Bloomberg / Schrerier: A Bioshock 1 Remake was canceled earlier this year

More keen to know what's going on at Cloud Chamber, but remakes/remasters of Bioshock were already done once, a second time would mandate doing something drastic to improve upon the originals.
 
Cert.in.Death said:
More keen to know what's going on at Cloud Chamber, but remakes/remasters of Bioshock were already done once, a second time would mandate doing something drastic to improve upon the originals.
Click to expand...
I agree, a remake seems largely unnecessary. I'm all for remaking some of the older stuff from PS2 gen and below, but there are quite a few PS360 games that look alright enough to just remaster for the most part.

Most of those games just need 60fps/120fps with toned down bloom and clear fidelity.
 
Steve Holt said:
I'm sure the Microsoft apologists will downplay this.
Click to expand...


Ice Cube Reaction GIF
 
I got fooled by a cutscene ending and gameplay starting when the plane crashes at the start. But the more "realistic" games get the less real they truly look so it wouldn't happen again.
 
Good. We have perfectly serviceable remasters available on modern platforms. We certainly don't need someone going all Steinman on the art direction in the tradition of other seventh gen remakes.
 
I still don't get why the BioShock games are so celebrated. Is it because of the story twist in the first game? Because the BioShock games are pretty much a couple steps back in every department in comparison to System Shock when it comes to gameplay. BioShock Infinite being the worst offender.

Prey 2017 is a great spiritual successor, but I want a proper System Shock 3.
 
Hudo said:
BioShock Infinite being the worst offender.
Click to expand...
Infinite was a 2000 shooter in a 2012 skin, but hey, classic gameplay perserveres for a reason.
That said it definitely wasn't a 90+ MC deserving on any metric.

But on topic, I just finished Bioshock 1 playthrough, and I'd struggle to find reasons from any 'modern' game in recent years that I'd want improvements from. 120hz,4k,hdr upscale worked just fine, and the rest of the game works as is, not remake needed.

It'd be as pointless as it was with Deadspace, and all we got there was a watered down shell of its former glory that added absolutely nothing of value to the (but took away certain things that made original good).
 
I'm not opposed to the idea of a BioShock 1 remake, it was certainly built on an intriguing concept and a captivating setting. The original game remains artistically strong and still holds up remarkably well. While I don't think a remake is strictly necessary, I wouldn't mind revisiting Rapture through a reimagined lens. A fresh take could offer a new experience and a renewed journey through that unforgettable world.
 
Hudo said:
I still don't get why the BioShock games are so celebrated. Is it because of the story twist in the first game? Because the BioShock games are pretty much a couple steps back in every department in comparison to System Shock when it comes to gameplay. BioShock Infinite being the worst offender.

Prey 2017 is a great spiritual successor, but I want a proper System Shock 3.
Click to expand...
People with ADHD rule taste making for games with an iron fist. This is why Infinite is considered good despite being basically dog shit compared to the first two. It is always pushing you forward with no puzzles or side paths to distract you with Elizabeth always being like "come here and advance the story shit for brains ADHD player". But it still has all the cinematic stuff and pretty arty stuff.
 
Hudo said:
I still don't get why the BioShock games are so celebrated. Is it because of the story twist in the first game? Because the BioShock games are pretty much a couple steps back in every department in comparison to System Shock when it comes to gameplay. BioShock Infinite being the worst offender.

Prey 2017 is a great spiritual successor, but I want a proper System Shock 3.
Click to expand...
I'm wondering the same thing. The hype made me buy Bioshock on PS3... And no...

I didn't like it, the art style is horrible.

The story is average to me, the gameplay ordinary.

I played it back in the day and almost finished it. I never liked the franchise; the only thing that saves me is Infinite because of the main duo.
 
March Climber said:
I agree, a remake seems largely unnecessary. I'm all for remaking some of the older stuff from PS2 gen and below, but there are quite a few PS360 games that look alright enough to just remaster for the most part.

Most of those games just need 60fps/120fps with toned down bloom and clear fidelity.
Click to expand...
So higher render resolution, higher FPS, with a tweak to bloom. So everything PC gamers were doing to the original version on release. Bioshock 1 even already got a remaster with visual improvements.

Consoles are fine for their exclusives. But multiplatfom releases can just continue to be improved over time on the PC. No need to beg for an updated release. Just play what you already own out of your library, with cloud saves you can even have new game+ features already unlocked. Though you could always start from clean saves if you really wanted to.
 
