BioShock Related content
-
Exclusive: BioShock comparison video
-
Latest BioShock screenshots
- Hands On BioShock Challenge Rooms [25]
Order before 5.30pm and receive your order the next working day!
PreviousBioShock Review
PlayStation 3 Review by Dan Whitehead
Page 1 of 2.
Page 2 
It feels a bit strange to be reviewing BioShock almost exactly a year since everyone was last talking about it. Even before it launched on the 360 and PC, it was one of the most widely and thoroughly dissected games of 2007. Riding the hype and backlash seesaw like few games before or since, it attracted reams of praise, (fevered) debate, and impassioned defence along the way.
In other words, so much has been said and written about BioShock that I fear there's little I can say about the long awaited PS3 version that won't taste like refried beans. But then, having been reunited with Rapture, BioShock is a game still magnificently capable of inspiring torrents of thoughts and ideas.
There's the story, one of the most highly lauded in recent gaming history, but then most of the things I'd want to discuss are precisely the sort of things that patient PS3 gamers probably won't want spoiled. I know I'd have been really annoyed if I'd learned that your character is actually a sexy female cyborg with Hitler's brain right before I started playing last year. Oops.
What is safe to learn is that you play as a mysterious man, left splashing about in the ocean after a plane crash in 1960. Swimming for the safety of a mysterious structure, you discover the entrance to Rapture, a secret undersea utopia built by Objectivist demagogue Andrew Ryan fourteen years earlier. Descending into the decaying ruins of this failed social experiment, battling the insane former inhabitants as you go, you slowly uncover the truth behind Rapture's fall. It's a world of faded art deco glamour where Ayn Rand's dream of brilliance unfettered by morality and charity has turned sour, rotted by human nature and encroaching sea water. A nightmare where young girls harvest corpses, protected in their work by lumbering behemoths in heavy diving suits; where doctors mutilate patients in defiance of accepted aesthetics; where poets slaughter for inspiration.
The Splicers, insane gene addicts wearing sinister party costumes, remain one of the more original and compelling FPS villains of recent times.
But to say any more would be grossly unfair to those who've managed to stay spoiler-free for a whole year. A huge part of what made - and still makes - BioShock a uniquely compelling experience is the sense of discovery as you creep around the varied environments. At a time when so many designers still seem in love with grey and brown tunnels, it's a joy to return to a game built around period detail, bold architecture and a very deliberate, specific and unique sense of place. This holds true of your enemies as well. Find a hiding place and you listen to them, talking manically to themselves as they hunt for you. In one memorable moment, having been done in by a Thuggish Splicer, I lay dying on the floor and was amazed to see them walk up to me and apologise, in their own lunatic manner, for having to kill me.
So, the story is still great and still worth experiencing fresh. I could, of course, talk about the technical differences between PS3 and 360...except there really aren't any. Or at least none that my human eyes can detect. I'm sure that a future comparison article will tear the frames apart to lay bare exactly how the PS3 code stands up to the 360, but for the vast majority of players it'll be a moot point. It plays at a steady 30 frames-per-second, with no screen tearing that I could see. Should such nefarious factors appear in the boxed retail version, the options menu contains video toggles that should put things right.
The initial descent into Rapture is perhaps the most evocative and brilliantly constructed introductions to a gameworld since the original Half Life.
As before, the Unreal Engine is put to fine use, conjuring up gruesomely misused medical facilities, decrepit industrial areas and the twisted whimsy of Fort Frolic without a flicker. BioShock is a great looking game, as much for the imagination of what it shows you as for the technical detail, and the PS3 rises to the occasion every bit as successfully as the 360. Perhaps even more so, since this version is free from the annoying - though eventually patched - cache bug that made the 360 version stutter in the later levels. On the other hand, it's another PS3 game that comes with an obligatory install, taking upwards of ten minutes and gobbling up another 5GB of your drive.
Are you excited about BioShock on PlayStation 3?
