Bioshock 2 Graphics

It looks more or less the same as Bioshock 1, which isn't bad at all cause Bioshock looks awesome even today, but I imagine when it came out (3 years ago) Bio1 should look amazing, idk I think in Bio2 they didn't improve the graphics too much I'm not a graphic freak I will buy it for the story but it still looks like a 2007 game, what do you think?

Bioshock 2 Graphics

Lisandro_v22

The PS3 version of Bioshock was best looking console version, and I thought it looked great. If Bioshock 2 looks almost or exactly the same, I won't be complaining that's for sure.

The PS3 version of Bioshock was the best version visually, and I thought it looked great. If Bioshock 2 looks almost or exactly the same, I won't be complaining that's for sure.

Doolz2024

No it wasn't, the PC version was best visually.

Bioshock 2 does look better than the first though as its on UE3, Bioshock 1 used UE2.5 so theres alot of newer tech in Bioshock 2.

Even if it looks exactly the same as the first one I wont mind. The first one had very nice graphics.

[QUOTE="Doolz2024"]

The PS3 version of Bioshock was the best version visually, and I thought it looked great. If Bioshock 2 looks almost or exactly the same, I won't be complaining that's for sure.

Snagal123

No it wasn't, the PC version was best visually.

Bioshock 2 does look better than the first though as its on UE3, Bioshock 1 used UE2.5 so theres alot of newer tech in Bioshock 2.

The PS3 version looks better than the 360 version. ;)

The PS3 version of Bioshock was the best version visually, and I thought it looked great. If Bioshock 2 looks almost or exactly the same, I won't be complaining that's for sure.

Doolz2024

Thats probably because Bioshock came out later on the PS3.

[QUOTE="Snagal123"]

[QUOTE="Doolz2024"]

The PS3 version of Bioshock was the best version visually, and I thought it looked great. If Bioshock 2 looks almost or exactly the same, I won't be complaining that's for sure.

Doolz2024

No it wasn't, the PC version was best visually.

Bioshock 2 does look better than the first though as its on UE3, Bioshock 1 used UE2.5 so theres alot of newer tech in Bioshock 2.

The PS3 version looks better than the 360 version. ;)

360 Version not only looks better, runs smoother, but alos has higher resolution.

360 Bioshock runs @ 720P

PS3 Bioshock runs @ 680P

I'm still waiting on some of the features of the engine... I would really like to see some decent DX11 support with this one...

I really hate the look of it. They're using the worst engine ever.AAllxxjjnn

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]I really hate the look of it. They're using the worst engine ever.mr-krinkles

[QUOTE="mr-krinkles"][QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]I really hate the look of it. They're using the worst engine ever.AAllxxjjnn

The PS3 version of Bioshock was best looking console version, and I thought it looked great. If Bioshock 2 looks almost or exactly the same, I won't be complaining that's for sure.

Doolz2024

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"][QUOTE="mr-krinkles"] Yeah me too. I played the PS3 version and I thought it looked like ass.mr-krinkles

The art style is what stole the show for me. If its going to stay the same as the PS3 version, I just hope they don't use so much bloom and improve the lighting, that's all I have to complain about.

[QUOTE="mr-krinkles"][QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"] It's like everything in Rapture is made out of cheap plastic. teh_shogun

[QUOTE="teh_shogun"]

[QUOTE="mr-krinkles"] Yup, with gross looking neon colours. AAllxxjjnn

While we're on the topic, I must say, most all of the humans in Bioshock looked completely plastic...

[QUOTE="mr-krinkles"][QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"] It's like everything in Rapture is made out of cheap plastic. teh_shogun

I just didn't like the look of it dude. I appreciate that it's not all brown I guess, but in general the whole look of the game just felt gross. I can't put my finger on it but it was so off-putting I never felt like playing it for than an hour at a time. Maybe it was also because I thought the gameplay was kinda crappy and clunky, as well. Framerate wasn't great, the game looked blurred, and the aliasing was crap. A gross looking game. AAllxxjjn narrowed it down pretty well: everything looked like cheap, shiny plastic. I would refer to it as a "gel" look.

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]

[QUOTE="teh_shogun"]

you're boring.

teh_shogun

I really hate the look of it. They're using the worst engine ever.AAllxxjjnn

Its Unreal Engine ... one of the best engines around.

[QUOTE="Doolz2024"]

[QUOTE="Snagal123"]

No it wasn't, the PC version was best visually.

