2K lied about Bioshock.

With or without a graphical update, this game is still the most atmospheric game I have ever played. The combination of graphics, sound, and level design set a mood that is simply unmatched in most games. I am so looking forward to getting BioShock when it comes out in a couple of weeks. knicknut17

i agree, the pacing of the game is outstanding. the storytelling is excellent and the gameplay is fantastic, it evolves in every room that you enter. more mechanics are thrown in, more story details come along with them. the setting is infinitely interesting. the first time you go in the submarine vessel that takes you down into the city amazing. that squid swoops by and you're like woah this is crazy I WANNA KNOW MORE!

too bad i cant afford it, LBP and CODWaW and Resistance2 are tearing up my wallet

They definitely weren't honest with us. :( Anyways, this was posted on the Beyond3d forums and the 2K BioShock Forums...

I didn't believe it at first, so I booted up the demo to see for myself, and low and behold, the Big Daddy in that waterfall area actually looks like that. To compare it with the other versions of the game, here's a screen...

Also, during the opening scene there's like white bars at the bottom and right of the screen, but not during gameplay. It's very messy and inconsistent in its presentation.

This is absolutely unacceptable, imo. We need to hold these devs accountable. Please spend you money elsewhere this holiday season. 2K doesn't deserve our money. Show them that we won't stand up for this.

Oh, and here are some quick snapshots I took with my cell. Crappy quality, but you can see the lacking detail on the Big Daddy...

http://i38.tinypic.com/1t6mo6.jpg

http://i38.tinypic.com/alhlwn.jpg

http://i34.tinypic.com/2yn44yp.jpg

http://i34.tinypic.com/1475ns.jpg

http://i36.tinypic.com/24q6dcz.jpg

There's no way, that has to be a shot taken before a texture loaded. This is UE3 afterall, the dang engine is known for having issues with textures loading late. I saw no white lines during the opening either, I just turned it on again.mbrockway

Nope. I took 5 shots, which are in my previous post. The textures never loaded. Anyone who says the Big Daddy doesn't look like that in the PS3 demo is being 100% dishonest.

Noone has the final game yet, right? Its gotta be a bug on that one. Where's the big daddy corpse at? I didn't notice any when I played through the demo the first time, and we don't meet any that soon going by the version on my laptop.mbrockway

Please read my previous post and it says where the Big Daddy corpse is. You meet a Big Daddy when the Splicer is trying to attack the Little Sister. Then you go past the first security camera, and there's a waterfall with 2 splicers in it, and the Big Daddy corpse is right there.

Crap, playing through the demo again, stared at the big daddy that shows up after you stick yourself with the first plasmid. Definitely artifacted to heck.mbrockway

Really? I didn't pay much attention to the Big Daddy in the cutscene, but I know the one by the waterfall stuck out like a sore thumb.

Don't care. However, I thought it had to be a bit sloppy compared to the box's version as well. Glad to see I wasn't wrong.

Aside from that....The moment I saw the opening scene, I was turning corners for Big Daddys ever since. T_T The atmosphere and the pacing was strong enough to warrant the privilege of not being flamed by me.

Fear the drills.

[QUOTE="mbrockway"]Crap, playing through the demo again, stared at the big daddy that shows up after you stick yourself with the first plasmid. Definitely artifacted to heck.BioShockOwnz

Really? I didn't pay much attention to the Big Daddy in the cutscene, but I know the one by the waterfall stuck out like a sore thumb.

I went back and edited:

All of them, the first one, the one in the theatre with the little sister, and the waterfall one. No bump mapping at at, pixellated like crazy. Didn't really notice playing the demo the first time, I was too busy hating on the GTA4-like hazyness that was going on.

Crap, playing through the demo again, stared at the big daddy that shows up after you stick yourself with the first plasmid. Definitely artifacted to heck. All of them, the first one, the one in the theatre with the little sister, and the waterfall one. No bump mapping at at, pixellated like crazy. Didn't really notice playing the demo the first time, I was too busy hating on the GTA4-like hazyness that was going on.mbrockway

Yeah, I noticed the "hazyness", too. For GTA IV it was an actual visual effect, so that the things going on in the foreground would stand out -- but BioShock is a linear corridor game for the most part, so it's definitely not a visual effect that enhances the experience here. It's actually the resolution, which isn't at 720p on PS3.

