho at least).
    Edited by 2 at 06/12/07 @ 12:17

  • Keza #50 4 years ago

    "Thought the point of journalism was to remain unbiased! "

    Well that's bullshit. The point of REPORTING is to remain unbiased. How is a professional critic to give an opinion without any personal feeling? This is an argument that's come up in every comments thread I've ever been in, and it stems from a base misunderstanding of the role of the critic and the role of the journalist.

    The danger here is in confusing the writer's opinions with The Site. It shouldn't be seen as The Site defending itself. It should be seen as one writer's opinion piece.

  • Byzanite #51 4 years ago

    Its a game? Jesus, after reading all this drivel I thought it would be something more substantial/valuable.

  • morriss #52 4 years ago

    Games are substantial and valuable to me.

  • bdc #53 4 years ago

    Physically_Insane, just about every other reviewer gave the game max scores, nobody is trying to 'save face'. It's a good game worthy of the accolades it got, simple as. If you disagree then all the more power to you, I'd like to hear about more interesting fps's than this one.

  • Inquisitor #54 4 years ago

    Perhaps it would have been better to ignore the criticisms and try and articulate exactly what it is about the game you love?

    I'm not really sure what the purpose of the article is as it stands, it managed to annoy even me slightly and bioshock is one of my favourite games.

    Focusing on what people have said and dismissing their comments just makes you seem a little arrogant and unwilling to understand criticism of the game.

  • TwistidChimp #55 4 years ago

    Great article. I very much feel Keiron's pain at watching a mate play the demo. There's nothing as frustrating as watching someone run through experiences like that, not listening to, noticing or really experiencing anything in the environment, only to loose interest and say "its boring".

    /hulk smash

  • the_tellurian #56 4 years ago

    All points in the article are fair and well points.
    Still, BS incorporates gameplay mechanics that make it just frustrating and no-fun to play for me. Most of all the horrid respawn rate and trigger points for spawning enemies. That's my biggest critisism of the game. All things are there to make it a truly horrifying experience, yet I'm constantly annoyed - yes, annoyed - by respawned enemies which just kill the feeling of being lost and alone in a creepy place.
    Really, the one reaction I've had most often while playing BS was "Sigh. Not again." when yet another random goon walked in.
    Given that might just be a matter of taste. I really don't like the combat of BS, which combined with the constant respawn rate pretty much wrecks the game for me.
    Aside from that I like it. I want to love it, but I just can't. It's like dating a supermodel that has the nasty habit of randomly spitting in your face. :(

  • pyrat6 #57 4 years ago

    This is great. When a review gets overly criticized on here - the poster is reminded that it is the reviewers *opinion*. Now we have a critique of the criticism. Followed by comments crit ... oh I give up.

    EG - if you don't like hearing other people's points of view - then shut down the comments & forums areas. Easy ! Otherwise take it on the chin.

    "would you kindly quit your whining". the old standby - if someone disagrees with you, then characterize it as 'whining'.

    I love the game - and agree with most of the points, but describing Mario as "cut-scene after cut-scene" is bollocks, and "if you go along with it - it'll take you to places we've never really been before." is hyperbole .

  • Vin #58 4 years ago

    It's a fabulous game.

    Again, internet chimps don't deserve it.

  • Salaman #59 4 years ago

    Wow.. that's an odd article.
    It's like a long one sided forum argument.

    I think the writer mentioned towards the end that facing criticism head on isn't the best way to deal with it. I think I'll have to agree.

    It doesn't make for a good read & it makes me feel like I unwittingly stepped in between two arguing spouses and am now stuck in the middle with arguments which have nothing to do with me and don't interest me flying around me.

  • gelf #60 4 years ago

    "Go have fun, says BioShock. But players aren't all - in fact, I suspect most aren't - wired to have fun in a world just because the tools are neat. They need to be pushed into doing neat things. Even if you haven't an excess of ammunition, there's simpler methods to taking people out rather than the more amusing ones. So they do them, and the game's repetitive."

    This reminds me of the some of the commentary from the Half Life episodes noting how playtesting showed how often when given the choice players will stick with the safe option they where used to so they had to add little (or in some cases big) nudges to the player to show them what's possible. If too many players find themselves going down a boring route then that's bad game design surely. I don't know how much this applys to Bioshock though, I've only played the demo.
    Edited by 1 at 06/12/07 @ 12:26

  • tomb85 #61 4 years ago

    I don't understand why being incredibly vocal about problems you find with a game is considered ok and in many cases a right, yet to be equally vocal about the positives you found within it is considered flawed journalism?

    Everyone who dislikes bioshock and is annoyed by this article now knows exactly how annoying it is for those of us who love the game to keep hearing the same arguments trotted out over and over again as to why we're wrong.

  • afghan_jones #62 4 years ago

    Well, to be honest, I did have some issues, some of which were in the article, some that werent.

    1. Hacking - fun the first few times but after the 50th or 150th go its just a mindlessly inane excercise.

    2. Little sisters - Not really a 'Choice'. If you go through the game killing them all, then why do they and tenebaum help you out? doesnt make any sense. The game should have had a more noticable level of 'rewards' for killing them, but then made other big daddys more likely to attack you on sight.

    3. Underwater. For fucks sake, if its going to be underwater then make that more of a factor. Some levels stomping around the seabed in the big daddy suit wouldnt have gone amiss and would have been a much better boss battle.

    4. Combat. Yes theres a lot of options but half the time they are an irrelevancy as you just dont need to use anything fancy and theres no discernable advantage to doing so.

    5. Once you know that Atlas can control you with his embedded voice controls, WHY DONT YOU JUST THROW THE FUCKING RADIO AWAY!!?!?!?!?

  • dsmx #63 4 years ago

    Way to add more fuel to the fire eurogamer. Now I'll add more fuel.

    I think you can judge how good a game is if you can be bothered to finish it a second time from start to finish, since you know the story your playing it for the gameplay and bioshock really does lack in that area. I just couldn't be bothered to finish it a second time to get the other ending.

  • Tonka #64 4 years ago

    Great idea!
    Now do one about RE4 Wii

  • Guv #65 4 years ago

    *shrug*

    I love the game, it's not something you play over and over again but that first play through it really grabs you... if you let it that is. It seems like most people aren't acctually playing games to enjoy themselves, but to find faults these days...

    Think it did help that I stayed the hell away from any forum threads while playing though, spoilers and stuff can really ruin this type of game.

  • miiiguel #66 4 years ago

    I quote Vin.

    Now back to work.


    Later.

  • cocorulverde #67 4 years ago

    "faëlnor: what's the point of the whole article ? "

    This: "Because BioShock gives back for everything you're willing to put back into it. On every level."

  • gaijin #68 4 years ago

    could the point have been made in a less contentious way? Probably. But comment-provoking editorial has been a circulation-raising tool since the heyday of the times letters page, and until the measure of internet success becomes quality of debate (yuh right) rather than number of page views it ain't going to go away.

  • QPRHOOPS81 #69 4 years ago

    i actually want to buy this on PC but the DRM has completly put me off. Its really annoying as i really want it.

  • rogermellie #70 4 years ago

    Nearly everyone disagrees with the 10/10 games so there's no need to defend the score.

    I loved playing Bioshock, System Shock 1 & 2.

  • derblaue #71 4 years ago

    I think a lot of people are actually missing the point of this article; they seem to think that what this article is about is "if you dislike this game, then you are stupid". It's actually okay to dislike the game, or rate it a 5/10.
    To me, the point that is being made is that when you do not think too highly of this game, for the love of please, come up with arguments that actually make sense.

    So far the defence for this article.

    Now, I don't really understand *why* such an article was needed on EG. Aren't all these "flaws" just the usual oh-look-at-my-extreme-view-on-this-game slash any gripe I have I will multiply by over 9000 and act like it's the worst thing evah forum posting by people who desperately need to say something? Are these forumites really worth spending time, energy and cold hard cash over?

    I say: whatever. Clearly these people cannot appreciate a good and above all entertaining game, even if it didn't live up to the hype (what game does...?). Does this really warrant a 3-page article on EG? I thought it was a fun read, but perhaps it was more suitable for a blog.

    Carry on...

  • MBar #72 4 years ago

    The simple fact this article exists says more to me than the actual content of it.

    Apparently I thought this game was entirely over-rated because I didn't play it the way the developers wanted me to.

    And this is my fault?

  • Stoatboy #73 4 years ago

    "The little sisters for example, you've been told by your only friend in the world that they are nothing but mindless monsters and you've seen their protector smash someones face in. "

    Yeah, but then you see the first one trying desperately to scramble away from you in terror, and you KNOW she's just a little girl. If I was trying to get someone to kill a little girl I'd probably say she was a mindless monster too.

    I liked this article, and would like to see more for other games. The only problem is that the people it's addressing are the ones who are least likely to accept any of the arguments. Ho-hum.

    This one struck a chord with me though. When I first played Bioshock I thought it would be my game of the year. I absolutely loved it. Then loads of other good games came out, and I kinda felt differently about it. Compiling my top ten games of the year was tricky - there have been so many good ones, and I actually considered not putting Bioshock in for a while.

    But thinking back to that first play through - only Portal beats it for overall experience. Sure, it's got flaws, but if you play the thing to experience it rather than just to beat it, it's a fantastic game. It's also the only FPS this year I've played through twice. Whilst I loved Halo 3 and CoD4 I've only replayed bits of them, but Bioshock got 2 full plays. And the DLC may prompt a third.

  • SimonM7 #74 4 years ago

    Just so you know, a forum post doesn't become more relevant just because it's an article.

    What we have here is simply a fan of the game making excuses for its shortcomings, and there's no more weight to this than to the subsequent posts in the comment sections.

    The 10/10 in retrospect was way too extreme, but ultimately people forgive that and chalk it up to a temporary burst of relentless passion which they may or may not have felt themselves. This way however, with an long article filled with "my opinion is better than all of yours' because I write for a games site!", it just gives a bad aftertaste.

    Boo! indeed.

  • ange| #75 4 years ago

    Great article. Unfortunate that it was always going to be attacked the very people it discusses (the "how many weapons has it got", score obsessed masses that feel the need to tell the world they abandoned it after 2 hours and returned it).

    Poor Bioshock, you were too subtle for the average modern gamer. They're too busy angrily complaining about it, having rushed through it and not enjoyed it.

    Oh and wheres my credit for the EGM article donation? :p

  • Machiavel #76 4 years ago

    Great stuff - though you need another sweep for spelling (no doubt formed by passionately wrought tapping).

    Its biggest accolade for me is in the way my gamer friend, who loves nothing more than war fps's and scouring areas for ammo and kit, doesn't really like playing this game for long periods as it makes him feel uncomfortable, and question what he is doing. That theme is beautifully carried through the game, and there are loads of artistically tingling moments for me; like when you get momentarily frozen in the room full of ice statues.

    The only damn shame is that some memories of more tedious gameplay (mine level, I'm looking at you) keep bubbling to the surface.

  • Katsumoto #77 4 years ago

    Mbar- It's's not your fault, no - what the article is saying is that just because you didn't explore all the possibilities and get the most out of it doesn't make it a bad game, it makes it a bad gaming experience FOR YOU. important distinction.
    Edited by 1 at 06/12/07 @ 12:33

  • tomb85 #78 4 years ago

    Squarejawhero- that's a good point. I seem to remember them doing articles like this before but there was always another writer there to put forward the other side.

    I doubt the discussions page would looke much different to this either way though.

  • Talha #79 4 years ago

    First things first: I enjoyed BioShock and while it's not the best thing since bread came sliced, it is wonderful.

    That said, WHY, oh why, do you have to explain it to people? I was surprised to read this article. I think this year's whipping-boy, poster-child for unfair criticism, was Crysis not BioShock, who everybody seems to be gloating over.

    Underwhelming last third? Check. Disappointing boss battle? Check. But while BioShock gets defended in articles despite having these attributes, Crysis gets grilled for them.

  • Garulon #80 4 years ago

    "Very enjoyable game. You'll just never play it again, it has zero reason to do so. "

    I disagree, I'd play it again for the same reason that I'd read a great book again. Bioshock's the first truly literate game I've played, and this is an excellent article on so many levels.

    Let me turn it around thusly: What was Super Mario Galaxy trying to say?

  • Agent_Llama #81 4 years ago

    As over-zealous as Bioshock's 10/10 may have been, it's not as over-zealous as the one dished out to Halo 3.

  • gaijin #82 4 years ago

    yeah, crates disguised as bodies would just be *weird*

  • gaselite #83 4 years ago

    This is a wonderful piece. I must admit to living (joyously) in a bubble that keeps me seperate from the dickheads that thought Bioshock wasn't an especially good game. Reading some of the comments here takes me out of this bubble, and it's just depressing. I really resent the online gaming community at times. The best way to sum it up is simple, simple mines, and often overwhelmingly cynical and intolerant of anything that fails to live up to their often entirely unreasonable expectations.

    On this piece specifically, I had a bitch on another forum the other day re: the whole Gerstmann thing, whereby gamers were getting in a tizzy about a potential cash for comment scandal, but few show any concern for the actual quality of journalism that they're exposed to in the first place, which, on mainstream websites and magazines is typically incredibly formulaic and dull. I admit I'm probably not as widely read in the area of game journalism as I could or should be but this piece still has some wonderful things to say about bioshock, things that can only really be said in retrospect, and things that are worth saying. You just don't see stuff like this, both in terms of content or writing quality, on gamespot or ign etc. and Eurogamer is better for it, although I would like to see more. It also has some great tangential comments to make about the medium and the community (do people realise how petty it sounds when they complain about use of widescreen and mouse sensitivity? I can understand your complaints, but to boycott or think less a game on these grounds? For a sizeable chunk of the community to dismiss the hard work of a very talented group of people committed to the medium out of hand like this due to a couple of small technical oversights is just a depressing thought). Despite its colloquialisms, it's a great piece and I hope you're not discouraged by many of the halfwits posting here (and I doubt you are), that made you think it was necessary to launch into a defence of Bioshock in the first place (not that it ultimately wasn't welcome).

    So, thank you.

    The online gaming community, for all its talk about being a 'nerdy/geeky' subculture, isn't even half as smart or intelligent as they like to make out they are.
    Edited by 1 at 06/12/07 @ 12:45

  • DanWhitehead #84 4 years ago

    Fantastic article. *applauds*

  • gaselite #85 4 years ago

    Most of the EG comments section 'Jade Raymond is a bitch I hope she dies' 'god you used big words in a feature article you're such a snob' 'thought the point of journalism was to remain unbiased!' isn't really worth having a discourse with. I can't speak for the forums, but I'm just talking about what I've seen here over (a relatively short span of) time.
    Edited by 1 at 06/12/07 @ 12:48

  • NickJD #86 4 years ago

    Just go ahead and say Bioshock is your GOTY, you don't need to try and defend the game with this ass kissing article.

    I think it was over rated, I loved the first two thirds of the game, but even the developers said the last third didn't get the same attention to detail and it shows. The game becomes a fetch quest and runs out of ideas in the last few hours. The endings sucked as did the Doom style boss who was totally out of place in this game. There are to many plasmids that are useless and not worth upgrading, the mini game with the pipes becomes boring after the first hour. the splicers are not scary at all and there isn't enough different types of them. Changing between all the different guns and ammo is a pain in the ass, and lastlyy the game has no replay value at all.

    I still like the game but it's not the best game of the year by a long shot, COD4 is better and deserves GOTY.

  • Stoatboy #87 4 years ago

    I probably enjoyed playing Bioshock more the second time through. The first time was the better overall experience. The second time was more fun from a gameplay point of view. I knew what was coming so played accordingly. For example, knowing that I was going to be attacked when I collected the rose petals in Arcadia meant I could booby trap the place to high heaven. I barely fired a shot when it kicked off, I just sat back and watched the carnage. Great fun!