Bioshock 2 does look better than the first though as its on UE3, Bioshock 1 used UE2.5 so theres alot of newer tech in Bioshock 2.

shogo1979

The PS3 version looks better than the 360 version. ;)

360 Version not only looks better, runs smoother, but alos has higher resolution.

360 Bioshock runs @ 720P

PS3 Bioshock runs @ 680P

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]I really hate the look of it. They're using the worst engine ever.3sFan

Its Unreal Engine ... one of the best engines around.

No its not.

Bioshock is one of the few that use it well imo, along with Batman, Mirror's Edge and Mass Effect most other UE3 games just look far too shiny, and plastic, they just apply specular lighting to everything! Looks very unnatural.

[QUOTE="shogo1979"]

[QUOTE="Doolz2024"]Oops, forgot about the PC, allow me to rephrase then:

The PS3 version looks better than the 360 version. ;)

Doolz2024

360 Version not only looks better, runs smoother, but alos has higher resolution.

360 Bioshock runs @ 720P

PS3 Bioshock runs @ 680P

Yeah, I think you do mate. I just checked it out... click on the full screen res comparison. PS3 version is horribly blurred, makes quite a significant difference.

[QUOTE="3sFan"]

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]I really hate the look of it. They're using the worst engine ever.Snagal123

Its Unreal Engine ... one of the best engines around.

No its not.

Bioshock is one of the few that use it well imo, along with Batman, Mirror's Edge and Mass Effect most other UE3 games just look far too shiny, and plastic, they just apply specular lighting to everything! Looks very unnatural.

This is pretty much it, why I hated the look of Bioshock. The specular lighting looks particularly gross when they use those neon colours, on top of all the shiny "plasticy-gel" look.

[QUOTE="teh_shogun"]

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"] Don't blame us for Bioshock's overrated art design.

AAllxxjjnn

[QUOTE="teh_shogun"]

[QUOTE="mr-krinkles"] Yup, with gross looking neon colours. mr-krinkles

I just didn't like the look of it dude. I appreciate that it's not all brown I guess, but in general the whole look of the game just felt gross. I can't put my finger on it but it was so off-putting I never felt like playing it for than an hour at a time. Maybe it was also because I thought the gameplay was kinda crappy and clunky, as well. Framerate wasn't great, the game looked blurred, and the aliasing was crap. A gross looking game. AAllxxjjn narrowed it down pretty well: everything looked like cheap, shiny plastic. I would refer to it as a "gel" look.

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]

[QUOTE="teh_shogun"]

how's it overrated? it perfectly portrays the 1950's.

teh_shogun

[QUOTE="teh_shogun"]

[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"] Cause everything looks flat and plastic, the lighting also isn't very good. It just looks ugly.

AAllxxjjnn

no, you're talking about technical graphics because you mention lighting. if you were to say "man, Bioshock does a horrible job of portraying an underwater 1950's metropolis..." THEN, you'd be bashing it's artistic graphics. but HOW does it have bad artistic graphics?

teh_shogun

You like don't seem to realize that how things are lit is part of the artistic side of things.

I loved the art design of Bioshock. If the graphics was bad as some claims I guess rest of the world didn't notice it at all.

[QUOTE="teh_shogun"]

no, you're talking about technical graphics because you mention lighting. if you were to say "man, Bioshock does a horrible job of portraying an underwater 1950's metropolis..." THEN, you'd be bashing it's artistic graphics. but HOW does it have bad artistic graphics?

AAllxxjjnn

You like don't seem to realize that how things are lit is part of the artistic side of things.

or maybe you just don't understand that lighting falls under technical graphics. here's a clue, art = creativity. bioshock is plenty creative, and that is evident in it's level design, enemy design, and overall atmosphere.

teh_shogun

So, are these pictures enough for you to realize how much 'lighting' has to do with art.

[QUOTE="mr-krinkles"]

[QUOTE="teh_shogun"]

you're boring.

teh_shogun

I just didn't like the look of it dude. I appreciate that it's not all brown I guess, but in general the whole look of the game just felt gross. I can't put my finger on it but it was so off-putting I never felt like playing it for than an hour at a time. Maybe it was also because I thought the gameplay was kinda crappy and clunky, as well. Framerate wasn't great, the game looked blurred, and the aliasing was crap. A gross looking game. AAllxxjjn narrowed it down pretty well: everything looked like cheap, shiny plastic. I would refer to it as a "gel" look.

