So my faith in BioShock: Infinite is now restored!

[BrionJames]

This has probably already been said, but Bioshock 2 wasn't done by Irrational Games, the developer who made System Shock 1&2 and the first Bioshock. If an Infinite is anything like any one of those games I'll be pleased as punch. Bioshock 2 was just a sequel pumped out for revenue by the publisher. It's a little disheartening to see it get pushed back so much, but then again I'd rather see a game be done right then pushed out with a boat load of flaws. If you haven't played the System Shock games you should get your head checked, the graphics haven't aged well, but the gameplay, story, and environment are all amazing.

 

[cptpuddingcup]

It definitely looks interesting but I think it will just be a rental for me. The first one was amazing and second was good but not great. I'll wait and see what people say first before diving into it.

 

[DanielBrown]

Neither hyped or very excited, but I am looking forward to playing a game with bright colors.
Will be a purchase once the price drops, if it gets good reviews from the players.

 

[IamLEAM1983]

Very excite indeed, and the typo is intentional.

My one gripe would be that it looks far less like a horror title and a lot more like a Steampunk actioner. I don't mind, but the footage we've seen so far didn't feel very "System Shock" or "BioShock" in nature. It feels a lot more like Irrational went "Hey, let's get the CoD crowd into this! Less horror, more dakka!"

At least the set design and atmosphere still look great.

 

[vasiD]

This thread showcases impressive ADHD from anyone claiming they were loosing their excitement for the game (without giving a better reason than 'it's taking too long').

"I mean, I was excited about the game, then like a month passed, I saw something shiny, and that shit was done-zo."

I am excited for this game because it's from the same creator, that said I hated Bioshock 2 and have since re-examined Bioshock and am less impressed (great for it's time, but only if you've had nothing better than a console all these years, which when I first played it was the case, and is now not)... Still, from System Shock on this guy has been kicking ass, so I have faith in him doing it some more.

Plus my ears perked up when he said something about making the games more difficult with permanent choices.

captcha: good work

.... o.o... Thanks Captcha...

 

[Jaeke]

I've been an absolute diehard fan of BioShock since soon after the first one was released.
I was 12 years old when the first one came out and I was as enthralled as I was horrified when I finally played it.

Wait, what?

You were 12 when the game came out? What the hell is a 12 year old doing playing Bioshock? The game was rated bloody M. Here in the UK, the BBFC rated it 18. And I'm not surprised at all. It's a great game, but it's not the sort of thing I'd want any twelve year old to be playing, just like I wouldn't want them to watch a Mad Max film or an Evil Dead film. When I was 12, I was still playing Pokemon for chrissakes.

Dare I ask whether you bought the game yourself, or whether your parents bought it for you? Because if it's the latter, that's exactly the sort of ignorant behaviour that is causing so much trouble for gaming in the first place.

Well, to be perfectly honest I was actually raised, well I guess I am still being raised, in a faithful religious home. It's not like my parents are unaware of it. If my parent sees it and thinks I'm mature enough... then what the hell, just go at it.
Lol I didn't even want the game when I was first exposed to it. Hah, I was actually too scared to play it but after a while I heard how great it was so I played it and loved it.

I'm a straight A honors student 4.1 and well on my way to a scholarship at University of Utah and/or BYU with many friends and fairly athletic (MvP Defensive End throughout Middle School) so I guess playing BioShock at 12 didn't do much.

Sorry, I guess some people just mature faster

 

[Jaeke]

This thread showcases impressive ADHD from anyone claiming they were loosing their excitement for the game (without giving a better reason than 'it's taking too long').

"I mean, I was excited about the game, then like a month passed, I saw something shiny, and that shit was done-zo."

I am excited for this game because it's from the same creator, that said I hated Bioshock 2 and have since re-examined Bioshock and am less impressed (great for it's time, but only if you've had nothing better than a console all these years, which when I first played it was the case, and is now not)... Still, from System Shock on this guy has been kicking ass, so I have faith in him doing it some more.