  • monty2k #88 4 years ago

    @Garulon

    Does mario need to say anything? You remind me of a friend who loves arthouse cinema. He dislikes blockbusters and tells me so everytime I watch one around him. He says that cinema should be involving and thought-provoking. I reply that I watch films to escape and relax. To leave my meagre existence behind for a few hours and watch massive metal Transformers duke it out whilst ogling Megan Fox. Games don't need don't need stories like Bioshocks, some games can be fun and good just through gameplay alone. The other two FPSs I have really enjoyed this year are Halo 3 and CoD4. CoD4 has a story with dodgy politics and slightly offensive Middle Eastern stereotypes ripped right out of Team America: World Police. Halo 3 has a generic sci-fi storyline which is admittedly much better than Halo 2.

    I really enjoyed playing through Bioshock but I have no desire to play through it again. Saying Bioshock has a great story compared to other games is like saying, to use an awfully bad taste analogy, it's the smartest kid with Down's syndrome. It's hardly a badge of honour.

  • Bonus #89 4 years ago

    Well done and well said.

    I might not agree with everything you said but I'll stand by anyone who's going to stick up for such a cracking game.

  • NickJD #90 4 years ago

    I would like to see Eurogamer try and defend their 10/10 review for Halo 3, or their 9/10 for Sega rally.

    No fucking way can they justify those over inflated scores.
    Edited by 1 at 06/12/07 @ 12:55

  • Rev.StuartCampbell #91 4 years ago

    "What was Super Mario Galaxy trying to say?"

    "WHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!"

  • gaselite #92 4 years ago

    "Well, rather than making blasé comments about the rest of your gaming brethren, why not try to discuss things in the forums?

    Hell, if we can actually have decent talks on Religion with the majority not trying the hack eachothers throats out, I'd say that's pretty good for a gaming site!"

    It's tempting, and I'm sure the EG forums are a fine place (I'm a regular at an absolute shocker, which I only stay at because it's Australian, like myself), but again, I'm just reacting to the kinds of highly simplistic and dismissive comments I read in comments threads like this (and all over the internet). It's just disheartening. I still stand by everything I said, whether that's misconstrued as arrogance or snobbishness or being on my high-horse or whatever. To me it's just an honest observation. Gamers react in funny ways to the products they consume in ways that you just really don't see in any other creative industry, and I'm just so tired of it.
    Edited by 1 at 06/12/07 @ 12:56

  • Eraser #93 4 years ago

    "(I'll concede losing the cover of a corner is regrettable, however.)"

    Not really, you see, Bioshock isn't about the surgical precision games like Quake 3 Arena or Unreal Tournament ask for. Leaning would be an utterly useless feature in Bioshock.

    "The actual punishment is you losing the resources you spent in the engagement before dying."

    Not really either, as any bullet fired or plasmid used to deal damage will still have done it's damage after your vita-chamber resurrection. It's not like Big Daddies regain their health if you die.
    Edited by 1 at 06/12/07 @ 13:28

  • edje #94 4 years ago

    Cognitive Dissonance FTW

  • Raz76 #95 4 years ago

    I agree completely with NickJD

    Also what the hell are you on about, concerning the little sisters?! You say that everyone who would kill little girls is a monster. But I didn't kill any little girls, I made a video game character do it, within the context of the world he inhabits. As Edge puts it "games can't give you moral choices, but they can give you a moral context for your in-game choices" (Edge by the way scored the game 8/10 and brought up a lot of the complaints you mention, so maybe you should send your article to them).

    And what the game had to say about that was: If you don't kill little girls, when given the choice, you grow old and happy and everyone loves you. But if you do kill little girls you become this crazy Hitler person. And if you somehow feel morally enlightened by that, then .... well, I don't know what to say..

  • afghan_jones #96 4 years ago

    I did like it to be honest but wouldnt ever consider another play through as the underlying mechanics arent that gripping.

    Strangely, I found myself utterly unsympathetic to the little sisters. Didnt kill them anyway but still. The only genuinely unsettling bit of the game for me was bashing Ryan's head in. Possibly becasue its the only bit where you relinquish control.

    Which in itself was odd because up until it did that, I was pondering all through his speech whether to kill him or not when the time came...



    also,

    WHY NOT JUST THROW THE FUCKING RADIO AWAY?!?!?!

    Dang, that annoyed me.


  • Gaol #97 4 years ago

    Not sure why anyone feels the need to defend a months old review, in any other year Bioshock might rightly have been GOTY material but Orange Box and CoD4 have blown the lift off.

  • BillyBrush #98 4 years ago

    'it makes everything else released in this incredible year for videogames distinctly second-rate'

    Good games do not make a difference to other titles quality. Change the chioce of wording to 'seem' perhaps

    And you missed IT NICKED THE PLOT TWIST OFF THE MOVIE OLD BOY

    and THE PLOT TWIST IS PERFORMED ALMOST COMEDICALLY BADLY, smack me with this golf club/oim an oirish man from ney york - seen better in a panto featuring C.Biggins

    It is probably better than it's given credit for, but that's because people shouted 10 from the rooftops for an 8 or 9 title, overhyping it, that creates backlash......some games get the good side of this such as Condemned which was probably undervalued, and some such as Mass Effect should bear the overhype issue even worse than this due to coming out unfinished

    It's a very high quality game, but good luck altering people's opinions of it, that's a tough ask...

  • Stonker #99 4 years ago

    It was dumbed down. Get the fuck over it.

  • BillyBrush #100 4 years ago

    'it makes everything else released in this incredible year for videogames distinctly second-rate'

    Actually since you've set one up to be knocked out of the park..

    Do you beleive Bioshock is better than Orange box?

    You absolutely can, as people are allowed differing opinions (breaking news). Myself I would say the Half life games are superior than Bioshock, and certainly not second rate

  • afghan_jones #101 4 years ago

    Thats the kicker though, giving it a 10, plus what was probably the most lyrically gushing review I have ever read on EG.

    Even a double Blowie off of Jenna Jameson and Tera Patrick smeared in jam on a bed of money would have difficulty living up to the frankly ludicrous hype Bioshock received.

    Hardly anyone actually believes it to be a shit game, but almost everyone can see its not the gaming nirvana it was said to be.

  • benster80 #102 4 years ago

    I think the problem is no matter how good a game is(and how good reviews it gets) some people are not going to like it. Hype is a problem, when a game gets hyped before release nowadays is it ever trully going to live up to that hype?

  • Katsumoto #103 4 years ago

    Can I just reiterate - this is not "Eurogamer" defending their 10/10 review. It is Kieron Gillen, a freelancer, addressing prevalent criticisms of a game and arguing why he does not share these popular sentiments.
    Edited by 1 at 06/12/07 @ 13:08

  • Kenshin001 #104 4 years ago

    Next week:

    Lair: A Defence.

  • Chris109 #105 4 years ago

    I thought Bioshock was brilliant, my only critism would be that it ended! compared to Halo3 which is now boring me to death it's a masterpiece.

  • Garulon #106 4 years ago

    "Does mario need to say anything? You remind me of a friend who loves arthouse cinema. He dislikes blockbusters "

    I love blockbusters, but yeah Mario says NOTHING. Mario is just brainless thumb candy. Nothing wrong with that, but BioShock is in a different class altogether.

  • [maven] #107 4 years ago

    Salaman: Well said.

  • BillyBrush #108 4 years ago

    BioShock believes in videogames and what videogames can be, and - if you go along with it - it'll take you to places we've never really been before.


    My lord...you do know you can say that about any videogame you like right, they all beleive in videogames and what videogames can be, as they are videogames, there is nothing existential or mythical about them, it's a lovely sentiment, probably best reserved for ICO and Half life 1 though

    Condemned believes in videogames and what videogames can be, and - if you go along with it - it'll take you to places we've never really been before.

    Shadow of Colossus believes in videogames and what videogames can be, and - if you go along with it - it'll take you to places we've never really been before.

    *Insert any game title here* believes in videogames and what videogames can be, and - if you go along with it - it'll take you to places we've never really been before.


    That has got to have been used many a time before by Keiron or some other new game journo...i just need to trawl teh interweb to find it

    Jeez i feel like a glass half empty moaner, but still..

  • afghan_jones #109 4 years ago

    "I thought Bioshock was brilliant, my only critism would be that it ended! compared to Halo3 which is now boring me to death it's a masterpiece. "

    Halo 3 is genius.

    But ultimately they are very different games. Bioshock has the edge in terms of atmosphers but Halo pisses all over it in terms of gameplay and replayability. (And for my money, good old fashioned fun. Remember fun?)

  • twelveways #110 4 years ago

    WHAT IS THIS EMO DEFENSIVE SHIT? Some people dont like the game, grow the fuck up.

    What a completely pointless article.

  • dryden555 #111 4 years ago

    Ouch -- this article really misses the mark and glosses over a heck of a lot. Bioshock's flaws are all in the gameplay. Flawed as a shooter and flawed as an RPG. The viti chambers located at every 20 feet were ridiculous and there was no way one couldnt use them. You spawned instantly in one of them so how can I not "exploit" that? ugh. It bears mentioning that the game deeply lacks replayability since you can re-plug you abilities with ZERO consequences at any time. The end level was pretty bad. "Nice atmosphere" does not constitute a game.

  • SlackMaster #112 4 years ago

    Did I miss something? Didn't know there was a backlash going on over BioShock. Personally it kept me gripped the whole way through. It was a bit grim in places but that just kept in with the story and nothing a little unplugging for a while wouldn't solve.

    A great game with just a few minor flaws (slowdown and texture pop up in some sections) and bugs (having an alert where your supposed to kill all the splicers to stop it but not all of them appear).

  • DDevil #113 4 years ago

    WHY DIDN'T HE THROW THE RADIO AWAY?

    I'll tell you why. Atlas said to him, right at the beginning "Would you kindly take that radio" (or words to that effect). He can't throw it away because of his programming.

  • drunkymonkey #114 4 years ago

    "Remember fun?"

    Yes, I have it when I'm playing games.

    If you don't get fun out of playing games, then I don't know why you're bothering, to be frank.

  • zedzee #115 4 years ago

    "ejaculate-smeared"

    That is so vulgar. Even for you, EG.

  • paulf #116 4 years ago

    how about it's just not much fun - to be fair the opening 10 mins is great but after that I found it a very cold experience, a bit souless.

    I think it might actually be more interesting to talk about Bioshock than it is to actually play it

    saying all that, its still a good game mind, it's just there are better games this year

  • Grayvern #117 4 years ago

    To twelveways its not emo defensive stuff, its a legitimate criticism of why some of the points made by detractors of the game arent valid.

  • marilena #118 4 years ago

    This might be KG's first article that I dislike. The idea is misguided and the implementation is also very flawed.

    If I give you reasons for why I dislike the game (and they are different reasons than the ones mentioned in the article), and you come up with arguments against these reasons, it doesn't change the fact that I didn't like the game. It just shows that I'm a simple person and don't have a good enough grasp of what really makes me dislike it.

    To me, Bioshock is just an example of an unsettling trend: these days, gaming critics are easier to please than ordinary gamers. For whatever reason that may be happening, it's stupid and it has to stop. I'm sick of reading about what a brilliant age-defining masterpiece an average game like Bioshock is.
    Edited by 1 at 06/12/07 @ 13:23

  • Chtulie #119 4 years ago

    re the article, not other comments:
    Aah, too bad your nintendo player wasn't a Metroid Prime player. That lot is used to spending some time just looking around whenever a new area is opened up to them.

  • ccfb #120 4 years ago

    So basically, people didn't like it because they didn't *get it*. Copy that.

  • BillyBrush #121 4 years ago

    In terms of Metacritic average, its only peers are Super Mario Galaxy and Halo 3

    I shink you'll find Orange Box sits atop the Metacritic Xbox 360 pile

    @Drunkmonkey

    I imagine most of the people having a dig still found it enormous fun, they just don't think it's the best game this year. Me for example, i think Orange box contains games that are better than this, but it don't mean i turned my nose up at it and did not henjoy

    It doesn't have to be black and white, phenomenal or shit, fun or not, it is all shades of grey and this game is greet but not the second coming, imo..

  • Waldo #122 4 years ago

    Emogamer.net

  • Katsumoto #123 4 years ago

    Another story hole? Okay. Ryan founded Rapture to escape the corporate blah blah and so on... then the currency within Rapture is the dollar. Oops. Tad inconsistent with our much-vaunted story aren't we?

    Nice to see you read the article.

    Direct quote: Games industry bible Edge were one of the few organs to not quite join in the review celebrations. One of their points was regarding the clunkiness of parts of the fiction. For example, if Ryan hated America so much, why did he make the currency "Dollars"? Which, as far as criticisms go, is a bit like wondering why Zelda doesn't include any obvious influences of the Indian subcontinent when its currency is the Rupee. Of course, Ryan's problem isn't with America per se - but New Deal democrats with their horrible back-door socialism. He's all for the laissez faire capitalism which characterised a slightly earlier era of the US - which the dollar embodies too. Generally speaking The Dollar is the absolute icon of modern capitalism - of course Ryan was going to use it.

    And AGAIN - to repeat myself - Can I just reiterate - this is not "Eurogamer" defending their 10/10 review. It is Kieron Gillen, a freelancer, addressing prevalent criticisms of a game and arguing why he does not share these popular sentiments.

    I don't think quoting Edge's Review invalidates EG's review, incidently.
    Edited by 2 at 06/12/07 @ 13:32

  • ByJingo #124 4 years ago

    Mario galaxy is fun. Bioshock isn't.

  • monkie_king #125 4 years ago

    .. and the page impressions keep racking up. Mission Accomplished.

  • itamae #126 4 years ago

    What a completely pointless article.


    Couldn't agree more. Someone earlier in this comments thread said this article is basically a one-side forum post and, well, that's exactly what it is.

  • Calgon #127 4 years ago

    The people arguing with the reviewers... pathetic "know it all" cry babies, nobody wants your opinions, pretending you somehow know better and preaching to others about what score it should have got because YOU think so is annoying as fuck... Im really getting sick of that sort of troll here at EG. Fair enough everyones entitled to their opinion, but when people dont agree with you accept it and move on damn it... YOU ARE IN THE MINORITY, you DONT know better than those who disagree 9 times out of 10.

  • dryden555 #128 4 years ago

    marilena says it best and better than I did

  • Goffee #129 4 years ago

    Not played BioShock yet. However as I've now been recommended (via the article - not the ranting) to play it in a particular way - rather than going through it as just another FPS adventure, do you think I will enjoy it more?

    I'll certainly be more cautious and explorative when playing it, but will I just end up bored? I hope not... we'll see

  • SlackMaster #130 4 years ago

    "WHAT TENNENBAUM IS UP TO NEVER REALLY BECOMES CLEAR, DOES IT?"

    Wasn't it just redemption? That as she was part of the creation of the little sisters with Dr Sushong (think his name is right) she felt responsible for their fate and therefore in the end wanted to save them to save herself.

  • afghan_jones #131 4 years ago

    The problem is the gameplay.

    Hacking is boring and repetitive. Fact. (Plus makes no sense when done halfway through a frantic battle)

    Trawling through every bloody box, crate, desk, corpse to find things is boring and repetitive. Fact.

    Upgrading your pistol to hold 24 bullets is irrelevant when enemies upgrade to take 24 rather than 6 bullets to kill.

    There is little reason to use any plasmids other than the electric one.

    There is none of the much hyped choice in the actual game bar the little sisters which makes no difference to the game bar the ending movie and some snippets of dialoge.

  • Calgon #132 4 years ago

    Mario isnt fun its for people who like to look at pretty colours, people who shit their pants at scary violent games with any grittyness or realness to them. ;)

    Overrated standard platformer with some interesting level design... only noobs and those whove devoted everything to Nintendo would even think of it challanging for game of the year. :D
    Edited by 1 at 06/12/07 @ 13:41

  • Sulaco #133 4 years ago

    "It only was really hammered home when I watched a friend playing - I talked them into having a crack on the demo, despite primarily being into Nintendo stuff. And they cheerily arrive in Rapture and walk along, not glancing left or right or down at those banners or... anything. It felt a little like I'd just tossed someone The Wire on DVD, and they were watching it with in x32 fast-forward or something."

    Wow I had that exact same experience with my brother he ran through the first level like it was unreal tournament. I had to stop him and say "for gods sake stop and take a look around you ..."

