No one is talking about Bioshock anymore

Did you notice how short-lived the enthusiasm for a new game is? Bioshock was released about a month ago and no one even talks about it anymore: now everyone talks about Halo3.

My conclusion is: a widely advertised game gets up to 18 months of pre-release hype, 3 weeks of spotlights and is then forgotten by most players. Many great games that don't get advertised skip the first two steps and just fall into oblivion.

Bioshock- A game that was flawed from a gameplay standpoint with dumb AI whose saving grace is that it is presented very well.

Halo 3- The multiplayer alone will keep me playing this well into next year, at least until something like Gears of War 2 comes out.

Bioshock was fun, but it was shallow and short, and now everybody is over it. The replay value is very small, and everything there is to do with it has been done.

Try reading the threads posted a few days after Bioshock was released, you'll often find people defining it 'the best game ever', 'an absolute masterpiece'...

...and where is it now? Who talks about it?

Does the power of The New influence us so much that we automatically agree with with what the mass says, only to change our mind when the hype fades?

Try reading the threads posted a few days after Bioshock was released, you'll often find people defining it 'the best game ever', 'an absolute masterpiece'...Black_Knight_00

I don't think this is a matter of the power of 'The New,' but merely the downfall of a game that didn't really posess any lasting appeal for most after a playthrough or two.

Try reading the threads posted a few days after Bioshock was released, you'll often find people defining it 'the best game ever', 'an absolute masterpiece'...

...and where is it now? Who talks about it?

Does the power of The New influence us so much that we automatically agree with with what the mass says, only to change our mind when the hype fades?

Black_Knight_00

I never said any of that. Just read my review.

What happened was other professional reviewing sites bought into their and others hype and had to go with it, no one really put forth an honest review other than the fact they sounded like gushing school girls talking about Brad Pitt.

Halo 3 has awesome multiplayer that keeps people coming back. Bioshock is a single-player only game without much reason to play through again.

I'm sure there are plenty of people talking about it in the gamespace shared forum.

Super Mario Galaxy will unquestionably be a GREAT game. 2 weeks after it comes out, everyone will be talking about Mass Effect. Why? Because it's new. That's the way things are and really have always been.

Trust me, people will still speak of Bioshock (which I have yet to play; poor) for months and years to come, just as we speak of Beyond Good and Evil, Psychonauts and Ico.

Did you notice how short-lived the enthusiasm for a new game is? Bioshock was released about a month ago and no one even talks about it anymore: now everyone talks about Halo3.

My conclusion is: a widely advertised game gets up to 18 months of pre-release hype, 3 weeks of spotlights and is then forgotten by most players. Many great games that don't get advertised skip the first two steps and just fall into oblivion.

Black_Knight_00

I think you're very very wrong, plenty of people are still talking about this game especially developers and analysts...Anyway if everyone was still talking about this I'd be pretty irritated, sure it was a great game but don't make it out to the end all be all of next-generation games. FurthermoreI think it is fair to give the game the credit it is due which has already been accomplished ten-fold, but it also good to move because there are plenty of arguably better games coming out in the next two months. Halo 3 is decent, the quality of the single player was suprising, but the multiplayer was almost just as dissappointing. It really was like I was playing a mod of Halo 2 online.

Bioshock was a fantastic game, but it wasn't that long, and it was very easy, even on hard.I beat it twice and I suspect that I'll never play it again.
Halo 3, on the other hand, I'll probably be playing for the rest of this generation... and I don't even consider myself to be a halo fan.Dire_Weasel

Actually, it was impossible to lose in Bioshock. That's what killed my enthusiasm for the game. One of the fundamentals of a game being a.... well, game, is that it should revolve around there being some skill involved. No game is fun if you can't lose. How compelling would Monopoly be if you knew you were going to win every time you busted out the board? Or how much fun would a racing sim be if you knew that you were going to win every race? Not so much I'd imagine. Shoot the same question at a shooting game that you can't lose and it gleans the same answer. Even the most simplistic games like Wii Sports stick to the fundamental design conceit that the player must have some skill to keep from losing.

