• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

BioShock 2 |OT| of Big Sisters, Delta Daddies, and Creepy Uncles

F

FLEABttn

Banned
bloodydrake said:
HOWEVER! can someone explain to me why,Companies can't figure out how to optimize netcode still?? I mean TeamFortress Classic was as smooth as this game is with 16 people on a 56k Modem.

This thing lags and studders with 10 people. Wolfensteins Multiplayer had the same issue,plus a ton of other small games.
Seriously if your gonna spend millions on multiplayer get some solid netcode first... period.
Click to expand...

Dedicated servers, dedicated servers, dedicated servers.

People now insist on paying for the privilege of listen servers and wonder why they aren't good.
 
Scarecrow

Scarecrow

Member
Reached level 30. 10 to go. I only have the level 40 achievement and the research everyone achievement left. I love poping people with the elephant gun in multiplayer. Especially when you get two people in a matter of split seconds. POW POW.
 
R

Ramirez

Member
FLEABttn said:
Dedicated servers, dedicated servers, dedicated servers.

People now insist on paying for the privilege of listen servers and wonder why they aren't good.
Click to expand...

There are plenty of games on the 360 that run just fine...no excuse really.
 
D

dark10x

Digital Foundry pixel pusher
You know, I still haven't finished this game. I definitely made an error by selecting the PS3 version. The initial comparisons had me optimistic and, outside of a couple examples, multiplatform PS3 games have been generally very solid lately. Bioshock 2, however, is really not.

It *LOOKS* exactly the same as the 360 version, which is great, but the performance is TERRIBLE. I mean, the first areas are pretty decent and you'd think things will be great, but as you progress and the battles ramp up, the framerate starts to tank hard. Siren's Alley is a mess on PS3. The framerate is dropping all the damned time. It really makes for an unappealing game when it runs so poorly during combat.

I just hate the fact that it's so easy to get burned even after all these years. I should have been smart and selected the 360 version, but man, the 360 is just unappealing to me as a collector. Poor reasoning to most, I'm sure. Performance is most important, however, and I know what I should have done... :\
 
F

FlashFlooder

Member
^try setting your PS3 to 720p native. It helps a lot. Wish they'd patch the game to just run that way by default so you don't have to switch settings to play the game, though.
 
N

NinjaFridge

Unconfirmed Member
dark10x said:
You know, I still haven't finished this game. I definitely made an error by selecting the PS3 version. The initial comparisons had me optimistic and, outside of a couple examples, multiplatform PS3 games have been generally very solid lately. Bioshock 2, however, is really not.

It *LOOKS* exactly the same as the 360 version, which is great, but the performance is TERRIBLE. I mean, the first areas are pretty decent and you'd think things will be great, but as you progress and the battles ramp up, the framerate starts to tank hard. Siren's Alley is a mess on PS3. The framerate is dropping all the damned time. It really makes for an unappealing game when it runs so poorly during combat.

I just hate the fact that it's so easy to get burned even after all these years. I should have been smart and selected the 360 version, but man, the 360 is just unappealing to me as a collector. Poor reasoning to most, I'm sure. Performance is most important, however, and I know what I should have done... :\
Click to expand...

Framerate only dropped hard a couple of times for me.
 
B

bodyofanamerican

Member
Holy crap! Secret messages on the posters that come in the Limited Edition if you hold them under blacklight
500x_bioshock_02.jpg

500x_img_0779.jpg

http://kotaku.com/5478247/there-are-secret-messages-on-your-bioshock-2-posters
 
C

Carm

Member
Today's patch didn't fix widescreen for me or put the big daddy hud back in at 1680x1050. Waited 2 weeks for a patch that does nothing. There are only two fixes listed on cult of rapture so doubt they fixed anything else. 2kElizabeth already said they are working on a bigger patch to fix all the crashes.
 
R

Ramirez

Member
FLEABttn said:
To you. None run as well as a dedicated server.
Click to expand...