  • Calgon #134 4 years ago

    afghan_jones are you a person who will take the easy way through every game just to finnish it rather than being creative, having some fun and experimenting?? Even not playing the game Ive seen from the video reviews already that some of what you say is bollocks if you play it right.

  • ByJingo #135 4 years ago

    I mock your implication that Bioshock is either scary, gritty or real. Also I'm sorry but the story is rubbish and only noobs who are devoted to masterbation would even think its something special. Of course excessive onanism doesn't leave you much time to read a book so I can forgive your ignorance.

  • dickrickulous #136 4 years ago

    I love Bioshock. Thought it was brilliant, particularly the narrative, design and combat. If someone doesn't like it because it's not their type of game, because the story didn't connect with them or it seemed like a fancy looking FPS then fair enough, it's not their cup of tea and that's fine. If they want a game to be pure escapism (which I usually look for) and fun then mario and guitar hero type games are nearby on the shelves for them to grab.

    But I think, and the article points this out brilliantly, for people to dismiss the merits of one game or any game, for the multitude of petty reasons listed then they are pretty ignorant. If game design choices as minor as vita chambers and plasmid types ruin a game for you then how the hell do you play anything else? Very few games ever have perfectly balanced or informed gameplay and by extension everything else must be similarly tainted for you by such minor flaws. Almost all of my favourite games have little problems or decisions in it that I wish were different. Do I like them a little less and wish they were better? Sure. Do I moan about them to people on forums with no explanation and brainless 6/10 nonsense? Do I fuck.






  • Physically_Insane #137 4 years ago

    "The people arguing with the reviewers... pathetic "know it all" cry babies, nobody wants your opinions, pretending you somehow know better and preaching to others about what score it should have got because YOU think so is annoying as fuck... Im really getting sick of that sort of troll here at EG. Fair enough everyones entitled to their opinion, but when people dont agree with you accept it and move on damn it... YOU ARE IN THE MINORITY, you DONT know better than those who disagree 9 times out of 10."

    I'm sorry, I thought we were aloud to post our comments about the artical on the 'comments page'. It would be very boring if everyone on EG just had to agree with the review scores every single time.

  • Calgon #138 4 years ago

    ByJingo you seem to think about masturbation alot 2 instances in one short post... wanker ;)

    Btw I was taking the piss out of the average troll... those opinions in that post do not reflect my own, its the sort of shit that goes on at EG when people dont agree with each other.

  • CannonAnBall #139 4 years ago

    I've played Bioshock and I loved it and it's up there as one of the best games I've ever played. People may disagree but they are not going to change my mind because I don't care what people think.

    One thing is apparent is that when a game is reviewed you get a bunch that like it and a bunch that don't. This happens the majority of the time.

  • Calgon #140 4 years ago

    Physically_Insane see look at you getting on the defensive like its your right to bore us all with your opinions that we dont agree with... what have you got to say that hasnt already been said and disagreed with in most cases? exactly, I think the reviewer is saying... IT IS GOOD... so shut up! ...

    and I couldnt agree more.

  • marilena #141 4 years ago

    @Goffee

    Just my opinion, but I don't think it has the depth to be played as anything but an FPS. There's simply not much you can do: shooting stuff, hackings stuff, listening to audio logs and sometimes watching semi-cut-scenes being played out without any influence from you.

    Personally, I think that Chronicles of Riddick is a much better example of FPS that can be played like an RPG. It has actual character interaction and stuff, which the creators of Bioshock found themselves unable to do.

  • Lemming81 #142 4 years ago

    I got to Neptune's Bounty and got bored of killing splicers and avoiding turrets. That seems to be all you do. And you can't even backtrack with out a load more turning up.

    So sue me. I was really looking forward to this game, but I've been more engaged by S.T.A.L.K.E.R., and that's full of bugs.

    Yes its pretty, yes its got a great story, yes it has its charms.

    But its not that great, sorry. I was expecting a lot more. The whole thing with the Big Daddies and the Little Sisters and their symbiotic relationship was hyped to buggery by the actual development team, and the finished result was not nearly as grand as we were led to believe. You don't ever see this relationship taking place. You just stumble upon them together, one protects the other and you either avoid or fight. It's nothing we haven't seen in any other FPS, tbh.

  • Milbe #143 4 years ago

    I would like to see a "Two Worlds: An apology" article next time...

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #144 4 years ago

    To me, Bioshock is just an example of an unsettling trend: these days, gaming critics are easier to please than ordinary gamers

    Ah, but you are not ordinary gamers, you are the whining messageboard-posting hardcore.


    When i started playing Bioshock, I found myself agreeing with Eurogamer's review, but by the time I finished it, I found myself conceeding to more of the points that Edge brought up. Still, I found myself somewhere in between the two (so 9/10 from me!). This article is more like an appendix to the original review, spelling out more of what the original review was trying to say, but with greater spoilers.

    Somebody made a point earlier about the focus testing at Valve, and I think Bioshock could have done a lot more with that. Portal was almost universally loved, and almost everybody seems to have had the same full experience through it, whereas the immersion in Rapture seems to have passed many more people by. I think Bioshock has a better story than Valves new games (both Ep2 and Portal), but valve's ones were better told.


    Edited by 1 at 06/12/07 @ 13:58

  • kangarootoo #145 4 years ago

    I haven't read all of this thread, and I probably won't, as I expect it to be bobbins.

    Just wanted to comment that I too want to slap someone whenever they start talking about dumbing down.

    Its just a fanboy staple; another way of saying "if this game is as good on PC/console as it is on console/PC, I will feel insecure, because I'm an idiot, so I'll assume it won't be".

  • Physically_Insane #146 4 years ago

    @Calgon

    I think everyone would rather read peoples comments disagreeing with the review rather than you telling everyone to shut up and deal with it. That's more boring.
    Edited by 1 at 06/12/07 @ 13:56

  • =BlanK= #147 4 years ago

    Great article Kieron, I found it to be a very interesting read. Though my own experience of Bioshock differed from yours (naturally), I enjoyed the chance to gain a fuller understanding through reading about your own experience and conclusions.

    Thanks for sharing.

    A lot of the feedback however is disappointingly cynical and negative, though I guess this is not surprising. Fucking ignorance is what it comes down to and I hope Tom doesn't become to disillusioned as to not encourage more of this type of article in the future.

    If this was published say, as an entry Kieron's own blog I don't think you would see nearly as much hate. Some people are failing to distinguish here what this piece actually is. As others have pointed out it is NOT a defense of the EG review for Bioshock, nor is it a "re-review". He is simply expressing his personal feelings regarding the perceived backlash Bioshock has gotten and EG thought it would make for an interesting article.

    If anything is smug around here its some of these comments.

  • gaijin #148 4 years ago

    "People may disagree but they are not going to change my mind because I don't care what people think. "

    and this is why internet discussions are pointless.

  • Calgon #149 4 years ago

    Physically_Insane I think you couldnt be more wrong or I need to find another site if thats the case... all it is, is whining - childish, pathetic bahaviour over the score which is a number(the reasons are sometimes about the PC versus Console thing which is sad in this day and age)... I really dont care what score the whiners think it should have got I'll make my mind up when I play it(because I know my games) all I need to know is if its good and theres no way you could tell me it wasnt. What does whining acheive?

  • ByJingo #150 4 years ago

    I apologise, I've been a bit bitter about Bioshock since i got it. Anyways, I thought that the combat was about 5 years out of date. Discovering that walking backwards and shooting was pretty much it immediately gave me a bad impression of the rest of the game which may have lead to me being a bit overcritical of the rest of it.
    That said, I still can't see why anyone would think the narrative is anything other than a good videogame narrative. Which still amounts to a steaming pile of wank.

    Utopian underwater community with vending machines that sell vodka and bullets? Ok fine. Thousands of other game have been even more stupid. That doesn't make this game genius though.

  • Schiraman #151 4 years ago

    This article isn't really a defence of Bioshock, it's a defence of EG and the gaming press at large. And the reason you're printing it is that, deep down, you know that the press over-rated Bioshock and that's what's causing a backlash - but it's easier to try and prop-up the game and its inflated review scores than to admit that maybe the gaming press at large got overwhelmed by the hype and made a mistake.

    As for the specifics of the article, it really only serves to clearly demonstrate one thing: Bioshock is a game with plenty of flaws. You may, or may not, wish to overlook those flaws because overall you liked the story, or the setting, or whatever. However, it remains deeply flawed.

    Personally I thought it was a good game, it had some nice ideas, some cool levels and was mostly fairly fun. But it is seriously lacking in gameplay variety (hardly any monster types, no real reason to use the majority of the guns and powers, etc.) and the story is plothole-riddled nonsense. I'd give it 7/10, perhaps an 8 if it wasn't for the weak end section.

  • ange| #152 4 years ago

    This comments page is pretty much beyond repair now, in a few hours.

    Says a lot more about the game's detractors than the game itself.

  • Madder-Max #153 4 years ago

    I love seeing toys thrown out of prams and people having strops. its funny. the hacking btwe was ripped off from Theme park PS2 more or less.

    It really is desperation when the very audience that games are aimed at, are had a go at!!

    This isn't navel gazing, this is navel diving with a bit of gaming facism thrown in.
    Edited by 2 at 06/12/07 @ 14:08

  • absolutezero #154 4 years ago

    DanWhitehead
    06-Dec-07 12:47:42

    Fantastic article. *applauds*


    AH HA HA HA HA HA HAHA

  • marilena #155 4 years ago

    @Mentalist(air)

    I resent that. It's actually one of the reasons why I don't like the article - suddenly, because I don't like a game, I'm branded a whiner.

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #156 4 years ago

    the hacking btwe was ripped off from Theme park PS2 more or less.

    Bollocks, it's knocked off from pipe dream (or Pipemania), pure and simple:

    http://en .wikipedia.org/wiki/Pipe_Dream_...

    in fact the end of that article states:

    A similar version of Pipe Dream appears in BioShock as a mini-game used to hack into turrets, security cameras, vending machines, etc.
    Edited by 1 at 06/12/07 @ 14:08

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #157 4 years ago

    It's actually one of the reasons why I don't like the article - suddenly, because I don't like a game, I'm branded a whiner.

    Oh, we're all whiners, the article's author included.

    shite, now I've got Tina Turner singing in my head

    "Everyone's a whiner, baby, that's the truth"
    Edited by 1 at 06/12/07 @ 14:10

  • Orange #158 4 years ago

    I like Gillen's point about the Edge reviewer, which is also ties in nicely with the people who moaned on about the so called widescreen "issue". There is a latent superiority complex in the nerd mentality, when faced with something not fully understood there is an automatic default to a position of presuming to know better, and then subsequently deflecting or ignoring any rational argument to the contrary once this position has been assumed.

    As for Bioshock, it is an excellent game. The atmosphere and the storyline alone are worth playing it, the gameplay is also solid. It certainly deserves defending against people who claim it to be only "average" or below that. It is clearly a lot better than that.

  • Calgon #159 4 years ago

    Personally the only thing that really pisses me off is the shitting on others opinions... for example: someone mentions a particular game(a marmite game if you like) as their game of year and what happens? Is it good reading? or do you like find it drags on and on because people actually beleive there is only one way to look at things... their way, so they must preach it over and over untill they agree(like that will ever happen).
    Edited by 1 at 06/12/07 @ 14:12

  • Nallen #160 4 years ago

    So this comments thread is the backlash to the backlash about the backlash yeah?

    The message here for me at least is that Bioshock is what you make it, and as such I see little point arguing with people that want to make it boring for themselves.

    I would suggest the same people that see no merits to Bioshock think Call of Duty is game of the year, the same people that keep starting EVE Online trials because of all the cool stuff they read about happening and then quit because it's boring and nothing ever happens to them.

  • blicko #161 4 years ago

    >>You, Kieron Gillon, should replay System Shock 2 (if you even played it before. I suspect you've just READ about it..)

    >Kieron Gillen not only played SS2, he did the original PCGamer review of it back in 1999.

    Without any doubt, that's the most decisive retort I've read on this website. Kudos to you, Katsumoto.

  • tapper #162 4 years ago

    Things I've learned in this comment section today:

    If you don't love Bioshock and point out (to me very obvious) technical and gameplay flaws you're an elitist asshole that just want to go against the stream.

    Uhm, yeah. Ok.

  • Calgon #163 4 years ago

    I was a bit dissapointed in Chronicles of Riddick so I hope I dont find that to be the case, it just didnt seem that deep once youd gotten past the first hour but it was no doubt a good game if a little clunky at times. Still having said that I wasnt annoyed at the hype given by some of the fans nor did I think less of the reviewers. I didnt feel the need to join every discussion about it as a result.... go figure eh?

    I can see I wouldnt like a game like Mario Galaxy as much as some but Im more of the mind that - yeah go for it! enjoy your games, Im not about to shit on it out of bitterness or indifference. Theres something really wrong with that and I cant beleive theres so many people who cant see why.
    Edited by 3 at 06/12/07 @ 14:29

  • InsoFox #164 4 years ago

    Hmm, I agree with the comments about other people's whining kinda spoiling the game for me.

    I remember intensely enjoying it the first time around and having fun the second time through. However, I have to admit that I never left the game feeling SATISFIED.

    That was nothing to do with the length, or anything - Portal left me satisfied after 3 or 4 hours. It's just that for a game that had been so note perfect most of the way through, it kind of dribbled to a stop, instead of pulling all of its resources together into a worthy climax.

    I think the kick back to front screen with no credits sequence was the final disappointment for me. When I finish a game I've been really involved in, I -like- to sit back for a moment through the credits sequence and bask in what I've just done. It may be a holdover from films, but it works.

  • corzair #165 4 years ago

    I read up to the crass comment on page 1 then stopped
    EG needs some kinda code of conduct me thinks But i guess EG dont care

  • Stonker #166 4 years ago

    Calgon - Would you kindly insert Bioshock sideways up your arse.

  • mazk #167 4 years ago

    I agree with afghan. It's the gameplay not the art style, which is fantastic.

    KG is wrong, the game IS repetitve, and boring. Pretty visuals can only take you so far (eg. Assassins creed). To say I didn't utilise certain elements makes it my fault I found it boring? I dont think so. At the end of the day if the consumer doesn't enjoy your product you've failed as a game designer. If the consumer fails to try out all your nice features because you give them no reason or inclination to, you've failed as a game designer. Look at Half-Life or Zelda, where if I hadn't used certain features ( gravity gun/bow and arrow) progression becomes impossible, whereas in Rapture you can use a pistol all the way through.

  • Calgon #168 4 years ago

    Stonker kindly fuck off back under your bridge ;)

  • Fwing #169 4 years ago

    I enjoyed Bioshock greatly and, while it isn't perfect, I wish more games were as good.

    A stand-out game in a year of stand-out games. I'd have given it 9/10 (excellent but not life changing).

  • dryden555 #170 4 years ago

    I'm happy some folks liked Bioshock but after reading this article I still have no idea why they liked it as a _game_. It wasnt worth 60 USD.

  • JediMasterMalik #171 4 years ago

    I really enjoyed Bioshock, but I do think it had some glaring issues which many reviewers simply failed to mention. And the end boss was atrociously dull.

    I do however, think this article is bollocks and is trying to tell us what to think.

  • Calgon #172 4 years ago

    I do however, think this article is bollocks and is trying to tell us what to think.


    This is what the trolls try and do though, which is kind of why he wrote it and for those of us who havent played it yet... how can you not have noticed it, we've heard everything theyve had to say about its flaws 3 times over and they are still at it... we knew them in the first week of release.
    Edited by 1 at 06/12/07 @ 14:41

  • zimzu #173 4 years ago

    gillon you used to be one of my favourite reviewers back when i was reading PCGamer... there is no defending this game. it has its moments of brilliance (story, setting, style) but is ultimately flawed at the one thing it needs to be: a GAME! you can boil any game down to being repetetive if you are pedantic (and defensive) enough, but there is no denying the utter lack of effort put into the game mechanics. poor variety of enemy with overly simplistic attacks and the blank-eyed-disbelief-at-such-a-waste-of-ability vita chambers. if i wanted immortality i'd turn on a god mode! i want to feel challenged! if nothing more, the vita chambers dispel completely the fear and atmosphere of vulnerability that the game tried so hard to create.

