I have yet to play the first Bioshock. I've debated with myself whether or not I should pick this up via Steam for a while now, but always decided I already have tons of games I need to play/finish. (like GTA4, DMC4 and MGS4.. but now I've beaten all but DMC4)
Well now Bioshock is coming to the PS3... with a new mode, eventually DLC, and trophy support (got to collect em' all!) I've also read that the PS3 version has been updated with higher-res textures (to help fill up more of the BR disc) ... There's no way around this game, I have to play it, but would you guys recommend the PC version if you had a 7800GT and a single core CPU or to go with the PS3 version (I don't own an X360) I've read that all the bugs in the X360/PC version still got ported / not fixed in the PS3 version... What’s more important.. Mouse&keyboard support or trophies? haha
(I couldn't find a Bioshock 1 thread, so I'm posting here o_O )
This game's mouse acceleration is completely broken. You'll also have trouble making it look pretty with a 7800. I couldn't tell you anything about the other versions though.
I mean, why not build a second Pentagon or Statue of Liberty?
I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure there is a sister statue of the Statue of Liberty in Paris.
There is.
There is also one that was built in Vegas.
There are tons of them around the world, but I think these were built at or around the same time.
Also, ksup Sceptre, haven't seen you around(I may just be blind) lately.
Well, there's actually two significant ones in Paris. One is the actual original, the model made by the sculptor Bartholdi to guide the construction of the US one (a second model exists and is in Maceió, in Brazil). Paris' second statue was made three years after the american one was completed, with its sight pointed at its bigger sister. It was a gift from the french community in the US to commemorate the centennial of the french revolution, much like the US one is a gift from France to commemorate the centennial of the declaration of independace.
I read somewhere that Fontaine had rapture rigged so that in the event of his death a balloon underneath Rapture would expand and force the city to the surface. Maybe thats why we apparently see Rapture rising from the sand, tho this may have just been a fan-wank
I read somewhere that Fontaine had rapture rigged so that in the event of his death a balloon underneath Rapture would expand and force the city to the surface. Maybe thats why we apparently see Rapture rising from the sand, tho this may have just been a fan-wank
In the first game when you escape from Rapture there is no sight of sand near the pod you escape in.
I read somewhere that Fontaine had rapture rigged so that in the event of his death a balloon underneath Rapture would expand and force the city to the surface. Maybe thats why we apparently see Rapture rising from the sand, tho this may have just been a fan-wank
In the first game when you escape from Rapture there is no sight of sand near the pod you escape in.
So probably just a fan-wank.
i meant the sand was just used as imagery for the city rising not that actual city coming up through the sand. And maybe as the trailer opens with "Atlantic Coast" the city ..erm.. floats there from the mid Atlantic. o_O
I watched that trailer a few times and here are my thoughts on it.
The girl seems to be between 9 and 16, she's thin and the picture makes her look out of proportion in her height vs. width.
The city rises out of the sand around her, it looks like she's using some sort of telekinetic ability to build sand castles.
So here's my guess and fuck you if you don't like spoilers. Go play the game.
The city is still down there, nothing ever indicated that it exploded imploded or stopped working. Your character killed both of the leaders in the fighting and left no one in control. There was always indication in the game that there were sane people left, and I got the impression there were quite a few but they were overpowered and unable to do anything because of the splicers which were mostly under the 'bad guys' control. Story wise it is feasible for the city to still be there and functioning now that most of the splicers were gone. You'd have to explain why they cut themselves off from the surface without going the only logical route of one bad guy taking control and locking everyone away. That's too easy, and would mean the entire place was much, much worse than what your character saw.
So I'm thinking that the girl pictured is a daughter of a little sister, (The "good" ending indicated that all the sisters were married and you led a peaceful life after that) mutated by her mothers adam sucking days and getting called back to Rapture. Probably someone in the city is calling them back rather than an instinct, surely for nefarious schemes. I just hope they don't attempt a twist, because no matter how good it is, it won't be good enough.
Sonar on
I'm building a real pirate ship. Really. Wanna help? Click here!
caffron said: "and cat pee is not a laughing matter"
I also just looked through a few online scripts of Contact and it doesn't seem to be in the script.
