Just finished Bioshock...

theCzar

this post is about the ending...

Whoops!

It seemed a no brainer at the start to harvest little sisters rather than rescue for double Adam, and besides, my mate Atlas said it was OK and they weren't real girls so it didn't matter. It was such an awful job killing the BD's, I wanted my full whack of Adam.

Course, now I've finished the game and Atlas aka Fontaine is a real jerk and not my friend at all, further I've seemingly become a bit megalomaniacal myself, hijacking a nuclear sub and all. Boy is my face red.

Mind you, even when I got to Tenenbaum's safe house, and got treated to the "stay from the bad man", "he's the one who hurts us" etc. I still went on to Harvest 8 more little sisters on a "in for a penny basis" but I still feel a little ambushed by my villainous end.

Good game, if a little frustrating at times, on hard mode at least. I might play again on normal and explore other possible routes.

While I'm here, did anybody go the wrench master route? I eschewed the wrench and associated tonics for guns and glory is the powered up wrench swinger anyway a match for grenade happy lunatic?

mathias

The game was far too easy in my opinion , even on hard and rescuing all the sisters you have more than enough adam , and once you figure out how to use the bots and sentries , you barely need any ammo at all , you can get those to do all your shooting for you , and no matter what setting your on , 2-3 shots from the rocket launcher takes out any big daddy.

There are 3 different endings , although the difference between two are very slight , the major ones you get for either saving all the sisters , best ending , or killing them all , which youve already seen.

theCzar

mathias wrote: »

...no matter what setting your on , 2-3 shots from the rocket launcher takes out any big daddy.

Which rocket launcher would this be? The rocket turrets? It takes a min of about 9 grenades from your own launcher (with research level 3)

Maybe its an Xbox/PC difference? I'm playing PC.

Edit:
my fav way to take them out is cover an explosive barrel or cylinder with 6 proximity mines, and fling it with telekinesis. That will kill, or very nearly kill an early Rosie.

mathias

I dont have an xbox , I played it on the PC too , Im talking about the rocket/grenade launcher etc. Whatever it is ! You buy the ammo from the vending machines.

Kiith

Well, you had an easier time then i remember having. Not saying the game was too tough, but the big daddies took an enormous amount of punishment. Theres no way 3 grenades would kill them (possibly on easy?).

Fantastic game either way.

super_furry

I thought Bioshock was vastly overated. Pretty and all, but way, way overated.

There, I've finally said it.

koneko

You're wrong.






Wrenching is fun, you can add a bunch of tonics to improve it and researching the Bouncher will improve your wrench damage too. I prefer saving all the little sisters, in the end you end up with a little less Adam, but the total is only about 2 or 300 less IIRC as you get adam as a gift after each 3rd little sister. You also get the very handy Hypnotize Big Daddy (and v2) plasmid, it's great for pitting two BDs against eachother.

I've only ever played the game on Hard, but even on Easy I don't think 2-3 rockets would take out a BD, it takes a lot more on Hard anyway.

Melion

Is this worth buying for someone who isnt normally a big fan of FPS? I hated Halo 3 but liked COD 4

koneko

Most definitely worth buying, or renting (if you can) if you don't want to buy.

Melion

Was just in xtra vision and they have the tin case pre-owned for €24.99, was gonna pick it up but wasnt sure if id enjoy it

Creamy Goodness

it's good, but it's basically a watered down version of another game (system shock2) and i don't think bioshock deserves all the praise it gets.

super_furry

Call of Cthulhu did everything that Bioshock was lauded for - atmosphere and tone, storyline and immersion - and did it better. I appreciated the drip-feed story and all, but I dunno, at the heart of it just felt like another FPS in a fancy setting.

Ruffty^

I finished it on the pc. I have warned anyone who will listen, not to buy this game. I had terrible problems with mouse lag, latest patch and everything. I have a logitech G9 latest drivers.

I don't understand why this is an award winning game. Sure the time period and the way the game is built sets the scene nicely. Pity they didn't put as much effort into the gameplay, it's a step backwards from hl2, cod4, crysis. I just really didn't like it. The whole way through it feels like a crappy console conversion.

This must be the first game based under the sea, where there is absolutely no swimming. Disappointed there was no outside mission what so ever, no subs or diving suit....nothing.
Also every map is SO dark. Yea atmosphere or whatever, but ffs there aren't any vampires in the game, 1/2 bright areas would have been nice.