    8/10 for the game; 5/10 for the re-review/fanboyism.

  • MakyoDetector #174 4 years ago

    For me it's all about the gameplay. Unfortunately, financial stakes are so high in big budget console games that game design isn't seemingly even attempted, for fear of failure. Probably strict production schedules and the complexity of coordinating the production also stifle innovation.

    I only tried the Bioshock demo. The art direction and especially sound design were impressive but gameplay seemed simple and repetitive.

    Ascribing emotions like bitterness and hatred to this game's detractors is like holding a mirror up to yourself.

  • Garulon #175 4 years ago

    "Again. "AN UNMITIGATED FAILURE." There's your key moral dilema in the entire game. "

    Edge were high on Nintendo Juice at the time though, they always go funny when N ship a game, it's like catnip to them. Look at their CRIMINALLY low score they gave GH III in the same issue they gushed all over SMG's dated blandness.

  • Stoatboy #176 4 years ago

    "Look at Half-Life or Zelda, where if I hadn't used certain features ( gravity gun/bow and arrow) progression becomes impossible, whereas in Rapture you can use a pistol all the way through."

    But that's rubbish. That's using what should be a cool feature as a simple key. You can't progress until you use X with Y. You have no choice. I'd much rather be given a box of toys and be left to play with them how I see fit. It would be nice if Bioshock encouraged people to play with the toys it gave them a bit more admittedly, but I much prefer this approach to enforced weapon usage.

    I just don't get the argument that the ability to play through a game using just one weapon (when many other more exciting and useful ones are readily available) is a bad thing. That's like saying life is crap because you can survive by only drinking water, despite the fact that coffee, beer and banana milkshake all exist. Water's generally easier to get hold of, but beer's a lot more fun. Make the fucking effort.

  • NickJD #177 4 years ago

    I played the hacking mini game way back on C64. it was a mini game that popped up while your game was loading. Not the same exactly but the idea was the same, join pipes to stop paint from falling out the pipe.

    Or something like that. Bioshock does nothing new, if the story wasn't decent nobody would give a shit about this game as the gameplay is pretty standard stuff.

  • The-Bodybuilder #178 4 years ago

    >" Rather than playing with the other things they could do, most players would just go down the vents, then complain they were spending all their time in vents. Because most players would rather be efficient than have fun. This is just the way many of us are wired, it seems"

    Heh, kinda reminds me of krudster and the Mass Effect review.

    I like these kinda articles (althouugh, IMO, halo deserves an article, considering the "halol" effect caused by eurogamer themselves). I also hope you do more "retrospection" articles, looking into previous reviews of games that were either overhyped by your reviews, or were just hated on.

  • NickJD #179 4 years ago

    And wtf are you people talking about?, there is no Bioshock bashing as far as I'm aware, this article was not needed and is just another stupid Eurogamer article designed to get people at each others throats, just like their stupid fucking Xbox 360 vS ps3 fights every month.

    Assassin's Creed and Kane and Lynch get raped every day by people, Bioshock gets no such treatment and is accepted to be a good game.

    This article is bollocks.
    Edited by 1 at 06/12/07 @ 15:03

  • zimzu #180 4 years ago

    Grayvern - "its not emo defensive stuff, its a legitimate criticism of why some of the points made by detractors of the game arent valid."

    you are saying that the poor aspects of the game that have been noticed "aren't valid"? at times like this i wonder if its even worth discussing. if you can't see how flawed the gameplay is, maybe its better to let you live in your world...

  • samadriel #181 4 years ago

    "This comments page is pretty much beyond repair now, in a few hours.
    Says a lot more about the game's detractors than the game itself."

    Considering that said pages consist mostly of gamers with pretensions of sophistication (and, apparently, broken keyboards) shrieking about how all Bioshock's critics are artless philistines (never mind that the criticisms overwhelmingly focus on the game's disappointing lack of depth), I'd say that's a funny way of looking at it. Perhaps you're standing on your head?
    Edited by 1 at 06/12/07 @ 15:03

  • The-Bodybuilder #182 4 years ago

    I have to agree that there is no reason for this article. Much as I enjoyed it(and I did, I really did), halo recieves a greater bashing than virtually any other game on this site, most if it due to EG themselves.

    Out of all the other games that get a bashing, what makes bioshock more worthy? Unless, ofcourse EG feel it is thier GOTY, and are defending it before they crown it (if that's really the case, they should've just released this after).

  • theleif #183 4 years ago

    It's articles like this that makes eurogamer great.


    Love you Kieron!

  • pigwhistler #184 4 years ago

    DRM isnt an issue cos after playing through once I really dont think i could be bothered to ever again. Good game (as mr forsyth might say), but 8/10 would have been more realistc

  • Lorka #185 4 years ago

    Games leave themselves open to missed subtlety more than any media. I had to grit my teeth in a pleasant smile as a friend stumbled blindly through the exquisite world of HL2, blind to all but the most glaring spectacles.

    Thinking about it, I took the same approach to Bioshock after a while. The combat mechanics weren't perfectly fluid, and I felt like the Rand references were bloodily on the nose. Quite soon, I was powering through sighing at conventional set piece design and pedestrian weaponry.

    Now Kieron, I feel like I may have missed out.

  • spekkeh #186 4 years ago

    It's nice that you do something differently as an article, it's also nice to read more personal stuff apart from reviews. But I agree with the previous persons who said that this is a rather pointless article. If you stick by your 10/10, just stick by it, no need for writing an extra article about it. I'm much more interested in reviews EG has done previously and in retrospect would like to change.

    Oh, and "Mario, by dumping you in cut-scene after cut-scene you have to click tediously through"..
    srsly, did I miss something or what?

  • miiiguel #187 4 years ago

    frod, so you're saying you don't like the game because it's a XBox one? Look it in a PC prespective.

    I want to go play outside, sharp rocks hide all the good stuff.
    Edited by 1 at 06/12/07 @ 15:19

  • dr.glyndwr #188 4 years ago

    A question to all the haters.

    If the widescreen FOV lock is indeed a fix -- and all us widescreen players were robbed of 20%ish of the screen right through the game -- why, after the patch now, does the viewpoint when you are wearing the helmet look so rubbish? With FOVlock on in the new version, with the helmet on, fully 30-40% of the screen is just black.

    Doesn't that suggest 2K were telling the truth all along: the game, as presented originally, was designed for widescreen and the FOV in the patch is now wider than originally intended. Otherwise, surely, no designer would have passed the helmet viewpoint. It looks awful.

    I'll wait while you go reload your savegame and check.

  • NickJD #189 4 years ago

    Were you payed by 2K to write this?, is this Gerstmanngate all over again?. Why have you chosen Bioshock to defend when there are other quality games out there in the running for GOTY.

    Why defend a game that does not need defending?, people are not talking about Bioshock anymore let alone bashing it, yet you put this out there as if it's a hot topic. It's not, no one cares so why stoke the fires with this bollocks?.

    Like I said why are you trying to make everyone love Bioshock?, did 2K slip you a big brown envelope?.I thought corruption was limited to Gamespot. I guess not. Don't tell me how to play Bioshock, don't tell me that if I don't love it I'm playing it wrong. And try to be fair and defend other games, are we to expect massive Bioshock ads on Eurogamer in the next few days or something?. I just don't get it.

    Forget GOTY, you win most stupid fucking article of the year

  • ange| #190 4 years ago

    I almost wish Bioshock received 8's across the board then it's fans could just enjoy it in peace.

  • miiiguel #191 4 years ago

    frod, have you heard Ali Farka ? You should, bashing one of the greates world music composers makes you look a bit narrow minded, even more when I know you haven't heard the guy.

  • apan #192 4 years ago

    Pretty and boring, just like many girls in Sweden.

  • DFawkes #193 4 years ago

    I really enjoyed this article. especially about the Edge reviewer not "getting" the Dollars thing. i love it when people try to be smart and fail - hence why I only ever say stupid stuff.

  • symbiote #194 4 years ago

    That was worse than listening to a Radiohead fan trying to convince me that Kid A is their best album.

  • Daymare #195 4 years ago

    Kudos for the article. I'm turning into an EG fanboy because of "stunts" like this:)

    Bioshock is, I sincerely believe, a game that will be mentioned in all the future books on videogame theory. It's one of the few games I could have a long discussion about or even write a goddamned thesis and just for that quality alone it gets a 10/10 for me. It's the perfect example of something that is more that then the sum of it's parts. If you don't see that, yes, You, Just, Didn't, Fucking, Get, It! And to every "oh, look at him, so smug and pretentious" I say: "oh, look at you, desperately trying to drag us down to your level". :)

    Seriously though: I do understand why some gameplay purist don't like Bioshock, but I guess it's just not a game for them. I like, hell, Love pure gameplay games like SMG too, but I also like games with some meat on them. Bioshock gave me that in spades.

  • paulf #196 4 years ago

    @ daymare - thats an interesting point, but like I mentioned earlier it's this discussion and the questions the game raises that are more interesting than the game itself. As a catylyst for discussion its a 10 no doubt, but I feel that this is at the cost of fun, playability or whatever you want to call it.

    It's a bit like the film 'atonement', pretty to look at, artsy and everything that people think is 'good', but look deeper and it's shallow and soulless, valuing arty pretensiousness over spirit and emotional content

  • Hypercube #197 4 years ago

    I absolutely loved BioShock. It has to be one of my favourite games ever. It has some flaws, and as such I would have given it a 9.5/10 (I don't think I've ever played a game that was a 10/10).

    But it's still a god damned masterpiece.

    However, having said that, trying to explain to people who didn't like it why they didn't like it ain't gonna work. I was trying to explain why dubstep is so wonderful to my trance liking friends. But the very things they like about trance simply aren't in dubstep. They just don't get it. Similarly, if someone doesn't like BioShock, I'll feel sorry that they can't get as much from the experience as I did, but then again I bet they might love football management games or racing games (two genres that I think suck monkeys balls).

  • Pulsar_t #198 4 years ago

    Halo3, COD4 and Bioshock are all linear and they didn't advance the genre. I already forgot about them, whilst the HL2 Ep2 story still lingers.

    This article is so half-assed.. Ah why should I bother. I'm only glad there are scores of people who *still* disagree. Now if only there was a strong backlash against Halo3 perfect scores as well :p

  • miiiguel #199 4 years ago

    yes like Ali Farka Toure is a "random guy" on Metacritic...

  • Sorbicol #200 4 years ago

    Wow so much vitriol! Erm, Bioshock is undoubtedly an excellent game, but it's not really the sum of it's parts is it? Yes, the story telling, the art direction and atmosphere are unmatched this year, but the overall game play and lack of variety just let it down so much. It's sort of having like having the chassis of a ferrari with a citreon 2 stroke engine in it, isn't it? Looks beautiful, great atmospherics, but after the 300th water tube hack and 900th big daddy scrap, it just gets soo repeatitive and boring.
    Maybe that's why people hate it so much - it really should be so much better than it is. Not that its bad, just a bit boring! I confess I haven't finished it yet - I got to the power plant and went on holiday for a week, I haven't restarted it since. Although I am tempted to play it now and finish it off.

    All I will say is that in my opinion, Portal delivers the combination of story telling, inspired puzzle solving and inventive game play that Bioshock truly deserves. Get it to balance the sum of its parts like Portal does and then you'd have the greatest game ever made. Probably ;)

  • miiiguel #201 4 years ago

    "people hated it so much" because it had great scores and fans alover, had it beem averaged 7 or 8, and haters wouldn't shout so loud. It's always proportional (had it been released on Nintendo or Sony it would have attracted their crowd too - even if exact the same game). I believe.

  • Stoatboy #202 4 years ago

    I think people hated it because it wasn't what they wanted it to be, and also what they were told it would be, to some extent.

    Not enough RPG, no real choice, no need to experiment with weapons and plasmids, etc. The game isn't bad because of these things, it's just not the game some people wanted.

    Returning to the "you can play it through using only the pistol" criticism again - the only other time I've heard this phrase used was about Halo and it was meant as a huge compliment. Go figure!

  • Nithron #203 4 years ago

    I think the biggest pile of wank in all this is the moral choice. The moral choice between killing genetically mutated monstrosities that *look* like little girls, or leaving them alone because they're wearing pretty pink dresses and only bad people kill things in pretty pink dresses.

    Honestly, wasn't it supposed to be a complex moral dilemma?
    Edited by 1 at 06/12/07 @ 16:27

  • Stonker #204 4 years ago

    I'm pretty sure nobody on this thread hated Bioshock. So labelling us haters is pretty stupid. Bioshock was and still is one of my favourite games of the year. In terms of art direction it is pretty much unsurpassed and is a landmark achievement. However, take away the graphics and you have a pretty standard FPS. In terms of FPS combat Halo 3 is leagues ahead. I honestly can't understand how anybody can defend the combat in Bioshock. Are you serioulsy suggesting that it was better than Halo 3, Fear?!?! Just to reiterate, Bioshock, one of the best games of the year. Just not the best.

    And Kieron, that article was fucking ridiculous. What were you thinking?

  • miiiguel #205 4 years ago

    Nithron, it's something like:
    "will I give a coin to this smelly drunk homeless worthless bum"
    or
    "this guy must have had some huge problem that messed his life and maybe he can cure himself. Let me help"

    Is this a dilema ? For some, maybe.
    Edited by 2 at 06/12/07 @ 16:31

  • Shinji #206 4 years ago

    I'm loving all the "HOW DARE YOU WRITE THIS ARTICLE! ACTUALLY HOW DARE YOU?!" comments here. You'd think Kieron had written it on poisoned paper and personally shoved a copy up the arses of some of the Outraged Of Tunbridge Wells style posters.

    And kicked their dogs, too.

    I liked the article, it was a fun read. I disagree with a fair bit of it, personally, but I liked reading it - I'll take disagreeing with something well-informed and articulate over agreeing with something dull any day.

  • BillyBrush #207 4 years ago

    Why does HYPE not die off anymore

    Used to be a game was hyped before release, then it came out, hype phase over reality phase begins, and we can see it's flaws

    but now HYPE does not die when a game is released, it just carries on. Thusly Mass Effect does not have really awful framerates, it's really smooth as they HYPE says it's a masterpeice from before it came out, same to a lesser extent with Bioshock

    even Kane & Lynch got 7's despite being unreservedly awful

    Flava Flav could teach gamers and games reviewers a few things i think. i wish games could come out of nowhere and garner genuine reputations like ICO and even Manhunt did (due to not being previewed for years in advance)...games like Mass Effect are classics because prevuies said they were, games like Bioshock are classics because the 1st hour is good. All 12 hours of Mario and Luigi superstar saga were good, it is no a classic as it was not hyped to fuckery

    Deflating the hype unfortunately is something gamers have to do nowadays, otherwise there would be a defining game every damn week...

  • Turrican #208 4 years ago

    This article reminds me of the Deus Ex 2 defence Kieran wrote in PC Gamer before he over-rated that too (in my opinion).

    For the record, I found Bioshock to be an intriguing scenario but it has got boring so I've stopped playing it. I've completed Halo 3 and Mass Effect so for me they are much better games. Perhaps the fix for the viewing angle (it really makes it tiring to play) will help me to get back into it.

  • Jac #209 4 years ago

    I've enjoyed Bioshock more than anything else this year. Cant believe so many people didn't enjoy it yet still played it through to the end without being paid to do so. Weirdos.

  • Waldo #210 4 years ago

    Do the Pipe Dream-esque hacking sequences in BioShock mean that Star Trek: Elite Force II was "genius" for having them too?

    Just curious. ;)

  • The-Bodybuilder #211 4 years ago

    >"Bioshock is, I sincerely believe, a game that will be mentioned in all the future books on videogame theory"

    Will EG be publishing books in the future?

  • marilena #212 4 years ago

    Well, Shinji, I didn't enjoy reading the article. After the first page I just couldn't take the punishment anymore and started skimming through it.

