As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
We're funding a new Acquisitions Incorporated series on Kickstarter right now! Check it out at https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/pennyarcade/acquisitions-incorporated-the-series-2

Bioshock - choice *is* wrong

1111214161724

Posts

  • Houk the NamebringerHouk the Namebringer Nipples The EchidnaRegistered User regular
    edited May 2007
    Meiz wrote: »
    apotheos wrote: »
    I love how there is all this talk about moral issues when it's been made pretty clear this was a game design decision due to the game not working the other way around.

    You guys just keep yelling at each other. Enjoy it. I'm getting a root beer.

    If you'd elaborate on that, you'd probably have a very good point.

    But you didn't, so enjoy the sugar suds and know that this post made about as much difference as people yacking about the moral implications.
    what's he supposed to elaborate on? his point was already discussed ad-nauseum in the pages prior, and that didn't stop anyone.

    Houk the Namebringer on
  • StigmaStigma Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    Houk wrote: »
    Resident0 wrote: »
    Umm... If the Little Sisters are immune to being shot and killed, why do they need the big daddies to protect them?

    If they are un-murderable anyway, what is the use of the big daddy, it kinda takes you out of the sort of experience a bit. (Not that im saying i want to murder little girls, just saying it kinda breaks the plot a bit)
    once you kill the big daddy, you can kill the girl. it would follow, then, that their invulnerability will be tied to the big daddy.

    problem solved!

    That's not going to happen. They don't want you killing the Little Sisters in any way other than some off-screen scripted sequence. Or, some nonviolent manner. Like they evaporate into your Adam collecting collector :P

    It's been pretty spelled out that there's no way, for instance, that a grenade or pistol will EVER be a cause of death for one of these NPCs.

    Stigma on
    YHWHYinYangblueblackblueborder.jpg
  • MeizMeiz Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    Houk wrote: »
    Meiz wrote: »
    apotheos wrote: »
    I love how there is all this talk about moral issues when it's been made pretty clear this was a game design decision due to the game not working the other way around.

    You guys just keep yelling at each other. Enjoy it. I'm getting a root beer.

    If you'd elaborate on that, you'd probably have a very good point.

    But you didn't, so enjoy the sugar suds and know that this post made about as much difference as people yacking about the moral implications.
    what's he supposed to elaborate on? his point was already discussed ad-nauseum in the pages prior, and that didn't stop anyone.

    Because I believe in him dammit.

    Meiz on
  • DoomninjaDoomninja Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    The mod community will add any functionality to the game that the developers failed to, or choose not to integrate.

    Probably a decision based on the fact that they are more susceptible to public backlash, and would rather continue developing games, rather than deal with social ramifications and a ton of bad press. The mod community can operate with more impunity, so they're taking the responsibility of the decision off their shoulders by not really making it. Better for gamers.

    Doomninja on
    1154825-1.png
  • Houk the NamebringerHouk the Namebringer Nipples The EchidnaRegistered User regular
    edited May 2007
    Stigma wrote: »
    Houk wrote: »
    Resident0 wrote: »
    Umm... If the Little Sisters are immune to being shot and killed, why do they need the big daddies to protect them?

    If they are un-murderable anyway, what is the use of the big daddy, it kinda takes you out of the sort of experience a bit. (Not that im saying i want to murder little girls, just saying it kinda breaks the plot a bit)
    once you kill the big daddy, you can kill the girl. it would follow, then, that their invulnerability will be tied to the big daddy.

    problem solved!

    That's not going to happen. They don't want you killing the Little Sisters in any way other than some off-screen scripted sequence. Or, some nonviolent manner. Like they evaporate into your Adam collecting collector :P

    It's been pretty spelled out that there's no way, for instance, that a grenade or pistol will EVER be a cause of death for one of these NPCs.
    whether you see it or not, you're still killing them. i.e. once the big daddy is gone, they are vulnerable. so yes, it is going to happen.

    Houk the Namebringer on
  • StigmaStigma Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    Houk wrote: »
    Stigma wrote: »
    Houk wrote: »
    Resident0 wrote: »
    Umm... If the Little Sisters are immune to being shot and killed, why do they need the big daddies to protect them?