View Eurogamer readers most anticipated games
Related Games
BioShock
Latest Features
Latest Videos
Exclusive: BioShock comparison video [15] 4 November, 2008
Bioshock PS3 - Little Sisters [2] 15 October, 2008
Latest News
-
BioShock 1 due for Mac next month [32]
-
Spanish director in BioShock talks [14]
-
BioShock man working on new shooter [13]
-
BioShock to get novelisation [14]
-
Universal puts BioShock movie on hold [17]
Latest Screenshots
4 November, 2008 [2]
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
|
Digital~Orgasm
16/10/08 @ 06:01
-1
Wow 10 wasn't expecting that.
I didn't think Bioshock was that great personally. |
|
-1
Oh FFS!
There's NO WAY bioshock is worth that! There's no bloody game! There's no punishment for dying! There's no skill required! Hell you could go thru the game with a pea shooter -> fire couple of bullets at big daddie, die, respawn, repeat until he's dead. There's bugger all replayability, no multiplayer, the only real reason to replay the game is to see the opposite ending.. I couldnt be bothered after playing it thru once - I just watched youtube. There's also a gawd awful "protect the ai" level that these games insist upon. Where the ai is f-ing stupid and just is desperate to get hurt. Grrr. 90% of the game is a piece of piss.. then on later levels they take away all your ammo for a Looooooooong section.. Only to give you shit loads again afterwards.. Oh and the end boss was a piece of piss even on the hardest setting. Only thing that's GOOD about this game is : A) eye candy (but i've been told that the 360 version apparently looks better)... B) The story. But personally, if i want a story - i'd read a book or watch a movie. I play games for the FUN of playing them.. and i'm sorry this game isnt fun... |
|
-1
I din't like either - this is one of those all too overrated games - Shure the story telling elements are very good, and the setting is different, but gameplay holds -nothing- new. Those drug improvements are just "rpg-ish" stat/skills in disguise, and for the so-called "moral descisions" - lets just call them marketing hype.
For all of the work they put into this game I would actually have preffered yet another ww2 shooter with the same production values. Yes, really! |
|
bigbadbeasty
16/10/08 @ 06:37
0
Let us not get into the bloody 'what is worth a 10' debate (again). Scores are simply opinions.
I really enjoyed Bioshock, but see no reason to buy it again, a year too late... on a console... |
|
+1
"Others see it as a merely average shooter, dressed up in intellectual clothing. Me, I loved it in 2007 - and have had that love reaffirmed by returning to Rapture after a twelve-month detox period."
There you go. One line to sum up that some people see a 10, some don't. Individuals.... crazy concept. Take that into account before going on a "this isn't a 10" crusade. I've only really played the intro on the PC but found it awesome. This should be sitting in my in tray at work today at some point!
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 16/10/08 @ 07:53
|
|
TiredRiver
16/10/08 @ 06:54
-1
This is an 8. Edge was correct. Combat is shallow. It does'nt feel right. It does not feel as good as Halo 3 ! Therefore it is not a 10.
|
|
Godhather08
16/10/08 @ 06:57
+1
@smelly
There's no way I give a shit about what you think. I'll be getting this game day 1. |
|
0
It's a 10 because it's done more to move the genre forward than anything else in recent years. decent voice acting, interactive storytelling without any cut scenes other than the opening and ending. amazing art direction and level design. What it might lack slightly in game play mechanics it more than makes up for in every other area.
Fort Frolic was the best thing I've played in years! |
|
Godhather08
16/10/08 @ 07:05
0
@LED
You say; "Why are we getting a review of the PS3 version?" You know the answer to this youself, don't play stupid. |
|
0
Bioshock has major flaws:
Rubbish character modeling/animation. Evidenced by the fact that everyone you get anywhere near of any importance is seperarted from you by glass/invisible walls except for Sander Cohen and the guy you golf club in the face. An act the game does itself, in some clever "twist" about lack of choice. The rest of the game is spent communicating with Jpg's through a crackly radio in AWFUL accents that sound like the ones your mates do because they THINK they're funny. People can gush about the story ALL they want, but when you're too scared/ashamed of your work to let the player interact with other characters on no other level besides kill them, then what's the point. In the era of Half life 2's Alyx and Bad company's facial animations. Hell, even GTA IV. There's no excuse for this sort of thing, I got sick of speaking to JPG's after DEUS EX. |
|
SleepyMagpie
16/10/08 @ 07:07
0
wired_protocol wrote: "Someone mentioned its worth playing for the story - hardly, it's all very good stuff until the last section, and a good story heavily relies on a good conclusion".