SScorpio said:
So higher render resolution, higher FPS, with a tweak to bloom. So everything PC gamers were doing to the original version on release. Bioshock 1 even already got a remaster with visual improvements.

Consoles are fine for their exclusives. But multiplatfom releases can just continue to be improved over time on the PC. No need to beg for an updated release. Just play what you already own out of your library, with cloud saves you can even have new game+ features already unlocked. Though you could always start from clean saves if you really wanted to.
Click to expand...
A PC gamer always replies this way but as per usual, my reasoning for remasters are as follows:

  1. It brings back games that may have been delisted or shackled to another launcher (for example many PC gamers forgot about Games For Windows Live)
  2. There were a ton of console-only games during the PS360 gen that need remasters/re-releases to newer platforms, especially Japanese games. For example I shouldn't have to keep my PS3 and find a rare copy of Tales of Xillia to play it.
  3. It gives a chance for an I.P. return if that old game managed to suddenly find an audience 10 years later.
  4. It gives a chance for a team to officially optimize the game as best as possible, because some older games had some really odd issues that require you to find an old thread on a forum from 10+ years ago that might not exist anymore for a fix.
  5. The teams who normally work on these remasters literally have a portfolio of remasters because they are designated for them, so it doesn't take away from primary developer resources (like people here tend to claim). Yes, sometimes there are exceptions but that is literally what makes them an exception.
Whenever someone, like myself, brings up a remaster request, it is meant for the benefit of everyone, not some weird Console vs PC reasoning.
 
March Climber said:
A PC gamer always replies this way but as per usual, my reasoning for remasters are as follows:

  1. It brings back games that may have been delisted or shackled to another launcher (for example many PC gamers forgot about Games For Windows Live)
  2. There were a ton of console-only games during the PS360 gen that need remasters/re-releases to newer platforms, especially Japanese games. For example I shouldn't have to keep my PS3 and find a rare copy of Tales of Xillia to play it.
  3. It gives a chance for an I.P. return if that old game managed to suddenly find an audience 10 years later.
  4. It gives a chance for a team to officially optimize the game as best as possible, because some older games had some really odd issues that require you to find an old thread on a forum from 10+ years ago that might not exist anymore for a fix.
  5. The teams who normally work on these remasters literally have a portfolio of remasters because they are designated for them, so it doesn't take away from primary developer resources (like people here tend to claim). Yes, sometimes there are exceptions but that is literally what makes them an exception.
Whenever someone, like myself, brings up a remaster request, it is meant for the benefit of everyone, not some weird Console vs PC reasoning.
Click to expand...
1. GFWL wasn't a launcher like we know them. And there are easy work arounds of copying files to make it offline. That said pretty much every game was updated to remove the requirement and given away to owners, often with all the DLC even if it wasn't origially owned. Yes, bringing back a delisted game is great.
2. For true console exclusives, yes. But there are many games you wouldn't have released were ported to PC that slipped under the radar. After Xillia 1 & 2, Zestiria and onwards are available digitally with ports like Syphonia and Graces and still purchasable today. If there's no licensing issues, there's no reason not to keep things for sale digitally.
3. There's nothing stopping this with sales that are available on PC. Hopefully Switch, PS4, and XBO are the starting point for infinite backwards compatiblity going forward and older games will remain available like on PC.
4. The changes I mentioned were just changing the graphical settings within the game. You can also use settings listed in a forum post with reshade to improve the look of games. Or use fan created changes, many are thankfully hosted on Steam itself through communities, as well as moddb. RTX Remix is also starting to take off and lets people create their own remasters where you download the pack, and models and textures and dynamically replaced on the fly. Just like those texture packs emulators have had for some type.
5. 10-15 years later? Maybe. But people are complaining about multiple remasters from studios that have only released a single current gen title, or maybe none at all. Just to have slightly better textures and models when a patch that bumped the resolution and frame rate would have left most people more than happy. Remakes and collection like Nightdive does are a completely different thing as they are almost like digital museum pieces or at least playable documentaries about games.

There's a contest running right now where PC gamers did the own remasters. Because why wait and hope when you can make something better yourself if you have the drive.
https://www.moddb.com/remix
 
In the absence of a Bioshock remake, Bioshock 1's remaster is currently on sale on Xbox for $7.

Runs at 1440p/60fps.