    If they are un-murderable anyway, what is the use of the big daddy, it kinda takes you out of the sort of experience a bit. (Not that im saying i want to murder little girls, just saying it kinda breaks the plot a bit)
    once you kill the big daddy, you can kill the girl. it would follow, then, that their invulnerability will be tied to the big daddy.

    problem solved!

    That's not going to happen. They don't want you killing the Little Sisters in any way other than some off-screen scripted sequence. Or, some nonviolent manner. Like they evaporate into your Adam collecting collector :P

    It's been pretty spelled out that there's no way, for instance, that a grenade or pistol will EVER be a cause of death for one of these NPCs.
    whether you see it or not, you're still killing them. i.e. once the big daddy is gone, they are vulnerable. so yes, it is going to happen.

    Through a binary choice of harvest/save. Their method of invulnerability has to remain the same after the Big Daddy is gone because they still want to force you to use their canned method.
    Your gun will probably lower automatically and they'll be immune to callateral damage.

    Stigma on
    YHWHYinYangblueblackblueborder.jpg
  • durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    Doomninja wrote: »
    The mod community will add any functionality to the game that the developers failed to, or choose not to integrate.

    Probably a decision based on the fact that they are more susceptible to public backlash, and would rather continue developing games, rather than deal with social ramifications and a ton of bad press. The mod community can operate with more impunity, so they're taking the responsibility of the decision off their shoulders by not really making it. Better for gamers.
    On this note, what with Hot Coffee, wouldn't this be a useless censorship move anyways?

    I mean, would it really stop reactionary idiots if it took a mod to allow you to shoot the little kids?

    Edit: You know what would be wonderful? If the "canned method" was a brutal, minutes long beating with a wrench. They're not censoring, they're afraid we're all wusses about child murder.

    durandal4532 on
    Take a moment to donate what you can to Critical Resistance and Black Lives Matter.
  • RookRook Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    drhazard wrote: »
    apotheos wrote: »
    I love how there is all this talk about moral issues when it's been made pretty clear this was a game design decision due to the game not working the other way around.

    You guys just keep yelling at each other. Enjoy it. I'm getting a root beer.

    I still confused as to why them dying as collateral damage wasn't affecting the players, though. That sounds more like they're not doing a good enough job invoking empathy from the Little Sisters. Which actually is a problem.

    Watch the first trailer walk through, Watch at 12:00 when the little sister dies. Watcha got? Nothing. Honestly, if you were playing the game like that and you wanted to save the little sisters what would you do. Quick Load. It'd just be annoying.

    Watch the hunting the Big Daddy video, or more specifically the ending. Which of those do you want the game to be about?


    And just to top it off, watch the latest trailer, because omg does the game look 100x better now.

    Rook on
  • RookRook Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    Stigma wrote: »
    Houk wrote: »
    Stigma wrote: »
    Houk wrote: »
    Resident0 wrote: »
    Umm... If the Little Sisters are immune to being shot and killed, why do they need the big daddies to protect them?

    If they are un-murderable anyway, what is the use of the big daddy, it kinda takes you out of the sort of experience a bit. (Not that im saying i want to murder little girls, just saying it kinda breaks the plot a bit)
    once you kill the big daddy, you can kill the girl. it would follow, then, that their invulnerability will be tied to the big daddy.

    problem solved!

    That's not going to happen. They don't want you killing the Little Sisters in any way other than some off-screen scripted sequence. Or, some nonviolent manner. Like they evaporate into your Adam collecting collector :P

    It's been pretty spelled out that there's no way, for instance, that a grenade or pistol will EVER be a cause of death for one of these NPCs.
    whether you see it or not, you're still killing them. i.e. once the big daddy is gone, they are vulnerable. so yes, it is going to happen.

    Through a binary choice of harvest/save. Their method of invulnerability has to remain the same after the Big Daddy is gone because they still want to force you to use their canned method.
    Your gun will probably lower automatically and they'll be immune to callateral damage.

    I wish I'd never used the word binary in the opening post. So, how does shooting them add to your choice? After all, this game isn't about the different ways you can kill little children.

    Rook on
  • CarnivoreCarnivore Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    I like the red glow on the new big daddies.

    plus their charge is like OH FUCK FUCK FUCK SHIT RUN kind of exhilirating.

    Carnivore on
    hihi.jpg
  • capable heartcapable heart Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    Stigma wrote: »

    Are you sure that it would get an AO for this?

