More Bioshock PS3 Rumors And Whispers

It's a lot like the MGS 4-on-Xbox 360 rumor...it just won't go away.

Bioshock is easily one of the most anticipated games of the year; the futuristic action pseudo-sequel to the revered System Shock series is definitely on many a wish list. However, as it is currently only confirmed for the Xbox 360 and PC, PS3 owners are constantly searching for evidence that this is yet another console exclusive that won't be so exclusive in the future. And more evidence is exactly what they have now, even if it is more rumors.

First, PSU reports that, during their conversation with the game's developers, they hinted there would be a PS3 version of the title that landed the 2007 Game Critics Award for Best Action Game. The devs even went so far as to say it would arrive next spring. Then SPOnG apparently had a brief sit-down with lead developer Ken Levine, and his reply to the question, "What happened to the PS3 version?" is as follows-

"If I talk about anything outside of the Xbox 360 version, my corporate overlords will spank me. We love the 360, we love working on it and we're not talking about any other versions right now."

Obviously, depending on how you look at it, this denial is almost as good as a confirmation. Levine made it clear that because his team has a contract, he really can't talk about anything outside of the 360 and PC versions. Now, none of this is confirmed - heck, even all this rumor talk could be a rumor - but it'll certainly get everyone talking. Bioshock on the PS3, even if it doesn't arrive until 2008, would be a pretty big deal.

http://www.psxextreme.com/ps3-news/1670.html

Discuss

i don't think it will happen. Not cuz it can't, just cuz Lazy devepolers won't dedicate the time themm

Agree!!!!!

i don't think it will happen. Not cuz it can't, just cuz Lazy devepolers won't dedicate the time themm

ahmen to that. what ever happend to sharing lol. there shouldn't be any exclusive anymore at best they should be timed from now on. they can make it for which ever console they want and port it later. its not like it want make them money.clarkportmanken

so you think mgs4 and ff 13 should go multiplatform like there were rumored to be also?

[QUOTE="clarkportmanken"]ahmen to that. what ever happend to sharing lol. there shouldn't be any exclusive anymore at best they should be timed from now on. they can make it for which ever console they want and port it later. its not like it want make them money.SmoothBrother1

so you think mgs4 and ff 13 should go multiplatform like there were rumored to be also?

If thats the case Sony buys Kojima Productions and lets SquareEnix do whatever they want with FF. Its what I'd do but i dont run the show.

yeah but i also think gear halo and mass effect should go multi plat as well. its seems pointless to me to have any game be on just one console. developers can choose which platform they want as the starting one and then just port after that, or at the very least they should be open to the possibility of porting as opposed to being so stubborn.

also what baffles me is how people praise Kojimi and have such faith in square enix but if you say they are going multiplat then everyone thinks the games will suffer because of it. if they can't make a multiplat game that works great on both platforms then they can't really make a exclusive game that will be very good on its platform is what i think. i think Kojimi and square enix have proven they have the chops to go multiplat and not have either version suffer because of it.

though honestly im not a fan of either series and not gonna get them. but iam excited for halo bioshock and mass effect and think it would be great if they went multiplat too, i hope that shows that i really do believe there shouldn't be anymore exclusives. some of us have all three consoles but most don't so why should they be shut out

You're missing the business side of it. It is about the money... A lot of devs that are exclusive are getting paid big bucks or are funded.

-The Glavin

[QUOTE="clarkportmanken"]ahmen to that. what ever happend to sharing lol. there shouldn't be any exclusive anymore at best they should be timed from now on. they can make it for which ever console they want and port it later. its not like it want make them money.SmoothBrother1

so you think mgs4 and ff 13 should go multiplatform like there were rumored to be also?

If it sells bad on the 360, 08 release for sure. This and Eternal Sonata are the only 2 3rd party 360 games I want.

Microsoft never confirmed that bioshock was a xbox 360 exclusive, so we might actually see it on the ps3.

[QUOTE="SmoothBrother1"]

[QUOTE="clarkportmanken"]ahmen to that. what ever happend to sharing lol. there shouldn't be any exclusive anymore at best they should be timed from now on. they can make it for which ever console they want and port it later. its not like it want make them money.LastSamurai14

so you think mgs4 and ff 13 should go multiplatform like there were rumored to be also?