That's because they're quoting it incorrectly.
It's "First rule in government spending: why build one when you can have two at twice the price?", according to Wikipedia at least, which is much more in line with what I recall from when I saw the movie last.
Forar on
First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
All I know is that this game better be amazing. One thing I want to see is more incentive to use powers other than Electo Bolt. The only time you use the other powers is when you are in some very situational predicament. Other than that it is clear that the electricity power is by far the most useful. Fire took too long to kill enemies. The insects were laughable.
I watched that trailer a few times and here are my thoughts on it.
The girl seems to be between 9 and 16, she's thin and the picture makes her look out of proportion in her height vs. width.
The city rises out of the sand around her, it looks like she's using some sort of telekinetic ability to build sand castles.
So here's my guess and fuck you if you don't like spoilers. Go play the game.
The city is still down there, nothing ever indicated that it exploded imploded or stopped working.
Except the thing was springing leaks everywhere and it wouldn't be too long before there was no air left. Not to mention limited food supplies, since that pagan cult of Houdini Splicers had taken over Arcadia and some asshole ate all of the extra potato chips and candy bars.
Uh, spoilers, people? PS3 people are just getting the game this week.
I think maybe it'd just be smarter for you to avoid a thread talking about the making of a sequel to a game you haven't even played yet.
It just seems like a common courtesy that'd be nice, especially since the teaser trailer is being mentioned as an extra in the PS3 version, the trailer itself doesn't really spoil anything and it's at the top of the most recent page.
doesn't say anywhere in the OP that this trailer is from the PS3 version, so this thread is about bioshock 2 talk, not PS3 bioshock talk
First rule in government spending: why build one when you can have two at twice the price?
If anyone here had even seen the movie they would realize that he was referring to the two machines that were built.
He also goes on to refers to he fact that the US made the second one so they would have a machine that they had total control over and not subject to international interests. It wasn't just a case of "hey, these things only cost a kojillion dollars, lets make two for two kojillian." Heh, even the movie itself doesn't use it as simplistically as "it only costs double!"
If Ryan built Rapture he needed to have contingencies. You spend money developing the technologies and planning shit so you want to utilise that expenditure as much as possible. That's why you build two cities, or three or fuck knows how many. Because you spent so long figuring out how to build it that you spend much less time actually on the construction.
See, this is better than just "It only costs X2," as it gives reasoning beyond just having two. Now, on the topic itself, having more than one city kinda takes away the impact and uniqueness of Rapture. If Ryan went "These things are cheap, let's make a half-dozen!" then it's kind of overall meh.
I wouldn't think that there would be a second+ city. I'm sure Mr. Ego Ryan would have stated something about it, especially if it were in the same state as the first.
One of the endings to the first essentially stated that the first city could continue to limp on for some time, especially if it finally started to get some supplies from the outside world.
Uh, spoilers, people? PS3 people are just getting the game this week.
I think maybe it'd just be smarter for you to avoid a thread talking about the making of a sequel to a game you haven't even played yet.
It just seems like a common courtesy that'd be nice, especially since the teaser trailer is being mentioned as an extra in the PS3 version, the trailer itself doesn't really spoil anything and it's at the top of the most recent page.
doesn't say anywhere in the OP that this trailer is from the PS3 version, so this thread is about bioshock 2 talk, not PS3 bioshock talk
Well you can see in the video someone signing in so that proves that it is in fact from the PS3 version.
One good way they could follow up the first game is, say somebody eventually took control of the Adam stock in Rapture and launched an assault against the surface.
Be vague about who exactly it was. Not necessarily the player from the first game, but someone who emerged from that conflict. Begin with a cinematic of the attack on the submarine from the "bad" ending. You play a new character, someone who washes up on a remote, touristy island that has been overrun by splicer forces. Eventually the action moves to a partially-rebuilt and further militarized Rapture, where you face your nemesis. If you've played "good," then you do battle with some smuggler who had returned to Rapture and taken control in the power vacuum left at the end of the first game. If you've played "bad," then you end up facing the player character from Bioshock, who has been splicing heavily and formulating plans for world domination.
One good way they could follow up the first game is, say somebody eventually took control of the Adam stock in Rapture and launched an assault against the surface.