Plus my ears perked up when he said something about making the games more difficult with permanent choices.

captcha: good work

.... o.o... Thanks Captcha...

Well thanks for the condescending tone with your typed words.

If you want me to grant you with a full explanation that by some chance may impress your grace here it is:

Like I said after months of silence from a game that I was really looking forward to, and seeing little gameplay but what I could gather from it the game seemed to have a very solemn and almost reserved tone to it.

But obviously from that ADHD capped trailer you can see that tone is very different, it reflects quite the opposite actually, filled with cinematic action with a lot of connection to the protagonists target, and it also showed, at least for me, for the first time that there are vibrant populations in the floating-city that I can interact with.

There you go your highness. Hope it fulfills your investigative tastes for the day.

 

[Jaeke]

[

Bioshock is non realistic and stylized... It's more bloody but it's still the same premise. And that "choosing whether or not to kill a little girl" point isn't really an issue. It has the same graphic violence of an episode of Teletubbies.

On that thought, the fact that you're escalating your views by Ocarina of Time to say that it's comparable to teletubbies and then saying that Bioshock is brutal murders and clubbing helpless children makes me think that you don't even believe your own points and are just bringing them up for the sake of an argument.

Hyperbolic statement was hyperbolic. Used to make a point.

There is a world of difference between controlling a cartoon elf and killing cartoon venus flytraps with cartoon bombs, and taking a guy's face apart with a golf club. Why can you not understand that?

I never said that a 12 year old SHOULD play Bioshock, i'm saying that there's no harm to them if they DO play Bioshock.

I'm glad to hear that you're so schooled up on this. Perhaps you could present your evidence to the various schools of Developmental Psychology who do study this, and who do argue that there may be a link between violent videogames and kids doing violent things?

And you're flat out insulting and you're out of line by saying people are bad parents by buying children games that are above their age.

No I'm not. If a game as a big red 18 on the box, it's not meant to be played by anyone under 18. Therefore, someone who buys their child an 18 game is, whether through ignorance or deliberate effort, ignoring the advice of the ESRB and BBFC. So yes, that makes them a bad parent.

And no, parliament and congress are not going to control games or turn into some dictatorship just because you play a game that's too old for you. In fact, you're not acting being any better than the big evil masterminds who rooted from the irresponsible parents that you seem to be envisioning.

I've got a newsflash for you. They already did. The UK Goverment banned sales of Manhunt 2. Why? Because some idiot parents let their child play the game, he then went on to murder another child, and the government decided to step in and ban it as a result.

You know the recent hubbub about games in the US Supreme Court? They've not been debating whether Mario or Sonic is the better game. They've been debating whether developers should have limits placed on what they can and can't develop.

This stuff is happening, and it's only happening because we as a community refuse to take responsibility ourselves, and make sure that kids are not playing inappropriate stuff.

Finally, the age ratings are there as a guideline. It isn't against the law for store owners to sell games to adults while being fully aware that it's for their children. In fact, when I was 12 going into game shops, they'd all tell me that they could only sell me the games if I had my parent's consent. They do this so that the parents and child understand the contents of the game. It isn't illegal for a minor to play games like GTA or Postal, but it is frowned upon.

No, it is illegal. Shops are not allowed to sell M games to minors, full stop. It's not different to cinemas barring you from seeing an 18-rated film, or porn sites being off-limits to anyone under 18. Maybe it's different where you are, but here in the UK, shops can get prosecuted if they're found selling 15 or 18-rated games to underage kids.

Ease off their brother.

Let's not gather a internet witch hunt just because one guy agrees with what most people think.
And it is kind of annoying to see people using my age as a constant factor in a social and psychological experiment they will never see through, or care enough to actually do so anyway.

No.

Playing BioShock at age 12 did not leave underlying scarring, psychosematic trauma, or effects that shorten my defecit to keep attention.
While I'm very aware people my age seem to be prone to these, I am not. While they tend to have these "symptoms" or effects, they more often than not come from outside sources and a good part of these "cases" tend to just be flat out lies in an attempt to seek more attention through medical verification.
Video Games, while I wish it were the opposite, are still not exactly in the limelight as we would like to believe, and I highly doubt they are as impacting as you seem to think in regards to mass populations of youth, not that I'm trying to lessen your obviously well thought out observations and opinions as I'm sure that there is still SOME impact.