To me and about a million other people, I know it's no dedicated server, but games like Halo and COD are fine, Bioshock's online is inexcusably bad.
 
C

CozMick

Banned
Ramirez said:
To me and about a million other people, I know it's no dedicated server, but games like Halo and COD are fine , Bioshock's online is inexcusably bad.
Click to expand...

You have got to be kidding?

Or you have no idea what lag actually is.

Those 2 games are the worst examples of a good netcode ever.
 
F

Firestorm

Member
Ramirez said:
To me and about a million other people, I know it's no dedicated server, but games like Halo and COD are fine, Bioshock's online is inexcusably bad.
Click to expand...
Are you kidding me? Half my deaths/kills as a low level player are from both players meleeing each other "at the same time". Same with Uncharted 2. Peer to Peer sucks in anything but PvE.
 
F

Feindflug

Member
dark10x said:
You know, I still haven't finished this game. I definitely made an error by selecting the PS3 version. The initial comparisons had me optimistic and, outside of a couple examples, multiplatform PS3 games have been generally very solid lately. Bioshock 2, however, is really not.

It *LOOKS* exactly the same as the 360 version, which is great, but the performance is TERRIBLE. I mean, the first areas are pretty decent and you'd think things will be great, but as you progress and the battles ramp up, the framerate starts to tank hard. Siren's Alley is a mess on PS3. The framerate is dropping all the damned time. It really makes for an unappealing game when it runs so poorly during combat.

I just hate the fact that it's so easy to get burned even after all these years. I should have been smart and selected the 360 version, but man, the 360 is just unappealing to me as a collector. Poor reasoning to most, I'm sure. Performance is most important, however, and I know what I should have done... :\
Click to expand...

Well it's not...

From the digitalfoundry comparison article:

The big visual differentiator between the two games comes down to the handling of transparent "alpha" textures. These eat up bandwidth and fill-rate on the consoles, and as regular Digital Foundry readers will know, the 10MB dedicated RAM attached directly to the Xbox 360's Xenos GPU can give the Microsoft console a very real advantage here.

A very common solution on PS3 is to reduce the resolution of these textures: Killzone 2 for example scales them up from a quarter-resolution buffer, but adds multi-sampling anti-aliasing to smooth off the edges. For effects that are on-screen for a split second (for example, explosions) it's very hard for the human eye to notice much difference: it's a massive bandwidth-saver, with little impact on overall image quality.

BioShock 2 employs the same trick with its transparencies (without the MSAA). A massive amount of the game's alpha textures are rendered with a quarter-resolution buffer, which is fine, except for one problem: these aren't on-screen for a split second, they are there a lot of the time. All of the water, particles and fire effects in BioShock 2 are rendered in this way, meaning that depending on the scene, some or even all of the screen is being generated at quarter-HD resolutions.

Even some of the neon decals have a quarter-res effect on them that stays constant no matter how far you are away from them - the upshot being that, weirdly, the further away you move from the texture, the more obvious it becomes. To some extent or another, the sub-HD elements are with you for much of the game. After all, Rapture is an undersea city springing a hell of a lot of leaks: water is everywhere. It's as much a part of the BioShock 2's signature look as the art deco architectural style. Even transparent items such as EVE hypos exhibit the effect.

The low-quality, quarter-resolution transparencies are the biggest issue here, since water and neon-bloom are so integral to the visual make-up of Rapture. In that respect, the impact to visual quality in what is such a beautifully designed world is somewhat disappointing, but won't detract too much from the overall gameplay experience.
Click to expand...

Also may I ask why the 360 versions of mp games are unappealing to you as a collector?

Seeing that performance is really important to you I can't see why all the obsession with buying the PS3 versions of mp games. :p
 
O

OldJadedGamer

Banned
Amir0x said:
You'll get them all (except Big Game Hunter) before rank, like, 15 I think. it doesn't take long. 3 hours of play or something.
Click to expand...

