Slashdot Mirror
Bioshock Downloadable Content to Increase Replay
Instead of expanding the story or adding additional content, Ken Levine's goal with DLC for Bioshock is to increase the replayability factor. 1up reports: "'Diablo II, to me, was a great model for an expansion, because it enhanced the original game, but also extended the game, too. I'm not a really big fan of expanding things just by linearly adding to the experience, adding a new campaign, as much as I am of enhancing the original experience and adding replayability to that experience,' said Levine in a post-release interview in the latest issue of Games for Windows Magazine. 'I think that certainly BioShock's combat experience is great, but it could be broader. I'm a little more confused as far as how to expand the narrative experience.'" He goes on to suggest some plasmids, cut during development, might see their way back into the game. Otherwise, not a lot of detail available on what 'adding replayability' might mean.
Big Daddy Telekinesis Football.
from reading the rather pathetic "article", is that they're looking for someway to get you to pay more but they aren't really sure what yet. From all accounts, it's a good game on its own that simply doesn't lend to an expansion. It's pretty pathetic when they feel like they have to muck it up with crap like this.
And as a quick aside rant, downloadable content, the newest buzzword for hacks, maps and mods, is getting a bit out of hand. I understand Microsoft's desire to give all content value, because they make money off every sale. At a more base level, even as a traditional PC gamer who is used to a decade of free downloads for my games I can certainly concede that some addon content is worth paying for. But when developers start stretching for ways to sell you trivial additions to a game it's getting a bit out of hand. What happened to the philosophy of giving a game and its community longevity through developer support?
Besides the more plasmids that was mentioned in the article, you could add a few gameplay modes and/or achievements to get people to play it more.
... not the things I mentioned)
eg, a speed game (beat the game in (x) time); change it so death backs up to the last time you passed a chamber; beat the game without any deaths; beat the game w/out using any weapon other than the wrench (which makes it VERY difficult to take down a big daddy if you're trying to play w/ no deaths), play w/out the research camera bonuses; play w/out the ability to hack.
Now, would I pay for this? Probably not. (I say 'probably' as there might be something _really_ cool that they come up with, but I don't know what it would be
Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
It's probably to address the one bulletpoint that Bioshock didn't aim to hit (and rightfully so): Multiplayer.
Remember, Deus Ex was originally a single player game that got MP added in as a patch. I don't see the need for it, but if it could potentially help them sell another million copies of a "GOTY" edition then I'm sure someone up in management is howling for it.
I was disappointed in the replay value of Bioshock. I just didn't feel compelled to rerun the game with a different set of plasmids; the choices I made were almost all based on the strenght level at a particular time and my personal style, so replaying it wouldn't have changed much for me without seeing my style change significantly (one of the reasons I hated the randomized plasmids portion of the game.) I'm unsure of how much new plasmids would add to the game.
On the other hand, I've replayed Episode 2 twice (once for the commentary alone) and Portal 4 times (not including small section plays.) Partly, this might be due to the size of the games, but I also think it says something about the nature of the game design. Perhaps Bioshock is better off releasing bonus maps (with the plasmid outtakes) rather than trying to broaden the current game's combat. Perhaps they could include new, insight-filled "pda plotlines" in them as well.
Demented But Determined.
Restoring the game to its pre-XBOX grandeur as a successor to System Shock would be nice...
I'm sure a lot of the game was simplified for the XBOX crowd, particularly things like inventory, which appear odd in its current state- for example, eating items outright instead of storing them for when they'd actually be useful. What about that really odd invention system? It appears half-baked for the same reason.
Also, much like in System Shock, it appears you have to make a decision somewhat early on if you want to use mind powers or guns, but you can't really use both very well, except that in BS you were never forced to choose. I *guess* that BS originally had that dillema built into the game, where if you harvested the little sisters, you got ADAM and thus plasmids and the plot went down one route, OR you could rescue the little sisters, NOT get the ADAM and focus on guns and the plot would progress down a different route.
Thats the classic replay of SS2 anyway, focusing on weapons in one game and PSI in the next, although the plot did not change depending on your choice.