Without the requirement of skill, all the player is doing is basically mechanically advancing a story. There's a lot of things that Bioshock absolutely nailed, but gameplay isn't one of them. Any player of any skill playing as recklessly as they want is guaranteed to see the ending assuming they stick with it to the end. I don't like that. I don't like that at all.

To be fair, on Hard Mode, I've been told that the enemies actually use Vita-Chambers occasionally, which corrects for the flaw to some degree, but that's not the default mode, either.

Bioshock was a fantastic game, but it wasn't that long, and it was very easy, even on hard. I beat it twice and I suspect that I'll never play it again.
Halo 3, on the other hand, I'll probably be playing for the rest of this generation... and I don't even consider myself to be a halo fan.Dire_Weasel

I agree. Really, although bioshock was a great game, it was NOT a game deserving of the ratings it got. It has VERY limited replay value, wasn't the longest to start with, and had numerous other issues including difficulty and technical problems. Overall, I'd say a year from now it will be relagated to footnote status. It just didn't have the impact on the genera of games like DX or SS2. The only thing that may keep it on people's minds is the potential sequels.

Without the requirement of skill, all the player is doing is basically mechanically advancing a story. Shame-usBlackley

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"]Try reading the threads posted a few days after Bioshock was released, you'll often find people defining it 'the best game ever', 'an absolute masterpiece'...Skylock00

I don't think this is a matter of the power of 'The New,' but merely the downfall of a game that didn't really posess any lasting appeal for most after a playthrough or two.

:)

BioShock is the only next gen game in gamerankings top ten of all time. So you're positing industry wide incompetence.

It will win goty's.

The discussion takes place in the BioShock forums. People there know little things like the story.

Few games get the attention BioShock gets. Bringing up BioShock to criticize it in every goty thread just proves it belongs there. Did you read Brendan Sinclair's BioShock feature?

Some people in this thread haven't even played BioShock.

Probably no one in this thread has read Ayn Rand.

Here is the fad and downfall: the same people in this thread's affection for a reviewer named Yahtzee.

Yahtzee was a genius for dissing BioShock (even though Yahtzee said at the beginning of the review, "No one paid attention to my Psychonauts review so I'm going to diss BioShock"); then Yahtzee reviewed Halo 3 and said BioShock was much better. Now we hear, "That doesn't sound like Yahtzee it was an impostor, Yahtzee has gone nuts."

The game should be renamed Rorschach which is pronounced Raw Shock. People have a weird reaction and expectation over what can only be considered a supreme success by any rational standard and to which we will see sequel(s). Levine did oversell it, though. Caveat emptor.

By the way, if you love BioShock, and you love learning new words and phrases like Rorschach and Caveat Emptor and reading important authors like Ayn Rand, watch the tv show Mad Men. Ayn Rand. Mad Man. Little Sister assistant. Advertising. Best show on tv goes perfectly with the possible goty.

perfect reason why its not GOTY. people sweat this game, now nobody cares. i was never impressed. i hated gears cause of the hype but i can't hate anymore adn if you still play the game a year later, thats a great game...... bioshock ain't a game you'll play a year from now.

Did you notice how short-lived the enthusiasm for a new game is? Bioshock was released about a month ago and no one even talks about it anymore: now everyone talks about Halo3.

My conclusion is: a widely advertised game gets up to 18 months of pre-release hype, 3 weeks of spotlights and is then forgotten by most players. Many great games that don't get advertised skip the first two steps and just fall into oblivion.

Black_Knight_00

Here is the fad and downfall: the same people in this thread's affection for a reviewer named Yahtzee.

Yahtzee was a genius for dissing BioShock (even though Yahtzee said at the beginning of the review, "No one paid attention to my Psychonauts review so I'm going to diss BioShock"); then Yahtzee reviewed Halo 3 and said BioShock was much better. Now we hear, "That doesn't sound like Yahtzee it was an impostor, Yahtzee has gone nuts."

appleater

For what it's worth, a lot of people found his Halo 3 review to be pretty weak. He didn't play the previous games in the series, and had no interest in the multiplayer, which is pretty much the best part of the game.