    Yes, at the very least. I could also easily see them (ESRB) refusing to rate it.

    capable heart on
  • durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    Rook wrote: »
    drhazard wrote: »
    apotheos wrote: »
    I love how there is all this talk about moral issues when it's been made pretty clear this was a game design decision due to the game not working the other way around.

    You guys just keep yelling at each other. Enjoy it. I'm getting a root beer.

    I still confused as to why them dying as collateral damage wasn't affecting the players, though. That sounds more like they're not doing a good enough job invoking empathy from the Little Sisters. Which actually is a problem.

    Watch the first trailer walk through, Watch at 12:00 when the little sister dies. Watcha got? Nothing. Honestly, if you were playing the game like that and you wanted to save the little sisters what would you do. Quick Load. It'd just be annoying.

    Watch the hunting the Big Daddy video, or more specifically the ending. Which of those do you want the game to be about?


    And just to top it off, watch the latest trailer, because omg does the game look 100x better now.

    Actually, the more I think about it, I think people are just annoyed that only their character can kill these things. As in, it's a little bit less of an "ecology", because it's obviously you and only you that has any chance of interacting with these people in a meaningful manner. Now, if they can have a bunch of crazy blood-teleporting knife doctors take down a Big Daddy once in a while, and show them being able to "harvest" as well, that might make people feel much more a part of a internally consistent ecology.

    durandal4532 on
    Take a moment to donate what you can to Critical Resistance and Black Lives Matter.
  • JWFokkerJWFokker Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    I'm still concerned about the lack of variety in terms of NPCs. There are what, five different types of NPCs and they're all hostile? This might as well be Doom 4 with a more complex story. It looks just as linear and mindless to me.

    JWFokker on
  • CarnivoreCarnivore Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    Its not that an AO is going to deter people from buying the game, its that a LOT of stores refuse to sell AO games, period. With something like GTA for example, this isnt so much of a problem, because that shit would sell if it was just a pong minigame. But for a newe franchise they wanna really shift some units.

    Carnivore on
    hihi.jpg
  • CarnivoreCarnivore Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    JWFokker wrote: »
    I'm still concerned about the lack of variety in terms of NPCs. There are what, five different types of NPCs and they're all hostile? This might as well be Doom 4 with a more complex story. It looks just as linear and mindless to me.

    there are way more. in the new trailer you see about 6 new ones for brief seconds.

    Carnivore on
    hihi.jpg
  • EdcrabEdcrab Actually a hack Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    JWFokker wrote: »
    I'm still concerned about the lack of variety in terms of NPCs. There are what, five different types of NPCs and they're all hostile? This might as well be Doom 4 with a more complex story. It looks just as linear and mindless to me.

    I had this worry originally with the old trailers, but at least some of them (the nurses at least) have proven to have alternate skins: and I'm guessing there're even more "types" under the covers.

    I'm pretty sure that you'll interact with NPCs in a way that goes beyond voice-only radio messages: or at least that's the impression I'd got from an old interview.

    Edcrab on
    cBY55.gifbmJsl.png
  • RookRook Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    Actually, the more I think about it, I think people are just annoyed that only their character can kill these things. As in, it's a little bit less of an "ecology", because it's obviously you and only you that has any chance of interacting with these people in a meaningful manner. Now, if they can have a bunch of crazy blood-teleporting knife doctors take down a Big Daddy once in a while, and show them being able to "harvest" as well, that might make people feel much more a part of a internally consistent ecology.

    Except we don't really know how the ecology works. At the moment it looks like all the mutants are on one side. One of your guides is on the still human survivors side just trying to escape, and the other is trying to restore what she's done to the world. It's one of those cases where if you really want to go through this all, you're just going to end up spoilering the story for yourself. But certainly in all the videos we've seen the mutants appear friendly with the harvesting team.

    Rook on
  • DarkWarriorDarkWarrior __BANNED USERS regular
    edited May 2007
    Watching that new trailer, one thing that really stood out and bugged me was that everyone had the same right handed lunge and slam with weapon attack.

    That and the amount of functional people while on fire. Though I'll chalk that up to genetic engineering.