That would add some replay value, IMO
For plot? How about Rapture is controlled by a computer AI that suddenly goes crazy and starts turning the residents into zombies... oh wait...
1. Explosion Plasmid- The games got a decent physics set up. But why only let the grenade launcher have the fun?
2. Rapture- The place is huuuuuge based on the opening scene. Lots of places like high-rises, were never fully touched. Let us fully explore it.
3. Big Daddies- I thought one of the most enjoyable experiences was fighting those things. I always relished these fights as I quickly surveyed my surroundings for the best battle plan. Give us more scenarios which to fight these things, which leads me to....
4. Environment- Rapture actually made me consider where i was going to run during a fight. As most fps'ers can attest (I'm looking at you Halo), you just duck, run, turn, kill. Bioshock's environment made me run to where I'd best be able to take the foes down, not simply hide. I'm not just running. I'm looking for water, or leading them away from water when I set them on fire. Give us more scenarios to exploit with plasmids(see #2 if your having trouble).
5.Story- Perhaps put the character into the role of a resident who didn't give in to the plasmid rush and is trying to get out. Remember those signs "Let this end! Let us Ascend!"? Now, they've gotta give into the plasmids they watched destroy rapture in order to escape...wow. that's actually not a bad idea.
6. Those "minigames" got pretty damn annoying pretty quick. Every hackable device has the same puzzle setup. Once you hacked every device type once, you have seen the setup for every minigame. It doesn't differ, except in the minor ways you solver it. Give us some alternate minigames or cut the whole experience out.
7. Optional: Multiplayer. Everyone and their mom has a multiplayer option now adays. Bioshock doesn't need it in my opinion, but then again, with the plasmids, you've got a pretty interesting setup.
8.Ummm....more plasmids?- The plasmid balance in the game was pretty neat I thought, so good that I was never thinking "Man, I wished they had made a plasmid." But with new scenarios and setups, I'm sure some ideas will come.
Bioshock is a pretty awesome game. There doesn't need to be a bunch of tweaks and adjustments to make it a game that you'd want to play. That said, even playing through it three times, you've gone through most of the scenarios the developers had in mind when they setup the level.
import system.cool.Sig;
The game requires Steam, which is intrusive DRM. It requires that you have an active Internet connection every time you want to play (so it can phone home and verify that you bought the game). Even though this is an offline game, if your Internet connection goes down (or you want to play it on your laptop sometime when you don't have wireless or whatever) you can't play.
Furthermore, Steam robs you of your right of first sale. It also forces you to wait for updates to the game if there are any...you can't just play with what you've got.
It's a load of crap. Steam is the main reason I won't consider buying the game.
"From all accounts, it's a good game on its own that simply doesn't lend to an expansion. It's pretty pathetic when they feel like they have to muck it up with crap like this.
Why is this an issue for you? Amazingly enough, you're not forced to buy any downloadable content that comes to be. If you don't think it's worthwhile, the world will merrily spin along its way if you choose not to buy it. Your game will remain pristine, with none of the mucking up that you dislike.
"Looking for someway to get you to pay more but they aren't really sure what yet."
A video game company what wants your money, thinks downloadable content might be successful, but is still just in the "thinking about it" stage?
Say it isn't so.
Congrats on getting onto "teh intarwebnetubes"! Since you have obviously not been here long, I'll give you a few tips!
1. Even though you may love AOL right now, they will eventually annoy you. Then it will take you hours to have them cancel your account. It's probably best to go with a "real" internet provider right from the start- see if your mom and dad will let you get a cable modem or DSL.
2. "Downloadable content" has been around since teh beginning of teh intatwebnetubes, and it's not a new concept, or a paradigm shift, or some evil scheme Microsoft made up to dominate the world by giving away free web browsers, service packs, server tools, software, virtualization applications, etc.
3. Most business in the history of humankind have sought to add value to their goods or services. This is not greedy, greedy would be NOT offering any extra value. Yes, the intention is to keep the customer happy so they will purchase more in the future, and No, this is not a bad thing. Keeping the customer happy is how business works, this is how the entire world works, and is applicable to far more than just teh intarwebnetubes.
