BioShock Receives Record-Breaking 12 AIAS Nominations

dampeal writes "The Academy of Interactive Arts and Sciences today announced the nominees for the 11th annual Interactive Achievement Awards. The nominations for the peer-based awards have been dominated by two blockbuster first-person shooter games, BioShock (2K Games) and Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare (Activision) by receiving an astounding 10+ nominations from industry leaders and members of the interactive entertainment software business. In addition, finalists in close lead with top nominations include: The Orange Box (Electronic Arts and Valve Software), Rock Band (MTV Games) and Super Mario Galaxy (Nintendo of America), all up for the Overall Game of the Year Award."

Comments

am I the only one

[Anonymous Coward]

that thought bioshock was just okay? heck, i thought FEAR was better

Re:am I the only one

[Anonymous Coward]

No. The people heaping praise on BioShock are the same twits who loved Half-Life 2 and Halo *. Yet another fucking mindless shooter. What fun.

Re:am I the only one

[Pojut]

I am one of those "twits" that loves Half-Life 2 but despises Halo. With a couple of rare exceptions, most of the people I have talked to that claim to not like Half-Life 2 have never played it...Just because a game is a shooter doesn't mean it can't be really engaging and pull you into the atmosphere. Also, playing Episode 1 and 2 make Half-Life 2 a much more complete experience (since by playing only HL2, you are only getting a portion of the story)

I don't know about you, but the first 15 minutes of Bioshock was EASILY one of the best openings to a video game ever.

Re:am I the only one

[Anonymous Coward]

Half-Life 2 and BioShock told interesting stories, if you like that kind of thing. As games they were entirely dull.

Re:am I the only one

[Pojut]

::shrug:: to each his own...personally, amongst shooters, I put Half-Life 2 and BioShock at the top of the list. Both of them created very believable worlds that felt alive. You didn't feel like just an observer, you felt like you were actually a part of those game universe's (Mass Effect is great at this as well)

Some folks view games as just a form of entertainment...and that's fine; there is nothing wrong with that. I personally view games as an experience; when I play a game, I consciously put myself in that game world. I'm no longer sitting on my couch, pressing buttons. I'm chasing after head crabs, shooting lightning out of my fingertips, or running for my life in an attempt to NOT see what is making that horrible screeching noise.

Many people will say I am lame and silly for being this way...I say I don't care. Know why I don't care? I may be lame and silly, but I will get WAY more out of my gaming time than people who simply view it as "entertainment" ever will.

Re:am I the only one

[metroid composite]

I got Half Life 2 as part of the Orange Box. Maybe Portal and Team Fortress 2 spoiled me (since I played those two first) but I found HL2 rather dull and uninspiring, not to mention cluttered with glitches (I was surprised how often I'd get stuck in geometry).

Re:am I the only one

[Digital_Quartz]

I played the demo, and I would've bought the game for PC if not for the activation system. But, really, it was a linear first person shooter with a cool art-deco style, and from what I hear a nice story line. I suppose if there are awards for art direction and best story, (which, I'm sure there are) then sure.

But "Outstanding Innovation in Gaming"? Not so much. (Portal takes it there, without a doubt).

Re:am I the only one

[SharpFang]

Thing is, these are yearly awards.

So rephrase your question "was there anything significantly better than BioShock last year?"

I'd say "Portal" but Portal is rated together with the rest of the bundle, Orange Box, and while the rest is pretty cool, it isn't nearly as good and lowers Portal's score.

Re:am I the only one

[Bongo Bill]

I wasn't aware that there were people out there who liked shooters at all but didn't like Half-Life 2. So, who, exactly, has been calling you a twit?

Re:am I the only one

[Pojut]

The AC that posted above my OP :-)

Re:am I the only one

[snowraver1]

I think that your comment really hits the nail on the head. Bioshock is creepysauce. I remember one part i'm looking down at a desk, collecting a tape recorder I think. Lightning momentarily lights up the room and throws a shadow on the wall directly in front of me. I look at the shadow for the moment that it is there, but something about my shadow looks a little... off. At that point I turn around and there is someone standing like a foot behind me. I almost browned my pants.