But that doesn't change that they are overpowered until you hit higher levels. I can completely own with a Big Daddy to the point where it's just not fair.

dark10x said:
I just hate the fact that it's so easy to get burned even after all these years. I should have been smart and selected the 360 version, but man, the 360 is just unappealing to me as a collector. Poor reasoning to most, I'm sure. Performance is most important, however, and I know what I should have done... :\
Click to expand...

I think most people would rather have a game that looks better when they are playing it rather than looking better on your shelf when you are not. Getting a game at launch without any information between the two versions, you're better off just sticking with the 360 version by default if you're a multiconsole owner.
 
D

dark10x

Digital Foundry pixel pusher
Feindflug said:
Well it's not...

From the digitalfoundry comparison article:

Also may I ask why the 360 versions of mp games are unappealing to you as a collector?

Seeing that performance is really important to you I can't see why all the obsession with buying the PS3 versions of mp games. :p
Click to expand...
Actually, I thought the lower resolution transparencies looked better in motion. It gives the impression that the water is distorting the reflections/images more. That aspect looks nice to me.

Anyways, as insane as it sounds, I do hold onto my entire collections, but with the 360 being such an unreliable machine, I hate to build a library around it as I don't expect them to last all that long down the road. I don't regret collecting anything in the past so I'm trying to do the same here. When you combine that with the fact that most 360 games these days come in lousy recycled cases with gaping holes in them, well, that also turns me away.

It's difficult to explain beyond that, but there is just something about 360 versions of games that feels less valuable to me. Perhaps it is my view on the original XBOX which is causing this. I have a decent XBOX collection, but it is the least desirable machine I have. In many cases, I remember getting caught up in performance battles between XBOX and PS2 or GC, but when I revisit them, I don't care as much due to their age. I prefer owning PS2 versions of older games over XBOX games.

In addition, there is the whole friends list thing. Unlike many, most of my friends are gaming on PS3 and we do actually compare trophies and the like in addition to playing multiplayer. I never do that on 360 any more as most of my friends had their 360s die and simply chose to buy a PS3 instead.

In general, however, I do not compromise my experience. Games like RE5, Modern Warfare 2 and Assassin's Creed II, for instance, I purchased on 360. It's just that, in this case, it actually seemed like Bioshock 2 was decent on PS3. Unfortunately, that isn't really true.


OldJadedGamer said:
I think most people would rather have a game that looks better when they are playing it rather than looking better on your shelf when you are not. Getting a game at launch without any information between the two versions, you're better off just sticking with the 360 version by default if you're a multiconsole owner.
Click to expand...
I usually do opt for the 360 version, but when I can, I prefer to go PS3 due to the reasons above. Friends, trophies, and collect-ability.

NinjaFridge said:
Framerate only dropped hard a couple of times for me.
Click to expand...
I doubt that. It drops constantly during most battles. :(

drmcclin said:
^try setting your PS3 to 720p native. It helps a lot. Wish they'd patch the game to just run that way by default so you don't have to switch settings to play the game, though.
Click to expand...
I do this as well. It improves the image quality greatly, but performance remains poor.
 
A

Amir0x

Banned
OldJadedGamer said:
But that doesn't change that they are overpowered until you hit higher levels. I can completely own with a Big Daddy to the point where it's just not fair.
Click to expand...

You're saying that the Big Daddy remains overpowered for about, say, 5 hours of playtime of multiplayer. Wow?

And even then, it's simply not true. Any collaborative effort with a team of -any- level with result in a Big Daddy dead in seconds, not minutes. Any Big Daddy, no matter how talented, can be taken out in a breeze provided your team works with you. Big Daddies are slow, lumbering and their gun overheats after about seven to ten shots. And his stomp has a recharge time. If you attack like a pack of wolves, like you should be doing, it's loltastically easy.

And that's how it should be. A Big Daddy should not be a 1 on 1 opportunity (even though I managed to get the trial where I beat a Big Daddy by myself lol), it should take a team effort to take it down. And as it stands, I've already taken down over 70 Big Daddies in the various matches I've played. That is just the Big Daddies I've had the kill on, not the near endless times we've decimated the Big Daddy with the rest of my team and I didn't get kill shot.
 
