"I'm just getting tired of all these multiplatforming games in general. These developers nowadays should start creating new IP's for the gaming market. You can only milk a game for so long before it start to get stale.
"

Sorry to hijack thread here, but how exactly is Bioshock dumbed down for consoles? Haven't played on it a console yet so I don't know.

"Sorry to hijack thread here, but how exactly is Bioshock dumbed down for consoles? Haven't played on it a console yet so I don't know."

"Who is sick of hearing people rubbishing great games just because they were released on other platforms besides PC?

Recently - at a certain other game site which shall remain nameless - I got quite sick of hearing it. To me it is just cynical. Sure people are entitled to their opinions but this is just ridiculous and unjustified.

I made a thread about COD5 and the new weapons and perks and all they did was say how bad COD4 was." 

"Sorry to hijack thread here, but how exactly is Bioshock dumbed down for consoles? Haven't played on it a console yet so I don't know."

"chililili said:

"Sorry to hijack thread here, but how exactly is Bioshock dumbed down for consoles? Haven't played on it a console yet so I don't know."

It was dumbed down since it wasn't a very good successor to SS2. It had nowhere near the depth of SS2, and all of the roleplaying elements that made SS2 great were absent in Bioshock. You can use every single weapon and every single plasmid in the game, hack anything you want as many times as you want, the difficulty was very easy and you respawn right after you die with all your weapons and ammo, and the hacking (or plumbing) system was way too simplistic and repetetive. This shift from the roleplaying and depth stuff might have been okay if Bioshock were good on the shooting aspect, but the gunplay was very lacking for being an engaging shooter. The weapons were weak, you fight the exact same enemies over and over again (splicers), and the AI, save for a few unique routine paths, wasn't impressive at all. The worst thing of all was how 2K made the game out to be before its release. I remember seeing a preview video narrated by Ken Levine where he basically said that he was going to revolutionize the first person shooter genre and advance it in so many ways, and overhaul the "cookie cutter AI in every other game". The game wasn't bad, but it didn't deliver on all the "revolutionary " stuff at all and was a disappointment to everyone hoping for something more like SS2, but instead got a watered-down version of it. With most of the depth from SS2 gone, you are left with an average shooter (although the story and presentation of the game were very well done)."

The chambers exist in SS2, except you just respawn with half health. I'm not sure what the big difference is...

As biggest_loser said, it's a totally different game. You shouldn't really expect it to be SS3.

"Yeah that sort of rubbish. I want to bring an end to this system war."

Its goddamn separate game from SS2 - you want it to have all that crap? Then go and make SS3 yourself.

There is a patch to turn off the chamber? Why not use the quick save/quick load function if you don't want to respawn.

The weapons had been under the ocean for 20 years! What do you expect?! You want the AI to be impressive? They retreated, ran to health machines. Why would they have tactics? They were just ordinary people.

The action is a lot better than in SS2 and its more fun since its not overly difficult to play. The environments are far more interesting too.

Like you say 2K made it out to be something else: hello? What developer doesn't do that? They are selling the game.
"

"biggest_loser said:

Its goddamn separate game from SS2 - you want it to have all that crap? Then go and make SS3 yourself.

There is a patch to turn off the chamber? Why not use the quick save/quick load function if you don't want to respawn.

The weapons had been under the ocean for 20 years! What do you expect?! You want the AI to be impressive? They retreated, ran to health machines. Why would they have tactics? They were just ordinary people.

The action is a lot better than in SS2 and its more fun since its not overly difficult to play. The environments are far more interesting too.

Like you say 2K made it out to be something else: hello? What developer doesn't do that? They are selling the game.
"

If I am not mistaken, many of the weapons had been smuggled into Rapture by Fontaine and his guys, so not all of them had been sitting there for 20 years. And just cause they're vintage weapons doesn't mean they have to be wimpy. A Thompson submachinegun or a shotgun are still powerful weapons, even if they are based on 80 year old designs. If the weapons design overall had made them feel more powerful then it would have been a good thing and wouldn't have ruined the atmosphere at all.

Also, just because the Splicers are ordinary people doesn't mean they shouldn't be smart. (And to be fair, these people aren't just ordinary, they were handpicked to live in Rapture because of their qualities in different fields of work). Bioshock was different from SS2 because of more of a focus on combat, but unfortunately the combat aspect wasn't very special because of average AI (and the devs said they were going to set a new bar for game AI).

SS2 was a difficult game, but it was more slower paced and required more forethought to play it right. It's the thinking and the challenge that I loved about the game, and it really shouldn't be considered a traditional shooter. If the devs wanted to change the complexity of the game in exchange for more action, that is perfectly fine, but it has to be a damn fine shooter to make up for it, which unfortunately wasn't the case.
"