Bioshock was one of those rare games that can really creep you out. If you did not play this game in HD with a good sound system, you completely missed out on this game. Hearing screams, but not seeing things...

Re:am I the only one

[Blakey Rat]

But "Outstanding Innovation in Gaming"? Not so much. (Portal takes it there, without a doubt).

Well, and this might be shocking to you, you might try actually playing BioShock before making a judgement on it... have you thought of that?

Also, Portal's only innovation is that you could shoot the portals out of a gun. Other games have had portals (Prey most recently, Serious Sam is another example I remember), so that's not particularly impressive. Considering that the core concept has been done before, albeit in a less flexible manner, and considering that the "game" was more of a tech demo than an actual fleshed out game, I gotta say I'm not so sure.

That all said, I'm sure the award will go to Portal anyway.

Re:am I the only one

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice story? The story and setting were simply fantastic.

Re:am I the only one

[MaugChief]

I'll stick with the Bioshock and Portal comparison for sake of this discussion, but I think that Portal wins the award for Outstanding Innovation hands down.

When I hear the word innovating, I imagine something that has never (or rarely) been well executed before. Note that this is different from something ever being done before in any fashion whatsoever. As you correctly stated, the concept of portals has been done before. What makes Portal innovating is its execution.

For example, if you take anyone with experience in FPS games and drop them in the later levels of Bioshock, they will be able to function fine without having played the earlier portions of the game. However, take that same person and drop them in the later levels of Portal. I would imagine there would be a lot of confusion trying to figure out what to do and, more importantly, how to do it. To me, this is a signal that it is "innovating". It is new and different.

I definitely agree that Bioshock's art style, gameplay, and story were exceptional and original, but I'm not sure I would go so far as to call them innovating.

Re:am I the only one

[Sibko]

On the flips side, most of the people I have talked to that claim to not like Halo, have never played it. ; P

Re:am I the only one

[KnightNavro]

I'm curious as to what parts of Bioshock you consider innovative.

I loved System Shock 2, so it's no surprise I liked Bioshock. Nearly every element of Bioshock was the direct descendant of an aspect of System Shock.

Like I said, I liked Bioshock, but it's hardly innovative.

Re:am I the only one

[Blakey Rat]

My point wasn't that Bioshock was the most innovative game in history, just that it's really stupid to judge a game's value based on a demo without even playing it. That's like watching a movie trailer and then instantly judging how good the movie is.

Re:am I the only one

[grumbel]

### Just because a game is a shooter doesn't mean it can't be really engaging and pull you into the atmosphere.

That worked for the first 10-20 mins in Half Life 2, after that it turned into yet another shooter.

Re:am I the only one

[Gromius]

My flatmates remember that scene too. They came running to figure out why I suddenly screamed quite loudly out of the blue :) Yes I felt embarrassed afterwards.

You're right, you need to play bioshock at full to get the maximum experience. Theres usually a lot of bashing of the people who spend $600-700 on a graphics card but god it really makes a difference to the immersion, the little details like the shadow not being quite right being too hard to notice on crap resolutions.

That said, bioshock started to bore me a bit when it losses the creepiness halfway through the game when you suddenly realise that the biggest and baddest thing walking through the Rapture is yourself. It then turns from really good creepy shooter into a run of the mill shooter feast albeit one with great visual design and a good story.

Re:am I the only one

[armareum]

..also the fact the you (as a player) do not cast shadows. Everyone else does, but not you. So seeing a shadow would always indicated an NPC.

Re:am I the only one

[ShadowsHawk]

I had that happen in the dentist's office. I almost had a heart attack. I went back and replayed that scene, but he didn't appear behind me. Freaky as hell.