    DarkWarrior on
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    Rook wrote: »
    Actually, the more I think about it, I think people are just annoyed that only their character can kill these things. As in, it's a little bit less of an "ecology", because it's obviously you and only you that has any chance of interacting with these people in a meaningful manner. Now, if they can have a bunch of crazy blood-teleporting knife doctors take down a Big Daddy once in a while, and show them being able to "harvest" as well, that might make people feel much more a part of a internally consistent ecology.

    Except we don't really know how the ecology works. At the moment it looks like all the mutants are on one side. One of your guides is on the still human survivors side just trying to escape, and the other is trying to restore what she's done to the world. It's one of those cases where if you really want to go through this all, you're just going to end up spoilering the story for yourself. But certainly in all the videos we've seen the mutants appear friendly with the harvesting team.
    There is also the fact that it would make no sense for them to kill the little sisters. If they kill one to get a bit of the Adam, they will lose future Adam because the little sister can't produce more of it.

    Couscous on
  • durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    Rook wrote: »
    Actually, the more I think about it, I think people are just annoyed that only their character can kill these things. As in, it's a little bit less of an "ecology", because it's obviously you and only you that has any chance of interacting with these people in a meaningful manner. Now, if they can have a bunch of crazy blood-teleporting knife doctors take down a Big Daddy once in a while, and show them being able to "harvest" as well, that might make people feel much more a part of a internally consistent ecology.

    Except we don't really know how the ecology works. At the moment it looks like all the mutants are on one side. One of your guides is on the still human survivors side just trying to escape, and the other is trying to restore what she's done to the world. It's one of those cases where if you really want to go through this all, you're just going to end up spoilering the story for yourself. But certainly in all the videos we've seen the mutants appear friendly with the harvesting team.

    Well, obviously not, but the pre-game hype was mostly about intelligent AI, living and breathing world, enemies with agendas etc etc. Obviously it's not a dang holo-deck, so it has to be within reason. But am I wrong about the whole idea being that there are 2-3 competing ideologies and these would all have ample reason to hijack ADAM? I was under the impression that the big daddies were not there to protect the girls from you, in particular, but from competitors.

    I mean, aren't they mutants too? So what are they fighting against if all the mutants are on the same side? Are they there to protect against a currently non-existant threat, or what?

    durandal4532 on
    Take a moment to donate what you can to Critical Resistance and Black Lives Matter.
  • apotheosapotheos Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited May 2007
    Meiz wrote: »
    Houk wrote: »
    Meiz wrote: »
    apotheos wrote: »
    I love how there is all this talk about moral issues when it's been made pretty clear this was a game design decision due to the game not working the other way around.

    You guys just keep yelling at each other. Enjoy it. I'm getting a root beer.

    If you'd elaborate on that, you'd probably have a very good point.

    But you didn't, so enjoy the sugar suds and know that this post made about as much difference as people yacking about the moral implications.
    what's he supposed to elaborate on? his point was already discussed ad-nauseum in the pages prior, and that didn't stop anyone.

    Because I believe in him dammit.

    Thats nice of you.

    But what can I say? They didn't get censored or tailor the content to avoid censorship - they say - but nobody will believe them because it is way more fun (and easier to be a blowhard) if you don't. We've got pages and pages and pages and PAGES of arguments that pertain to a scenario that may very well be ENTIRELY fabricated.

    We won't know until we play the game. And we *can* speculate in the mean time, but we've got people saying this has ruined the game (they've not played) and thinking they know better than the designers and the testers of the game (they've not played).

    So I think vast portions of this thread have jumped the shark. But who wants to hear that, I mean, really?

    apotheos on


    猿も木から落ちる
  • StigmaStigma Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    Rook wrote: »
    Stigma wrote: »
    Houk wrote: »
    Stigma wrote: »
    Houk wrote: »
    Resident0 wrote: »
    Umm... If the Little Sisters are immune to being shot and killed, why do they need the big daddies to protect them?

    If they are un-murderable anyway, what is the use of the big daddy, it kinda takes you out of the sort of experience a bit. (Not that im saying i want to murder little girls, just saying it kinda breaks the plot a bit)
    once you kill the big daddy, you can kill the girl. it would follow, then, that their invulnerability will be tied to the big daddy.

    problem solved!