 

[vasiD]

Well thanks for the condescending tone with your typed words.

If you want me to grant you with a full explanation that by some chance may impress your grace here it is:

Like I said after months of silence from a game that I was really looking forward to, and seeing little gameplay but what I could gather from it the game seemed to have a very solemn and almost reserved tone to it.

But obviously from that ADHD capped trailer you can see that tone is very different, it reflects quite the opposite actually, filled with cinematic action with a lot of connection to the protagonists target, and it also showed, at least for me, for the first time that there are vibrant populations in the floating-city that I can interact with.

There you go your highness. Hope it fulfills your investigative tastes for the day.

Yesss, I suppose that's quite satisfactory. =P

Your reason is fair enough, only reason I give you a hard time is I've grown pretty accustomed to waiting for extended periods of time for good games. And I'm not even talking about the crazy long waits like FFVersusXIII or the now legendary Duke Nukem Forever wait (which ironically took forever). The thing is the quicker a game comes out usually the shittier it is, a good game requires a long development cycle, and I feel like modern gamers are forgetting that in this age of a new Call of Duty every year.

The old saying is: Good things come to those who wait.

Now while this isn't always true (Again: Duke Nukem Forever), I'd say it's still true the majority of the time.

All of this said however; All developers could take a page from Rockstar and only really start to announce and show off their game when it's primed to be released in less than a year as that would avoid the whole issue.

 

[Jaeke]

Well thanks for the condescending tone with your typed words.

If you want me to grant you with a full explanation that by some chance may impress your grace here it is:

Like I said after months of silence from a game that I was really looking forward to, and seeing little gameplay but what I could gather from it the game seemed to have a very solemn and almost reserved tone to it.

But obviously from that ADHD capped trailer you can see that tone is very different, it reflects quite the opposite actually, filled with cinematic action with a lot of connection to the protagonists target, and it also showed, at least for me, for the first time that there are vibrant populations in the floating-city that I can interact with.

There you go your highness. Hope it fulfills your investigative tastes for the day.

Yesss, I suppose that's quite satisfactory. =P

Your reason is fair enough, only reason I give you a hard time is I've grown pretty accustomed to waiting for extended periods of time for good games. And I'm not even talking about the crazy long waits like FFVersusXIII or the now legendary Duke Nukem Forever wait (which ironically took forever). The thing is the quicker a game comes out usually the shittier it is, a good game requires a long development cycle, and I feel like modern gamers are forgetting that in this age of a new Call of Duty every year.

The old saying is: Good things come to those who wait.

Now while this isn't always true (Again: Duke Nukem Forever), I'd say it's still true the majority of the time.

All of this said however; All developers could take a page from Rockstar and only really start to announce and show off their game when it's primed to be released in less than a year as that would avoid the whole issue.

Couldn't agree more. In fact, I think Rockstar has become one of the last developers that can actually be properly expected of without disappointment.

 

[aguspal]

I am not still excited by the title.

I was always waiting for it in the first place. They better take their time and try not to rush it, thougt.

If you were always waiting for it, then I don't see how it's possible to NOT be excited for it..

The definition of excited is to be anticipating or looking forward to something. If you've always been waiting for it then you've been anticipating or looking forward to it.

OT: Can't blame them for the silence really, they announced it and got everyone hyped, then they announced all the cool stuff and all the different mechanics and features that would be introduced, planning to release the game a couple weeks ago but then it got delayed.

I think that the silence was just a space that they didn't plan for and had nothing to put in. It's not like they're going to use all their pre launch trailers when the game still has 4 months to go.

You were 12 when the game came out? What the hell is a 12 year old doing playing Bioshock? The game was rated bloody M. Here in the UK, the BBFC rated it 18. And I'm not surprised at all. It's a great game, but it's not the sort of thing I'd want any twelve year old to be playing, just like I wouldn't want them to watch a Mad Max film or an Evil Dead film. When I was 12, I was still playing Pokemon for chrissakes.

