GC: Images of Bioshock Infinite

This message and account have been deleted at the user's request

Sath

Commented on 2010-08-18 13:02:40

Love the art direction!

Can't wait for the first gameplay reveal :)

In reply to

Megido

Commented on 2010-08-18 13:04:49

I know i'm repeating myself here but wouldn't it be bloody great if the premise of at least ONE of their goddamn games werent "grandiose city in isolated place that has fallen into decay and been overrun buy crazy fuckers"? I mean for fucks sake, they could at least try to make it different ONCE.

In reply to

Ronsauce

Commented on 2010-08-18 13:09:26 In reply to Megido

Posted by Megido

I know i'm repeating myself here but wouldn't it be bloody great if the premise of at least ONE of their goddamn games werent "grandiose city in isolated place that has fallen into decay and been overrun buy crazy fuckers"? I mean for fucks sake, they could at least try to make it different ONCE.

You might want to look up the games they developed.

In reply to

KORNdog

Commented on 2010-08-18 13:10:59

looks nice, clearly not indicative of the real thing (at least on consoles) but it's looking good. i agree with megido tho, i loved system shock 2, loved bioshock, but the premis is getting a little bit old. even if there is a change of scenery

In reply to

Megido

Commented on 2010-08-18 13:15:30 In reply to Ronsauce

Posted by Ronsauce

You might want to look up the games they developed.

Like...system shock, system shock 2, bioshock and now this? Look i know the amde freedom force like a decade ago and that part of Tribes that no one ever played, but let's face it, the "Shock" series is basically waht defines Irrational and i can't help but feel that it's a wee bit stale :P

In reply to

Ronsauce

Commented on 2010-08-18 13:39:33

System Shock 2, Bioshock, and now a sequel to Bioshock. That's pretty much it. Three games hardly seems worth complaining about.

In reply to

Megido

Commented on 2010-08-18 14:04:00

I really don't care that Looking Glass made System Shock, it still counts so 4 games. I'm willing to overlook Bioshock 2 as it is nothing but a quick cash-in but this is the fourth shock game building on that same concept. If you like it that's swell i guess, i just think it's starting to feel a little old. I guess the fact that people don't seem to realize or care that they are just rehashing the same damn idea over and over riles me upa bit extra. Ooh, aah, it's so new and innovative and . . . oh, wait we've already seen it three times. Right. Like with Bioshock, which wasn't a bad game at all, i just think it got undeserved prasie. It was basically a dumbed down System Shock 2, 10 years later. Pretty but shallow.

But it also bugs me becasue well, i never thought these games were anything special from a gameplay point of view. If the gameplay was enough to carry the game, i wouldn't care as much at all but the series pretty much lives and dies by it's atmosphere, setting and story.

In reply to

hotkirby

Commented on 2010-08-18 14:34:08 In reply to Megido

Posted by Megido

I really don't care that Looking Glass made System Shock, it still counts so 4 games. I'm willing to overlook Bioshock 2 as it is nothing but a quick cash-in but this is the fourth shock game building on that same concept. If you like it that's swell i guess, i just think it's starting to feel a little old. I guess the fact that people don't seem to realize or care that they are just rehashing the same damn idea over and over riles me upa bit extra. Ooh, aah, it's so new and innovative and . . . oh, wait we've already seen it three times. Right. Like with Bioshock, which wasn't a bad game at all, i just think it got undeserved prasie. It was basically a dumbed down System Shock 2, 10 years later. Pretty but shallow.

But it also bugs me becasue well, i never thought these games were anything special from a gameplay point of view. If the gameplay was enough to carry the game, i wouldn't care as much at all but the series pretty much lives and dies by it's atmosphere, setting and story.

so you dont like bioshock infinit X3 ?

In reply to

[quote=Megido]I really don't care that Looking Glass made System Shock, it still counts so 4 games. I'm willing to overlook Bioshock 2 as it is nothing but a quick cash-in but this is the fourth shock game building on that same concept. If you like it that's swell i guess, i just think it's starting to feel a little old. I guess the fact that people don't seem to realize or care that they are just rehashing the same damn idea over and over riles me upa bit extra. Ooh, aah, it's so new and innovative and . . . oh, wait we've already seen it three times. Right. Like with Bioshock, which wasn't a bad game at all, i just think it got undeserved prasie. It was basically a dumbed down System Shock 2, 10 years later. Pretty but shallow.

But it also bugs me becasue well, i never thought these games were anything special from a gameplay point of view. If the gameplay was enough to carry the game, i wouldn't care as much at all but the series pretty much lives and dies by it's atmosphere, setting and story.[/quote]

so you dont like bioshock infinit X3 ?

b0vril

Commented on 2010-08-18 14:53:57 In reply to Megido

Posted by Megido

I know i'm repeating myself here but wouldn't it be bloody great if the premise of at least ONE of their goddamn games werent "grandiose city in isolated place that has fallen into decay and been overrun buy crazy fuckers"? I mean for fucks sake, they could at least try to make it different ONCE.

What?! How is this not different enough?! You want another Gears Of War or something?