You also go on about this game not being intellectual, and make a point about getting everyone to conform to your idea that it won't make you smarter..? Since you claim to know something about being intellectual, one would speculate that you have delved into various taxing tomes and are maybe even quite the connoisseur of arthouse films? If you have even a passing knowledge of more obscure books, and "deep" stuff in general, you would know that many works fail to bring anything to a Hollywood "good" conclusion (even though I don't think you meant this), or even a firm conclusion at all (which I think you meant). In the realm of "high" prose and films, clear-cut conclusions are not as common as you seem to think, wired_protocol. Maybe you should check out Ayn Rand yourself, it might give you a better appreciation of Bioshock's leitmotif, and the game's atmosphere in general. The game is probably a 9/10. Very good. It is a game first and foremost to be savoured for it's brilliant atmosphere. Anyone considering it a FPS and judging it accordingly are missing the mark by a mile. |
|
0
I'm glad it's out at last (and I hope they've patched the bugs http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/showthr... ).
I played the 360 version and didn't think that much of it as I'm one of the "but it's System Shock 2 underwater and less good" brigade. From my experience most 360 owners are current or former PC gamers. However, PS3 owners are a different breed and may have never played System Shock 2 so they'll absolutely love this. I own a PS3 too but I don't think I can face going through it all again. A bit surprised to see it got the same score even though it is 14 months later. I was under the impression that scores took the year into consideration as a mark of technical achievement. Producing the same game 14 months later doesn't seem that impressive to me. |
|
0
If you judge it on pure gameplay terms, it's 8/10 or so. But if you can look past that, the experience, art direction and the story, (which is way smarter then the story of 98% of other games - especially in this genre), then it is what Dan recognizes it to be: a 10/10.
I have a suspicion that "if I want a good story, I'll read a book" argument comes mostly from the people who don't actually read much:) |
|
squarejawhero
16/10/08 @ 07:20
0
But I suppose the point is it can basically be played as an FPS, and any pretensions towards being anything otherwise seems unimportant when the design only allows you the opportunity to make you think, rather than actually require it.
Most defenders cite this as one of the reasons it makes it great, that the tools afforded to you give you flexibility to approach situations in different ways, but ultimately it's not important when you can merely respawn and try again or rely on one or two weapons or powers through the whole game. Which really defeats the purpose of the plasmid system in the first place. |
|
squarejawhero
16/10/08 @ 07:21
0
Oh and the story's great, if a little obvious, up until the reveal. Then it delves into videogame tropes with aplomb and never recovers.
|
|
SleepyMagpie
16/10/08 @ 07:28
0
squarejawhero wrote: "But I suppose the point is it can basically be played as an FPS, and any pretensions towards being anything otherwise seems unimportant when the design only allows you the opportunity to make you think, rather than actually require it."
You are sooo left-hemisphere! |
|
0
When was the last time you saw a console shooter dare to use pink? And make it scary?
The last time someone fired a needler at me? They even named an achievement after it. Still don't get it. Yes, the atmosphere and sound is superb, and it's quite pretty (but only quite pretty, it's far from being a Gears or Uncharted), but the story is about 0.1% that of Halo, its moral decisions are about 0.1% those of GTA4, its AI is about 0.1% of Pong, and has a series of incredibly pointless but cool-looking weapons. Yes the plasmids look nice, but aside from fire and lightening you don't need any of them. Buy as many grenades as possible, walk up to Big Daddy, fire 6 grenades, Big Daddy dead in 2 seconds. Press button to save indentikit alien thing (because you always save, it's not a moral decision when there's a big achievement up for grabs for doing one but not the other). Repeat. Throw in some annoying pipe puzzles and backtracking fetch quests for good measure. Sometimes I wonder if the game I played was the real Bioshock, and if there's some 1950s-underwater-Halo or something with the same name that has AI and gameplay. Normally when I play a game getting universal 10s that I don't like I can at least see why someone might think that. But with this I simply cannot comprehend why anyone thinks it's worthy of a maximum score because so much of it is just so fucking awful. |
|
0
I suppose Dan had no option but to give the PS3 version the same score as the 360 one, otherwise you would get cries of "oh, so the PS3 version is worse then!" from mouth-breathing retards with no concept of expectations shifting over time, or the benefit of hindsight.