Dare I ask whether you bought the game yourself, or whether your parents bought it for you? Because if it's the latter, that's exactly the sort of ignorant behaviour that is causing so much trouble for gaming in the first place.

There's a difference between starting to play more mature titles like Splinter Cell and Halo when you're turning 15/16, and playing something like Bioshock when you've only just started High School.

As far as I'm concerned, Bioshock is not suitable for someone who's only just left primary school. Not only are the themes and ideas way beyond what any Year 7 student is going to be able to understand, but being presented with choices like whether to bludgeon a Little Sister to death or not are choices that only adults should be presented with.

I'm not one of these uber-conservative types. I believe developers should be free to make whatever games they want. But the flipside is that age ratings should be followed stringently. While adult gamers are able to play all sorts of things with no negative side-effects, kids are still learning about the world around them. They're still impressionable. I wouldn't want a 12 year old playing Bioshock any more than I'd want them playing Rapelay or Postal. Mature games are just that- for mature gamers.

Sorry but your idea of a 12 year old is incredibly broken. In the UK you go to High School at the age of 11. When you're 12 you've already been there for a year, and playing Bioshock might be a scare to someone who's 12, but that's because it's supposed to be a horror/thriller game. A 12 year old has already seen more than their parents would bargain for, and if you hadn't at that age then you were quite sheltered at school.

Even today I saw a 8 year old girl sitting at the front of the bus while some roudy teens at the back were yelling things like fuck, shit and ****. Don't call people bad parents because they don't stick strictly to age ratings.

Also, Ocarina of Time was rated 6. That game had you go into the future where you see that the whole town of people you got to know for the first half of the game had all died and had all became zombies. I know for a fact that's a darn sight more horrifying for a 6 year old than a game where you run round some dark corridors.

Ok, lets see this by points.

1: Yeah you are right about the whole excited thing. I meant to say that unlike OP, I never lost faith in the game at all. I guess its my bad english combined with my bad wording.
2: I dont see why you need the age crap in games. Age dosnt matters so long as you are mature enough. I played GTA series since I was around 5 years old, and nothing bad happended to me at all. If anything it only helped to make me into an experienced gamer


EDIT: Oh you are not the one with the whole age trouble, you are rather saying what I just did... Well, thats what happens when I try to awnser to a post when its 4:00 AM I guess. sorry.

 

[Easton Dark]

Wait, what?

You were 12 when the game came out? What the hell is a 12 year old doing playing Bioshock? The game was rated bloody M. Here in the UK, the BBFC rated it 18. And I'm not surprised at all. It's a great game, but it's not the sort of thing I'd want any twelve year old to be playing, just like I wouldn't want them to watch a Mad Max film or an Evil Dead film. When I was 12, I was still playing Pokemon for chrissakes.

Dare I ask whether you bought the game yourself, or whether your parents bought it for you? Because if it's the latter, that's exactly the sort of ignorant behaviour that is causing so much trouble for gaming in the first place.

I still play Pokemon now.

I played Bioshock when it came out, I was 13.

Whether you could handle violence and politics or not at that age shouldn't be cause for you to call people ignorant. I was already capable of understanding the plot. It's not like it's very deep. Also that violence is bad in real life.


OT:

That excited you? I thought the Shock license was about more than action and bad music.

Truthfully, it looks like crap to me.

 

[vasiD]

Couldn't agree more. In fact, I think Rockstar has become one of the last developers that can actually be properly expected of without disappointment.

/bumps it.

Seriously, I mean I was so excited for RDR I honestly thought there was no way it could live up to the hype. And then I beat it twice within 3 months and found myself addicted to the online...

I keep waiting for them to fuck up, but honestly I haven't seen one bad R* game since the PS2 era.

 

[uncanny474]

The game has robot George Washington with a Gatling Gun. I don't think I could ever lose faith in a game that has robot George Washington with a Gatling Gun.