It looks "gross" to me, but for the wrong reasons. We often play environments in games which are supposed to look "ugly" and/or menacing irl, but you still regard them as good looking games. For instance, you wouldn't think hell is a very good looking place irl, but a videogame could produce it and you might call it a sweet looking game based on its engine/art*****.

I've already explained why I think Bioshock looks bad, and you're arguing that that's solely due to its technical limitations rather than ar****. I think that's a load of crap because the engine pretty much defines the look of that game. Sure, wow, they've created a city under water unlike anything released before and blah blah blah, it still looks crap to me based on its general shiny plastic and crappy lighting aesthetics.

Anyway, why are you taking this so personally? You like the look of the game, so be it, I'm not allowed to dislike it? I don't play Resistance and have no idea why that's relevant but there are plenty of old-school games that I play today that look far worse than Bioshock - it's the gameplay that keeps me coming back to them. I'm not too fond of how Bioshock plays, either.

*GS edits out s t y l e.

[QUOTE="Doolz2024"]

The PS3 version of Bioshock was the best version visually, and I thought it looked great. If Bioshock 2 looks almost or exactly the same, I won't be complaining that's for sure.

Snagal123

No it wasn't, the PC version was best visually.

Bioshock 2 does look better than the first though as its on UE3, Bioshock 1 used UE2.5 so theres alot of newer tech in Bioshock 2.

PC version is usually the best version anyway, particularly with graphics.

Bioshock looks and plays stellar on PC, of that I can attest.

[QUOTE="Doolz2024"][QUOTE="shogo1979"] Um......NO! http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/xbox-360-vs-ps3-face-off-round-15-article?page=2

360 Version not only looks better, runs smoother, but alos has higher resolution.

360 Bioshock runs @ 720P

PS3 Bioshock runs @ 680P

mr-krinkles

Yeah, I think you do mate. I just checked it out... click on the full screen res comparison. PS3 version is horribly blurred, makes quite a significant difference.

[QUOTE="Snagal123"]

[QUOTE="Doolz2024"]

The PS3 version of Bioshock was the best version visually, and I thought it looked great. If Bioshock 2 looks almost or exactly the same, I won't be complaining that's for sure.

Doolz2024

No it wasn't, the PC version was best visually.

Bioshock 2 does look better than the first though as its on UE3, Bioshock 1 used UE2.5 so theres alot of newer tech in Bioshock 2.

The PS3 version looks better than the 360 version. ;)

Actually you managed to get that one wrong too. http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/xbox-360-vs-ps3-face-off-round-15-article?page=2

Read the whole article please.

[QUOTE="mr-krinkles"]

[QUOTE="Doolz2024"]Man... I must need to get my eyes checked. I've seen both and honestly think the PS3 version looks better. Roushrsh

Yeah, I think you do mate. I just checked it out... click on the full screen res comparison. PS3 version is horribly blurred, makes quite a significant difference.

The blurriness wasn't fixed in any patch because it's a post-processing effect and is written into the PS3 code. Also the PS3 suffers constant frame changes.

Hard to believe its built upon a heavily modified Unreal 2 engine. Guess the devs had a lot of experience with Tribes Vengeance and SWAT 4. Props to the 2K Canberra studios.skrat_01

Bioshock was, Bioshock 2 has moved onto UE3.

I'm also going to be crazy here and say SWAT4 looks better than Bioshock, it had a far more realistic look, not specular lighting on everything, alot of vareity as well and a really "lived in" feeling.

I want SWAT5!!!

[QUOTE="skrat_01"]Hard to believe its built upon a heavily modified Unreal 2 engine. Guess the devs had a lot of experience with Tribes Vengeance and SWAT 4. Props to the 2K Canberra studios.Snagal123

Bioshock was, Bioshock 2 has moved onto UE3.

I'm also going to be crazy here and say SWAT4 looks better than Bioshock, it had a far more realistic look, not specular lighting on everything, alot of vareity as well and a really "lived in" feeling.

I want SWAT5!!!

[QUOTE="Doolz2024"]

[QUOTE="Snagal123"]

No it wasn't, the PC version was best visually.

Bioshock 2 does look better than the first though as its on UE3, Bioshock 1 used UE2.5 so theres alot of newer tech in Bioshock 2.

shogo1979

The PS3 version looks better than the 360 version. ;)

360 Version not only looks better, runs smoother, but alos has higher resolution.

360 Bioshock runs @ 720P

PS3 Bioshock runs @ 680P