    That's not going to happen. They don't want you killing the Little Sisters in any way other than some off-screen scripted sequence. Or, some nonviolent manner. Like they evaporate into your Adam collecting collector :P

    It's been pretty spelled out that there's no way, for instance, that a grenade or pistol will EVER be a cause of death for one of these NPCs.
    whether you see it or not, you're still killing them. i.e. once the big daddy is gone, they are vulnerable. so yes, it is going to happen.

    Through a binary choice of harvest/save. Their method of invulnerability has to remain the same after the Big Daddy is gone because they still want to force you to use their canned method.
    Your gun will probably lower automatically and they'll be immune to callateral damage.

    I wish I'd never used the word binary in the opening post. So, how does shooting them add to your choice? After all, this game isn't about the different ways you can kill little children.

    No, but their vulnerability was an important gameplay mechanic that's been completely nullified so that I no longer need to be careful around them at all. It's rather stupid. Here we are at the beginning of the conversation again.

    I just hope that in the next Rainbow Six game the hostages are still vulnerable so that I can't get away with throwing frag grenades into rooms with them.

    Stigma on
    YHWHYinYangblueblackblueborder.jpg
  • RookRook Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    Stigma wrote: »
    Rook wrote: »
    I wish I'd never used the word binary in the opening post. So, how does shooting them add to your choice? After all, this game isn't about the different ways you can kill little children.

    No, but their vulnerability was an important gameplay mechanic that's been completely nullified so that I no longer need to be careful around them at all. It's rather stupid. Here we are at the beginning of the conversation again.

    I just hope that in the next Rainbow Six game the hostages are still vulnerable so that I can't get away with throwing frag grenades into rooms with them.

    Really, it was an important gameplay mechanic? Good to know you're working hard on Bioshock and not goofing around on message baords. Because I'd hate to take your boss' word for things over yours.

    Rook on
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    No, but their vulnerability was an important gameplay mechanic that's been completely nullified so that I no longer need to be careful around them at all.
    Accidentally pissing off the protectors isn't a reason to be careful around them?

    Couscous on
  • StigmaStigma Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    titmouse wrote: »
    No, but their vulnerability was an important gameplay mechanic that's been completely nullified so that I no longer need to be careful around them at all.
    Accidentally pissing off the protectors isn't a reason to be careful around them?

    I'm fairly certain that pissing off their protectors is almost required by the storyline we know of.

    First thing I'm going to do when I get chance? Throw a grenade at a LS.
    Second thing? Laugh.

    Stigma on
    YHWHYinYangblueblackblueborder.jpg
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    Stigma wrote: »
    titmouse wrote: »
    No, but their vulnerability was an important gameplay mechanic that's been completely nullified so that I no longer need to be careful around them at all.
    Accidentally pissing off the protectors isn't a reason to be careful around them?

    I'm fairly certain that pissing off their protectors is almost required by the storyline we know of.

    First thing I'm going to do when I get chance? Throw a grenade at a LS.
    Second thing? Laugh.

    Third thing? Die because you aren't strong enough to beat him.

    Couscous on
  • StigmaStigma Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    titmouse wrote: »
    Stigma wrote: »
    titmouse wrote: »
    No, but their vulnerability was an important gameplay mechanic that's been completely nullified so that I no longer need to be careful around them at all.
    Accidentally pissing off the protectors isn't a reason to be careful around them?

    I'm fairly certain that pissing off their protectors is almost required by the storyline we know of.

    First thing I'm going to do when I get chance? Throw a grenade at a LS.
    Second thing? Laugh.

    Third thing? Die because you aren't strong enough to beat him.

    Fourth thing?
    Load!

    Stigma on
    YHWHYinYangblueblackblueborder.jpg
  • ElJeffeElJeffe Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited May 2007
    Stigma wrote: »
    Deus ex machina for games, to borrow an overused phrase. It's irritating, but it just tells me "oh, so and so is important so I'm not allowed to kill this person. It's stupid but I'll live.".

    Me, I'm willing to sacrifice a little bit of realism so I don't get 80 hours into a game only to find out that some fucker I offed 50 hours ago was integral to the plot and that now I get to restart the game.

    ElJeffe on
    Maddie: "I named my feet. The left one is flip and the right one is flop. Oh, and also I named my flip-flops."
  • EdcrabEdcrab Actually a hack Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    I'm going to stop saying things like "I'm assuming" and "I suppose", because by now it should be damn obvious that nobody's quite sure what they're talking about.