If it sells bad on the 360, 08 release for sure. This and Eternal Sonata are the only 2 3rd party 360 games I want.

i think if it sells good then they will go ahead and port it to the ps3 not if it sells bad though, it be to big a risk. also on a side note i tried the demo for eternal sonata didn't think i was gonna like it and i ended up loving it hope it comes out for the ps3 as well.

Im pretty sure the 360 will get mgs4 but i doubt the PS3 will get bioshock..

It's a lot like the MGS 4-on-Xbox 360 rumor...it just won't go away.

hurmatps3

Its nothing like the MGS4 rumor by Bioshock was orgnially annoucend for PC 360 AND PS3 then MS bought the exclusive right 4 months after develpoment on the PS3 started. Meaning they were actully working on a PS3 version making more real than MGS4 on 360 cause development for that never started. Flamming end.

[QUOTE="clarkportmanken"]ahmen to that. what ever happend to sharing lol. there shouldn't be any exclusive anymore at best they should be timed from now on. they can make it for which ever console they want and port it later. its not like it want make them money.SmoothBrother1

so you think mgs4 and ff 13 should go multiplatform like there were rumored to be also?

yeah but i also think gear halo and mass effect should go multi plat as well. its seems pointless to me to have any game be on just one console. developers can choose which platform they want as the starting one and then just port after that, or at the very least they should be open to the possibility of porting as opposed to being so stubborn.

also what baffles me is how people praise Kojimi and have such faith in square enix but if you say they are going multiplat then everyone thinks the games will suffer because of it. if they can't make a multiplat game that works great on both platforms then they can't really make a exclusive game that will be very good on its platform is what i think. i think Kojimi and square enix have proven they have the chops to go multiplat and not have either version suffer because of it.

though honestly im not a fan of either series and not gonna get them. but iam excited for halo bioshock and mass effect and think it would be great if they went multiplat too, i hope that shows that i really do believe there shouldn't be anymore exclusives. some of us have all three consoles but most don't so why should they be shut out

clarkportmanken

so what you are pretty much saying is that we should just have one system and competition should be non-existent?

yeah there should still be time exclusives give insentives. Companies can make games whoever they want, but it should be there choice to go multi-platform

if the game sucks and you just make it for ps2, thats fine. Worst they should be able to buy is time until it goes multi-platform.
Then theres only time and console facts deciding which to get. ps3 for higher-def Blu-Ray sixaxis, 360 for cheaper and rumble. And backwards compatibility for whichever you want.

The only people hurting are average consumers w/ 1 console, and want to buy a game, and developers who want to sell a game. Basically 360 is just buying every ps3 copy of bioshock out there, so we cant get our hands on it.

[QUOTE="clarkportmanken"]

yeah but i also think gear halo and mass effect should go multi plat as well. its seems pointless to me to have any game be on just one console. developers can choose which platform they want as the starting one and then just port after that, or at the very least they should be open to the possibility of porting as opposed to being so stubborn.

also what baffles me is how people praise Kojimi and have such faith in square enix but if you say they are going multiplat then everyone thinks the games will suffer because of it. if they can't make a multiplat game that works great on both platforms then they can't really make a exclusive game that will be very good on its platform is what i think. i think Kojimi and square enix have proven they have the chops to go multiplat and not have either version suffer because of it.

though honestly im not a fan of either series and not gonna get them. but iam excited for halo bioshock and mass effect and think it would be great if they went multiplat too, i hope that shows that i really do believe there shouldn't be anymore exclusives. some of us have all three consoles but most don't so why should they be shut out

sakura_Ex

so what you are pretty much saying is that we should just have one system and competition should be non-existent?

no not at all what im suggesting is actually for all games to be sort of timed exclusives. this way each version can be worked on separately and optimized for the console. the hardware is different so the game will be not be the same on each version. one version may look better then the other or have more stuff, but all im saying is at least give the other guys a chance at playing the games.

i think if anything having game go multiplat makes things more competitive being restricted to one platform removes all competition. plus imagine a super smash brothers brawl where you have link master chief and rachet how cool would that be lol

i know it will never happen lol but if it did i honestly think everyone would benefit including the developers.