I played it through on hard. The final boss is laughably easy, compared to normal enemys. I expected alot more enemy types too, more mutant enemies and stuff. What I got was about 5 types over and over with pipe/pistol/machine gun.

From a guy who plays every fps I can get my hands on. This is a poor game getting its award from story telling and the 1920s or whatever time setting. They should have written a book, not wasted my time by making a crappy game.

CiDeRmAn

I finished it last night on the 360 and wow, loved it.
Now don't get me wrong, the gameplay is really old school dressed up in some pretty clothes, but wow, what clothes!
It was one of those experiences that I will love and carry with me, along with Monty Mole, Manic Miner and Metal Gear Solid.
I mean in the movies we don't mind being presented with the same old action movie plot once it's been tarted up with state of the art special effects and some decent acting, and that's what we got here.
Hopefully a sequel will answer those gameplay weaknesses and bump the challenge up a bit.
I was a little disappointed with the simple circle strafe mechanic needed in the final battle, ah well, the ending movie, the good one at that, more than made up for it, magnificent.
Everything in the game painted a coherent picture of not only a bygone era, but an era frozen in amber by a megalomaniac and the terrible fate wrought upon those foolish enough to accept his invitation to live there, in Rapture, the music, the art on the walls, the party banners, the signs of a recent celebration everywhere, one that ended in the worst kind of brutality, and then the enemies, the twisted remanents of the inhabitants, no longer human, feral and lethal, and rather suseptable to shotguns, thank the gods.

I don't know what game you were playing Ruffty, but I suggest you bring it back and get Bioshock!

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

CiDeRmAn wrote: »

I mean in the movies we don't mind being presented with the same old action movie plot once it's been tarted up with state of the art special effects and some decent acting, and that's what we got here.

umm.. some of us do, those of us that don't find thinking painful anyway.

Ruffty^

CiDeRmAn wrote: »

Best game ever = bioshock
Best movie ever = AVPR: Aliens vs Predator - Requiem

CiDeRmAn

Ruffty^ wrote: »

I finished it on the pc. I have warned anyone who will listen, not to buy this game. I had terrible problems with mouse lag, latest patch and everything. I have a logitech G9 latest drivers.

Perhaps thats your problem, perhaps it simply didn't play as well on your PC as it did on my 360?
Or maybe you are simply one of the very few who really didn't like the game,
Ah well...


And please don't mis quote me again,

Aliens Vs Predator Requiem isn't the best film ever...

That award has to go to Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas.

That and Ernest Saves Christmas....:D

Dr Bob

Ruffty^ wrote: »

I finished it on the pc. I have warned anyone who will listen, not to buy this game. I had terrible problems with mouse lag, latest patch and everything. I have a logitech G9 latest drivers.


...where there is absolutely no swimming....there aren't any vampires ...
...more mutant enemies and stuff.

.... This is a poor game getting its award from story telling and the 1920s or whatever time setting. ....:D

No mouse lag for myself or anyone else I knew who played it on PC .And i've an MX518/G15 combo(the "2 installs and you're out"type security WAS a pain though).
Jesus! you played through the game and you think it was set in the 1920's?
Did you even bother listening to any of the dialog/backstory etc?
Maybe you should trade in the PC and get an console , they do the kind of no brainer FPS's that might suit you better.
It's not a perfect game (It's really a dumbed down/tarted up re imagining of the sublime System shock 2), buts it's one of the best games released in the past few years.

Kiith

luas_dublin wrote: »

It's not a perfect game (It's really a dumbed down/tarted up re imagining of the sublime System shock 2), buts it's one of the best games released ever.

Fixed for you

pixelburp

super_furry wrote: »

Call of Cthulhu did everything that Bioshock was lauded for - atmosphere and tone, storyline and immersion - and did it better. I appreciated the drip-feed story and all, but I dunno, at the heart of it just felt like another FPS in a fancy setting.

Apart from also utilising that most retarded of game mechanics; auto-respawning enemies. It was something that TOTALLY killed the atmosphere in both games, where having cleared out a room of enemies at great expense, you find a whole bevy of new enemies to fight. Grrr

Bioshock is a great game, but its difficulty was clearly toned down for the console market; I breezed through the whole thing without too much bother. Nothing illustrated this more than the vit-a-life tanks & the fairly easy boss fights. It was an adult, atmospheric, haunting game, but its difficulty was akin to a lucasarts on-rails shooter. Non-existent.

Ruffty^

I have a quadcore and 8800gts, it ran perfectly for me, -mouse lag, if you dont believe me, just google it. It ruined the game for many people.
Some people are talking about this on console and others for pc.