    We are here to comment on the article and by God* we will.

    I'm not some Gillen hater either, I normally really like his stuff. But this piece is not just patronizing, it's also shallow, ill-thought and poorly written. Much like Bioshock :D.

    @jac
    I played it to completion because I was waiting for it to click with me. At the moment of the big reveal I actually thought it did, and I went into the following area with a renewed interest in it and a conviction it will come through. What follows is initially pretty good, but not more than 20 minutes later I was shooting boring enemies while on a fetch quest.
    Edited by 1 at 06/12/07 @ 16:54

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #213 4 years ago

    This article reminds me of the Deus Ex 2 defence Kieran wrote in PC Gamer

    I was just thinking that if you removed the specific storyline references, this article could have been about Deus Ex 2. However, I'd still have agreed with it in the main if it were about Deus Ex 2.

    Especially the bit about people complaining because they can't tell the difference between superficial complexity and depth.

  • miiiguel #214 4 years ago

    BioShock... best... game... eva!

    Deal with it.
    :D

    And the definitive version will come to the powa of da c3ll!, you can bet on that!

  • symbiote #215 4 years ago

    Great art speaks for itself. It doesn't need a three page defence aimed to patronise the masses.

  • Stonker #216 4 years ago

    "Bioshock is, I sincerely believe, a game that will be mentioned in all the future books on videogame theory"

    Yes, it'll be mentioned as a game that didn't do combat very well. Awesome grahpics though.

  • UncleLou #217 4 years ago

    A good read, but a bit of a strange idea for an article - it's not like most people think Bioshock was shit, it's just that most people - at least that was my impression - thought it was very good, but didn't quite deserve the enthusiastic coverage, at least not to that degree.

    The "haters" mostly exist in the mind of a few disturbed, um, fans.

    For me personally, while I enjoyed the game a lot while I played it, the surprising thing was that I almost instantly forgot about the game after finishing it, it didn't make any lasting impression whatsoever.
    Edited by 1 at 06/12/07 @ 17:03

  • _Price_ #218 4 years ago

    One of the best Bioshock reviews I've seen:

    [link url=http://ww w.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/editorials/zeropunctuat ion/1394-Zero-Punctuation-BioShock
    ]http://ww w.escapistmagazine.com/articles...[/link]

    Syncs well with the article too.

  • miiiguel #219 4 years ago

    completly off-topic:

    Cooking Mama sold 1million in Europe alone! Go Ninty! Go Ninty!

  • BillyBrush #220 4 years ago

    There is not an awful lot that BS does that it's stablemate The Darkness does not do, that was a weekly release, this is supposed to be a masterwork

    one of the main flaws i found with the game was it's handling of plot and the twist in that plot, unfortunately when put side by side with OldBoy the inspiration for it, it pales, and leaves you feeling games will not reach the storytelling nous of other media...Half life on the other hand, creates it's own world and own stories very effectively

    BS was exactly what i was expecting it to be, the only 360 game that surprised me so far was EDF, you could probably add Crackdown to that for many people...not that they were better games, but they were not tarred by people proclaiming them the 2nd coming, it's odd but i think i'd have enjoyed the game more had it been an 8. Now that does not change the quality of the finished product sure, but i think games sites do tend to leave you knowing too well what to expect, 5 star reviews as per film are probably more useful in some ways, as you do not come in with a mindset where X game has to change your world for it to meet expectation..

    It's a shame that art style, music, and atmosphere as thick as a proverbial theif cannot move one more, but if you play a lot of games it's true, it cannot, and origionality is very much in question with the plot and twist this game carried....if you do not consume other media then yes Bioshock is an origional work, but if you have seen oldboy as i suspect this team of coders have, then it devalues the narrative massively

    the greatest trick 2K pulled was convincing the world they had a new story to tell, when they merely had a new environment to show, a rather nice one at that.

    I hope one day that a reviewer can put on a pessemistic hat, watch Oldboy, then play Bioshock, and have their view of Irrationals marterwork tarred forever, gaming as it stands, does not need to grow beyond imitating other media....Bioware, do they need to do more than make BSG/Starwars the game? no, as trailing in other artists wake works a treat, Nintendo with Mario, at least made new culture, rather than presenting old art in a new frame

  • silver-jon #221 4 years ago

    My 2p . . .
    I really enjoyed Bioshock except for a couple of the points you raised and defended, Kieron. The lack of variety in enemy (basically Splicer, turret, or Big Daddy) and the real anti-climax in the final 20% (including the final boss battle).

    I remember that the last "Holy Crap" moment when I played through the game was when you wake up in (was it) Tenebaum's room surrounded by the little girls you've saved. It was a genuinely powerful emotive moment testament to my immersion in the game.
    UN-fortunately, because I had harvested only 2 of the girls in desperation I got the bad-guy's ending which seemed so a/ unfair and b/ ill-considered and inappropriate that it felt like having an intense and wonderful relationship with someone for 3 weeks who suddenly and without any provocation slaps you hard round the face for liking spinach (and not in a good way).

    I was all for rating it 10/10 but the ending really did sour it down to a 9. Still, a 9 !

  • Azazel #222 4 years ago

    Well I would place myself in the category of people who get pissed off when critics start making more of a flawed execution than the 'bigness' of the ideas. So I kind of can appreciate the sentiment this article is trying to convey.

    I for one welcome it in the style of Kent Brockman.

  • Feanor #223 4 years ago

    How can people call this article pointless when it gets this many comments and page views?

    Surely the point of every article on EG is to do that so they can sell ads, unless this website is actually run by some sort of gaming charity.

  • theleif #224 4 years ago

    A lot of you people doesn't seem to get the point of this article. It's not a review, it's Kierons personal opinions. And that's why i love it. I don't agree with Kieron on everything but your not supposed to.
    So please Eurogamer, MORE of this! If i want watered down impersonal reviews i go to Gamespot.

    Eurogamer to Gamespot is like Bud to Guinness.

    And if i didn't have to start cooking now i would have wrote something more elaborated.
    Cheers
    Edited by 1 at 06/12/07 @ 17:38

  • TOOTR #225 4 years ago

    Thanks so much for the article. As others have said its one of the reasons I come to EG. I come here for reviews, news, interviews with developers, dudes and dudettes in the industry and often for some of the very witty and insightful comments in the forums. Trueness. Haven't found many other sites which have such a sense of humour.

    This thread isn't exactly a shining example of that but still...

    Basically I come here cos I love games and when I'm not playing them I waste a ridiculous amount of time reading about them - and I fully appreciate this opinion piece/ personal insight/ whatever you want to call it because (to me) its sentiments rings true and has offered better insight into a game I personally was completely immersed in and loved. So thanks.
    Edited by 1 at 06/12/07 @ 17:52

  • MikeN #226 4 years ago

    Uncle Lou:
    "A good read, but a bit of a strange idea for an article - it's not like most people think Bioshock was shit, it's just that most people - at least that was my impression - thought it was very good, but didn't quite deserve the enthusiastic coverage, at least not to that degree"

    Exactly. I enjoyed Bioshock, it had its flaws but they were (mostly) outweighed by the good. However it seems that failing to trumpet Bioshock as the second coming of videogames defines you as a 'hater' in the eyes of Kieron.

    This article would have been much better with an opposing argument refuting Kieron's claims. As it is , the most whining I've read about Bioshock was contained in that article itself.

  • bf #227 4 years ago

    I think part of the backlash to the patch is that it took four freakn months to come out and it still doesnt have the promised "remove anal probing on installation" fix in it.

    I'll admit to being one of those who is split over Bioshock, the installation thingie (as you may have guessed) didnt go down well with me and it has a few nagging short comings, upon my expectations atleast. But when someone flaunts something as FPS 2.0 to a dedicated FPS player ones expectations tend to rise. The game is an absolute stunning achievement as a video game, something that reviews might build upon rather than actual fun/£. Anyways, here goes.
    -Console feel. For a dedicated PC gamer this is a killer, somehow the feel just isnt there.
    -Closed gameplay. The game isnt as open and "go where you want" as I had been led to believe. The storyline needs this but then they shouldnt sell it as an open game world. True its not as closed as say CoD4 but its still one level after the other in order, exept in one place and that is IMO not enough for FPS 2.0.
    -To much fighting in relation to exploration. Rapture is an amazing world but you spend so much time fighting in it instead of just exploring and discovering the utterly amazing wolrd that Rapture is. I feel like I'm being cheated out of something greater.
    -Fighting the big daddies. They should be near invincible. Having something in the gameworld that just ignores you unless you step on their small patch and then beats you into a pulp withing seconds is cool. I think it would give a wonderfull sense of scale, like the rock throwing giant in Unreal.
    -Building stuff. There are makeshift gunturrents but you cant make your own or maintain them.
    -Definsive/trap weapons. Used for what exactly? This might just be me and I'll tie it into my point about building stuff. You are constantly moving forward so what are these for?

    And my final and very personal point, no replay value. I am playing it now but thats because I got hold of a 8800GT but before that when it was over it was so utterly over. A in large parts very enjoyable ride but I ususally play games two or three times when I enjoy them.

    Longer post then I though. Guess that might be key to all this, Bioshock provoces opinions in all kinds of ways for better or worse.

  • Gulag #228 4 years ago

    Hopefully, by the end of next year, Eurogamer will have taken the mature step of doing away with numbers at the end of reviews.

    If 2007 has taught us anything it's that the best way to fill a comments thread with morons is to write a couple of pages of text, slap a number on the end and wait for the messages that start: "I didn't read the review, but I looked at the number at the end and it didn't match the one I had guessed, so now I'm going to spout some incoherent drivel about why it's the wrong number..."

    We have only so much time on this planet, lets find a better use for it.

  • TOOTR #229 4 years ago

    @bf - you think you had a long post - mine went for SCREENS :)

    Just edited it and kept the first paragraph (out of about 90).

    Think i'll drop bits of it back in in bite sized chunks starting with :

    Why, when you can set an enemy on fire, watch him run for water, electrocute him to quivering sparking stillness once he's in said water and THEN finish him off with ONE headshot with a pistol? Why wouldn't you do that??

    Great Barrier Reef!!!....Why oh why would you just use one weapon?


  • Bursk #230 4 years ago

    Will you also do one of these articles for Sensible Soccer 2006?

  • Feanor #231 4 years ago

    WTF are you talking about, Gulag? This article has no score, but the comments thread has as much crap in it as the one for the Mass Effect review.

    Try a bit harder next time, eh.
    Edited by 1 at 06/12/07 @ 18:09

  • TOOTR #232 4 years ago

    and continuing with :

    What on earth's going on here?

    Are people playing games just to rush through and BEAT the game as opposed to actually 'playing' the game and by that I mean playing WITH The game?

    Its a singleplayer - are you playing or competing? You expecting a deathmatch?

    I saw some article on Assasins Creed getting poor reviews potentially due to the 'rush through and finish' point - ain't played it ....can't comment.
    Um....maybe I can..Jade Raymond is great and you should buy the game cos of her!

    /checks line for bites

  • Katsumoto #233 4 years ago

    For Christ's sake! To repeat myself for the 4th time - this is not Eurogamer "defending" their 10/10. It is a freelancer writing trying to put his perspective on the numerous criticisms that have been all over the internet for the last few months. Since when was a journalist not allowed to do that? He wasn't saying FUCK YOU ANYONE WHO DOESN'T LIKE BIOSHOCK, he was saying I THINK ALL THE CRITICISM ITS GETTING IS SILLY AND THIS IS WHY.

    I really have no idea why people are getting so angry. This thread is probably the scariest thread i've seen on an EG article, and having been reading EG for a few years now, that is saying a lot.

  • Mordum #234 4 years ago

    What is this all about? Everyone is entitled to their opinion, why are Eurogamer being so defensive in Bio-Shocks case? I thought the game was good, although it would'nt get my vote for game of the year... get over it EG.

  • peeetah #235 4 years ago

    Opinions aren't allowed on the internet.

  • Madder-Max #236 4 years ago

    "We have only so much time on this planet, lets find a better use for it."

    /Bathes and then showers in the irony......of this being posted on a gaming site!

  • Katsumoto #237 4 years ago

    Yes, everyone is entitled to their opinion - this is KG's opinion.. whats the problem? Argh!

  • mattigan #238 4 years ago

    I thought it was a good article and highlighted what I think about the game especially the getting back for what you put in bit.

    I know why the vital chambers only worked for me and also why the bathespheres only worked for me as I exlplored the whole thing (probably more than most) and got the full picture.

    I would say that although there was a large selection of plasmids, the majority of them were fairly pointless and only provided novelty value of a "let's see how this one works" type, before I went back to the guns (Ice and Cyclone being the worst offenders for me), last boss excluded, where one particular plasmid which was unused for the enrtre game made taking him down a piece of piss.

    That said I thorughly enjoyed it while it lasted and got totally blindsided by the twist, which is a VERY rare occurence for me (for any entertainment media).

  • sbaker899 #239 4 years ago

    BioShock needs a defence? One of the best games of recent years in my opinion.

  • Azazel #240 4 years ago

    Some people just can't handle a little bit of subjectivity seemingly.

  • Katsumoto #241 4 years ago

    Matt - I take what you're saying, what I really meant to emphasise was that this wasn't a direct reply to the criticism the 10/10 EG review got, it was a direct reply to the criticism the game got, independent of EG's review in and of itself.

  • Pho-Zoon #242 4 years ago

    Haven't read the comments...

    What is this pseudo-intellectual shit? He's even written it in that tone that occasionally sounds informal, Pitchfork style. However, where Pitchfork accurately discusses music, we get this deluded rebuttal of arguments which are objectively true.

  • Subquest #243 4 years ago

    I enjoyed the article, and would gladly welcome more of the same. I think EG could use more editorials, it adds to the richness of the site. Despite the laughably vitriolic bullshit that ensues, ironically the source of the article's sentiment, I say well done.

  • theleif #244 4 years ago

    Oh please,come on folks!
    This article is not EUROGAMER DEFENDS IT'S 10/10 RATING OF A GAME YOU DIDN'T THINK DESERVED IT!
    It's ONE persons PERSONAL THOUGHTS on the aftermath discussions on the game. It's not meant to be objective. It's not meant to appease everyone. It's a thought provoking debate article.
    And, it's a perfect example why this site is my favourite game site (boargamegeeks excluded for obvious reasons).
    Because it's personal. Period.

  • Inquisitor #245 4 years ago

    Conversely I agree with most of what it said but found it a pretty hard read. If anything it was written in the forum style KG seemed so adament to dismiss.

    Very one sided and resorted to name calling to get the point across. A simple retrospective of the game and even review of the game would have been better. Calling up so called common put downs of the game and taking them on one by one seems unneccessary.

  • nic_forsyth #246 4 years ago

    Interesting article. I'm not sure of the "there's no need for this article", type comments, an opinion, as articulate as this, is justified. Rather than just saying, "this game is shabby plopp", someone is entitled to press "s" and lean round a fucking corner and toss their electrical jizz at some spunky cocknonsense".

    Anyway, my thoughts on one section, "There's no moral excuse. You're an ethical monster, and are made of the same stuff of Fontaine. Or, alternatively, you're someone who treats it just as a videogame."

    One thing I felt while playing the game was that these "girls" were mere puppets, their world and their existence was not fully realised, to me, until the after the "twist". To me, it was not a moral choice or the fact I was treating it like a video game, I trusted no-one at all from the moment I stepped into the biosphere for the first time. Having playing system shock 2, I expected deception, although I was not ready, after Ryan's demise, for the feeling of guilt during the help to eascape and my short safe passage.

    Will you kindly, excuse me for the things I have done?

  • Injurak #247 4 years ago

    For the most part I agree with the article. In fact nearly all of it. I loved this game. I played through it trying very very hard not to die, collecting everything and killing in as many way as I could find. I had allot of fun!

    The only thing I don't agree with is the new patch, it took too long to come out and it has nothing in it to make me feel like I want to replay...

  • Charlie_Miso #248 4 years ago

    what a whinge!

    harden the fuck up.