Be vague about who exactly it was. Not necessarily the player from the first game, but someone who emerged from that conflict. Begin with a cinematic of the attack on the submarine from the "bad" ending. You play a new character, someone who washes up on a remote, touristy island that has been overrun by splicer forces. Eventually the action moves to a partially-rebuilt and further militarized Rapture, where you face your nemesis. If you've played "good," then you do battle with some smuggler who had returned to Rapture and taken control in the power vacuum left at the end of the first game. If you've played "bad," then you end up facing the player character from Bioshock, who has been splicing heavily and formulating plans for world domination.
One good way they could follow up the first game is, say somebody eventually took control of the Adam stock in Rapture and launched an assault against the surface.
Be vague about who exactly it was. Not necessarily the player from the first game, but someone who emerged from that conflict. Begin with a cinematic of the attack on the submarine from the "bad" ending. You play a new character, someone who washes up on a remote, touristy island that has been overrun by splicer forces. Eventually the action moves to a partially-rebuilt and further militarized Rapture, where you face your nemesis. If you've played "good," then you do battle with some smuggler who had returned to Rapture and taken control in the power vacuum left at the end of the first game. If you've played "bad," then you end up facing the player character from Bioshock, who has been splicing heavily and formulating plans for world domination.
But that would fuck up continuity.
Please explain. Because I don't see any way this would fuck up continuity, unless you're reading a lot extra into it beyond what I wrote. The above suggestion merely makes the assumption that if you preferred the good or bad ending to the original, you'll likely have the same preference in the sequel.
One good way they could follow up the first game is, say somebody eventually took control of the Adam stock in Rapture and launched an assault against the surface.
Be vague about who exactly it was. Not necessarily the player from the first game, but someone who emerged from that conflict. Begin with a cinematic of the attack on the submarine from the "bad" ending. You play a new character, someone who washes up on a remote, touristy island that has been overrun by splicer forces. Eventually the action moves to a partially-rebuilt and further militarized Rapture, where you face your nemesis. If you've played "good," then you do battle with some smuggler who had returned to Rapture and taken control in the power vacuum left at the end of the first game. If you've played "bad," then you end up facing the player character from Bioshock, who has been splicing heavily and formulating plans for world domination.
But that would fuck up continuity.
Please explain. Because I don't see any way this would fuck up continuity, unless you're reading a lot extra into it beyond what I wrote. The above suggestion merely makes the assumption that if you preferred the good or bad ending to the original, you'll likely have the same preference in the sequel.
Oh okay. But there is the possibility that a player gets the good ending in the first and then a bad ending in the sequel. It wont make any sense, unless there alot of backstory to explain how it did work.
Oh okay. But there is the possibility that a player gets the good ending in the first and then a bad ending in the sequel. It wont make any sense, unless there alot of backstory to explain how it did work.
Only matters if you insist on Ken Levine endorsing a particular ending to the first game as "canon." And technically, by your logic, you're destroying continuity by merely playing the first game twice with different endings each time.
I say, leave the first game open-ended, and leave the second game open-ended.
Oh okay. But there is the possibility that a player gets the good ending in the first and then a bad ending in the sequel. It wont make any sense, unless there alot of backstory to explain how it did work.
Only matters if you insist on Ken Levine endorsing a particular ending to the first game as "canon." And technically, by your logic, you're destroying continuity by merely playing the first game twice with different endings each time.
I say, leave the first game open-ended, and leave the second game open-ended.
I agree with this. Make all the allusions to the main events in the first game, but don't say anything about the ending.
Oh okay. But there is the possibility that a player gets the good ending in the first and then a bad ending in the sequel. It wont make any sense, unless there alot of backstory to explain how it did work.
Only matters if you insist on Ken Levine endorsing a particular ending to the first game as "canon." And technically, by your logic, you're destroying continuity by merely playing the first game twice with different endings each time.
I say, leave the first game open-ended, and leave the second game open-ended.
I agree with this. Make all the allusions to the main events in the first game, but don't say anything about the ending.