For pc, imo this is a very average game. I would rate it somewhere around doom3, but that was better in many aspects. As I have said already its major faults for me; no underwater missions, minimium enemy types, no vehicles,
no multiplayer,0 replay value, boring maps.
Remember in crysis when the mountain explodes? Remember in hl2 when c17 explodes? Remember in cod4 when the nuke goes off?

Its a joke that it got awards on pc without a mulitplayer.

Maybe it is a good console game, I don't know. Imo playing fps without a mouse and keyboard....it's just stupid and i cant understand it.

Basically for pc, there are many superior fps games than bioshock available; crysis, hl2 box, cod4, frontline fuel of war, ut3, etc.
Although, if you have no internet, and you throw games away after playing them, then maybe you should consider it, but still only after crysis and frontline.

0ubliette

Ruffty^ wrote: »

I have a quadcore and 8800gts, it ran perfectly for me, -mouse lag, if you dont believe me, just google it. It ruined the game for many people.
Some people are talking about this on console and others for pc.

For pc, imo this is a very average game. I would rate it somewhere around doom3, but that was better in many aspects. As I have said already its major faults for me; no underwater missions, minimium enemy types, no vehicles,
no multiplayer,0 replay value, boring maps.
Remember in crysis when the mountain explodes? Remember in hl2 when c17 explodes? Remember in cod4 when the nuke goes off?

Its a joke that it got awards on pc without a mulitplayer.

The mind ****ing boggles, it really does.
Bioshock is a STORY driven SINGLE PLAYER fps. Ill state that again, SINGLE PLAYER. Remeber we used to have those back in the 80's? I think there might still be the occasional single player game floating around now too... :rolleyes:

Cod4 is not better than bioshock. For MP sure it is, but as a sp game? Go bollocks. Yeah i remember when the nuke went off in cod4, and i also remember thinking, "wow, a barely interactive cut scene, how thrilling, i guess now im back to the generic terrorist-em-up and the respawning enemies with homing grenades".
And if youre actually trying to say that frontlines fuel of war is a better game than bioshock, seriously....youre wrong.

Kiith

I agree with 0ubliette here. I miss the days where single player, story driven games were more popular then multiplayer games. I like stories. I like being immersed in a (semi)believable world, with characters that you actually care about (be it love/hate etc...). Call of Duty 4 was a good game. Great multiplayer, decent single player.

I dont think a game like Bioshock should get a lower review score, just cause its got no multiplayer. Its not supposed to, and it never was going to. And rating it somewhere around Doom 3 is insulting. Doom? Come on...

Ruffty^ wrote: »

Remember in crysis when the mountain explodes? Remember in hl2 when c17 explodes? Remember in cod4 when the nuke goes off?

So, if there had been more explosions, you would have liked Bioshock? Did you like the new Rambo film by any chance :rolleyes:

Kiith

Also seems that Bioschock is getting a sequel...yay (although i fear it may suck ass. how do you continue from where Bioshock left us? Prequel maybe?)

http://savingprogress.com/bioshock-sequel-made-official/

koneko

Ruffty, I don't know what drugs you're on, but let me know so I can avoid them. Agree totally with 0ubliette and Kiith. If you think multiplayer and explosions make a good game then you live on a different planet than I do. Doom 3? Crysis? Wow.

Ruffty^

haha ofc explosions make a good fps. Some of the most important requirements in a good fps are good explosions, variety of enemies, variety of killing enemies, somekind of vehicle action, nowdays map interaction is a big factor in a great fps.
It is important to feel you actually have an imapact on your surroundings. What did we get in bioshock? I think the ground shook for a little bit. I mean they coded all of the city and all that crap, did we see any of it get damaged? It would have been OBVIOUS and nice to have a sequence where you flood and drowned an area, killing enemies, since we happen to be underwater, but even that was too much to ask..

You know why there are no single player fps on the pc nowdays? It's because of the untility you are using right now, the internet. Multiplayer is the most important part of any fps, perhaps on console where you play with auto-aim on a joypad, its not that important, but for real gamers on a pc, it is paramount.
Bioshock will be forgotten the minute you finish it, will crysis? will cod4? will frontline? will ut3?
Yea bioshock went into this single player niche that has been left alone for a long time, but thats because it is dead. Single player fps is like left hand drive in ireland, its just stupid and a failure. Sure it mite be fun for about 10hrs, but giving awards to something that is totally eclipsed by other games, e.g. cod4, that will live on for a number of years, it's like pissing into the wind, a waste of time.