  • yagisencho #249 4 years ago

    penhalion claimed:
    "Genetically manufactured collection units is what they are. They are constructed in much the same way as the hero himself. The fact that they look like kids shouldn't give them leave to be monsters!"

    Bzzt! Wrong. They were children living in Rapture, taken from their families, experimented upon/spliced with sea slugs, and brainwashed into becoming Adam collection units. You didn't listen to many of the journals, did you?

    Frankly, most gamers both desire and deserve brain-dead entertainment that leads them on an explosion-filled darkhouse ride. Mirrors only reflect what is in front of them, but even then, you see only what you choose to.

  • VMerken #250 4 years ago

    There was a backlash about the game content? Gee, I never got to that point, the DRM issue on the PC version was too much of a hurdle (So, shall I pay €50 to rent a game license? Hmm... but, what am I worrying about, there's no mention of any restrictive DRM with limited activations on the box, so surely there isn't any restrictive DRM with limited activations to worry about). Pity, because the demo was really cool.

    Anyway, Kieron, thank you for sharing your opinion.
    Edited by 1 at 06/12/07 @ 23:10

  • smelly #251 4 years ago

    (wonders how much was paid for this article)

    btw.. since when was mario galaxy endless cutscenes? There are loading screens hidden with an animation.. But i cant remember much in the way of cutscenes?

  • figaro7 #252 4 years ago

    So, someones defending bioshock from its fanbase cussing it a little? We are gamers just as much as the people who run the majority of the big game websites and get games handed to them rather than going out and buying them. To me thats the biggest gap between websites and us. Expecations are higher when you slap a 100 AU on a game and lets face it, gaming is not a cheap past time.

    Games dont need defences, thats like visiting system wars on gamespot saying game A is better than game B and we dont really want to go there.

    Out of the 1 mil + people who bought the game, not everyone is going to be happy with it and we have to compare to the 90+ reviewers who scored it. Its hard to get a generalisation from that because most reviewers play games for a living, we dont.

    Looking back, i still think bioshock was one of the best experiences of the year.
    If i ever were to go back and replay any fps on the 360 out this year it would certainly be bioshock.

    And um, if its prob mentioned already, havent bothered to read the 250+ posts, it sits above halo 3 on metacritic, and equal with the orange box. Anyway thats tit for tat and metacritic although fits a lot of websites, still hand picks the ones they put on there site. Much like game rankings doesnt include the unbolded (not enough reviews) websites in there rankings, but we all knew that right.

  • nic_forsyth #253 4 years ago

    "You didn't listen to many of the journals, did you?"

    Mah!, I didn't believe, the guilt, stop it!

  • Scimarad #254 4 years ago

    I absolutely fell in love with Bioshock when I played the demo and the game itself most certainly wasn't a disapointment when I got it. But, for some reason, by the time I'd got to Fort Frolic I was pretty bored of the actual gameplay no matter how much I loved Rapture as a setting. I'm not sure if I got sick of the combat or what...

  • symbiote #255 4 years ago

    "Would you kindly quit your whining"

    Would you kindly swallow your own medicine?

    OK, the game has many merits, but attempting to 'educate' us in ways it should or should be played or interpreted leans not towards your argument of it being a masterpiece, but more towards it being flawed.

    And I'll be fucked sideways before I accept that as being a flaw of my character rather than it being lazy, repetitive and arrogant game design.

  • marilena #256 4 years ago

    yagisencho: Frankly, most gamers both desire and deserve brain-dead entertainment that leads them on an explosion-filled darkhouse ride. Mirrors only reflect what is in front of them, but even then, you see only what you choose to.

    I'm not annoyed by your ridiculously pompous and smug attitude as much as I am annoyed by the fact that it was caused by Bioshock. It's not Proust, get over yourself.

    Edit: If anything, I think that's what bothers me the most about Bioshock. Not how pretentious it is, for something so shallow and limited ("oh my God, they made a meta comment about gaming, call the Nobel committee!";), but how pretentious its fans are.
    Edited by 3 at 06/12/07 @ 21:44

  • immateriaux #257 4 years ago

    Wow!

    When did 2K start paying eurogamer's wages. Or is "2K e........" fucking the staff here?

    3 pages? Trying to convince us that this game, a game that contains everything we've seen before, the emptiest of moral choices (hey, just pick the good option), the minimalist of challenges, and the complete repetition of scenario and enemy ... not a bad game mind, nice setting, bit different, in much the same way that lots of games pitch themselves in an unusual setting, be it a future dystopia or a strange mutated Chernobyl etc. ... but to say , will "take you to places we've never really been before" !!! ... that's the most unbelievable tripe that has clogged the bitstream since ... since ... no, maybe that's probably it.

    (And, of course, still no acknowledgement that it launched with the most restrictive copy protection ever seen in a PC game. But then, obviously, Eurogamer does not want to concede that for some reason. Why?)

    If I read all that from an XBox noob, I'd indulge it, it is a good game for the Xbox relative to what else is available especially. But on here, I expect to read articles by people who have actually experienced other games, that pitch things in perspective, not to simply play the marketing fool. This is absolutely shocking apologia for an over the top review of an already ludicrously over-hyped game. I'm really appalled and it certainly shatters any trust I had in the intent of Eurogamer's game articles.

  • symbiote #258 4 years ago

    Here's the thing: I've just been playing what you would call a 'pure' FPS on Hard, and I flunked a section a few times. I had to ask myselfy questions. Why? What more could I do? How could I react or respond differently? Was I using the right weapon? Did I pick the best location? It's this challenge and progress that I LOVE in FPS.

    Now OK, Bioshock isn't a 'pure' FPS, but it IS and FPS, so FFS get THAT right and THEN I'll stomach the other wares you're peddling. I didn't have to ask myself ANY of the above questions ONCE in Bioshock - therein lay it's greatest sin IMHO.

    And anyone who thinks such issues are unimportant, even in the context of the artistic genius that IS Bisohock, clearly couldn't beat Halo on Legendary if their fucking life depended on it.

    Worse still, such people 'review' FPS and only EVER play it on Normal i.e. they're prone to promote form over function.
    Edited by 1 at 06/12/07 @ 21:54

  • Robsabbaggio #259 4 years ago


    I love games that immerse me in the world, and make me believe I am actually there. Bioshock is my favourite game because it did this better than anything else I have ever played.

    If anything, I think the Eurogamer review undersold it.

  • smelly #260 4 years ago

    I reacon this advert has come about as a way of saying "look this review wasnt bought - honest!" in answer to what's happening over at gamespot at the moment.

    The reality is that even the biggest idiot in the world would find it hard not to see a link between advertising space and stupid OTT reviews.

  • nic_forsyth #261 4 years ago

    "how pretentious its fans are."

    So how, in words, are we supposed to appreciate a game which makes us think about our actions? Or even, how can we describe our own gaming experiences?

    I dont think, by definition, that the comments you refer to are pompous. Or even smug.

    I can appreciate the discussion, even if I feel bad for my initiial comments, but if I felt the writer was being pretentious then I would tell them to suck on a twat stick, but what is pretentious about? Go on you lot, make this thread come alive!

  • some1 #262 4 years ago

    So your way of attacking the oppositions arguments is dismissing them outright as irrelevant. Anything that is in SS2 but not in Bioshock is irrelevant and unimportant.

    That's not an argument, that's arrogance. Oh and, you can upgrade weapons in System Shock 2. Unless I just imagined that big orange modify button that appears in the System Shock 2 interface.

  • Katsumoto #263 4 years ago

    <a href="http://www.roc kpapershotgun.com/?p=708
    ">http://www.roc kpapershotgun.com/?p=708
    </a>

    I've no doubt that Kieron is in fact getting paid by 2k, however. It's so obvious. You're so right. You're all so right. This game is SUCH A PILE OF SHIT that if anyone was to say something positive about it then it could only be because they were paid off.

    I would also like to add that EG is also regularly paid by Microsoft, Sony or Nintendo, depending on which thread you are in.
    Edited by 1 at 06/12/07 @ 22:10

  • Tuffty #264 4 years ago

    Great article by EG

    If there's one thing I've come to understand and accept, it's this:

    For the most part, you just can't have an intelligent debate in the gaming community

    I'm fully aware that you can and there's individuals that can form intelligent and rational discussions on everything the big 3 have to offer, but there's many more who are either heavily swayed by one of the companies or by gaming reviews to pass judgement or they're just plain morons. How many of you can say you've seen a comment section that doesn't have some form of critical comment or negativity? Even now with the GTA IV trailer, first thing I read is, 'Graphics are s***'.

    It's simply pathetic. No wonder the games industry can't be taken more seriously when comments like this crop up everywhere. I agree whole heartedly with the article, people need a slap across the face to realise just what can be achieved nowadays.
    Edited by 1 at 06/12/07 @ 22:15

  • nic_forsyth #265 4 years ago

    Dont forget the regular payments from Tiger Telematics

  • trooper6 #266 4 years ago

    KG, that you for the re-review. Very well done and thoughtful. Some of my fellow musicologists are thinking about putting together a video games music conference, and I am torn between doing something on Bioshock and on the Shalebridge Cradle level of Thief 3...but your review might have just finally pushed me over to the bioshock side.

    Too bad there can't be more reviews and articles of a slightly more thoughtful caliber like the one you just wrote.

    Good job and keep it up.

  • nickthegun #267 4 years ago

    Is this the right place for taking the internet too seriously?

    Some guy over at a Nintendo thread pointed me in this direction.

  • immateriaux #268 4 years ago

    Hmmm, getting facts wrong, omitting crucial ones and being generally misleading = "more thoughtful"???

    I guess it is just as well there aren't so many thoughtful articles out there or we'd be neck high in tripe.

  • dryden555 #269 4 years ago

    The many comments here make it clear that there's a heck of a lot of us who have similar reasons for not enjoying Bioshock. I dont think the article argument that BS is an amazing game were convincing at all -- sorry Eurogamer.

  • Azazel #270 4 years ago

    For the most part, you just can't have an intelligent debate in the gaming community.

    The new site strapline?

  • Azazel #271 4 years ago

    Hmmm, getting facts wrong, omitting crucial ones and being generally misleading

    Elaborate.

  • Stickman #272 4 years ago

    Not read the rest of the comments; don't care.

    I thought that was a brilliant article. Easily the best thing I've read on EG for about a year.

  • Stoatboy #273 4 years ago

    Fuck me. People pay 40 to 50 quid for a game, choose to ignore a large part of the content they've just bought, then whinge that their lack of enjoyment is entirely the game's fault. Because obviously the player - a human being and hence supposedly intelligent, creative and imaginative - can't possibly be expected to bring any of those qualities to bear when playing a game. Heaven forbid you should be expected to try something you haven't explicitly been told to do.

    I wonder if these are the same people who complain that paid-for downloadable content is a rip-off and should have been included in the main game. That way they could have ignored that too, as they joylously bludgeon their way through the game in the most tedious and mind-numbing way imaginable.

    FFS - a game's not just for playing - it's for playing WITH.

  • marilena #274 4 years ago

    All of the pro-Bioshock arguments here, including the ones in the article, seem like strawmen to me. You guys have all created an image inside your heads on why someone might dislike Bioshock (or, to be more accurate not like Bioshock that much) and are now attacking that image, even though it's not true.

    For instance, I have explored most of the game and listened to most of the audio logs. I haven't missed any content. I even tried a lot of tricks for doing things (i.e. killing stuff), but ended up using the simplest ones for most of the game, because I couldn't justify the complications.

    And about the logs, it's not that I didn't listen to them, it's just that I don't find this to be a very good storytelling technique. It seems like everything that's interesting in this game (bar one scene) happened to someone else instead of me. It's like I'm an actor in an interesting film, but I have the most boring part.

  • Siberian_Khatru #275 4 years ago

    lalala laaaaaaaaala

    Flashback time

    Back in the day we had adventure games with inspired stories and fps games with inspired gameplay. And other good things like gabber.

    slap slap wake up

    Today we have Ron Hubbard-... i mean Ayn Rand-inspired fps-es with monotonous gameplay. And adventure games with shitty combat sections.

    ok it's not that simple, whatever

    Also, your Bioshock has ragdoll-enabled dead cats in it, which is just plain wrong.

    Apart from that it's one amazing game!

    Bi-o-shock.

    Amazing!

  • Moonprince #276 4 years ago

    "its only peers are Super Mario Galaxy and Halo 3. You'll note, bar minor sniping, their status hasn't been questioned anywhere near as much as the adventures of a man with a wrench in Rapture's"

    That's bs for a start. is it worth reading on beyond this point??

  • VMerken #277 4 years ago

    @Stoatboy
    "I wonder if these are the same people who complain that paid-for downloadable content is a rip-off and should have been included in the main game. That way they could have ignored that too, as they joylously bludgeon their way through the game in the most tedious and mind-numbing way imaginable."

    I am all for DLC, but then the offerings should be worthwhile - an elaborate afterthought, enhancing the game. I'm not going to pay 70 Euros for the latest racing simulator, and then pay extra to for new cars to drive. New, cool tracks, on the other hand, is something else (given that there were plenty in the "basic package";).

    However, I certainly will not support full price games which have been intentionally stripped of the usual extras (harder game modes, most of the characters, cars, bonus costumes, secrets, unlockable content, etc) by clever marketeers who want to charge additional micropayments for them. On top of the full price. No deal, sorry.

    Perhaps I have been spoiled over the years by things like Devil May Cry where Dante Must Die mode is a free extra, or Diablo II, where the later free patches changed the game dramatically and leveling up characters became fresh again. Or Gran Turismo, with tons of unlockable content. Tja.

    Sign of the times?
    Edited by 1 at 06/12/07 @ 23:33

  • Stickman #278 4 years ago

    Moonprince, if you think that's shit, then probably not.

  • tgigreeny #279 4 years ago

    "Hope there's a more critical look too. Thought the point of journalism was to remain unbiased! :p"

    Kereon's not a journalist. He's a critic. He's also completely right. Bioshock is to videogames what literature is to pulp fiction. It only rewards those who seek deeper meaning within its complex socio-political metaphors rather than simply wish to plow on through its narrative. More Fyodor Dostoyevsky than Michael Crichton, then.

    That doesn't necessarily mean that any defence of the game should automatically be an attempt to convert or criticise those who yearn for a more superficial experience. I think the article was merely an attempt to suggest to those prepared to rubbish the game in it's entirety that they should simply realise it wasn't "for them". That's fine. We need more variety of depth in an industry that so often pitches its output at the lowest common denominator.

    Personally I loved Bioshock, but I play it in the same way I might watch a Jean-Luc Godard film. There are still times when I crave a little bit of James Cameron.
    Edited by 2 at 06/12/07 @ 23:50

  • Stickman #280 4 years ago

    Ponce.

  • Raised_By_Puffins #281 4 years ago

    "The Wire on DVD"

    Clearly people should watch this until their eyes bleed.

  • thedaveeyres #282 4 years ago

    A great read. Superb!

  • VMerken #283 4 years ago

    @tgigreeny
    "I think the article was merely an attempt to suggest to those prepared to rubbish the game in it's entirety that they should simply realise it wasn't "for them"."

    Which can be said about every game. There will always be a group of people not on the same wave length as a game. Does that mean the game requires an opinion piece aka "defence article"? Not really - voicing opinions on forums is a much better, natural place for this kind of thing since everyone has the opportunity to respond.

    So now that we have all read Kieran's opinion piece and since we know that there's always another angle, it's only fair to see a counter-opinion piece on the matter by an equally talented author. Wouldn't you agree? After all, every opinion has the same value.

  • YourMessageHere #284 4 years ago

    OK, I got 150 comments in. I can't face reading any more; this is for KG, assuming his stomach for comments is hardier than mine:

    Good article, nice work. Great points about Bioshock critiquing FPSs, too, never saw that side. However, EG's editors/scrutineers still suck.