M

Miburou

Member
dark10x said:
You know, I still haven't finished this game. I definitely made an error by selecting the PS3 version. The initial comparisons had me optimistic and, outside of a couple examples, multiplatform PS3 games have been generally very solid lately. Bioshock 2, however, is really not.

It *LOOKS* exactly the same as the 360 version, which is great, but the performance is TERRIBLE. I mean, the first areas are pretty decent and you'd think things will be great, but as you progress and the battles ramp up, the framerate starts to tank hard. Siren's Alley is a mess on PS3. The framerate is dropping all the damned time. It really makes for an unappealing game when it runs so poorly during combat.

I just hate the fact that it's so easy to get burned even after all these years. I should have been smart and selected the 360 version, but man, the 360 is just unappealing to me as a collector. Poor reasoning to most, I'm sure. Performance is most important, however, and I know what I should have done... :\
Click to expand...


Dude, aren't you a PC gamer?!
 
G

GhostRidah

Member
Galanthas said:
Today's patch didn't fix widescreen for me or put the big daddy hud back in at 1680x1050. Waited 2 weeks for a patch that does nothing. There are only two fixes listed on cult of rapture so doubt they fixed anything else. 2kElizabeth already said they are working on a bigger patch to fix all the crashes.
Click to expand...
thought it was just me, installed it and I dont see any changes? running with 1920x1080
 
F

Feindflug

Member
dark10x said:
Actually, I thought the lower resolution transparencies looked better in motion. It gives the impression that the water is distorting the reflections/images more. That aspect looks nice to me.

Anyways, as insane as it sounds, I do hold onto my entire collections, but with the 360 being such an unreliable machine, I hate to build a library around it as I don't expect them to last all that long down the road. I don't regret collecting anything in the past so I'm trying to do the same here. When you combine that with the fact that most 360 games these days come in lousy recycled cases with gaping holes in them, well, that also turns me away.

It's difficult to explain beyond that, but there is just something about 360 versions of games that feels less valuable to me. Perhaps it is my view on the original XBOX which is causing this. I have a decent XBOX collection, but it is the least desirable machine I have. In many cases, I remember getting caught up in performance battles between XBOX and PS2 or GC, but when I revisit them, I don't care as much due to their age. I prefer owning PS2 versions of older games over XBOX games.

In addition, there is the whole friends list thing. Unlike many, most of my friends are gaming on PS3 and we do actually compare trophies and the like in addition to playing multiplayer. I never do that on 360 any more as most of my friends had their 360s die and simply chose to buy a PS3 instead.

In general, however, I do not compromise my experience. Games like RE5, Modern Warfare 2 and Assassin's Creed II, for instance, I purchased on 360. It's just that, in this case, it actually seemed like Bioshock 2 was decent on PS3. Unfortunately, that isn't really true.

I usually do opt for the 360 version, but when I can, I prefer to go PS3 due to the reasons above. Friends, trophies, and collect-ability.
Click to expand...

Well I understand the whole PS3 preference thing (well except that XBOX thing...:p) about playing mp with friends and stuff but why don't you just get SP games at 360 assuming you care about performance and IQ, if there was cross-game chat on the PS3 all this preference would make more sense but now it's just weird.

I still remember when you got the PS3 version of The Darkness back then and going crazy by how dumbed down/inferior it was on the official thread. :p
 
B

Brainboy

Member
Ugh, I seem to have run into a pretty annoying bug. Near the end of Pauper's Drop, one of the 'dramatic event' songs keeps looping over and over. Very very distracting. Any way to get out of it, bar getting to the end of the level or reloading a save from a while ago?
 
M

Minotauro

Finds Purchase on Dog Nutz
dark10x said:
You know, I still haven't finished this game. I definitely made an error by selecting the PS3 version. The initial comparisons had me optimistic and, outside of a couple examples, multiplatform PS3 games have been generally very solid lately. Bioshock 2, however, is really not.