Buy BioShock Remastered | Xbox

Explore the undersea city of Rapture, a haven for society's greatest minds that has devolved into a dystopian nightmare wrought by one man's hubris.
www.xbox.com
 
I don't think we need a remake of Bioshock 1. The current remaster runs in stable 60 fps and it still looks very good.

Plus with a remake there's a risk they could sanitize some things, like the violence towards Little Sisters.
 
Last edited:
I really don't like remakes. I don't remember when was the last time I genuinely enjoyed remake more than the original game.

I like remasters like Nightdive Blood or Quake. They touch up gameplay, controls, graphics without changing any core aspects of the game - including artstyle.
 
Hudo said:
I still don't get why the BioShock games are so celebrated. Is it because of the story twist in the first game? Because the BioShock games are pretty much a couple steps back in every department in comparison to System Shock when it comes to gameplay. BioShock Infinite being the worst offender.

Prey 2017 is a great spiritual successor, but I want a proper System Shock 3.
Click to expand...
Marketing, looking nice, being made for Xbox 360 and most journalists/console gamers not really knowing/caring about pc games besides a few famous ones. Also, the genre was already declining (2007 was far more decent than the others of that era though). I'm pretty sure there would be far more criticism if it happened in the other way.

I say all this despite liking the first two games. The atmosphere, the aesthetics and the use of physics were great, the world was interesting and fighting big daddies was something. I liked Bioshock 2 than 1 more though because its verticality and superior combat. I enjoyed the B1 story, but in a lot of ways was just a System Shock 2 plot's remake. Also, the obligatory and free vita chamber system at its launch was a big issue to me. I restarted the game every time I died because the pre-patch version didn't even allow you to turn them off and it made the game far less exciting. That didn't stop it for having 10/10s and being aclaimed as the revolutionary "FPS 2.0". Anyway, S.T.A.L.K.E.R was by far my favourite single player FPS of that year.

About Infinite...it had its moments and the setting was interesting but too wasted in arenas, the level design wasn't very good and the combat was far less interesting because being that, a FPS arena but having worse gunplay than Serious Sam and Painkiller, regenerating shield and being a cakewalk if you don't choose the 1999 mode. A lie from developers btw, it was just an tiring extra hard mode at the end. I liked Elizabeth, but its story was worse told than previous ones and as a game was another FPS franchise wanting the CoD cake.

This franchise didn't need a remake anyway, just a better management about what kind of game wants to be. If they can't, better leaving the franchise stay dead. More important the substance than the brand.
 
Last edited:
freemandos said:
Marketing, looking nice, being made for Xbox 360 and most journalists/console gamers not really knowing/caring about pc games besides a few famous ones. Also, the genre was already declining (2007 was far more decent than the others of that era though). I'm pretty sure there would be far more criticism if it happened in the other way.

I say all this despite liking the first two games. The atmosphere, the aesthetics and the use of physics were great, the world was interesting and fighting big daddies was something. I liked Bioshock 2 than 1 more though because its verticality and superior combat. I enjoyed the B1 story, but in a lot of ways was just a System Shock 2 plot's remake. Also, the obligatory and free vita chamber system at its launch was a big issue to me. I restarted the game every time I died because the pre-patch version didn't even allow you to turn them off and it made the game far less exciting. That didn't stop it for having 10/10s and being aclaimed as the revolutionary "FPS 2.0". Anyway, S.T.A.L.K.E.R was by far my favourite single player FPS of that year.

About Infinite...it had its moments and the setting was interesting but too wasted in arenas, the level design wasn't very good and the combat was far less interesting because being that, a FPS arena but having worse gunplay than Serious Sam and Painkiller, regenerating shield and being a cakewalk if you don't choose the 1999 mode. A lie from developers btw, it was just an tiring extra hard mode at the end. I liked Elizabeth, but its story was worse told than previous ones and as a game was another FPS franchise wanting the CoD cake.

This franchise didn't need a remake anyway, just a better management about what kind of game wants to be. If they can't, better leaving the franchise stay dead. More important the substance than the brand.
Click to expand...
Thank you. That is an interesting perspective.
 
Who cares how well the original game holds up?

EVERYTHING holds up in some way, doesn't mean it's the same as playing it as when it came out.

You can play it, enjoy it even, but most people won't go out of their way to try almost 20 years old title.

Everyone who shelves / cancels a remake of any kind, but especially of a highly acclaimed game, I can only think the worst about them.
 
Liopleurodon said:
Who cares how well the original game holds up?