CiDeRmAn

Nope, not right there at all,
And given that you're pretty much the only person holding this opinion, I figure even you must be thinking you may be wrong.
I mean, ultimately, liking or disliking something is entirely subjective but there are elements that are not, things that can be said to be well done regardless of whether the overall game is to your taste.
The visuals, the sound the enemy design are all very well done.
Given that the game is set in the 50's with heavy 20's influences, the weapons available to our hero are naturally underpowered relative to the future war FPS you are used to.
Having the ability to flood an area may have been cool, but it would have broken the rest of the game, as the question would be raised "why can't I do that all the time?", it broke Red Faction after all.
Also, whats to stop a flooded area continuing to flood the rest of the game?
No, better that the lead character have the same sort of influences over the enviroment as we do, the damage to the city is due to the disrepair and the impact of the aircraft from above.
Bioshock has, plainly, not been forgotten as soon as it is finished, a point you must conceed, as the people here defending it have shown.
COD4, living on for a number of years? A military FPS is released all to often, you yourself seem to praise Fuel of War, no doubt you were hooked on GRAW as well, when the next shiny bauble of COD5 turns up COD4 will be consigned to the finished it bin, and you will be dazzled by the next set of extreme demolition effects offered up, whilst those of us loved Bioshock, despite its flaws, will remember it for a long time, as one remembers a great book, and we many, will look forward to it's follow up.


As for single player FPS being a failure in Ireland, where on earth did you get that notion from?
Thats the dumbest thing you have said so far, the whole purpose of the FPS is to provide a backdrop for many types of games, be they single player stories, multiplayer arenas, shoot em ups like Doom3 or more considered adventures like Metroid Prime 3, perhaps you are too limited in your experience as yet, maybe you need more time to sample what gaming has to offer before you come in with such sweeping, and frankly wrong, statements.

kowloon

I put forward that both System Shock 2 and Half Life (not CS) were better single player than Multi (SS2 didn't even include multi until a later patch).
Games like quake were better multiplayer (and they knew it, the story was all but dispensed with)

Azza

I liked both Crysis and Doom III, they where good games but not without there faults. I was a little dissapointed with Crysis as my expectations where quite high but its still a good game. Doom III had superb atmosphere and the gameplay was good but repetitive.

Bioshock is better than both in my opinon and once you patch and turn the vital chambers off 1 on my 2 main gripes (that game was too easy) is gone.

Story and gameplay in Bishock are great although it does have a dissapointing last chapter and ending.

Cod 4 is a great game with lots of stand out moments but it is insanely short. Mutiplayer is fantastic. Even though there are alot of military games out this won't be forgotten and unless COD5 is something out of this world its not going change that fact either.

UT3 has no storyline and is not a single player game. Its recieved a mixed reception from UT fans and on the PC at least looks like it will be a failure.

Ruffty you give PC gamers a bad name berating console users which I'm also one. Console players are real gamers too you know. Just because your play game on the PC does not mean you have found the excelsior of life. Bioshock got great reviews on the PC as well as consoles and it equally loved on both.

MooseJam

doom 3 was rubbish, you couldn't see anything, help me mom its sooo dark in here

0ubliette

Ruffty^ wrote: »

haha ofc explosions make a good fps. Some of the most important requirements in a good fps are good explosions, variety of enemies, variety of killing enemies, somekind of vehicle action, nowdays map interaction is a big factor in a great fps.
It is important to feel you actually have an imapact on your surroundings. What did we get in bioshock? I think the ground shook for a little bit. I mean they coded all of the city and all that crap, did we see any of it get damaged? It would have been OBVIOUS and nice to have a sequence where you flood and drowned an area, killing enemies, since we happen to be underwater, but even that was too much to ask..

You know why there are no single player fps on the pc nowdays? It's because of the untility you are using right now, the internet. Multiplayer is the most important part of any fps, perhaps on console where you play with auto-aim on a joypad, its not that important, but for real gamers on a pc, it is paramount.
Bioshock will be forgotten the minute you finish it, will crysis? will cod4? will frontline? will ut3?
Yea bioshock went into this single player niche that has been left alone for a long time, but thats because it is dead. Single player fps is like left hand drive in ireland, its just stupid and a failure. Sure it mite be fun for about 10hrs, but giving awards to something that is totally eclipsed by other games, e.g. cod4, that will live on for a number of years, it's like pissing into the wind, a waste of time.