Fallout 3, Bioshock: Videogames or not?

Discussion in 'Fallout 3 Discussion' started by k9wazere, Nov 20, 2008.

  1. k9wazere

    k9wazere It Wandered In From the Wastes

    134
    Nov 20, 2008
    Having just finished Fallout 3, I have my fair share of complaints, and some positives to take away. But they've probably been done to death already on these very forums.

    So instead I'm going to say that F3 and games like Bioshock need their own classification. I don't think they're video games at all.

    I grew up with Spy Hunter, Bubble Bobble, Arkanoid clones, various platformers, C&C, The Settlers, X-COM, Battle Isle, Front Mission, etc. All of those are proper computer games.

    Common to all is that the player must observe and react, and is likely to fail quite often while learning the specifics of each level. That is because each level is its own unique challenge, and normally these get more complex and difficult.

    In short, a game makes several non-trivial demands of the player. Presents obstacles that require either practice or thinking to overcome.

    Now, Fallout and Bioshock I feel are something different. For a start, there is very little learning needed in either, beyond the first five minutes. The way you defeat the last enemy is the same way you defeated the first.

    Moreover, both games feature horrible "I win!" buttons. VATS and plasmids. Both ensure that the game virtually plays itself.

    So, long story short (and I'm aware I've explained this really crappily - it's early :p), I think we need to start calling these games "interactive media" or something. Not a deragotary term, but reflecting the fact that these aren't trying to challenge your brain or your reflexes. These are stories told using XBox instead of film or print.
     
  2. Roflcore

    Roflcore Mildly Dipped

    581
    Nov 2, 2008
    I just call them console games, because thats what they are. Designed for somebody who wants to have five minutes of fun and somebody who can't stand losing.
     
  3. ScottXeno

    ScottXeno It Wandered In From the Wastes

    172
    Nov 10, 2008
    Hey now, I can't stand losing :P However, while I cannot stand losing, when I win I want to feel like I really won, therefor I want to fight for that win. I enjoy it when the game is pretty difficult and I still win :P


    Bioshock was cool in it's own way. They are both games. With Fallout 3, it's not a particularly good game, or one that was even, well, finished in my opinion. It's buggy, the story is stupid, the dialogue options are idiotic... But, you do still play it, yeah? Therefor it's a game.
     
  4. Deadman87

    Deadman87 It Wandered In From the Wastes

    183
    Nov 7, 2008
    Yeah. I wish I could go back in time and destroy the concept of making a microsoft console.

    It was bad enough with playstation...
     
  5. ceacar99

    ceacar99 It Wandered In From the Wastes

    128
    Nov 11, 2008
    bioshock is even more of an abomination then fallout 3 is.... both games are PERFECT examples of how the modern console tard movement is destroying gaming. now i say console tards because they cannot seem to figure out how to work a computer, but back in the day before the console tards took over everything even console games were very good. rembemer classics like metal gear solid? banjo kazooie? castlevania symphony of the the night? hell we cant forget goldeneye, perfect dark or turok 2(the first one was ok, it was in the second one that the genius was refined).

    what crap do we get today? 10 medal of honors, MANY call of duty variants that are allmost exactly the same save for cod4, the medicore halo series being hailed as the "greatest of all time", big hit loosers like bioshock and fallout 3, and countless others that just make up the sea of crap that is modern gaming. all because of the moronic fucking console tards leading the way. i know now that if a game is for "all platforms" its 90% likely to fucking suck. thats becuase those games are "made so a retarded monkey can play them™".

    fuck making something original, difficult and fun. lets make endless copies of the same game that ammounts to bumper bowling. it doenst matter that the nazi mg42 put 40 rounds in my ass. all i need to do is sit tight, breathe for a minute and my health will regenerate and as we all know halo demonstrated that as a perfectly acceptable gameplay mechanic, and if i die enough times, no big deal the game will help me out with health and shit. AWESOME!
     
  6. k9wazere

    k9wazere It Wandered In From the Wastes

    134
    Nov 20, 2008
    I don't know about that. I don't want to blame consoles.

    I have played tons of PS2 games which had challenge and were very enjoyable. Front Mission, MGS, Final Fantasy 8, Time Splitters 2 (TS2 gold medal challenges were pretty damned hard).