I wasn't that impressed with Mass Effect

[Blakey Rat]

I wasn't that impressed with Mass Effect, or it's heavily promoted conversation system. Conversations could sound natural if you select options fast enough, but more often than not they ended up still sounding as stilted as ever. In addition, even the longest lines were unskippable, and one of the alien races spoke with an annoying e x t r e m e l y s l o w voice mod that made me want to pull my hair out. (It even used the cliche "reverse the audio, add an echo, reverse it again" effect, ugh.)

As for the game itself, it's pretty much standard Bioware. And like every Bioware game, there's one point in the game where, once you reach it, it's impossible to go back and complete previous quests. That really peeves me off, they could at least warn you that "hey when you land on planet X, the game's on a path to finishing and you won't be able to freely roam anymore!"

The controls were clunky and unintuitive, especially the lunar rover. (It has two weapons, one bound to right trigger, one bound to right shoulder, making it impossible to fire both at once! Meanwhile, the left trigger does virtually nothing.) Equipping mods to weapons and armor was always a pain, and I went through the game confused about when to use X to go back and when to use B to go back. (Getting into the galaxy map, then mistakenly hitting B instead of X wastes a whole lot of loading time! I did that probably a half-dozen times.)

However, it does get kudos for actually allowing my character (with a high personality stat) to talk the villain into killing himself. That's something I've never seen before. 7/10

Re:I wasn't that impressed with Mass Effect

[Pojut]

You do know that during ANY conversation, you can hit X and it will skip to the next line of spoken dialogue... right?

Re:I wasn't that impressed with Mass Effect

[Anonymous Coward]

i agree with some of your points, but what makes this game great is the depth and gameplay. the lunar rover controls are horrible and the upgrade\map controls could have been made with the same standards, but that doesn't keep this game from being awesome.....it looks great and is a really fun game overall

Re:I wasn't that impressed with Mass Effect

[Anonymous Coward]

Hitting X when someone is talking skips ahead in their conversation (sometimes to the end, sometimes it takes a few hits to jump to the end) in all but a very few story scenes. When in the rover, holding the left trigger takes you into zoom mode. Click the right stick and you'll zoom in further, making sniping guys at range much easier.

Re:I wasn't that impressed with Mass Effect

[Aladrin]

No, only during most conversations. Any time there was animation as well, you could not skip the dialogue.

Re:I wasn't that impressed with Mass Effect

[Pojut]

splitting hairs here, but I would consider those to be more along the lines of in-game cinimatics...

Re:I wasn't that impressed with Mass Effect

[Blakey Rat]

I do now, but too late to change my impression of the game.

Why didn't they use A like nearly every other game ever made? Again, that's just poor controls-- I tried A, I tried B (for Back, again like nearly every other game ever made) and I tried Start, Back the triggers... pretty much everything but X.

What possessed you to think that X would skip dialog? Be honest with me: was it because that decision was intuitive for you and you just knew it would work, or was it because you spazzed out over the entire controller, cursing at your TV, until it finally worked? If you're anything like me, I'm guessing the latter.

Re:I wasn't that impressed with Mass Effect

[Blakey Rat]

Unfortunately, I couldn't experience most of the depth because when I landed on the Magic Game-Ending Planet, I wasn't able to go back to the dozens of quests I'd collected in the galaxy to do. And when the game ends, it ends-- it's not like Oblivion or other RPGs where you can keep playing the mini-quests after the main quest is over.

It does look great.

Re:I wasn't that impressed with Mass Effect

[DDLKermit007]

Not to mention one of the characters does notify you that once you perform a certain action you likely won't be able to go back for anything else. I think the OP possibly hasn't actually played the game.

Re:I wasn't that impressed with Mass Effect

[Pojut]

I found out by reading the game manual...sometimes I will jump straight into a game and try to figure everything out for myself, but not having to fight with the interface or the controls when you start makes things much smoother...