Hope this clears up any of those youthful misconceptions. BTW, shouldn't you be in school right now?
If this content was originally supposed to be in the game, shouldn't this content be free? I loved BioShock and may eventually play through it a 2nd time down the road. I just don't want to pay for the leftovers.
So I can create a few hours of extra fun from Bioshock for myself and the whole world.
One of the complaints about the original game that I'm aware of is that the FOV is not user-adjustable, hence the game experience is exactly the same on a widescreen monitor as it is on a traditional 4:3 monitor. For a while, at least, there was a minor hue and cry about this among the dualhead enthusiasts and their ilk. Although I think the game currently plays fine on my widescreen monitor, it might be interesting to add content for WS and multihead players, such as a FOV adjuster, additional diagnostics (e.g. map stays visible on second monitor), and subtle enhancements to ensure that any improvements don't break the game experience. For example, if you expand the field of view, you want to make sure hidden enemies don't spawn in plain sight.
There are two kinds of people: 1) those who start arrays with one and 1) those who start them with zero.
It's too bad I'll never get to play Bioshock because of the stupid copy protection and since I don't plan on getting an XBOX.
I like how the summary for the article was about the same length as the article.
In other news, I'm sure when Levine says he's not "interested" in adding a new campaign or whatever it's just justification for reintroducing minimal material that was cut from the game and charging for it. We already know Bioshock 2 is greenlighted and I doubt he was hemming and hawing in that board meeting. I might sound negative about this but thats mostly because of the disingenuous way that the information is presented. I actually think its kind of interesting that all of the cut material of yesteryear has become bonus content. I wonder if our ancestors who took breaks from clubbing dinosaurs to watch the Wizard of Oz would want to see a Making Of feature or if that would taint the experience for them.
From the article: "There's no multiplayer and the storyline doesn't lend itself to simply dropping in additional "levels.""
It doesn't? Rapture is an entire underwater city. Certainly it would be an easy matter to let the bathysphere go to additional locations, each with a self-contained storyline.
One might as well say that the Diablo II storyline didn't lend itself to simply dropping in additional "levels"... until Act 5 got added.
I haven't played through it the first time. I got bored on (I think) the second level. It just didn't hold my attention. Honestly, I don't see what all the fuss is about. There's nothing revolutionary about this game. It's a cookie cutter FPS with some (sortof) fancy new graphics. Yay, my hands are guns too. Yawn.
I'd like to see a top ten list of PC games across all genres that have great replay value either through mods, or simple game design.
Is anyone worried that with these incremental additions to games, that the original game will get smaller and less detailed?
Or
Do you think that it'll raise the quality of games, because if they're not good no one will buy the increments?
"To be is to do." --Socrates
"To do is to be." -- Aristotle
"Do-Be-Do-Be-Do..." --Sinatra
Yes. As far as I'm concerned, the copy protection renders the game unplayable, since I can't purchase it, and I won't "rent" it. Instead of focusing on "replayability", perhaps they should work on "playability".
... remove the DRM and online activation scheme. So that when I want to replay BioShock years from now to recapture the rapturous experience, I won't be denied the pleasure because the activation servers have been shut down. Or when I want to replay BioShock on my laptop while on a business trip, I don't have to be online to get approval when I install the game from the original media while sitting in the terminal waiting for my late plane. Or when I played Bioshock after receiving it as a birthday gift and playing it while traveling to the visit inlaws in another state, I want to replay it when I get home and install it on my own PC.
THAT is replay value. Stupid little addons don't qualify.
I much prefer Valve's approach -- Lost Coast, Half-Life 2 Episodes, where I can get a completely new game.
Yeah, go ahead and add features and playability to the elements you carry over -- but also give me a new story, new areas to fight through, even a completely new environment.
To me, "enhancing replayability" is a cop-out, so they can selectively implement whatever they feel like -- a new gun here, an upgraded map there -- rather than having to replace almost everything, and upgrade what you keep.
Also: I'll pay for an expansion. I won't pay to enhance replayability.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!