    At the very least, these games required you to play them, learn them, make decisions, adapt.

    I felt more like an observer whilst playing F3/BS. Sure, I pressed the trigger quite a bit. And the VATS button got some use. But I was mechanically going through the motions.

    That's what I'm getting at, I think. Games where you can sit back, relax and put your brain in full autopilot shouldn't be called games.

    [edit: ceacar99 I wasn't replying to you ;) You snuck your post in while I was typing this :p]
     
  7. Gandar

    Gandar First time out of the vault

    64
    Nov 17, 2008
    Bioshock was developed in the spirit of System Shock

    System Shock 1 & 2 were actually AMAZING games. Bioshock is just System Shock set in an alternate 50's world. Some of the gameplay elements are almost the same. Personally though, I liked upgrading "my rig" in System Shock 2 better. The idea of stats in a shooter worked SOOOO well in SS2. You actually felt compelled to play through as Navy, Marine and Special OPs :D

    Fallout 3 is not really a "Bioshock" type game. Fallout 3 is more of a mix between oblivion and Max Payne with that time slowing thing. VATS = Godmode. Plasmids in Bioshock = psionics from System Shock, which, by the way, were a limited resource in both games.

    The real imbalance of Bioshock was that EVERYONE could use plasmids. Everyone in SS could use Psi powers, but only if you devoted all your character growth to it would you be any good at it. A good SO/Psi char would be lacking in either tech (navy) or guns (marines). You would probably have to pick only one type to specialize in (guns).

    Fallout 3 is a spinoff. It is one of the better games in its genre, but not "the best Fallout". I might put it above FO:POS at least :D
     
  8. ceacar99

    ceacar99 It Wandered In From the Wastes

    128
    Nov 11, 2008
    bioshock didnt feel anything like either of the system shocks. the sense of dread was gone, the actual need to explore for every last scrap of usefull gear and information was gone, the interesting enemies were gone, and even interesting sub plots through audio logs were gone. bioshock didnt even really bother with audio logs strewn about save for the main plot line... the only thing decent about it was that the main plot wasnt all that bad...

    ss2's stat shooter system was awesome. hell, the pure psionic character often felt weak untill you upgraded your rig enough. lol evne then it was a class about looking around the corner and then devising a plan for the situation, often with me it involved melee damage boosts and the psi sword, being able to cut down a rumbler in 1-2 hits. but with the rarity of psi chems it ment that i STILL had to scrounge for every scrap of gear i could, particuarly things i could dump in the recycler for cash to buy psi chems....

    ss1 didnt have stats but it was an awesome shooter for the era. hell it still has one of the best huds ever devised for any video game ever, made better by the fairly scary atmosphere and the gadgets(like a camera to watch whats behind you kinda like a rear view mirror) made the game a instant piece of awesome. bioshock.... it was just a clone of countless other linear shooters with plasmids and a decent story line....
     
  9. sentorio

    sentorio First time out of the vault

    37
    Oct 16, 2008
    I totally agree that console killed the gaming just like video killed the radio star.

    However PC gaming in a terrible state because of ridiculous hardware prices. I've got a main desktop for gaming and casual stuff (with SLI + dual core) and a PS3.

    Cost of PS3 is one time and I know it'll be just fine for the next 2,5 years. However my PC costs shit load money every 6 months I still can't play some bloody new games with 60 FPS! And I learned one more thing SLI is a big rip off.

    One high-end graphic card almost costs the price of a brand new PS3 (and PS3 is great media box as well with great connectivity features)

    Now how can we expect people to keep buying these expensive hardware to keep up with the new games? That's the problem console gaming is sooo much cheaper. Even though games are slightly more expensive you can rent games so you don't have to buy stupid games just to see how crap they are.
     
  10. ceacar99

    ceacar99 It Wandered In From the Wastes

    128
    Nov 11, 2008
    um... i upgrade like every 4 years, mostly when my hardware is outdated to the point htat i cannot play the new stuff anymore.... i run everything just fine now, not always at 60fps(why do you need 60 anyway) but its just fine... often im happy with my 22-24 fps count in most modern games...
     