Why not have the bad guy someone who used the splicers to take over the world, and have a side character that helped the Little Sisters escape, and not ever say which one is Jack?
well there are 2 ways you could relieve that problem. 1 you port your save from the first game over and it builds off of the ending you got on that save. or 2 you answer some questions at the beginning of the game. I.E. "If you were in a situation where you had to choose between taking a life to obtain power or sparing a life and possibly being killed what one would you do?" .
Artoria on
0
MongerI got the ham stink.Dallas, TXRegistered Userregular
So Ryan is basically one of those men who has a second family his first family doesn't know about.
Hey, now. It's not Ryan's fault. The Great Chain demanded it, and it pulled him into it.
The Great Chain is his penis.
Maybe it's just me, but I don't think there's any reason not to just assume the good ending from the first game. Levine's been pretty comfortable saying good/bad endings were a terrible idea in the first place, and the mechanics preferred the good ending anyways. I vote retcon.
Maybe it's just me, but I don't think there's any reason not to just assume the good ending from the first game. Levine's been pretty comfortable saying good/bad endings were a terrible idea in the first place, and the mechanics preferred the good ending anyways. I vote retcon.
It's not that they were terrible persay just that they hyped up that choice BS then it turns out you really don't have one and your ending is set after one or two grisly murders
King Riptor on
I have a podcast now. It's about video games and anime!Find it here.
As a X360 player of Bioshock, I demand a termination of all fucking hacking games with stupid damned tubes and moving little blocks around after uncovering them god dammit fuck that. I shot every damned thing
Something I didn't see mentioned in the thread (I might have missed it) is that in the teaser, the Little Sister's neck and arm is twitching something fierce. It could just be a red herring but also leads to the her using telekinesis theory.
I loved the hacking game and wished it could have been for sale individually on my phone or something. I hacked everything just because I thought it was so fun.
mxmarks on
PSN: mxmarks - WiiU: mxmarks - twitter: @ MikesPS4 - twitch.tv/mxmarks - "Yes, mxmarks is the King of Queens" - Unbreakable Vow
I loved the hacking game and wished it could have been for sale individually on my phone or something. I hacked everything just because I thought it was so fun.
It's called Pipe Dream.
Renzo on
0
KorKnown to detonate from time to timeRegistered Userregular
I loved the hacking game and wished it could have been for sale individually on my phone or something. I hacked everything just because I thought it was so fun.
Pipe Dream on the NES:
Wiki says its a cellphone game that comes on most nokias as well.
Posts
There are tons of them around the world, but I think these were built at or around the same time.
Also, ksup Sceptre, haven't seen you around(I may just be blind) lately.
Steam, PSN, XBL, Xfire and everything else JamesDM
This game's mouse acceleration is completely broken. You'll also have trouble making it look pretty with a 7800. I couldn't tell you anything about the other versions though.
I've been spending my time shirtless in the Americas.
Or pantless in my dorm.
Either way, it's been cold.
Well, there's actually two significant ones in Paris. One is the actual original, the model made by the sculptor Bartholdi to guide the construction of the US one (a second model exists and is in Maceió, in Brazil). Paris' second statue was made three years after the american one was completed, with its sight pointed at its bigger sister. It was a gift from the french community in the US to commemorate the centennial of the french revolution, much like the US one is a gift from France to commemorate the centennial of the declaration of independace.
In the first game when you escape from Rapture there is no sight of sand near the pod you escape in.
So probably just a fan-wank.
i meant the sand was just used as imagery for the city rising not that actual city coming up through the sand. And maybe as the trailer opens with "Atlantic Coast" the city ..erm.. floats there from the mid Atlantic. o_O
Please, more like system shock 1/2, less consolitis.
PSN:Hakira__
Having just joined in the conversation... is this legitimate speculation, or completely baseless speculation?
The girl seems to be between 9 and 16, she's thin and the picture makes her look out of proportion in her height vs. width.
The city rises out of the sand around her, it looks like she's using some sort of telekinetic ability to build sand castles.
So here's my guess and fuck you if you don't like spoilers. Go play the game.