Im pretty sure the 360 will get mgs4 but i doubt the PS3 will get bioshock..

southernboy01

Get out of here you fanboy, we aren't talking about MSG4 gonig to the 360.

[QUOTE="hurmatps3"]

It's a lot like the MGS 4-on-Xbox 360 rumor...it just won't go away.

Bolund

Its nothing like the MGS4 rumor by Bioshock was orgnially annoucend for PC 360 AND PS3 then MS bought the exclusive right 4 months after develpoment on the PS3 started. Meaning they were actaully working on a PS3 version making more real than MGS4 on 360 cause development for that never started. Flamming end.

Thank you!!

everyone please listen to him

one thing that interests me is how some people feel that every game should be multiplatform. everyone gets the game, everyone's happy right? in theory and in a perfect world maybe. but if every console had the same games, what's the reason for owning the more expensive console then?

if i was a potential buyer, looking to buy a console for the first time, going by the saying "games make the console," but I'm seeing two different gaming consoles with one cheaper than the other, but both have the same games, and the two games look to be on par with the other... what's the incentive for me to buy the more expensive console? especially if the cheaper console has the same game? this is going by the thought that "every game should be multiplat which includes 1st/2nd party developers" now, if all 3rd party titles are indeed multiplatform then it's kind of a different story. but if we go by "every game should be multiplatform," then the more expensive console is definitely gonna lose out. simply because with every game on every system, what's the point of me spending so and so more, especially when the cheaper got the same game and it's cheaper. I save money. I'm happy. but the company that loses money and basically made a pointless system would be the more expensive console makers... and they would be unhappy.

the idea that every game should be multiplatform is an overall stupid idea because as people say: "games make the console". and without exclusive content there would be no real competition.

i don't know, just my little 2 cents i'm throwing into the pond, which will get more than likely misinterpreted, flamed, and lord knows what else.. but it needs to be said.

yay for exclusive content. That's what makes these consoles shining stars. be they the ps3, the 360 or the wii.

A surprise Bioshock announcement will be made on Sunday.

"In addition, the trailer debut will close with a surprise announcement by Game Head's Geoff Keighley. You won't want to miss this!"

http://kotaku.com/gaming/special-surprise-inside%21/bioshock-trailer-premiers-sunday-on-spiketv-287949.php

Possibly Ps3 Bioshock? The only other possible announcement would be a demo coming to PC/XBLA, but that wouldn't really be a surprise... And Gamehead does get big exclusive announcements. They were the first to report on the new R* exclusive franchise for ps3.

Im pretty sure the 360 will get mgs4 but i doubt the PS3 will get bioshock..

southernboy01

its more likely bioshock will come to ps3 and mgs4 will not go to 360. its been like 100% confirmed already mgs4 is on ps3 ONLY but bioshock is in question atm. i doubt it'll happen but look what happened to oblivion.

you can never trust those american companies for exclusivty support

one thing that interests me is how some people feel that every game should be multiplatform. everyone gets the game, everyone's happy right? in theory and in a perfect world maybe. but if every console had the same games, what's the reason for owning the more expensive console then?

if i was a potential buyer, looking to buy a console for the first time, going by the saying "games make the console," but I'm seeing two different gaming consoles with one cheaper than the other, but both have the same games, and the two games look to be on par with the other... what's the incentive for me to buy the more expensive console? especially if the cheaper console has the same game? this is going by the thought that "every game should be multiplat which includes 1st/2nd party developers" now, if all 3rd party titles are indeed multiplatform then it's kind of a different story. but if we go by "every game should be multiplatform," then the more expensive console is definitely gonna lose out. simply because with every game on every system, what's the point of me spending so and so more, especially when the cheaper got the same game and it's cheaper. I save money. I'm happy. but the company that loses money and basically made a pointless system would be the more expensive console makers... and they would be unhappy.

the idea that every game should be multiplatform is an overall stupid idea because as people say: "games make the console". and without exclusive content there would be no real competition.

i don't know, just my little 2 cents i'm throwing into the pond, which will get more than likely misinterpreted, flamed, and lord knows what else.. but it needs to be said.

yay for exclusive content. That's what makes these consoles shining stars. be they the ps3, the 360 or the wii.