EVERYTHING holds up in some way, doesn't mean it's the same as playing it as when it came out.

You can play it, enjoy it even, but most people won't go out of their way to try almost 20 years old title.

Everyone who shelves / cancels a remake of any kind, but especially of a highly acclaimed game, I can only think the worst about them.
Click to expand...
Then we should have every single game having a remake over and over again. And every movie. And every book.

And btw, a remake doesn't serve to understand the original's impact and acclaim in the first place. No matter how good it is.
 
Last edited:
you guys can forget the bioshock "remasters", they have terrible animation and audio bugs. bought those for ps5 for 5$ or something like that and i still regret it. i honestly think because of the audio problems they border on being unplayable which is why i really wanted a remake at least of the first bioshock.
 
TastyPastry said:
you guys can forget the bioshock "remasters", they have terrible animation and audio bugs. bought those for ps5 for 5$ or something like that and i still regret it. i honestly think because of the audio problems they border on being unplayable which is why i really wanted a remake at least of the first bioshock.
Click to expand...
Or maybe they should care more about fixing the remasters. A remake is not the solution. A remake will be still like a new game. This is not like lost silent movies, having much more resources among other things.
 
Last edited:
freemandos said:
Then we should have every single game having a remake over and over again. And every movie. And every book.

And btw, a remake doesn't serve to understand the original's impact and acclaim in the first place. No matter how good it is.
Click to expand...
A remake doesn't need to be as impactful as original, it just needs to be a modern version with improved graphics, and gameplay, that is fun to play.
 
Liopleurodon said:
A remake doesn't need to be as impactful as original, it just needs to be a modern version with improved graphics, and gameplay, that is fun to play.
Click to expand...
But it won't still be the original, just another version. A remake isn't the original's replacement or "the way to apreciate the original's work for the next generation". About the remake itself, it depends. If its biggest aportation is just graphics and copying tiring trends of its gen and adding so little by itself is a pointless remake. Obviously not from a corporation's point of view of course. But there's a reason why remakes of movies like Psycho and Carrie bombed. Also, with these long developments and high budgets, why better a remake than a new entry or a spiritual successor?

And talking about Bioshock particulary, its faults nowadays are the same as in 2007. If we talk about "being unplayable" nowadays there isn't much about it: aesthetics hold up well, controls and interface aren't a issue, the story hasn't aged bad in any way and its difficult design was already mostly made for babies, specially with vitachambers on. The engine being old? I don't it isn't enough reason to wasting resources and time to make a remake. The gunplay? We could say the same about so many modern FPS and TPS with mediocre or just serviciable gunplay or even combat in general being much less old and yet being acclaimed, so "standards" haven't evolved so much about it.
 
Last edited:
freemandos said:
But it won't still be the original, just another version. A remake isn't the original's replacement or "the way to apreciate the original's work for the next generation". About the remake itself, it depends. If its biggest aportation is just graphics and copying tiring trends of its gen and adding so little by itself is a pointless remake. Obviously not from a corporation's point of view of course. But there's a reason why remakes of movies like Psycho and Carrie bombed. Also, with these long developments and high budgets, why better a remake than a new entry or a spiritual successor?

And talking about Bioshock particulary, its faults nowadays are the same as in 2007. If we talk about "being unplayable" nowadays there isn't much about it: aesthetics hold up well, controls and interface aren't a issue, the story hasn't aged bad in any way and its difficult design was already mostly made for babies, specially with vitachambers on. The engine being old? I don't it isn't enough reason to wasting resources and time to make a remake. The gunplay? We could say the same about so many modern FPS and TPS with mediocre or just serviciable gunplay or even combat in general being much less old and yet being acclaimed, so "standards" haven't evolved so much about it.
Click to expand...
...

Do you want to change my opinion?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

[Bloomberg] Next ‘BioShock’ Game Changes Leaders After Development Turmoil
News 
36
384
FeralEcho replied
Bloomberg: Why EA Canceled a New ‘Black Panther’ Video Game - 4 Years in Pre-Production - Game Had Multiple Heroes + Expanded Nemesis System
2 3
107
1K
StreetsofBeige replied
Gothic 1 Remake - Official Gameplay Release Window Trailer
Trailer 
7
186
Gamer_By_Proxy replied
Silent Hill 1 remake announced - Konami/Bloober
News  2 3 4 5 6
286
3K
GrayChild replied
THIS IS THE YEAR!!!!
2
56
1K
Maiden Voyage replied
Top Bottom