    But to add to the rampant speculation: the other Slicers (or whatever the relevant types/factions are called) will (still?) try and take down Little Sisters: just that now they're forced to go through the Big Daddy. Otherwise the ecosystem isn't quite what I'd guessed it'd be.

    Edcrab on
    cBY55.gifbmJsl.png
  • RookRook Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    Rook wrote: »
    Actually, the more I think about it, I think people are just annoyed that only their character can kill these things. As in, it's a little bit less of an "ecology", because it's obviously you and only you that has any chance of interacting with these people in a meaningful manner. Now, if they can have a bunch of crazy blood-teleporting knife doctors take down a Big Daddy once in a while, and show them being able to "harvest" as well, that might make people feel much more a part of a internally consistent ecology.

    Except we don't really know how the ecology works. At the moment it looks like all the mutants are on one side. One of your guides is on the still human survivors side just trying to escape, and the other is trying to restore what she's done to the world. It's one of those cases where if you really want to go through this all, you're just going to end up spoilering the story for yourself. But certainly in all the videos we've seen the mutants appear friendly with the harvesting team.

    Well, obviously not, but the pre-game hype was mostly about intelligent AI, living and breathing world, enemies with agendas etc etc. Obviously it's not a dang holo-deck, so it has to be within reason. But am I wrong about the whole idea being that there are 2-3 competing ideologies and these would all have ample reason to hijack ADAM? I was under the impression that the big daddies were not there to protect the girls from you, in particular, but from competitors.

    I mean, aren't they mutants too? So what are they fighting against if all the mutants are on the same side? Are they there to protect against a currently non-existant threat, or what?
    Protectors: (Big Daddies, or Mr. Bubbles as some of the Gatherers call them) Mute, lumbering bio-mechanical monstrosities, created to protect the Gatherers. They are heavily armored and wield high-powered weaponry, including a large drill.Their armor somewhat resembles a large diving suit. Most of the inhabitants stay out of the way of the Gatherers and Protectors. According to lead designer Paul Hellquist "Once you mess with them, you find out why no-one messes with them."

    From wiki.
    I'm not particularly keen on snooping around too much because I'd rather experience the story by playing the game. But I'm pretty sure irrational are smart enough to know what they're doing.

    edit: Actually this line makes a hell of a lot of sense. The genetic arms race is fueled by adam. Those with the most become the best, so who's better placed to become the strongest than the one's with a symbiote that collects the adam in the first place.

    Rook on
  • CarnivoreCarnivore Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    You're suggesting that rather than protecting the sisters the protectors have an ulterior motive, they are using the sisters for their own means.

    that would be fuckawesome.

    Carnivore on
    hihi.jpg
  • StigmaStigma Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    ElJeffe wrote: »
    Stigma wrote: »
    Deus ex machina for games, to borrow an overused phrase. It's irritating, but it just tells me "oh, so and so is important so I'm not allowed to kill this person. It's stupid but I'll live.".

    Me, I'm willing to sacrifice a little bit of realism so I don't get 80 hours into a game only to find out that some fucker I offed 50 hours ago was integral to the plot and that now I get to restart the game.

    Which is why I'm totally good with it, even though it's stupid.

    From what I know though, the Little Sisters aren't integral to the plot... at least, their lives aren't. You're given a choice to kill them anyway.

    I just really hope this isn't done stupidly. The worst things about games are things that feel extremely forced and artificial. Invisible walls...

    Frankly, the best way they can do this is by making the LS AI really really good at running away from danger so it never seems totally unnatural that she just survived an explosion, then have it so my gun lowers when it's aimed at her. That's all fine.

    The last thing I want is to fire a chaingun into a room and having everyone die except her, because the bullets hit her but sparks fly off because she's made of metal or something in the game engine.

    Stigma on
    YHWHYinYangblueblackblueborder.jpg
  • augustaugust where you come from is gone Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    Carnivore wrote: »
    You're suggesting that rather than protecting the sisters the protectors have an ulterior motive, they are using the sisters for their own means.

    that would be fuckawesome.

    Well, they have a symbiotic relationship, right?

    I'm guessing the LS are so chock-full of Adam that they can't be damaged physically. But the have no offense capability.