So for me, this 10/10 means 'just as good as the 360 version' Not 'genuine 10/10 game' Which it really should...... maybe it is to Dan But not to me. |
|
0
Nice review, Dan.
I completely agree with the review and the score... BioShock was last year's finest game and I utterly adored it on the 360. It was an atmospheric and engrossing experience right up until the last section, which alas was a massive disappointment. Still a few minutes of disappointment versus the 35+ hours I got out of it... I can't really grumble. I'm immensely looking forward to the sequel. I also like the way Dan always mention whether a game has screen tearing or not. Too many reviewers ignore this IMO even if it doesn't annoy everyone (I think it makes my expensive HDTVs look like cheap knock-offs personally). Keep it up. :) |
|
0
Still overrated, then.
Meh. Bioshock was ok. Good story, with some good ideas, but still very average gameplay. The gunplay is weak, the Plasmids are either far too effective or almost useless, and there are about 6 different enemies in the game which repeat indefinately, but get inexplicably tougher as the game goes on. Thats hardly good design. Its a decent game. But not the all-singing all-dancing saviour of story and shooting that most press articles seem to make it out as. |
|
0
I like the way defenders of the faith are criticising 'haters' for disliking the game, for wanting everyone to think like them...
...which is exactly what they are doing by ragging on the dissenters. I thought BioShock was average, spoiled by the Vita-Chambers - but not because they existed, but because the game was designed with them in mind - so just taking them out won't solve the problem, it'll just make everything more frustrating. People are right - there is no reason to replay this game - the moral decisions are entirely inferior to those present in, say, The Witcher |
|
0
Jesus.
You'd think smelly was sexually abused by a Big Daddy when he was younger or something. Smelly - a prime example of someone who does not understand that DIFFERENT PEOPLE HAVE DIFFERENT INTERESTS AND OPINIONS. Me, I think smelly's an absolute knob-jockey, but I'm perfectly willing to accept that other people think of him differently. Like his mum, who thinks he's a rub-tugger. |
|
0
Bioshocks glimmer did dim with me a bit with time, but playing the demo again brought me right into Rapture again. It really is very, very good. All 360 & PC Bioshock owners should have another playthrough, all PS3 owners should have their first, everyone wins!
Except those that don't like it obviously. They'll probably still not like it. |
|
0
"Me, I think smelly's an absolute knob-jockey, but I'm perfectly willing to accept that other people think of him differently"
Bad example. I don't think you'll find anyone who disagrees. :) As for Bioshock - a very good game everyone should play. Whether it's an 8 or 9 (which sounds about right to me) or a 10. |
|
0
Daymare,
How so? Maybe you liked the story (I didn't), but if you think the 'decision-making' of pressing one of two buttons to do something to one of 50 exactly-the-fucking-same alien things is mental anguish then you're far too sensitive, and if you think the AI was anything less than abysmal then I presume you haven't played another game in the last ten years. |
|
0
It was a ten last time, and the PS3 version delivers the same game (a tiny bit more blur, which looks better to some, worse to others) and a few extras ... so it would be inconsistent to rate it lower. It's a great game, but I have to see I keep failing to see how this is a 10 but LBP isn't. There's some serious matter-of-taste issues here. ;) Which should be obvious as I don't like Bioshock at all. I like the art of the environments and the atmosphere of the game, but not nearly enough to want to look at and kill everything that walks inside it ... I had my fill half-way through the demo, and by the time I finished that (on the 360 and then again on the PS3) I was thoroughly convinced that this isn't for me. A big contrast with LBP which I put 10s of hours into the beta and was genuinely depressed for a few hours when it ran out, and then felt genuinely happy about the experience for several days after ...
Edited 2 times,
most recently on 16/10/08 @ 08:52
|
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