kelindas02

If the game was identical on all three platforms then yeah why wouldn't you buy the cheapest console in the first place. the reality is that the game will vary from console to console even multiplats now aren't the same. the ps3 and 360 are different and have different strengths and weaknesses which developers can take advantage of.

you can make the same argument about games coming out right now. there shooters rpg spy games etc.. any game on a console has a somewhat similar game on the other console, though the execution is slightly different because of the hardware. all im saying is why can't all games go multiplat and take advantage of each consoles specific hardware, that way we have different versions, in a sense, of the same game. gamers can choose which they like best.

plus the more games in a console library the more other developers are pushed to make there take on what ever genre stand out. though i understand what your saying as well and i don't think your wrong im just saying in a perfect world it could be great

but the reality is that the developers most likely will cut corners and not utilize the hardware in which case the lead platform will be the better version. though thats not so bad either cause while u may get a crappier version of halo or MGS you at least get to play it and see what its like. anyways just my opinion and i think ill make this my last long winded post of the day lol

Im pretty sure the 360 will get mgs4 but i doubt the PS3 will get bioshock..

southernboy01

[QUOTE="sakura_Ex"][QUOTE="clarkportmanken"]

yeah but i also think gear halo and mass effect should go multi plat as well. its seems pointless to me to have any game be on just one console. developers can choose which platform they want as the starting one and then just port after that, or at the very least they should be open to the possibility of porting as opposed to being so stubborn.

also what baffles me is how people praise Kojimi and have such faith in square enix but if you say they are going multiplat then everyone thinks the games will suffer because of it. if they can't make a multiplat game that works great on both platforms then they can't really make a exclusive game that will be very good on its platform is what i think. i think Kojimi and square enix have proven they have the chops to go multiplat and not have either version suffer because of it.

though honestly im not a fan of either series and not gonna get them. but iam excited for halo bioshock and mass effect and think it would be great if they went multiplat too, i hope that shows that i really do believe there shouldn't be anymore exclusives. some of us have all three consoles but most don't so why should they be shut out

clarkportmanken

so what you are pretty much saying is that we should just have one system and competition should be non-existent?

no not at all what im suggesting is actually for all games to be sort of timed exclusives. this way each version can be worked on separately and optimized for the console. the hardware is different so the game will be not be the same on each version. one version may look better then the other or have more stuff, but all im saying is at least give the other guys a chance at playing the games.

i think if anything having game go multiplat makes things more competitive being restricted to one platform removes all competition. plus imagine a super smash brothers brawl where you have link master chief and rachet how cool would that be lol

i know it will never happen lol but if it did i honestly think everyone would benefit including the developers.

that doesn't make sense,in order to have competition is to have something thatthe other person/company doesn't have,ifthey both had the same exact thing thenwhat's the point of competition?.i don't know what world you live in but i wouldn't like that one single bit,i like the fact that each console has different than each other because if they all had the same exact game there would be no point in three different companies.

Oh yeah and the part about brawl with master chief and etc would suck imo

one thing that interests me is how some people feel that every game should be multiplatform. everyone gets the game, everyone's happy right? in theory and in a perfect world maybe. but if every console had the same games, what's the reason for owning the more expensive console then?

if i was a potential buyer, looking to buy a console for the first time, going by the saying "games make the console," but I'm seeing two different gaming consoles with one cheaper than the other, but both have the same games, and the two games look to be on par with the other... what's the incentive for me to buy the more expensive console? especially if the cheaper console has the same game? this is going by the thought that "every game should be multiplat which includes 1st/2nd party developers" now, if all 3rd party titles are indeed multiplatform then it's kind of a different story. but if we go by "every game should be multiplatform," then the more expensive console is definitely gonna lose out. simply because with every game on every system, what's the point of me spending so and so more, especially when the cheaper got the same game and it's cheaper. I save money. I'm happy. but the company that loses money and basically made a pointless system would be the more expensive console makers... and they would be unhappy.

the idea that every game should be multiplatform is an overall stupid idea because as people say: "games make the console". and without exclusive content there would be no real competition.

i don't know, just my little 2 cents i'm throwing into the pond, which will get more than likely misinterpreted, flamed, and lord knows what else.. but it needs to be said.

yay for exclusive content. That's what makes these consoles shining stars. be they the ps3, the 360 or the wii.

kelindas02

finally someone with some sense