I'm sure BioShock will be remembered as a great game, but perhaps not as great as people initially thought it was.

To be fair, on Hard Mode, I've been told that the enemies actually use Vita-Chambers occasionally, which corrects for the flaw to some degree, but that's not the default mode, either. Shame-usBlackley

I did my second (good) playthrough on hard mode and never once saw that happen. That might have made things a bit more interesting, actually.

As it stands I played the game twice - once evil, once good. After beating it a second time I felt totally ripped off, and the game does absolutely nothing to make you want to do further playthroughs because you've seen absolutely everything it has to offer in about ten hours.

[QUOTE="Shame-usBlackley"] To be fair, on Hard Mode, I've been told that the enemies actually use Vita-Chambers occasionally, which corrects for the flaw to some degree, but that's not the default mode, either. DJ_Lae

I did my second (good) playthrough on hard mode and never once saw that happen. That might have made things a bit more interesting, actually.

As it stands I played the game twice - once evil, once good. After beating it a second time I felt totally ripped off, and the game does absolutely nothing to make you want to do further playthroughs because you've seen absolutely everything it has to offer in about ten hours.

You shouldn't feel totally ripped off. You killed Ayn Rand a hundred times.

Watch Mad Men for more valuable lessons.

Well IMO the game was never really that good in the first place. It had amazing presentation, first impression, and appeal but the gameplay was just slightly above average. I was never impressed with the game to begin with, I think the reason it got so much praise and died down because. Things like presentation and appeal only stay for the first time you play through the game (usually that's the case at least) and when they replayed it they saw it for what it was, high presentation and above average gameplay. Also I think people just wanted that "killer" next-gen game. Last gen by this time we had Metal Gear Soild 2, Halo, Grand Theft Auto III, etc. Basically people were looking for that "revolutionary game" you know that game that pushes hardware and shows "next-gen", so they looked towards Bioshock. But in honestly that game really wasn't anything new, it was similar to Half-Life 2's travel fashion only you're in a ship and you backtrack more. But in all honestly I don't think there ever will be a game that pushes gaming as far as those games in a while (though Mario Galaxy looks to challenge it) so it was obvious overhyped for what it was suppose to be. I think most games that are suppose to be "killer" should concentrate on perfecting and introducing new forumlas, but even to those extents Bioshock doesn't meet up too. These of course are just my opinions though.

I remember hearing Levine talk so much about RPG elements in the game and I never came across any in my playthrough. I guess the term RPG is becoming much broader these days.foxhound_fox

In all honesty I think that's because their are few gamers or not enough that want a full real RPG expierence. We are seing less and less focus on RPG's these days and more on being hybirds.

How many turnbased JRPG's do you see today? How do you compare the sales of SRPG's of now compared to 10 years ago? When was the last time you've seen a game as Role Playing focused as Planescape Torment or Baldur's Gate?

I see it similar to the fighting or beat-em-up genre, as their are less of those but more of those that are action-adventure games and have much emphasis on combat (Devil May Cry for example).

because the gameplay is simply broken. Many of us stated this major flaw shortly after the game came out. But unfortunately, it was lost in a flood of "GOTY", "Greatest game ever made", "Utter masterpiece" posted by the screaming minority who were only dazzeled by the presentation but oblivious to the gameplay. Not to mention some posters who never played the game were riding on the game's coattail by acting like obsessed cheerleaders, flooding every other posts and regurgitating over-the-top acclaim. They eventually came to term with reality and quietly backed away from the game. banjobear_basic

Agreed 100%. I was one of the very very few people who actually saw what the game was at first play and complained about it. I remember challenging many forum posters (more like them challenging me because they but in my comments) and ironically some of them are in this very thread I'm posting in now.

But that's what it pretty much was to me.

High Presentation first.

Gameplay second.

People got all overexcited over all the perfect 10s it got on review sites and now that it didn't live up to their expectations, it's the ripe time for the Bioshock Backlash.

I, on the other hand, went into the game knowing absolutely nothing except that it was underwater and took place in the 1960s. I've played through the campaign three times and I am still not exhausted of it. It's my favorite game since Resident Evil 4 in 2005 and I would probably rank it up in my Top 5 games of all time (probably # 4).