    I love Bioshock, but I love SS2 better. Why? I feel your understanding of the 'dumbed down' claims is incorrect. I agree with what you say regarding Bioshock's relationship to SS2 (except that I for one roundly applaud SS2 for being the first game ever to have degrading weapons). However, the 'dumbed down' claim for me applies not in that it removes options, but in that it removes limitations. In SS2 I could be good at guns OR good at Psi OR good at tech, or at best average at all of them - I had to specialise to get the best out of any particular field. People specialise, this is a perfectly natural mechanic. In Bioshock, I cannot help but become equally good at guns AND Psi (Plasmids) AND tech (hacking/invention/research) at once - simply put, it's a much easier game because of this, and generally, easiness acts against atmosphere, and because of my immense field of expertise I also feel far more like a superhuman, and far less like a manipulated pawn.

    OK, sure, I could for example ignore the weapon upgrade stations. However it's not as if I can use them for anything else - there's no benefit in doing that. I can't use my Adam to make my shotgun better instead of upgrading plasmids, either. If I had to decide whether to spend the same resources upgrading a gun or a plasmid (like SS2) that would be a different matter.

    Plus, SS2 has tons of replay value, because the inability to upgrade everything at once enforces specialisation, and specialisation means that, while you may be aware of the existence of other ways of doing things, you're not necessarily able to actually do them because of your skillset. Bioshock removes that, both through letting you upgrade everything at once, and through supplying simultaneous alternative ways of doing things, like the chemical thrower doing the same job as the ice, fire and electric plasmids.

    At any given time you have the potential to do pretty much everything you can identify to do, but you can only do it one way in one playthrough - you could replay the game, but given that everything you can do is already there for you, it seems like your experience isn't actually going to be that different. I've been waiting for my memories of Bioshock to fade more before I replay it for precisely this reason.

  • cobracotton #285 4 years ago

    I applaud you Eurogamer you are slowly but surely becoming the best video game website on the internet I see how you conspire to invoke huge reaction in your pieces and enjoy the ever increasing activities of your comments section,


    p.s. Bioshock needs no defense but I like that you did it, honestly someone who doesn't like Bioshock well that instantly sums that person up to me!

  • Yossarian #286 4 years ago

    [link url=http://streetlightsasfairgrounds. blogspot.com/2007/09/strangely-about-fate.html
    ]http://streetlightsasfairgrounds.blogspo...[/link]

    etc.

    not sure KG ever read it, sadly

  • Mun #287 4 years ago

    Cheers for the link Yossarian
    That is how you write (what I would suggest is) a glowing tribute to and simultaneously a dauntingly intelligent critique of bioshock. Fascinating stuff. Makes KG's effort look a bit silly really.
    Also, what backlash?

  • Enyeez #288 4 years ago

    "Why don't the baddies use the Vita Chambers?"

    There is an explanation to this.


    ...

    ..

    .

    ***spoiler..... alert..... now......*** SPOILER SPOILER***






    Andrew set up those so he could respawn if something should happen to him, and fairly early you pick up an audio book that mentions that people with the same DNA could use it too..... etc....


    spoiler again..... and since you're his offspring... etc...

    best game of the year...
    Edited by 1 at 07/12/07 @ 06:38

  • Daymare #289 4 years ago

    @marilena

    "I'm not annoyed by your ridiculously pompous and smug attitude as much as I am annoyed by the fact that it was caused by Bioshock. It's not Proust, get over yourself.

    Edit: If anything, I think that's what bothers me the most about Bioshock. Not how pretentious it is, for something so shallow and limited ("oh my God, they made a meta comment about gaming, call the Nobel committee!";), but how pretentious its fans are."

    Or maybe you're shallow and limited, hm?:) You're dragging it down because it's "just" a game.
    Edited by 1 at 07/12/07 @ 06:42

  • Megalodon #290 4 years ago

    I never whined about BioShock at any forum, but I do have to take the whiners side this time. This is not a "dumbed-down" anything, it just..wasn't very fun to play. It bore me, it aggravated me, it's poor attempt at 50's based humor a-la Fallout was annoying and not entertaining at all ("Got a problem? Set it on fire!" Oh, the amazing wittiness), the very poor attempt to allow different approach to each problem, when it basically forced you to follow the path the designers set it out to be. For example - that door will only open with lightning and nothing else, the enemies drop down straight to a lake so you can electrify them. I wonder, I just got fire attack, and there's a gasoline trail at my feet, hmmm...perplexing.

    The bottom line is - the game felt so far from the hyped reviews for me, that I almost call the reviewers straight out liars, as I was promised something big and exciting, and got something mundane and not that earth-shattering at all. As it is, I have no excuse. I simply didn't like it. It just sits on my shelf, gathering dust, and I can't bare to try to ever play it again.
    Edited by 1 at 07/12/07 @ 07:36

  • TOOTR #291 4 years ago

    For the love of bourbon biscuits - Does every high score these days mean this paranoid twitchy generation of ADD gamers are going to cry 'Filthy Advertorial Game Review'? Or ..um....FAGR for short?


    Surely even if thou art disappointed with the purchase (or download Mr torrent face- we nose you know )) you cannot deny the amount of pride and sheer craftsmanship from Irrational that went into that game?

    Why the bitching?

    Are you telling me that Bioshock is worth all this moaning when we have Medal of Honour 52/Need for speed 13/90% of the movie-tieins coming at us in an avalanche of mediocrity?

    You are?

    You seriously seriously honest injun are?

  • marilena #292 4 years ago

    "Medal of Honor 52/Need for speed 13/90% of the movie tie-ins"

    I don't play those, so I can't bitch about them.

    For the sake of my sanity, I'll have to stop posting in this thread, so I'll only say once again that there's no way I disliked Bioshock because I'm shallow, suffering from ADD or stupid. You may wish it was like that, but, if anything, this shows how limited and shallow you are yourself, if you think this is what something smart looks like. No way in Hell is Bioshock the gaming equivalent of Dostoevsky. And it has no "complex socio-political metaphors" in it, just a few very simple ones. Planescape Torment is about 25 times smarter than Bioshock, and it still has some catching up to do before it is allowed to look up at Dostoevsky.

    (And, honestly, I don't really hate the game, I think it's just a bit of a mixed bag. Great atmosphere and some very good moments, but overall too thinly spread out, with the good bits separated by long stretches of dull combat. Also, the storytelling techniques are a behind the times.)

  • ChrisOTR #293 4 years ago

    Proviso: I really loved Bioshock.

    Strange that the article compares Bioshock to System Shock 2, when it was System Shock 1 that had more amazing features in some respects - having played both through (I suspect not THAT many people ever played the first one), the first one had "cyberspace", such as it was, it had simultaneous forward/backward/left/right real time view (!!), and it had zero-gravity sections.

    System Shock 2 had none of that.
    Edited by 2 at 07/12/07 @ 09:15

  • Daymare #294 4 years ago

    @marilena

    "For the sake of my sanity, I'll have to stop posting in this thread, so I'll only say once again that there's no way I disliked Bioshock because I'm shallow, suffering from ADD or stupid. You may wish it was like that, but, if anything, this shows how limited and shallow you are yourself, if you think this is what something smart looks like. No way in Hell is Bioshock the gaming equivalent of Dostoevsky. And it has no "complex socio-political metaphors" in it, just a few very simple ones. Planescape Torment is about 25 times smarter than Bioshock, and it still has some catching up to do before it is allowed to look up at Dostoevsky."

    Stop taking it out of the context and comparing it to other mediums/art forms, which most of them are thousands years old. Saying it's not Plato or bringing up rarity that is Planescape doesn't make it stand out comparing to most other games any less. If Bioshock is shallow I wonder what 99% of other games are then? It's a game open for interpretation, how often do we get that? Not often, not yet. And listening to some of you here, these kinds of games will stay a rare breed.

  • Stoatboy #295 4 years ago

    "the very poor attempt to allow different approach to each problem, when it basically forced you to follow the path the designers set it out to be. For example - that door will only open with lightning and nothing else, the enemies drop down straight to a lake so you can electrify them. I wonder, I just got fire attack, and there's a gasoline trail at my feet, hmmm...perplexing."

    Oh christ! Now someone's complaining about the few bits that actually were included to teach you how to use the plasmids.

  • Megalodon #296 4 years ago

    Stoatboy, these were just minor examples, I just simply didn't like the game overall. I believe I'm entitled to, no?

    It appears that you people are the ones that whine and complain about every little negative thing someone has to say about the game. People may not like the same things you like and vice versa. Welcome to real life.

  • marilena #297 4 years ago

    Ok, just one more time, to answer this bit: "If Bioshock is shallow I wonder what 99% of other games are then?"

    I don't disagree here. It does have a more interesting idea and a better thought out plot than most games. Still, it's not enough to carry it through the dull combat, especially since there is so little plot and so much combat. Planescape worked not just because it was better written, but also because there was a lot of writing to make you forget the rather uninspired combat mechanic.

  • samadriel #298 4 years ago

    "I dont think, by definition, that the comments you refer to are pompous. Or even smug."

    I'm afraid I do.

    Over, and over, and over again, critics of the game are told here that we are brutish philistines, that we aren't appreciating Bioshock's supposed extraordinary depths, that we are 'playing the game wrong', and allegedly rushing through it without exploiting the textural (and textual!) riches on offer. Posters carry on about the supposed childish invective employed by 'bashers', pummelling away at a phantom critic who has yet to actually raise his mythical head anywhere here (maybe these "Bioshock is too DEEP, man!" critics are hanging out in other Bioshock threads, I don't know). I don't have anything against people who enjoyed Bioshock more than I did, per se, but unfortunately certain overzealous 'Shock advocates here (and I'm surprised and disappointed that this seems to include Kieron; trolling from the bully pulpit is incredibly unclassy, ole mate) are reminiscent of the pubescent shut-ins who'll tell you that, oh, let's say Donnie Darko, is the mindblowing zenith of experimental cinema ("Obviously you were too BLOWN OUT OF YOUR MIND by the big rabbit thing to appreciate its AMAZING depth, you square!";).

    I think 2k's art/design/graphics department deserve enormous praise; I have no quarrel with the decor, character-designs and stylistic touches of Bioshock, which are inspired and perfectly executed. Similarly, the story and themes deserve both all the praise and criticism they received in the 'Strangely About Fate' article; the 'Would You Kindly' twist was mischievous and very clever, and the savaging of Ms Rand's idiot fantasies was delightful to see in a medium usually populated by the politically and philosophically illiterate (sorry Counterstrikers! Dust plz!).

    Unfortunately, that extremely well-considered work by the 'veneer' departments seems to have unintentionally lulled Bioshock's... dumber advocates into thinking that the game is deeper than it is ("Wow, it references BOOKS and stuff! That Ayn Rand guy must have been a really amazing dude!";). If lovers of Bioshock can excuse the flaws in its gameplay, then more power to them, but I feel that, in a video game, peerless art direction is no excuse for sub-par game direction.

    Bioshock is a shooter. No amount of audio diaries, radio messages or vending machines can change this. There is always an 'A' and a 'B' (and a 'C' and 'D' in the multi-fetch-quest sections), and you get from the 'A' to the 'B' by pulling out your guns and plasmids and applying them to anyone who gets in your way. Therefore, Bioshock must, at minimum, succeed as a shooter. Why do I think it doesn't?

    (a.) Bioshock is a corridor shooter. Without even Half-Life's sprawling environments, let alone the genuine multi-approach exploratory options of real innovators like Deus Ex and STALKER, Bioshock hearkens all the way back to the Doom series, almost entirely channelling you along linear conduits to your goal. I'm hesitant to call this an inherently bad thing (although it's strongly against my tastes), but it drastically minimises one's tactical requirements, along with the variety of the experience. It could be said that this is necessary due to the nature of Rapture (underwater and all), but if that's the case, they should have modified it in some way.

    (b.)Bioshock is a crude shooter. IIRC, it was Levine who noted that gamers want to take 'the most efficient route'. This has apparently mutated from an innocent observation on his part, to recriminations from Bioshock advocates that if you play conservatively and stick to known strategies where applicable, you're PLAYING IT WRONG. Apparently, 2k are completely blameless for sending us an array of foes who can all be readily defeated with a very small pool of moves. Other developers avoid this by providing an array of enemies with significantly different weaknesses/threat-levels -- don't waste bullets on headcrabs, use the crowbar; heavy armour is immne to bullets, so use explosives; clear rooms with grenades; kill at close range with the shotgun, etc etc. Unfortunately, with the extremely limited spectrum of threat types (turret/human/bot/BD) and the fecundity of ammo, there is no compulsion whatsoever to change strategy. I agree that it's bad form to use nothing but, say, the electricity and the shotgun, but a basic design principle of multi-weapon combat games is to challenge the player in a variety of ways, so that they must vary their approach. If you aren't doing that, why even put, say, a chemical-thrower in there in the first place? If your method of getting the player to change weapons is tedium, surely you are doing something wrong? The same goes for plasmids; apart from near-useless novelties like 'Enrage' and 'Security Target', they're just more varieties of gun that you don't need. For all the advocates' sneering at action FPSes, I can't think of any (high-profile) ones that fail at the fundamental step of weapon-weighting, even ones I don't particularly like, eg Far Cry or Halo.

    But, let's assume you've successfully dodged the monotony by occasionally pulling out the crossbow instead of the machinegun or whatever does it for you; Bioshock's supposedly about WAY MORE than the shooting, after all, because it's so innovative, DRAGGING VIDEOGAMES BLINKING INTO THE LIGHT OF A NEW DAY, etc etc. Hooray! Let's list the gameplay elements which Bioshock boasts over what I believe to be the definitively 'bog standard' modern FPS, Doom 3.
    Vending machines for extra supplies. A small pool of extra weapons and powerups, activated/deactivated at certain vending machines.. Minor weapon upgrades. A camera that gradually makes its targets weaker or gives you a bonus powerup, depending. And an enemy that protects a useful NPC, rather than being immediately hostile. Now, I've already acknowledged the very accomplished aesthetics of Bioshock, and I think that aesthetics are important in the delivery of a concept, message, atmosphere, whathaveyou. But even if Bioshock didn't defuse its supposed 'moral dilemma' element (by nerfing the result on a gameplay level, making the narrative 'answer' insultingly obvious and using a horribly crude equation to determine your endgame), surely to really advance the development of games, a game must at least have some form of innovation in the way it's played? (if Bioshock blows your mind, Portal must've made your head explode!)

    Gameplay-wise, Bioshock lingers around the boring end of mediocre, and as ambiguous morality plays go, it pales into nothingness compared to Deus Ex, a game from 7 years ago. A game can have the best art direction and/or plot twists in the field (indeed, Bioshock probably does at the moment), but it has not succeeded if the actual game part has been neglected. Unfortunately, that's the part 2k let slide.
    Edited by 1 at 07/12/07 @ 10:26

  • pinchofsalt #299 4 years ago

    What a great read.
    Stopped reading the comments after a couple of pages as it was making my stomach turn. The internet in all its glory (!)

  • samadriel #300 4 years ago

    Thanks :p

  • Stoatboy #301 4 years ago

    @Megaladon

    Of course you're entitled to think and say whatever you like about the game. Your comment just baffled me because it's the exact opposite of one of the complaints levelled earlier in the thread.

    My problem overall is that people (and this isn't aimed at you) just don't seem able to not like a game - they instead feel the need to claim the game is crap. It's such a childish thing to do.

    @samadriel

    You make some relevant points, but we're going to have to agree to disagree on a lot of points (I love linearity in many games, for example...).

    "But, let's assume you've successfully dodged the monotony by occasionally pulling out the crossbow..."

    A crossbow headshot is a one-shot kill on every enemy bar Big Daddys and the final boss (certainly with a fully powered crossbow). Why would I only use it occasionally? I used it as often as it was safe to. On the same note - Target Dummy is arguably the most useful Plasmid in the game, but most people always talk about Electricity as the one they stuck to. That's the bit I don't get. People frequently complain that the "optimal" method they use is boring, and yet they aren't using the optimal method - they stick with the one the game told them to use.


  • samadriel #302 4 years ago

    Yeah, I should've acknowledged the niceness of 'Dummy'. But while I acknowledge that there are several 'winning combinations', the fact is that once you've found one, whatever it is, you never need to vary from it outside of BD fights, since practically every splicer has the same 'strategy' and weaknesses, and ammo is never in short supply.