... :\
Click to expand...

Out of curiosity, why didn't you go with the PC version? I think it has its issues (primarily the lack of gamepad support) but it would seem to be the best option for the graphics-oriented amongst us (ie. me).
 
M

Miburou

Member
WTF is this shit? I was playing a match that would've pushed me to Rank 10, there's some network issue, and I get booted out of the game. Then it tells me "congratulations" on achieving Rank 10 and getting a bunch of stuff I already have, BUT NO ACHIEVEMENT! So now I'm rank 10 without the achievement for getting rank 10 which looks utterly retarded. I played another match in the hopes of getting the achievement, but nope, nothing.
 
D

dark10x

Digital Foundry pixel pusher
I still remember when you got the PS3 version of The Darkness back then and going crazy by how dumbed down/inferior it was on the official thread. :p
Click to expand...
Yeah, but that really hasn't happened since. Most PS3 ports I've gone with have been great and, when that isn't the case, I've gone 360. Haven't had something like this happen in a great while. The beginning of the game definitely fools you, though, as it runs much better early on than it does as you progress.

Minotauro said:
Out of curiosity, why didn't you go with the PC version? I think it has its issues (primarily the lack of gamepad support) but it would seem to be the best option for the graphics-oriented amongst us (ie. me).
Click to expand...
Simple: no game pad support. I would have picked it up on PC if pad support were still in. Without it, I won't touch it anymore.
 
X

Xater

Member
Finished the game today. Not impressed at all. I kinda regret that I ordered it before the reviews were out. Is it just me or did anyone else not care about anythng that was happening in this game? For some reason all the storytelling and atmosphere was so much more effective in the first game. Gameplay wise it is better but it's still not a great shooter to make it a more enjoyable experience on that level. I guess Bioshock really was a one chance experience that just didn#t work for a second run.
 
D

dark10x

Digital Foundry pixel pusher
Xater said:
Finished the game today. Not impressed at all. I kinda regret that I ordered it before the reviews were out. Is it just me or did anyone else not care about anythng that was happening in this game? For some reason all the storytelling and atmosphere was so much more effective in the first game. Gameplay wise it is better but it's still not a great shooter to make it a more enjoyable experience on that level. I guess Bioshock really was a one chance experience that just didn#t work for a second run.
Click to expand...
That's actually another thing. The shit performance on PS3 is making it seem unappealing to go back to, but the game itself just isn't as interesting. I suppose I simply have to chalk this up as a disappointment. I had hoped Jordon Thomas would have been able to pull off something more in line with his previous work on other games, but perhaps a lesser staff combined with so many studios working on the project prevented that. It just isn't what it could have been.
 
X

Xater

Member
dark10x said:
That's actually another thing. The shit performance on PS3 is making it seem unappealing to go back to, but the game itself just isn't as interesting. I suppose I simply have to chalk this up as a disappointment. I had hoped Jordon Thomas would have been able to pull off something more in line with his previous work on other games, but perhaps a lesser staff combined with so many studios working on the project prevented that. It just isn't what it could have been.
Click to expand...

I also was very unimpressed by the strict level structure and the levels themselves. I don't think there was anything memorable. Defending the little sister was kinda fun at the beginning but got tedious after a while.

Oh and the PS3 version is terrible imo. The texture pop in is hilariously bad. I don't know how prominent this is in the other versions.
 
V

VistraNorrez

Member
dark10x said:
That's actually another thing. The shit performance on PS3 is making it seem unappealing to go back to, but the game itself just isn't as interesting. I suppose I simply have to chalk this up as a disappointment. I had hoped Jordon Thomas would have been able to pull off something more in line with his previous work on other games, but perhaps a lesser staff combined with so many studios working on the project prevented that. It just isn't what it could have been.
Click to expand...