I guess the term RPG is becoming much broader these days.foxhound_fox

It is possible for a game that you only play through once to win GOTY. I voted for Metroid Prime as my GOTY for 2002 or 2003, whatever year it came out. I only played through that once, and damn, was it great! Is Bioshock as good as Metroid Prime? No, not by a long shot IMO. Do I have the right to say that no one else should call Bioshock GOTY? No, not at all. The game is amazing, and I can understand why people want to call it GOTY. Maybe they don't need multipayer (it really should always take a back seat to the single player). Maybe they really did feel the presenation was enough. Or, it could all be a side product of the hype.

Also, to Shameus, I didn't use the Vita-Chambers. If I died, I restarted. It's probably why it took me a lot longer to finish the game than others who just let them get regenerated and finish off whatever was left of the Big Daddies before they died. See, I could have used the Vita-Chambers if I wanted, but doing so would have cheapened the experience. Every Big Daddie I killed I did without dying (meaning taking down their entire lifebars without being resurrected at a Vita-Chamber and resuming where I left off). It's exactly the same as restarting from a check point. You had that option to not use them. I'm sure for some, the Vita-Chambers were a welcome addition that let them play carefree and just enjoy everything else.

It is possible for a game that you only play through once to win GOTY.

JustPlainLucas

I agree 100%. I like to think that I'm a well-rounded gamer, and I've never played through a game more than once. It's just how I am. The fact that BioShock is short and easy plays to my personal tastes. I try to experience as many games as I can, so I prefer shorter games with good stories that I can finish and move on. I have less and less time to play games lately, so I prefer games I can finish in just a handful of sittings. I'm willing to sacrifice gameplay, and that's probably why I like games like Indigo Prophecy or Dreamfall: The Longest Journey so much.

I'm sure I'm not alone. I've never felt like a game was too short, and BioShock is no exception.

If you only have $60 in your piggy bank, don't buy BioShock. Please look up the ancient phrase Caveat Emptor.

I don't know who some of you are referring to. You quote yourselves that the gameplay is broken. Jeff gave it a 90. It's the highest ranked next gen game. It sold like hotcakes. It's getting a sequel. Brendan Sinclair of GameSpot already did a feature on it. The minority is clearly you. I'm sorry Yahtzee disappointed you. But perhaps where BioShock and Yahtzee close a door, The Fountainhead will open a window. Or something.

It's fair to point out flaws, but not this way. Although some of you are able to speak reasonably, others persist in looking at the ink blots and saying things that reveal more about you than the game.

Oblivion was released in a part of the year when it was the only new high profile title on the market and it had plenty of time to shine. Bioshock is great, we all played it to our fill, but now there's a truckload of highly anticipated titles arriving from all angles so of course people are going to move on quickly. I'm not going to downplay my experience with the game for a second just because I have 5 games I've purchased since then that have captured my attention.

Also, to Shameus, I didn't use the Vita-Chambers. If I died, I restarted. It's probably why it took me a lot longer to finish the game than others who just let them get regenerated and finish off whatever was left of the Big Daddies before they died. See, I could have used the Vita-Chambers if I wanted, but doing so would have cheapened the experience. Every Big Daddie I killed I did without dying (meaning taking down their entire lifebars without being resurrected at a Vita-Chamber and resuming where I left off). It's exactly the same as restarting from a check point. You had that option to not use them. I'm sure for some, the Vita-Chambers were a welcome addition that let them play carefree and just enjoy everything else.

JustPlainLucas

True, but that can be said of any game. I could call Pac-Man the most challenging game ever made if I decided that the only way I was going to play it was on one life. You are having to alter the way the game is played to make it more challenging, which kind of shows how flawed it really is IMO.

EDIT: Now, if the Vita-Chambers were off by default and the game gave you the option of turning them on after having your ass kicked a few times (a la God of War) I wouldn't have a problem. But it's the reverse -- the game defaults to what is essentially God Mode and makes the player figure out ways to make the game challenging. I loved certain aspects of the game (I think it's the most immersive game environment-wise I've ever played), but the gameplay defaults to Busted. Which isn't helped at all by the fact that the game is just one giant, contrived fetch-quest.