Re:I wasn't that impressed with Mass Effect

[provigilman]

Ummm... You use your index finger on the RB button and your middle finger on the RT button. Also, left trigger operated the first person mode and allowed you to zoom. Did you actually read the manual?

Re:I wasn't that impressed with Mass Effect

[revlayle]

However, it does get kudos for actually allowing my character (with a high personality stat) to talk the villain into killing himself. That's something I've never seen before.

[emphasis mine]

two words: play Fallout

Re:I wasn't that impressed with Mass Effect

[JMZero]

..and, honestly, the conversations with animations were the only ones I wanted to skip. The only time I died more than once in the game was Matriarch Benwhatsia - so I got to watch those cinematics (she points, the soldiers appear, oh boy!) a bunch of times. I remember being annoyed.

Oh, and it would have been nice if some of the "merchant dialog" was skipped by default. The "Hello". "Would you like to see what I have." "Yes. Show me what you have." conversations were slow and annoying.

(Note: for whatever my nitpicking, I really liked the game).

Re:I wasn't that impressed with Mass Effect

[Blakey Rat]

I've played Fallout and Fallout 2. Several times. And I've never seen that before.

Maybe my characters weren't of the right type or something, but don't insinuate that I don't know my RPGs. :P

Re:I wasn't that impressed with Mass Effect

[Blakey Rat]

Ummm... You use your index finger on the RB button and your middle finger on the RT button.

No I don't. Please don't tell me how I hold a game controller, thank you.

If I actually held the controller that way, my hands would be aching in minutes, instead I put in index fingers on the trigger and move them up as needed to the shoulder buttons. Of the 20+ Xbox 360 games I've played, holding the controller this way doesn't impact the game play in any way. Mass Effect is the first game I've played where you need to use the trigger and shoulder, on the same side of the controller, at the same time. IMO, that's just bad design.

Also, left trigger operated the first person mode and allowed you to zoom.

I just drove up and killed them the old fashioned, non-sniping way. (Plus running them over was more fun than shooting.) I didn't zoom at all, and I'm sure people who did would be able to cope it the zoom function was activated by, say, clicking down on a thumbstick (like most other games use.)

Did you actually read the manual?

No. It's the year 2007. The vast majority of games have standard controls. The rest have tutorials. There are minimum quality standards here, and expecting the game to explain its controls is not some crazy request, it's expected.

I should have mentioned in my original review that if they were going to screw with controls for no reason, they could have at least added a tutorial mode to teach you, for example, how to drive the Mako for the first time.

Again, this is the year 2007... if it was 1997, I'd be more tolerant of confusing, non-standard controls. But the Mako is basically a Halo vehicle, similar appearance, similar physics-- would it have killed them to use Halo controls that every Xbox gamer instantly recognizes and understands?

Re:I wasn't that impressed with Mass Effect

[Blakey Rat]

Maybe I didn't select that dialog option, if it was there. If the game warned you about that, good for you, but there was no warning for me, and it negatively influenced my opinion of the game. Although, having played previous Bioware games, I kind of saw it coming and rolled with the punches, since they *all* do that (and it pisses me off in every game.)

I mean, people in this thread talk about the depth of the game-- maybe it has depth, but there were over a dozen quests I couldn't complete because of this issue, and half the galaxy map was still unexplored.

If you think I haven't played the game, then quiz me. But don't ask me any questions any side quests, since I missed most of those.

Re:I wasn't that impressed with Mass Effect

[Anonymous Coward]

Zooming with the thumbstick would not work because you use both thumb sticks to control the vechicle. Sometimes you need to move and zoom and shoot at the same time (e.g. on any difficulty setting above Normal) . Pressing the thumbstick during this would unintentionally alter the course of the vehicle.

Most game designers design their games for the general public not those with special hands. You should look for a conroller that better fits your hands and then try holding the controller the way described to you.