  11. Gandar

    Gandar First time out of the vault

    64
    Nov 17, 2008
     
  12. k9wazere

    k9wazere It Wandered In From the Wastes

    134
    Nov 20, 2008
    Wasn't SS2 a partnership between Looking Glass and Irrational? Not sure what input LG had, but I didn't think the design was entirely due to Irrational.
     
  13. Leon

    Leon A Smooth-Skin

    681
    Oct 10, 2008
    System Shock was Looking Glass Studios' creation, but yes, SS2 was a joint effort between LGS and Irrational. Irrational went on to become 2K Boston/2K Australia and developed BioShock.
     
  14. Gandar

    Gandar First time out of the vault

    64
    Nov 17, 2008
    I think the studio that put out BioS absorbed the Looking Glass folks actually. That company is defunct. Looking Glass produced one of my favorite games EVER though.

    Ultima Underworld
     
  15. Erny

    Erny It Wandered In From the Wastes

    180
    Nov 2, 2008
    tbh I couldnt stand BioShit.The design, the charachters, the mess of combat, the shoehorned "moral choice" which is a joke, the broken mouse input (which is a big deal for an fps). And how they shitted allover System Shock making Bio much dumber/casual.
    Cant deny good writing and atmosphere, but I just couldnt enjoy it. I quit soon after lttle-sister forced choice bullshit. Dissapointment of the year 07 for me.
     
  16. Naissus

    Naissus It Wandered In From the Wastes

    102
    Jan 17, 2006
    I enjoyed the story and style of Bioshock, but I can't seem to find a reason to replay it. Perhaps they will fix the problems you have listed Erny in the next installment.
     
  17. gregor_y

    gregor_y Where'd That 6th Toe Come From?

    405
    Jan 19, 2007
    System Shock 2 and Deus Ex for example are 2 best games i ever played...

    Aby way u suggest using dosbox some even older games are great like system shock 1,dune 1 not 2,settlers 2,theme hospital,space hulk,reunion,ufo 1 & 2,lost dutch man,frontier,ishar...and so on...

    About Bioshock and Fallout 3 well they arent bad i actually enjoy them becouse im waiting for my copy of X3 terran conflict :)
     
  18. ceacar99

    ceacar99 It Wandered In From the Wastes

    128
    Nov 11, 2008
    system shock 1 was complete looking glass studios. system shock 2 they brought in developers that had actually left the company to help produce system shock 2 using the dark engine that powered the awesome game thief: the dark project. in many ways it was those developers who went on to run irrational games developed ss2, but it was also under the direct hand. technicly it was looking glass, irrational was hired on for "temp work" lol.

    normally i love irrational games products(who can forget the freedom force series? one of the greatest rpg times to be had), but bioshock must have been their card played at the console tards in order to not die out like looking glass did.... either way its an abomination, its TERRIBLE compared to system shock one or two. once the thrill of setting a guy on fire with a plasmid wears off the game largely looses its kick. the only really cool thing about it was becoming a big daddy, but even then it exemplifies the lack of characters and monsters if all you had to fight were turrets, helicopter bots, 2 types of druggies and the big daddies. i mean cmon!
     
  19. Foobar

    Foobar First time out of the vault

    15
    Nov 17, 2008
    That's not fair. Some excellent, challenging, and unforgiving console games:

    The NES Megaman games,
    The 2D Metroid Series (esp. the more recent GBA games),
    The 2D Mario Games,
    Chrono Trigger,
    Final Fantasy 2 (4 jap),
    Final Fantasy 3 (6 jap),
    Blaster Master,
    The Zelda Series (tho the last two were pretty easy, Ocarina of Time is a beast)

    Could name more. Console != bad game by default :P
     
  20. Alphadrop

    Alphadrop A right proper chap.

    Aug 21, 2008
    Man the old Megaman games and Metroids, if you want challenge they're the daddies of difficult.
    Most of my friends are console gamers and PC gamers aren't the only ones lamenting how crappy modern console orientated games are. It seems industry wide and no ones really sure why all these companies are now scared of offering a challenge. It seems to be a rut they are stuck in. Sorta reminds of how TV channels start of interesting and then end up sucking and mediocre (for example MTV).