    That's where you get the Big Daddies.

    august on
  • CarnivoreCarnivore Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    oh god yeah. im hoping they run and hide every fight, so after the carnage you find em hiding in a corner or in a cupboard or something. then its like 'finally, now to get what i came for'

    Carnivore on
    hihi.jpg
  • durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    Rook wrote: »
    From wiki.
    I'm not particularly keen on snooping around too much because I'd rather experience the story by playing the game. But I'm pretty sure irrational are smart enough to know what they're doing.

    edit: Actually this line makes a hell of a lot of sense. The genetic arms race is fueled by adam. Those with the most become the best, so who's better placed to become the strongest than the one's with a symbiote that collects the adam in the first place.
    Oh. Well. Yes, I got the impression a while ago that they were super-badass.

    What I mean is that now, even if it is for gameplay reasons, (I.E the AI controlled characters wiping a level of Gatherers before you got there), harvesting/saving is something that only the player can do. And because the big hype for this game has been emergent gameplay and a living environment, people were hoping that player-specific actions could be kept at a very bare minimum. So it does make sense that a reasonably underpowered enemy wouldn't mess with the biggest and the baddest, it also makes sense that a group of desperate, crazy people would do desperate crazy things. Now we're not going to (I can only assume, of course) see that, because the mechanic to be that crazy is only in the player's arsenal.

    durandal4532 on
    Take a moment to donate what you can to Critical Resistance and Black Lives Matter.
  • StigmaStigma Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    august wrote: »
    Carnivore wrote: »
    You're suggesting that rather than protecting the sisters the protectors have an ulterior motive, they are using the sisters for their own means.

    that would be fuckawesome.

    Well, they have a symbiotic relationship, right?

    I'm guessing the LS are so chock-full of Adam that they can't be damaged physically. But the have no offense capability.

    That's where you get the Big Daddies.

    Y'know those teleporting enemies?
    Make the LS like that. Except harder to hit. Like, the most annoying fucking thing in the world.

    I'd find that pretty funny and probably waste some ammo just to hear them giggle at me for thinking I had a chance.

    edit: and of course... hide in the bullet proof cupboard.

    Stigma on
    YHWHYinYangblueblackblueborder.jpg
  • CarnivoreCarnivore Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    Im betting that once the game launches and you come across your first LS and BD combo, you fight for like 10 mins to take out the daddy, waste all ur ammo.

    then you come to the LS in a corner and she stands up and just as ur about to hit her with a wrench or whatever her eyes start to glow, she floats up off the ground about 5 ft and starts screaming a horrific banshee wail, and you're all like 'oh my fucking god....' and the devs are all like 'oh yeah, heheh, hope you didnt get the impression these things were weak from our advertising, cause now you are totally fucking fucked'

    Carnivore on
    hihi.jpg
  • augustaugust where you come from is gone Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    Stigma wrote: »
    august wrote: »
    Carnivore wrote: »
    You're suggesting that rather than protecting the sisters the protectors have an ulterior motive, they are using the sisters for their own means.

    that would be fuckawesome.

    Well, they have a symbiotic relationship, right?

    I'm guessing the LS are so chock-full of Adam that they can't be damaged physically. But the have no offense capability.

    That's where you get the Big Daddies.

    Y'know those teleporting enemies?
    Make the LS like that. Except harder to hit. Like, the most annoying fucking thing in the world.

    I'd find that pretty funny and probably waste some ammo just to hear them giggle at me for thinking I had a chance.

    edit: and of course... hide in the bullet proof cupboard.

    Well, that doesn't make any sense because the why would they need the BDs at all?

    If I had to make up an explanation it's that they're these tiny little super-dense Adam filled critters that can't really be harmed with conventional weapons. But for some reason the way their bodies are built makes it so they have no real offensive capability. Like there's no room for it, like say in Desu Ex where all your slots are full. So people could just pick them up and off they go. That's why they keep the BDs around.

    august on
  • StigmaStigma Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    Hehehe

    Stigma on
    YHWHYinYangblueblackblueborder.jpg
  • capable heartcapable heart Registered User regular
    edited September 2021
    cutting off a lot of hair can be like, symbolic of getting rid of past bad vibes

    capable heart on
Sign In or Register to comment.