In reply to

prodygee

Commented on 2010-08-18 15:10:14

No whining. Just pure awesomeness.
If you want a different game, go play it. There's enough out there. They see these games are well received. So let them milk the cow until its dead.

In reply to

blmbox

Commented on 2010-08-18 15:31:03 In reply to Megido

Posted by Megido

but the series pretty much lives and dies by it's atmosphere, setting and story.

And all three are (usually) fantastic. What's the problem?

I don't see how a concept can ever really get stale in a video game. A setting can, certain gameplay elements can, but the fact that this is the same type of premise we've come to expect from 2K is pretty insignificant when it's in an entirely new setting.

Besides, this one's in the sky... that's the complete opposite to Bioshock. :P

In reply to

pythxvii

Commented on 2010-08-18 16:25:44 In reply to Megido

Posted by Megido

I know i'm repeating myself here but wouldn't it be bloody great if the premise of at least ONE of their goddamn games werent "grandiose city in isolated place that has fallen into decay and been overrun buy crazy fuckers"? I mean for fucks sake, they could at least try to make it different ONCE.

Ever played -insert any big franchise here-? Cause they totally have more games than these guys have Shock games.

In reply to

Zarsky

Commented on 2010-08-18 17:33:58

Ken Levine promised more varied gameplay, there's even flight combat.
Another new thing that differs this one is that you have a companion named Elizabeth with you the most of the time.

I'm sure this will be one mighty game.

In reply to

Megido

Commented on 2010-08-18 22:18:23 In reply to blmbox

Posted by blmbox

And all three are (usually) fantastic. What's the problem?

I don't see how a concept can ever really get stale in a video game. A setting can, certain gameplay elements can, but the fact that this is the same type of premise we've come to expect from 2K is pretty insignificant when it's in an entirely new setting.

Besides, this one's in the sky... that's the complete opposite to Bioshock. :P

I disagree, re use the environment as mucha s you lke as long as the premise is unique i'd rather say. All i'm saying is do something other than the decaued failed utopia bit for once, try making another statement than that a utopic fenced off society doesn't work, cause they've already done that three times. If all the games were connected in a story arch it wouldn't feel as much as the same stuff regurgitated over and over again, but each game is a standalone which just magnifies the sensation, at least for me.

But the whole "It's in the sky so it's different!" is exactly my point, it's not different becasue it's in the sky as the premise is still that some excentric tried to build a utopia in a inacessible location and then it all turns to shit. They've just taken rapture and repainted it as far as i can see.

I know people are gping to like this and i don't think it will be a bad game as such, i just wanted to bring forth this little criticism as i think it actually holds some validity. But whatever floats your boat.

In reply to

[quote=blmbox]

And all three are (usually) fantastic. What's the problem?

I don't see how a concept can ever really get stale in a video game. A setting can, certain gameplay elements can, but the fact that this is the same type of premise we've come to expect from 2K is pretty insignificant when it's in an entirely new setting.

Besides, this one's in the sky... that's the complete opposite to Bioshock. :P[/quote]

I disagree, re use the environment as mucha s you lke as long as the premise is unique i'd rather say. All i'm saying is do something other than the decaued failed utopia bit for once, try making another statement than that a utopic fenced off society doesn't work, cause they've already done that three times. If all the games were connected in a story arch it wouldn't feel as much as the same stuff regurgitated over and over again, but each game is a standalone which just magnifies the sensation, at least for me.

But the whole "It's in the sky so it's different!" is exactly my point, it's not different becasue it's in the sky as the premise is still that some excentric tried to build a utopia in a inacessible location and then it all turns to shit. They've just taken rapture and repainted it as far as i can see.

I know people are gping to like this and i don't think it will be a bad game as such, i just wanted to bring forth this little criticism as i think it actually holds some validity. But whatever floats your boat.

blmbox

Commented on 2010-08-18 22:45:33

I do see where you're coming from; I just don't think it's much of a valid criticism. I also think it's so, so early to judge it, because we don't really know much about the game's story as a whole. Sure, it's a utopia which has gone toilet yada yada, but that's not to say it will turn out exactly as Bioshock did. I'm willing to believe that there will be enough here to make it feel different, and that's what really counts - even if the premise remains the same.

In reply to

Cendres

Commented on 2010-08-18 22:57:14

Love the screens but ... oh my god, they gave peter molyneux a gun ? (screen2)

In reply to

Ronsauce

Commented on 2010-08-18 23:57:51 In reply to Megido

Posted by Megido

I really don't care that Looking Glass made System Shock, it still counts so 4 games.

LOL. You don't really care that the Irrational only actually made System Shock 2, Bioshock, and now this? ...over the course of how many years? Damn, you're right, so stale....

If you like it that's swell i guess....But it also bugs me becasue well, i never thought these games were anything special from a gameplay point of view. If the gameplay was enough to carry the game, i wouldn't care as much at all but the series pretty much lives and dies by it's atmosphere, setting and story.

Don't assume. I actually didn't find Bioshock's gameplay all that fun at all. I thought the gunplay felt weirdly disjointed, and the enemies were boring as hell. I didn't even watch more than one video for Bioshock 2 as I couldn't care less about it, and I'm even remotely excited for this.

In reply to