People are only saying "it's overrated, it underdelivered, the gameplay sucks" because they were suspecting the second coming of christ. Everyone feels that they should get at least 25 hours or they feel ripped off. Honestly, I've had way more fun with Halo 3 single player... it just doesn't feel as repetitive as the mp. Though I still like the mp, it just doesn't feel like it has a point... your not trying to achomplish anything, other then "get the flag"or "kill the enemy". Just good for an hour or two of fun.

I think bioshock is comparable to a book or movie. Why would you buy a book? Surely your not going to read it over and over back to back. You read it, put it away, and reread it after a few months or years. Same thing with a movie... your not going to watch it multiple times a week. That's the type of game bioshock is IMO. It concentrated on story, and isn't trying to throw hours and hours of replay value. MP seems like a desperate attempt to keep players playing IMO, except in games that get it right, like halo.

To answer the TC question... no one talks about it because they finished it. They'll either never play it, or play it again later.

Did you notice how short-lived the enthusiasm for a new game is? Bioshock was released about a month ago and no one even talks about it anymore: now everyone talks about Halo3.

My conclusion is: a widely advertised game gets up to 18 months of pre-release hype, 3 weeks of spotlights and is then forgotten by most players. Many great games that don't get advertised skip the first two steps and just fall into oblivion.

Black_Knight_00

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"]

Did you notice how short-lived the enthusiasm for a new game is? Bioshock was released about a month ago and no one even talks about it anymore: now everyone talks about Halo3.

My conclusion is: a widely advertised game gets up to 18 months of pre-release hype, 3 weeks of spotlights and is then forgotten by most players. Many great games that don't get advertised skip the first two steps and just fall into oblivion.

wizdom

Bioshock came out almost two months ago, thats a long time in gaming terms.

The Orange box came out so no more talk about Bioshock SP its HL2s turn.

[QUOTE="Dire_Weasel"]Bioshock was a fantastic game, but it wasn't that long, and it was very easy, even on hard.I beat it twice and I suspect that I'll never play it again.
Halo 3, on the other hand, I'll probably be playing for the rest of this generation... and I don't even consider myself to be a halo fan.Shame-usBlackley

Actually, it was impossible to lose in Bioshock. That's what killed my enthusiasm for the game. One of the fundamentals of a game being a.... well, game, is that it should revolve around there being some skill involved. No game is fun if you can't lose. How compelling would Monopoly be if you knew you were going to win every time you busted out the board? Or how much fun would a racing sim be if you knew that you were going to win every race? Not so much I'd imagine. Shoot the same question at a shooting game that you can't lose and it gleans the same answer. Even the most simplistic games like Wii Sports stick to the fundamental design conceit that the player must have some skill to keep from losing.

Without the requirement of skill, all the player is doing is basically mechanically advancing a story. There's a lot of things that Bioshock absolutely nailed, but gameplay isn't one of them. Any player of any skill playing as recklessly as they want is guaranteed to see the ending assuming they stick with it to the end. I don't like that. I don't like that at all.

To be fair, on Hard Mode, I've been told that the enemies actually use Vita-Chambers occasionally, which corrects for the flaw to some degree, but that's not the default mode, either.

I'm assuming you're talking about the respawns at the vita-chamber when you die. I thought that was a bit odd too. But then I started thinking, what would I do otherwise if I died? I would reload from my last save or checkpoint and continue. That's really not too far off from what the game does for us automatically. And in other games, as long as you have a save point to load from you can't really lose the game either. You died, load up and keep trying.

I'm assuming you're talking about the respawns at the vita-chamber when you die. I thought that was a bit odd too. But then I started thinking, what would I do otherwise if I died? I would reload from my last save or checkpoint and continue. That's really not too far off from what the game does for us automatically. And in other games, as long as you have a save point to load from you can't really lose the game either. You died, load up and keep trying.

brianpoetzel

That's the main problem that guys like Shame-Us had with the Vita-Chambers.

i believeit was caused by low gameplay.