Re:I wasn't that impressed with Mass Effect

[provigilman]

No I don't. Please don't tell me how I hold a game controller, thank you. If I actually held the controller that way, my hands would be aching in minutes, instead I put in index fingers on the trigger and move them up as needed to the shoulder buttons. Of the 20+ Xbox 360 games I've played, holding the controller this way doesn't impact the game play in any way. Mass Effect is the first game I've played where you need to use the trigger and shoulder, on the same side of the controller, at the same time. IMO, that's just bad design.

I didn't tell you how to hold a controller. You said you couldn't fire both at the same time, I told you how you could. Simply because you refuse to do so doesn't mean it's impossible. Not to mention, you don't really need the ability to shoot them both at the same time, but if you do, it's there. Stop whining.

I just drove up and killed them the old fashioned, non-sniping way. (Plus running them over was more fun than shooting.) I didn't zoom at all, and I'm sure people who did would be able to cope it the zoom function was activated by, say, clicking down on a thumbstick (like most other games use.)

Well, had you known how to zoom, perhaps you wouldn't have needed to use both weapons at the same time? Plus, the zoom is controlled by one of the thumbsticks IIRC. You go into first person mode with the LT button, and then click R3 IIRC to zoom in up to two successive levels. Didn't COD2 use the LT to look down the iron sights?

No. It's the year 2007. The vast majority of games have standard controls. The rest have tutorials. There are minimum quality standards here, and expecting the game to explain its controls is not some crazy request, it's expected. I should have mentioned in my original review that if they were going to screw with controls for no reason, they could have at least added a tutorial mode to teach you, for example, how to drive the Mako for the first time. Again, this is the year 2007... if it was 1997, I'd be more tolerant of confusing, non-standard controls. But the Mako is basically a Halo vehicle, similar appearance, similar physics-- would it have killed them to use Halo controls that every Xbox gamer instantly recognizes and understands?

So you would rather sit through a tutorial than read a manual? Personally, I'm sick of games that make me sit through tutorials when all the same information was already in the manual. Just because you're apparently illiterate when it comes to game literature doesn't mean the design needs to spend extra time crafting a tutorial that everyone else will have to through just so you can figure out how to zoom the cannon. Hell, you don't even have to read the whole thing, just look up "Controls" in the Table of Contents and it will show you where the control layout is.

Furthermore, if they had just ripped off the controls for Halo, I'm sure someone else would complain that they're not more like the vehicles in X...or that it's just another Halo clone in terms of controls. They came up with their own little interface that actually works...unless of course you can't read and/or have freakish hands that can't press two buttons at once.

Re:I wasn't that impressed with Mass Effect

[provigilman]

And sorry for the double post here...but you probably spent more time complaing on a slashdot board about the controls than it would've taken for you to look up "Controls" in TOC and look at the diagram. Maybe you should check your priorities.

Re:I wasn't that impressed with Mass Effect

[Yosho]

two words: play Fallout

Also, Planescape: Torment.

Re:I wasn't that impressed with Mass Effect

[revlayle]

In Fallout 1 you can convince the Master to kill himself when presented with scientific evidence from the BoS that the Super Mutant poulation is sterile and would not survive anyways after thehuman race was "wiped out" by them. GRANTED, you must have discovered this info from discussions at the BoS base *and* you must have a high IN to get to those dialogue options. However, it is possible, having done it before a few times...

Re:I wasn't that impressed with Mass Effect

[armareum]

When running around normally, the left trigger zoomed in then too. Why change this for the rover?

I do agree that the controls could have been slightly better, but I didn't RTFM and I had no problem working them out. And having played the game through several times, I've not problem with them anymore. Even the back button for the (strangely non-arcing) grenades is no problem.

Personally, I just wish ALL xbox games allowed the complete remapping of controls like Halflife/Orange Box does (and most PC games seem to allow players to do). It even takes the changes into account when starting a new game and it is telling you how to do stuff, ala in-game tutorial. I have no idea why this feature is not present on all games, or if there are any good reasons for not doing so.