    Kudos to you for not dismissing me as a 'whiner'; if only I could say the same for Kieron!

  • Daymare #303 4 years ago

    @samadriel

    Good post. You can't argue someone who justifies why exactly he/she doesn't like something. Fair enough. All I can say, when reading your pretty fair critisism of Bishock's gameplay, is that I wasn't so put off with it as some of people who regard the game, because of that, as "nothing special". I understand you/them, I really do. It is, after all, a game and a game needs good gameplay that suits your tastes for you to really like it. But enjoying or not enjoying gameplay has no special meaning for me. It has no value besides the difference of having fun or not having fun. Some would say that makes ALL the difference between a good game and a bad one, but not to me (to clarify: if Bioshock's gameplay was completely shit, I would hate Bioshock for it, but it's just good enough, for me, to appreciate the game more for what it is then hate it for what it isn't).

    Sure, I didn't have as much pure fun playing Bioshock as I had fun playing, for instance SMG, but they're both 10/10 games for me. Go figure. I would just hate to mark Bioshock down because of some of its (potential) shortcomings in gameplay department. It would be like puting taste first and heart second for me, I dunno, I can't express it any better right now.
    Edited by 1 at 07/12/07 @ 10:49

  • reality_cheque #304 4 years ago

    I'm going to put all the morons on ignore, and see how many posts there are left.

    I'm predicting less than a dozen.

  • ErrantSaint #305 4 years ago

    Didn't read some of the middle comments, it's too late IRL and it's too long, sorry. That being said, my 2 cents:

    1) I signed up on this board just so I could bitch about the Dostoevsky comparison but marilena beat me to it. Plus, spelled it correctly. Matter of fact that whole post was spot on, yay for you.

    2) If the vita-chambers were set up for Ryan and his family (as the game does claim) then why doesn't he pop out 50 gajillion times like you do?

    3) What gets people so riled up I think, or at least does in my case, is the fact that most "haters" are people that loved SS2, really wanted to love BS, but were left feeling flat and disappointed. BioShock for them (us) equaled little more than it's initials compared to what was promised\hyped. Taken as a completely separate game, something that is very hard to do, it'd be pretty good (at least above standard fare); but compared to what we were expecting, based on the hype that Levine & friends helped build, it's a disappointment. So mix the disappointment of a long awaited, much beloved (series), game with the super positive press and fanboyism that KG forgets in his defence and lots of these people feel jaded and frustrated.

    @Daymare: Before ragging on marilena for comparing BioShock to Dostoevsky why don't you scroll up a bit and realize it was a response to tgigreeny.

    @TOOTR: Yep, I didn't buy the game. I was really going to but I had a bad feeling about it when my dusty copy of Oblivion caught the corner of my eye. I'm quite happy I didn't too. If I did I'd have to add horribly pissed to my above "jaded and frustrated".

    @samadriel: Great post. Well put.
    Edited by 2 at 07/12/07 @ 11:49

  • Daymare #306 4 years ago

    @ErrantSaint

    "@Daymare: Way to go judging somebody for being smug and pompous and then tossing out Proust's name. Also before ragging on marilena for comparing BioShock to Dostoevsky why don't you scroll up a bit and realize it was a response to tgigreeny"

    Err, wha? I'm not judging anyone being smug and pompous - I was critisizing that "oh, look at him, he's pretentious" stance. And who said anything about Proust? I sure didn't. Why don't You scroll up a bit, eh?

    EDIT: Oh, edited already:)
    Edited by 1 at 07/12/07 @ 11:52

  • ErrantSaint #307 4 years ago

    I guess ya caught that slip, eh? But I still gotcha on the other part. 1-1 buddy ;]

  • Daymare #308 4 years ago

    Hehe:)

  • TOOTR #309 4 years ago

    @samadriel

    Thanks mate - your post is another reason again is why I will still come to EG. (That and the handy ignore poster option).

    I don't share your viewpoint of Bioshock but it was heartening to read an articulate and heartfelt viewpoint with only a hint of the searing frustration that many on this thread seem to be feeling. Kudos to you man - this place was becoming Lord of the Flies.

    Its strange that for something which you consider as 'Gameplay-wise, Bioshock lingers around the boring end of mediocre' is getting such a fired up thread response wouldn't you say?

    For me, it couldn't have been further from the truth and for this year alone (so I'm not comparing to Deux Ex, Thief, SS1 and 2, Planetscape, HL, X-wing, Tetris, galaxians or whatever!) it was the BEST single-player game for pure immersion and fun. For me. And its been a good year but there's still a ton of crap out there.


    Still - I see more where some of the nayers are coming from thanks to your post.

    Thanks for everyone with the - 'Sux, too easy, non-original, no storyline, this was supposed to be the best game ever - we've been lied to, and..*cough* ..the aspect ratio was wrong' cries. Your thoughts were duly noted.

    There are some games I am 'proud' to have completed/beaten - Ninja Gaiden for example. (My wife wouldn't be impressed with this definition of pride but I'm sure some of us here know what I mean).

    There are a very few games I have been severely challenged by due to awesome game design and not irritating unbalance/grinding - and I got a real sense of satisfaction and *cough* smugness by changing strategy/weapon balance and beating the AI. I 'earned' those victories.

    And it is true......I wasn't 'Proud' to complete/beat Bioshock in that manner.


    But from the second I started playing til the moment it finished I had an absolute blast. I was proud to have played it!

    Pleased that there are designers out there that are trying to lift the immersion for people like me ....happy to get sucked into that world, the creepy music, the sound effects, the whole STYLE of the thing hooked me to the point where yes, of course I noticed the AI wasn't genre-breaking but I was having so much fun trying out different stuff I didn't care.

    It was not a gamebreaker for me.

    I had a huge grin on my face after battling the big b*stards for ages you first hypnotise a Big Daddy , and have it clanking around by your side wrecking your enemies for you... two hacked sentry bots whirling around for me - lightning ripping from my fingers - great :)

    So it seems that (ironically) I didn't try enough options!!! If I tried the option of just one weapon I wouldn't have needed the rest.... I'm not being sarcastic here. Seems like I gave the bad-guys too much respect eh? :)


    Edited by 1 at 07/12/07 @ 12:17

  • tgigreeny #310 4 years ago

    "So now that we have all read Kieran's opinion piece and since we know that there's always another angle, it's only fair to see a counter-opinion piece on the matter by an equally talented author. Wouldn't you agree? After all, every opinion has the same value."

    It would be an interesting read - but then as EG were the ones that gave the game such a high rating it is up to them to defend their position, not to criticise it. That's what the forums are for, and this piece was merely a riposte to the forum based criticism. That said it would be nice to see the concerns of some posters neatly encapsulated in a well-written piece - fancy it?

  • dryden555 #311 4 years ago

    I wonder if those who loved the game will be happy to see the same "sandbox shooter with story-line" treatment all over again in the inevitable sequel?

  • smelly #312 4 years ago

    @katsumoto:

    "I would also like to add that EG is also regularly paid by Microsoft, Sony or Nintendo, depending on which thread you are in."


    So you're saying the adverts on the site are free?

  • IQpierce #313 4 years ago

    Why would you assume your readers knew what Dachau was?

  • DjFlex52 #314 4 years ago

    Hey whiners, samadriel just showed how you counterpoint someone else's criticism in an articulate manner. But I don't believe that what samadriel wrote is why so many complained about Bioshock or else why did it take 300 posts for me to read an opinion like his.

    Like TOOTR said, posts like samadriel is why I still visit EG more often and Gamespot, IGN and 1Up less and less.

    From reading samadriel's comments, though, it becomes clear that he's a PC gamer first and foremost. All the games (Deus Ex, Stalker, Planescape) that he used as a comparison to Bioshock were pc games which makes all the difference when critiquing it. I assume he played Bioshock on PC. Bioshock is a console game first (that the devs also wanted pc gamers to appreciate) and like Halo, Gears of War and others console games ported to pc, it doesn't impress pc gamers who have played the best of the best pc games. Deus Ex, Stalker and Planescape would not work on a console without changing it to be accesible to the console gamer. I don't want to say "dumbed down" but you get my drift. That is also why Fable, Jade Empire and all console games ported to pc don't wow pc gamers. So, in effect, if Mass Effect were ported to a pc game it would be blasted the same way immediately.

    That said, I loved Bioshock for what it was....a rare immersive console game and that's why I didn't play it on pc. Bioshock is definitely one of the best single player CONSOLE games this year. If Halo 3 and COD4 didn't have online multiplayer, Bioshock would be in my top 2 for GOTY. If Portal (really a pc game by all standards) was longer then The Orange Box would be my GOTY without question. Assassin's Creed gets an honorable mention for being a non sequel with great graphics and a few innovations.

  • VMerken #315 4 years ago

    @tgiGreeny
    "It would be an interesting read - but then as EG were the ones that gave the game such a high rating it is up to them to defend their position, not to criticise it. That's what the forums are for, and this piece was merely a riposte to the forum based criticism. That said it would be nice to see the concerns of some posters neatly encapsulated in a well-written piece - fancy it?"

    Yeah, I'd fancy such a piece. I'd love to give it a go myself if it weren't for the fact that (a) I never saw more than the demo thanks to SecuRom's limited activations system keeping me from playing the full game PC version and (b) I think Samadriel appears to have done a nice job already. As for "EG defending their position", allow me to quote Katsumoto (instead of a furiously eye-twitching Katsumoto copy/pasting himself ;):

    "And AGAIN - to repeat myself - Can I just reiterate - this is not "Eurogamer" defending their 10/10 review. It is Kieron Gillen, a freelancer, addressing prevalent criticisms of a game and arguing why he does not share these popular sentiments."

    See, it's not a riposte at all - so nothing's really stopping Eurogamer from "printing" Samadriel's post (possibly cleaned up and enhanced) as a "freelancer riposte to the riposte". :)

  • DjFlex52 #316 4 years ago

    See, it's not a riposte at all - so nothing's really stopping Eurogamer from "printing" Samadriel's post (possibly cleaned up and enhanced) as a "freelancer riposte to the riposte". :)

    I wonder if Kieron was giving his riposte for criticism of the PC game or the console game (he doesn't really specify) because like samadriel's riposte to his riposte...it makes a big difference which format you played Bioshock on.

  • immateriaux #317 4 years ago

    "And about the logs, it's not that I didn't listen to them, it's just that I don't find this to be a very good storytelling technique. It seems like everything that's interesting in this game (bar one scene) happened to someone else instead of me. It's like I'm an actor in an interesting film, but I have the most boring part."

    That's a good point marilena, your posts here in general have been well said and well argued.

  • dryden555 #318 4 years ago

    the issue is of course that System Shock 1 and 2 utterly wipe the floor with BioShock's faulty gameplay. I would have enjoyed a good single-player shooter but alas Bioshock isnt even that.

  • 1984 #319 4 years ago

    I liked Bioshock. It manages to be pretty much all at the top (story, audio video) but I have some gripes (player since the C64 days)
    The game is not open enough and choices do not really matter
    The game is too consolish and it has been dumbed down for that reason (hopefully the sales means that there will more similar but deeper experiences).
    The enemies respawn way too d-mned often.

  • bf #320 4 years ago

    samadriel- Very good post. During my replay of Bioshock the things you point out have become glaringly obvious. I am howerver playing the game like a propper FPS now, couldnt do that before due to crappy fps, and with the increase in pace and the element of discovery gone comes a great big void. Can't help but thinking that forcing a different pace if play would make the game better.

    The one thing that buggs me the most right now is that they dont pause the game or in some other way halt events while you are supposed to get bits of the story. Don't know how many times I've found a tape recorder and started listening to it only to be attacked by a splicer halfway through.

    Edit: OK I have to double back a bit. Getting the bouncers to fight one another justifies a bit of the admission.
    Edited by 1 at 12/12/07 @ 16:32

  • dryden555 #321 4 years ago

    Fruit are you saying you only played for the first 20 minutes and think it is an "oustanding" game? You will be disappointed whenever you get around to seeing what the whole game has to offer. Lots of the same thing over and over in a good-looking setting. no replayability. no real decisions as far as RPG's go. Enjoy.....

  • DUFFMAN5 #322 4 years ago

    Totally brilliant game. Funny thing, when I played the demo I thought that it was so very not for me. What a difference a few months can make!

  • Lexx87 #323 4 years ago

    Brilliant game...who don't think so are fucking idiots.

  • Endoskeleton #324 4 years ago

    Yet another f..ng idiot reporting in o/

    We already know , what works in the game and what doesn't. I'd just like to point out that giving 10/10 to a game that has clear design faults in various areas, pretty much fastens inflation. By Next christmas, the max points will be /12 or something.

    And this defence...

    Generally, the text gives a bit shaky impression with all those "i shouldn't be talking to you anymore" lines. It signals many readers that even you doubt your own reasons. Also, the glorifying of the story and deeper meaning of the details, is just exaggerated. There were some promise in the start, with the twisted beauty surgery consept, but soon after the theme stopped evolving to higher state, and continued to be everyday evil with a retromix.

  • Lockyy #325 3 years ago

    I probably should know this, having loved the game and played it multiple times trying to discover everything...


    But why didn't ryan use the vita chamber?

    Or, thinking into it...
    Maybe he did and he just retreated and hid, waiting...
    Edited by 1 at 21/09/08 @ 10:38

  • windflaw #326 3 years ago

    "But why didn't ryan use the vita chamber?"

    From a plot summary on GameFAQs (http://www.gamefaqs.com/console/xbox360/file/931329/500 49):

    "Ryan revealed to Jack that Atlas had been manipulating him since his welcome in Rapture with the words "would you kindly." After a short speech, Ryan used the code phrase to instruct Jack to kill him with a golf club. This was to demonstrate two important things. Ryan wanted to die on his own terms to prove that he was in control to the end. He had shut off the Vita-Chamber in his office so that he wouldn't be resurrected. He also wanted Jack to realize that he was truly a slave and a puppet so that he might get revenge by seeking out Atlas."

    Given Ryan's last words, this explanation seems quite reasonable (well, to me anyway).

  • dryden555 #327 3 years ago

    there were so many gameplay issues including the braindead AI and the lack of challenge -- just not a 9 or 10 game.

  • m0thr4 #328 3 years ago

    Okay - if you're going to quote Edge magazine, answer this bigger gameplay hole they presented: why don't the Splicers even attempt to attack the Little Sisters once their protecting Big Daddy has been killed?

  • sirtacos #329 3 years ago

    Good read. Even though I had to skip over some sections because I haven't quite finished the game yet (almost) I agree with the meat of Gillen's argument. The Bioshock backlash is, as a whole, retarded.
    It's not Jesus Christ standing on a pile of cash with champagne and strippers, but it's an awesome game that redefined what a pseudo-FPS can do in terms of organic gameplay, atmosphere and storytelling.
    Edited by 1 at 25/11/08 @ 01:52

  • B1G_D #330 1 year ago

    One of the key points that was missed (or wasn't raised at the time) is that Bioshock lacks the kind of ATMOSPHERE that System Shock 2 created. Of course Rapture was a very interesting place to visit, but it didn't create the same compelling and totally engrossing feeling that SS2 enveloped you in. SS2 had vita-chambers as well, but the fear of death was much more acute, to the point of regularily making the player crap large bricks of doo-doo at the sight, or the sound (sound was used more effectively) of a nearby monster. The monsters were also scarier, mainly beacuse they we're innocent people, mutated unwillingly by a biological threat (plus they would scream things like "I'm sorry!" or "Run away from me!" while trying to seperate your head from your shoulders). Bioshock contains enemies who are nowhere near as scary or engaging and simply choose to splice their DNA, as a result there isn't any human conflict within the player during combat.
    The Von Braun made you feel more isolated, Rapture's at the bottom of the sea, the VB was in outer space, light years from earth. The odds also felt more against you, in Rapture you had to deal with the mutated population and some big daddy's, in SS2 you had to deal with not one but two enemies (both significantly larger and more powerful than you).
    Oh and in SS2 people had committed suicide all over the place, always a sure fire way to create some atmosphere.