Denver, 11:45 PM
Thu Dec 17
66 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip us:
Editor-In-Chief:
Brian Crecente
| AIM | Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Stephen Totilo
| AIM | Twitter
Senior Editor:
Michael McWhertor
| AIM | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor, Japan:
Brian Ashcraft
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, East Coast:
Michael Fahey
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, Oceania:
Luke Plunkett
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, Weekends:
Owen Good
| AIM | Twitter
Correspondent, San Francisco:
AJ Glasser
| AIM | Twitter
Columnist:
Leigh Alexander
Columnist:
Tim Rogers
| posts about #digitalextremes more → |
BioShock 2 Multiplayer Extends The Fiction |
Dark Sector Review: A Difficult Journey |
Dark Sector Multiplayer Gimped On PS3 |
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
Kotaku 
05/08/09
05/08/09
Whiskey + Ability to Shoot Fire From Hand = Nightly Mayhem
I think Einstein came up with that equation.
05/11/09
E=McAWESOME
05/08/09
05/08/09
Only problem is, the way this multiplayer is set up it sounds like single player gamers will be missing out on some interesting stuff pertaining to the BioShock world.
As a gamer who despises multiplayer, this leaves me at a disadvantage. I won't be enjoying any of this simply because I don't like multiplayer.
Woulda rather seen your average multiplayer so I know I wasn't missing much.
05/08/09
05/08/09
Bioshock came out before CoD:4, so perks can really be compared to the tonic and plasmid system, only taken into multiplayer.
05/08/09
05/08/09
BUT THE FANS! They ASKED for it! Won't somebody think of the fans?
05/08/09
It's not like they're taking manpower away from the single player experience, they just hired a separate company to handle to multiplayer side of things. If they have to include it at all, I'm glad they did it this way. I'd much rather have an excellent single player experience and be surprised when the multiplayer has legs of its own.
05/08/09
05/08/09
A few people think they get it, but those people lack the business sense it takes to balance a checkbook.
Taking money away from a project is no different than splitting time when you have a finite amount of resources.
Also, it is completely unrealistic to think that just because an outside team is taking the lead role developing multi player that the in-house team is uninvolved.
05/08/09
05/08/09
Future profit is irrelevant when discussing current resources. No matter how exasperated you are with those who disagree with you, you cannot simply will away simple economic principles.
They have a limited budget (time and money) and they are choosing to spend some of that adding multi player features. It's well within the realm of logical thinking to assume the single player game could have been better than what it will be.
Who knows? It may be great, it may be awful. No matter what, it could have been better.
Let me remind everyone that the original Bioshock, which focused from day one on single player only, and yet the endgame was rushed, felt disconnected, and generally not as robust as the rest of the game.
So if they failed to do it then (despite Bioshock overall being a great game), what gives you so much unfounded confidence that they can deliver this time?
The original development team had the courage to eschew the run-of-the-mill. It's too bad the suits, ahem, I mean fans have made them into cowards.
05/08/09
05/08/09
It took me longer than 8-10 hours to beat, although I was a little scavenger finding everything I could. I thought it was the perfect length for that game.
05/08/09
WHAT!?!? I'm calling you out, Christoph Hartmann, any fan of Bioshock would NOT want multiplayer.
05/08/09
Multiplayer would be nice.
Your theory dies there.
05/08/09
Yeah, but did you ask for it? Or are you just passively pleased that it's in there?
05/08/09
05/08/09
Okay, Game of the Year is a relative term. There are so many different sites and publications giving away their own version of the title that five games in one year can go GotY. It makes no sense. Not to say that video games need an Academy style presence to fuck the little guy - I mean, represent the players in the industry, but the term Game of the Year loses its value when Half-Life 2's box has the phrase "Winner of over 35 Game of the Year awards!". WTF!
Now, with that out of my system, I'd love to see Bioshock 2 blow me away like the first one did, but I just don't see it happening. Will I buy it: absolutely, but most of what made the game so amazing was feeling apart of this whole discovery process. Like we were learning something new as the character was. The world was so unique and vibrant that it was hard not to become enamored with the title. Since it's going back to Rapture, it may lose some of it's allure.
Also, no Ken Levine is a bad thing, too. He was the genius behind the story, concept, and production so without his influence it may kind of lose focus. Ken Levine is arrogant like Will Wright, but I haven't been disappointed with any of his games yet.
05/08/09
05/08/09
fELIXADER is right, you play as a Big Daddy who is following the Big Sister as she tries to destroy you, or something. Either way I'm stoked as well, but still slightly apprehensive.
05/08/09
05/08/09
05/08/09
I never asked for a multiplayer experience
05/08/09
05/08/09
I also screwed up the Fallout DLC and recommended against Marvel vs Capcom 3!
Bwahaha!
05/08/09
05/08/09
I would rather him be honest and say, "We're copying the shit out of COD4. Look at how popular that is!"
Otherwise, I just imagine a fan saying to him, "Hey, you know what would make the sequel more fun? Less fun."
05/08/09
If this addition doesn't take anything away from the SP experience, then fine. But I've come to find that when devs become so focused on multiplayer, the SP experience suffers for it.
05/08/09
Exactly. Why waste resources and dilute the fantastic single-player experience? If I want to play an FPS online multiplayer game...I'm sure as hell not going to pop in Bioshock. Either will anyone else. I predict empty servers after a month or two.
05/08/09
Okay, here, let me clear this up for you. They hired out the making of multiplayer to a separate studio specifically so the singleplayer wouldn't have any effort of resources taken away from it. If there was no multiplayer, then you'd be getting the exact same singleplayer!
Why do you people have an allergy to logic?
05/08/09
Why do you people have an allergy to logic? -SketchyIndividual
Funny you should ask that since you don't seem to realize that time equals money. It all comes from the same resource pool.
It doesn't matter if they split the dev team's time or farm it out; if doing something costs money, then, logically that money cannot be spent on something else.
Want it written in plain logic?
If A then not B.
A.
Therefore, not B.
As long as something is taking resources, something else has to give them. It just doesn't get anymore basic than that.
Sorry to hear about your allergy.