Re:I wasn't that impressed with Mass Effect

[Killjoy_NL]

Kotor 2 has some instances of this
(Kotor 1 might have had as well, but it's been a while since I played that one)

Bioshock was good...

[spocksbrain]

...but CLEARLY Portal was the better game - more innovations and a much better ending. I enjoyed Bioshock very much but I cannot remember being this enthralled with a video game as I was when playing Portal. It felt like it was 1994 again and I was playing an FPS for the first time.

Re:Bioshock was good...

[elrous0]

Portal doesn't get an award until I get my bath and cake!

They promised it to me, they owe it!

Re:Bioshock was good...

[jandrese]

It was a tough year for game awards with so many great releases. I've heard people comparing 2007 to 1939 in films where the Oscar choices included Gone with the Wind, the Wizard of Oz, Mr. Smith Goes to Washington and other classics.

Was there really anything..

[Paranatural]

Groundbreaking in BioShock? I mean, a neat plot, simple gameplay where you got better/stronger/faster and all, but was it really that much better than anything else?

I've not played it, simply because it hasn't interested me enough. Most of the impressions I got from reviews was that it was good but kinda overhyped.

Me, I'll stick with TF2 a while longer.

Re:Was there really anything..

[readandburn]

I've not played it, simply because it hasn't interested me enough. Most of the impressions I got from reviews Reading about video games is like dancing about architecture.

Re:Was there really anything..

[Bieeanda]

No. It was much more impressive the first time, when it was System Shock 2.

Re:Was there really anything..

[Pojut]

There was indeed something groundbreaking in Bioshock...the art direction.

Now now, I know...the graphics weren't the BEST GRAPHIX EVAH!!!! but there was a SHITLOAD of detail in that game. Hundreds of different posters, signs, carpets...

The weapons aren't terribly inventive, the plasmids were under-utilized (in my opinion), and the game is very linear...and yet, it's still an amazingly engrossing experience. You get sucked into the atmosphere like it was a black hole. Granted, as with any game like this (notably Doom 3), you get "used" to the atmosphere and it doesn't affect you as much the more you play it...still, while playing it in the right settings (volume loud, night time) you really are there in Rapture.

Most engrossed in a location I have been other than when reading a book...and considering a book is all in my head, that is quite an achievement.

Re:Was there really anything..

[Xelios]

Not groundbreaking, it just managed to do a lot of things right. The atmosphere is it's best quality in my opinion, from the first 5 minutes of play I was more immersed in the world than in any other FPS I've played (with the Half Life 2 series being the only exception). I'm not going to spoil the opening, but at first I thought I was watching a cutscene, it took a few seconds to realize "Hey, I'm supposed to be playing already".

Most groundbreaking game, I'd have to say Portal. Great concept and great humor. The end credits were simply awesome, and I miss my Weighted Companion Cube :(

Re:Was there really anything..

[contraba55]

Very rarely is something with a 2 following it the first.

Re:Was there really anything..

[Bongo Bill]

Everybody's got their own reasons, but for me, it was the fact that every time you approached a given situation, it was different. There were so many ways to approach situations, and the AI was just unpredictable and dynamic enough when you weren't looking, that you couldn't walk down the same corridor three times without getting in three vastly different fights, each of which is interesting and precisely as challenging as you want to make it. It was even more like that with the Big Daddy encounters, which could happen anywhere.

And to think, I probably wouldn't have noticed this particular strong point if the earlier releases of it didn't periodically lock up, before the patches. It would have just struck me as a very dense sequence of decent scripted events. I guess there's an upside to everything.

The other thing I noticed was that things in your environment mean a lot to the gameplay. The way you can make use of the environment in so many different ways isn't quite apparent in the demo, where they have to focus first on showing that you can interact with the environment (set a splicer on fire and it will run to the nearest water, where you can electrocute them in one hit) than the immense versatility of what you can do with it, especially with the more advanced plasmids.

It's a game you can play with intelligence and foresight if you want, or as a twitch shooter if you don't, and it's different every time.

