Eldron on 13/8/2010 at 00:04
I'm pretty sure that started back in storyboarding, the animator is most likely the last step in the line, so be gentle with his life.
Yakoob on 13/8/2010 at 00:04
lol @ all the BAWWW in this thread.
Inline Image:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v474/Koobazaur/baw1.pngQuote Posted by henke
I had to pause the buffering to let it load before I clicked play, then I saw what the URL said and I was like
awww, can't you guys make something NEW instead? :( , but then after the video had actually loaded and I watched it I was like
oooh! :D
Exactly my sentiment. I expected a new IP from all the hype so when I saw bioshock infinite I was like "seriously? come on..." But then I saw the trailer and realized that it really has nothing to do with Bioshock besides the name and the "style." As someone else on another page put it, Bioshock Infinity is to Bioshock 1 what each new Final Fantasy is to the previous. Its all a certain style of a game, but completely different worlds and stories. Not a horrible idea at all.
That being said, from the trailer and previews, I can also totally see this becoming "Bioshock in the sky." Holding off my judgment until we see more.
Quote Posted by The_Raven
My girlfriend thinks she has the plot twist figured out just from watching the trailer: it's actually the kidnapped telekinetic girl who's keeping everything in the air.
And thus the moral dillema (which we all know Ken is so keen on): do you free a girl who has been enslaved for years at the cost of destroying a city home to thousands, or do you save the whole city and its people, at the cost of keeping one person enslaved?
Quote Posted by ZylonBane
Physics does not work that way!You cant really build an underwater city they way they did it either :o
Eldron on 13/8/2010 at 00:10
Well, ever since the money started pouring into bioshock, ken gave up ever admitting that bioshock has inferior gameplay to the predecessor.
And if he's not going to admit that, to anyone, or even himself, then we'll be stuck with shooter 2.0, which means, pewpew one hand, magic with the other, eat chips straight from floor, carry all guns, and become the master of all trades.
fun only garanteed with one playthrough.
(Btw, has he ever talked about wanting bioshock to be more deep in terms of gameplay?)
Yakoob on 13/8/2010 at 00:20
I was gonna respond snarkily to this, but lets not have the same retarded "bioshock sucks hurf durf ken lied" discussion again.
Eldron on 13/8/2010 at 00:29
No, wasn't looking for that, bioshock is a good game, but we're talking about a game that's the spiritual sequel to one of the most important games on pc, up there with xcom and other such games.
So I wasn't going into the derp-biosuck discussion, I was listing things that were a result of a deadline rushing closer in the bioshock development, and suddenly this unfinished part of the game becomes great?, how does that work, where's the will to improve that?
And how many years do I have to wait until we get a truthful word on why the modding communities aren't embraced by irrational anymore.
jtr7 on 13/8/2010 at 00:29
Hindenburg 2.0! Is BS infinite, because the sky appears to be the limit?
Nameless Voice on 13/8/2010 at 00:34
Thanks for that, I couldn't get the trailer to play all the way to the end on the official site.
Eldron on 13/8/2010 at 00:39
Actually, I found this from an old interview, And I'll let it explain why I have a hard time with the systemshock -> bioshock series transition.
Quote:
Ken Levine: The core thing is that we came back from E3 and we sort of got a lot of feedback on the game: "Oh! It's a RPG, it's an adventure game. It's a dessert topping." And you know, that's a problem. When you try to innovate you get that. When people see something new they don't know what to make out of it. But our goal with BioShock is really to make people re-consider, re-imagine, and redefine what a first-person shooter can be. It's like those first experiences you had when you first played Gran Turismo. In previous games you could choose a course and a few cars. GT broadened the definition of what a racing game could be.
And now, when you play a racing game and it doesn't have the features that GT brought into the act? You know, the abilities to tune your car, get new equipment, and make it look cool, well it doesn't feel like a complete racing game anymore. It changed the audience's expectations of a racing game. GTA is like that for action games.
It's hard to go back to simpler games after having played it.ZylonBane on 13/8/2010 at 00:46
And then they got into the focus group testing, and realized they'd rather be wildly profitable than innovative.
Quote Posted by Sulphur
Before you critique the physics, ZB, you need to keep one thing in mind: the game is based in a floating city, circa 1912.
Right, so that excuses
everything.
Provided enough buoyancy, a floating city is entirely possible, if not at all practical. But lifting an object with a high center of gravity entirely
from the base is just stupendously idiotic. One strong gust of wind and... oops, lost another one!