The city is still down there, nothing ever indicated that it exploded imploded or stopped working. Your character killed both of the leaders in the fighting and left no one in control. There was always indication in the game that there were sane people left, and I got the impression there were quite a few but they were overpowered and unable to do anything because of the splicers which were mostly under the 'bad guys' control. Story wise it is feasible for the city to still be there and functioning now that most of the splicers were gone. You'd have to explain why they cut themselves off from the surface without going the only logical route of one bad guy taking control and locking everyone away. That's too easy, and would mean the entire place was much, much worse than what your character saw.
So I'm thinking that the girl pictured is a daughter of a little sister, (The "good" ending indicated that all the sisters were married and you led a peaceful life after that) mutated by her mothers adam sucking days and getting called back to Rapture. Probably someone in the city is calling them back rather than an instinct, surely for nefarious schemes. I just hope they don't attempt a twist, because no matter how good it is, it won't be good enough.
caffron said: "and cat pee is not a laughing matter"
That's because they're quoting it incorrectly.
It's "First rule in government spending: why build one when you can have two at twice the price?", according to Wikipedia at least, which is much more in line with what I recall from when I saw the movie last.
http://www.audioentropy.com/
doesn't say anywhere in the OP that this trailer is from the PS3 version, so this thread is about bioshock 2 talk, not PS3 bioshock talk
He also goes on to refers to he fact that the US made the second one so they would have a machine that they had total control over and not subject to international interests. It wasn't just a case of "hey, these things only cost a kojillion dollars, lets make two for two kojillian." Heh, even the movie itself doesn't use it as simplistically as "it only costs double!"
See, this is better than just "It only costs X2," as it gives reasoning beyond just having two. Now, on the topic itself, having more than one city kinda takes away the impact and uniqueness of Rapture. If Ryan went "These things are cheap, let's make a half-dozen!" then it's kind of overall meh.
One of the endings to the first essentially stated that the first city could continue to limp on for some time, especially if it finally started to get some supplies from the outside world.
Well you can see in the video someone signing in so that proves that it is in fact from the PS3 version.
Hey, I have a blog! (Actually being updated again!)
3DS: 0860-3240-2604
I'm not sure how you can do a sequel without it being pretty contrived.
But that would fuck up continuity.
Hey, I have a blog! (Actually being updated again!)
3DS: 0860-3240-2604
Please explain. Because I don't see any way this would fuck up continuity, unless you're reading a lot extra into it beyond what I wrote. The above suggestion merely makes the assumption that if you preferred the good or bad ending to the original, you'll likely have the same preference in the sequel.
If someone drove a dump truck full of money up to my door, I'd make my peace with contrivances.
Oh okay. But there is the possibility that a player gets the good ending in the first and then a bad ending in the sequel. It wont make any sense, unless there alot of backstory to explain how it did work.
Hey, I have a blog! (Actually being updated again!)
3DS: 0860-3240-2604
Only matters if you insist on Ken Levine endorsing a particular ending to the first game as "canon." And technically, by your logic, you're destroying continuity by merely playing the first game twice with different endings each time.
I say, leave the first game open-ended, and leave the second game open-ended.
I agree with this. Make all the allusions to the main events in the first game, but don't say anything about the ending.
http://www.audioentropy.com/
Maybe it's just me, but I don't think there's any reason not to just assume the good ending from the first game. Levine's been pretty comfortable saying good/bad endings were a terrible idea in the first place, and the mechanics preferred the good ending anyways. I vote retcon.
All right, people. It is not a gerbil. It is not a hamster. It is not a guinea pig. It is a death rabbit. Death. Rabbit. Say it with me, now.
It's not that they were terrible persay just that they hyped up that choice BS then it turns out you really don't have one and your ending is set after one or two grisly murders
B.net: Kusanku
http://www.audioentropy.com/
This.
Hacking minigames get old really fast.
Deus Ex 3 should learn from that mistake.
Something like, All doors with locks use the tube game, but give turrets their own type of hacking game, and cameras their own type, etc...
this would atleast make sense, as turrents should have the same mechanics as cameras shouldn't have the same mechanics as doors.
Pokemon Safari - Sneasel, Pawniard, ????
Then you can inject him with plasmids. Like bees.
Then he can bark and shoot bees out of his mouth.
It's called Pipe Dream.
Pipe Dream on the NES:
Wiki says its a cellphone game that comes on most nokias as well.
Pokemon Safari - Sneasel, Pawniard, ????