Re:Was there really anything..

[roguetrick]

My biggest problem with that is, it was amazing but the rest of the game wasn't as amazing, all the way to a lackluster end. It felt like they blew their load on the demo or something.

Re:Was there really anything..

[provigilman]

Exactly...rarely have ever put so much forethought into a fight. Every time I had to take down a Big Daddy I would look around and see what I could use. "Look, there's a turret, I could hack it and lure him in front of it. Look, there's a nitro splicer, I can use my Telekinesis to fling Grenades at the Big Daddy if I can just lure him over this way..."

Other things like the oil pools and standing water allowed you to make tactical decisions if you had the right plasmids equipped. Snapping research photos was a little adventure in and of itself. Even with both research plasmids equipped it could be hard to get enough points to finish the last research level. However, use your Hypnotize Big Daddy plasmid to get a Big Daddy to attack a splicer for you and all of a sudden you have a multi-subject action shot for an A rating!

System Shock 3

[Hythlodaeus]

System Shock and Deus Ex were groundbreaking. The only thing Bioshock did differently was to be on a console so that the unwashed masses could experience it. And, like Deus Ex 2, it suffered for its console-oriented developement.

Re:System Shock 3

[westlake]

The only thing Bioshock did differently was to be on a console so that the unwashed masses could experience it.

I think this attitude explains why the Slashdot gamer-geek is ignored in development for the PC and the console.

Why he doesn't get the games he wants to see.

Re:System Shock 3

[Hsien-Ko]

Groundbreaking games existed before Halo?!?? Say it ain't so!!!

CoD4

[framauro13]

Bioshock and CoD4 definitely deserve some attention for storyline.

Bioshock doesn't need any more explanation than it's received already, but I think the quality of the storyline in Call of Duty 4 has been largely ignored. The incident in the Middle East with the Nuke (and the helicopter scene following) made me feel more disturbed than anything I saw in Bioshock.

Re:CoD4

[bealzabobs_youruncle]

Agreed, BioShock was great but the level of intensity in parts of CoD4 were amazing and left me a lot more satisfied when the single player game was done. And the excellent mulitplayer was just icing on an already delicious cake that GlaDOS had made for me earlier in the fall.

New Game+

[nullChris]

Continue your old career in a new game, and check out those side quests.

It keeps your level, skills, and equipment, resets your renegade/paragon meters.

Re:New Game+

[Blakey Rat]

Nah, I'm done with it. Considering how I feel after finishing the main quest, I doubt anything in the side quests is really going to blow me away, and I have a whole stack of unfinished games to play instead.

Huh?

[kellyb9]

Why no love for Assassin's Creed?

Really? Bioshock?

[Anonymous Coward]

Shouldn't there be a rule against the most bug-filled poorly coded game of the year being able to win awards? Who cares that it is a visual treat or has a gripping storyline? I patched the damn thing with every patch known to man and the game locks up and is grossly unplayable in most areas. I have a top-of-the-line gaming system and the only way for me to get BioSchlock to work correctly is to use a cracked and illegal version. I got removed from the 2K forums for demanding action, 2K just flat refuses to address the issue. Here is a quote from Wikipedia (lets not start with the validity of wiki articles for now, I will vouch for this one.)

"Two months after the initial release, 2K attempted to alleviate customer complaints by developing a special pre-uninstallation utility to refund activation slots to the user. This tool however does not address situations where the game has been installed on a PC which uses more than one user account as it only works once per PC (unlike activations which are counted per user-account), nor is it able to revoke an activation if the installation has become unusable, for example by hard disk failure, effectively rendering such activations permanently lost. 2K Games has specifically mentioned each of these issues in the revoke tool FAQ, and have stated that until software solutions are found for such situations they will handle any further requests for additional activations past the 5-activation limit on a case-by-case basis"

COD4 was average at best, the single player lasted 2 hours and the multiplayer holds no replay value for me beyond every other FPS online game IMO