Or it was exactly what it wanted to be, a revisit of Rapture with tweaked gameplay. Something I and many others didn't have much of problem with. I had just as much fun with the game as first. The story didn't actually do much for me, but when I think about it neither did the first game's. It was all about mood and the city of Rapture. Bioshock 2 hit all the notes that made the first game so enjoyable to me.

I think it's about as disappointing as your expectations. Which really should be as limited as possible when it comes to sequels. There isn't a blueprint for how to make a video game sequel. Some games go totally in a different direction, some just spruce up what the first game offers.

I've gone back and played through the Medical Pavilion in Bioshock, and it's of course not nearly as impressive as it was the first time. Fun sure, but there are a few things I wish it had from the sequel.
 
X

Xater

Member
VistraNorrez said:
Or it was exactly what it wanted to be, a revisit of Rapture with tweaked gameplay. Something I and many others didn't have much of problem with. I had just as much fun with the game as first. The story didn't actually do much for me, but when I think about it neither did the first game's. It was all about mood and the city of Rapture. Bioshock 2 hit all the notes that made the first game so enjoyable to me.
Click to expand...

I get that, but I already experienced that. It was just more of the same and was therefor nowhere near as effective.
 
B

BattleMonkey

Member
Ramirez said:
To me and about a million other people, I know it's no dedicated server, but games like Halo and COD are fine, Bioshock's online is inexcusably bad.
Click to expand...

Because they don't know better or have no choice. Dedicated servers and those who been playing PC games for a long time know better and it greatly bothers them.

Frankly COD without servers is complete shit compared to the past versions with server support. COD4 on PC vs. consoles was like night and day.
 
L

Lan_97

Member
Finished the single player last night. Really liked the game, probably more than the first one. I didn't care much for the main story, but I enjoyed all the background story going on. Textures are terrible not even taking into account the pop-in.

Getting all the single player trophies in one play through was pretty easy. Now, I just have to grind my way up to Rank 40 online.
 
G

GreekWolf

Member
I guess I'm one of the few who is actually having more fun with the sequel.

Obviously, it's impossible to recapture all the magic from the original game. The environments and set-pieces were an amazing experience, with nothing really comparable on the market. However, I'm really enjoying the variety of ways to tackle Rapture this time around, and have been surprised to find myself much more emotionally invested.

It takes about 3 chapters to really get going, but the last half of the game has been extremely impressive.
 
K

kitch9

Banned
richisawesome said:
Playing through Bioshock 1 again, it's a little bit restricting not being able to dual wield plasmids and guns...
Click to expand...
I'm just starting 2 after finally finishing 1 yesterday and I keep firing my plasmid in error as right mouse has changed to fire plasmid instead of change to it.
I can't shake the habit.
 
F

Filldough

Member
GreekWolf said:
I guess I'm one of the few who is actually having more fun with the sequel.

Obviously, it's impossible to recapture all the magic from the original game. The environments and set-pieces were an amazing experience, with nothing really comparable on the market. However, I'm really enjoying the variety of ways to tackle Rapture this time around, and have been surprised to find myself much more emotionally invested.

It takes about 3 chapters to really get going, but the last half of the game has been extremely impressive.
Click to expand...

I thought it was great, definitely feels like there are more ways to approach the game than in the first one. Story starts slow like you said but I felt ended on a much stronger note. Definitely doesn't have the magic of the first but still a great game that I personally enjoyed more than the first when all was said and done.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Don't expect big reveals at Summer Games Fest, says Geoff Keighley
Community Event 2 3 4
164
10K
Boralf replied
Screenshot for an early build of Bioshock 4 reportedly leaked
Rumor
47
6K
rodrigolfp replied
DF Direct Weekly #178: PS5 Pro Incoming? Black Myth: Wukong Xbox, MGS Delta/Silent Hill 2 Hands-On!
25
2K
Magic Carpet replied
System Shock Remake: A Surprise GotY Contender
2
76
4K
Grildon Tundy replied
Firearms Expert Reacts To BioShock 1 & 2’s Guns
Opinion Analysis Trailer
0
679
IbizaPocholo replied
Top Bottom