Here's the issue:

The game runs at sub-720p, but forces itself to display at 1080p instead of defaulting to the game's optimal resolution like other 720p games. Thus you have to manually change it to 720p in the Display Settings or you'll get nasty white bars on the bottom and right side of the screen during cutscenes, which ruins the immersion factor of, say, the underwater cutscene at the beginning. And frequently during play, traces of this white garbage will appear and linger on the outskirts of the screen until you pause the game. Terrible.

http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=22894

Is your PS3 set-up for hd? or is it the basic 480p and your just starting **** because you have nothing better to do right now. I think you should prove to us your using a hd and then I can listen to you complain about how the graphics don't match the reality. Please do remember that this is again a game and in a way shouldn't resemble reality cuz life sucks

WHO CARES ANYWAY! BIOSHOCK IS STILL AN AWESOME GAME...STOP COMPLAING YOU F*CKING LOSERS!

and 2K never said that the graphics in the PS3, would look better at all. AND WHEN ARE YOU GONNA BE THAT CLOSE TO A BIG DADDY STANDING STILL! WHO CARES?! JUST PLAY THE GAME

realSHOTKILL

WHO CARES ANYWAY! BIOSHOCK IS STILL AN AWESOME GAME...STOP COMPLAING YOU F*CKING LOSERS!

and 2K never said that the graphics in the PS3, would look better at all. AND WHEN ARE YOU GONNA BE THAT CLOSE TO A BIG DADDY STANDING STILL! WHO CARES?! JUST PLAY THE GAME

realSHOTKILL

I'm not denying that the game has subsantial appeal: but don't you get that sad feeling that you're playing a half-assed port that is a year old.

[QUOTE="realSHOTKILL"]

WHO CARES ANYWAY! BIOSHOCK IS STILL AN AWESOME GAME...STOP COMPLAING YOU F*CKING LOSERS!

and 2K never said that the graphics in the PS3, would look better at all. AND WHEN ARE YOU GONNA BE THAT CLOSE TO A BIG DADDY STANDING STILL! WHO CARES?! JUST PLAY THE GAME

parvie

I'm not denying that the game has subsantial appeal: but don't you get that sad feeling that you're playing a half-assed port that is a year old.

Thats funny, cause I've actually gotten that feeling alot lately -_-

Why in the world are people getting so defensive over this? :| We shouldn't be standing up for this.

They definitely weren't honest with us. :( Anyways, this was posted on the Beyond3d forums and the 2K BioShock Forums...

I didn't believe it at first, so I booted up the demo to see for myself, and low and behold, the Big Daddy in that waterfall area actually looks like that. To compare it with the other versions of the game, here's a screen...

Also, during the opening scene there's like white bars at the bottom and right of the screen, but not during gameplay. It's very messy and inconsistent in its presentation.

This is absolutely unacceptable, imo. We need to hold these devs accountable. Please spend you money elsewhere this holiday season. 2K doesn't deserve our money. Show them that we won't stand up for this.

Oh, and here are some quick snapshots I took with my cell. Crappy quality, but you can see the lacking detail on the Big Daddy...

http://i38.tinypic.com/1t6mo6.jpg

http://i38.tinypic.com/alhlwn.jpg

http://i34.tinypic.com/2yn44yp.jpg

http://i34.tinypic.com/1475ns.jpg

http://i36.tinypic.com/24q6dcz.jpg

BioShockOwnz

[QUOTE="realSHOTKILL"]

WHO CARES ANYWAY! BIOSHOCK IS STILL AN AWESOME GAME...STOP COMPLAING YOU F*CKING LOSERS!

and 2K never said that the graphics in the PS3, would look better at all. AND WHEN ARE YOU GONNA BE THAT CLOSE TO A BIG DADDY STANDING STILL! WHO CARES?! JUST PLAY THE GAME

parvie

I'm not denying that the game has subsantial appeal: but don't you get that sad feeling that you're playing a half-assed port that is a year old.

that pretty much sums up the PS3, i always buy the multiplatform games for the 360 and only stick with exclusives on the PS3.

[QUOTE="parvie"][QUOTE="realSHOTKILL"]

WHO CARES ANYWAY! BIOSHOCK IS STILL AN AWESOME GAME...STOP COMPLAING YOU F*CKING LOSERS!

and 2K never said that the graphics in the PS3, would look better at all. AND WHEN ARE YOU GONNA BE THAT CLOSE TO A BIG DADDY STANDING STILL! WHO CARES?! JUST PLAY THE GAME

TheMierArmy

I'm not denying that the game has subsantial appeal: but don't you get that sad feeling that you're playing a half-assed port that is a year old.

that pretty much sums up the PS3, i always buy the multiplatform games for the 360 and only stick with exclusives on the PS3.

I don't have an XboX 360 nor do I really have the money to buy one because in my analysis the only one that seems to work fairly well is the Elite model (the most expensive) and truth be told there are only 4 games in total I can think of that I would want to play (including BIOSHOCK). So it is an expense to me to buy an XboX 360. Note I used the word "expense" and not "asset".

So what do I do?

I buy the PS3 version of BIOSHOCK and "deal with it".

$59.99 for the PS3 version of the game is a hell of a lot cheaper than $59.99 + $399.99 for the XboX 360 version of the game and the XboX 360 Elite. Sure you could argue that I will play other games on the XboX 360 but like I said I can only think of 4 games in total I would want to play ... not my idea of $399.99 well spent. Rather the opposite.

As for the PS3 demo ... I played it but didn't make it all the way through ... I got to this one part and kept dying. People were jumping out of everywhere and I would flame them and they would fall in water and come after me and then more came and I had no idea where to go and ... it was ugly LOL

Still though I liked it and I might give the demo another try (so I can say I finished it) but based on all I've heard about the game from it's previous XboX 360 release plus playing the PS3 demo ... well I'm sold on it!

In short I'll be buying it at some point :)

if this is really the case, I will not be buying bioshock for ps3. I had it for the 360 (god rest its soul) and had thought about picking it up for the ps3... but since the devs appear to have been so lazy in porting it, no thanks.

ports like this may have cut it back in 2006/07, but ps3 owners have seen much better attempts now.

There HAVE been demos that have lacked that final graphical polish and looked considerably better in the retail version (i.e HS). Let's hope this is one of them.Deathtransit

if this is really the case, I will not be buying bioshock for ps3. I had it for the 360 (god rest its soul) and had thought about picking it up for the ps3... but since the devs appear to have been so lazy in porting it, no thanks.

Frankly, i'm sick of PS3 getting the shaft on craptacular ports. If we have to wait a year, we should be getting a superior, not inferior version. This is like Orange Box 2.0. There is NO excuse for pixilation in 2008. I played the demo, and it looked crappy compared to Bioshock on my PC.

ports like this may have cut it back in 2006/07, but ps3 owners have seen much better attempts now.

thetruespin

the game's a year old, there are better games comin out this month i'd only play it for the story...seems to me like 2k jus wants some extra cash so they aren't focusing so much resource on this port. ill end up buyin this game later.

No TC your wrong.Stop jumping to conclusions from a demo version.

Well after playing both intensively. I have come to the conclusion that the PS3 has the better graphics.

The developers said the PS3 version looks superior due to the more powerful hardware of the PS3.

The developers said PS3 version has 8XAA and 16XAF. While the Xbox360 version only filtures textures with bilinear filtering because the 360 gpu can't do AF.

Basically the PS3 version looks much much better than the 360 version according to the devs.

Well after playing both intensively. I have come to the conclusion that the PS3 has the better graphics.

The developers said the PS3 version looks superior due to the more powerful hardware of the PS3.

The developers said PS3 version has 8XAA and 16XAF. While the Xbox360 version only filtures textures with bilinear filtering because the 360 gpu can't do AF.

Basically the PS3 version looks much much better than the 360 version according to the devs.

IvyCassandra

Aren't you playing the same demo as everyone else? Or did they send a special one to your PS3 or what?

One thing I noticed is that the colors are a lot brighter, which really didn't fit the dark and murky atmosphere of the 360 version. But I hadn't played the 360 version in a long time, so it may have been my imagination.

But you knew when the trophy list and 360 achievement lists were the same that they weren't going to put a tremendous amount of effort into it. An extra difficulty level? Big deal... the original game was too easy anyway. And the challenge rooms are the pinnacle of half-assedness. Instead of actually adding to the game, we'll have a separate section where you have to rescue the Little Sister from the.... pfffth. Who cares.

But if it turns out the game looks just as good, I'll get it on PS3 just because I'm looking to liquidate as many of my 360 assets as I possibly can... recognizing along the way that if a person DIDN'T want to do that, that their so-called "bonuses" don't make this package worth an additional $60. Challenge Rooms. LAZY!

after playing the demo, i got the same impression that this was an inferior port... which is really lame and disappointing since its a YEAR OLD game, and 2K still has the coglione to charge $60 for it (when the better 360 version is $30-40). I noticed blurry tectures and an inconsistent framerate (much bigger deal). This was gonna be a $30 pickup when it went down, now I'll just rent it.

Again, 2K are pathetic for charging full price for a year old game, and now one thats is inferior to the original.

Well after playing both intensively. I have come to the conclusion that the PS3 has the better graphics.

The developers said the PS3 version looks superior due to the more powerful hardware of the PS3.

The developers said PS3 version has 8XAA and 16XAF. While the Xbox360 version only filtures textures with bilinear filtering because the 360 gpu can't do AF.

Basically the PS3 version looks much much better than the 360 version according to the devs.

IvyCassandra

And that's why they lied. :(

Some people are sad enough to look so damn close at their tv. There bound to find some fault. Truth is Bioshock looks better on my PS3 than my PC so i am happy. If its not the same for you don't complain you have enough cash to afford an amazing graphics card.Keir21

Than your PC? Does that mean you were looking too closely to your monitor to see the difference?

I experienced the same blur, or whatever it is that makes my eyes hurt.

Those effects were fine on SD TV in previous generations, but on HDTV, just like GTA IV, I couldn't play much because of non-proper resolution textures.

I'm sorry, I'm not going to pay 60 dollars or any kind of money when I know that this generation games can and should be sharp with proper textures.

Maybe Ratchet, MGS4, Uncharted along side Heavenly Sword, Folklore, etc. Heck even Brothers in Arms had crisp and clear textures and colors.

I have nothing against the game, but I refuse to pay or even play such products.