Bioshock

Bioshock 1 & 2

I recently purchased, after a recommendation from a friend, Bioshock. I quickly played through the game and then bought its sequel, Bioshock 2. This I also rapidly completed. The two games are very similar so I will comment on both games in one go. This will contain some spoilers so you have been warned!

Before I bought Bioshock, I had heard very little about the game. I half read a couple of reviews and decided that I would wait for the game to come down in price before I got it as it wasn’t at the top of my gaming priorities at the time. I tend to go through a lot of games in a typical year and forgot all about Bioshock until a friend recommended it to me a few weeks back. So I found the original Bioshock and Bioshock 2 for a bargain price and eagerly started playing.

The first thing that really stuck me was the awesome setting. In the first game, you play Jack, who after a plane crash, lands beside a mysterious lighthouse in the middle of the ocean, which leads to an undersea city called Rapture. As the game progresses, you learn that Rapture was founded by a wealthy business magnate called Andrew Ryan, who wanted to build a city away from the rest of the world that was based on the philosophy and teachings of the Russian/American philosopher Ayn Rand, although this is never directly stated. Here he gathered all of the world’s best scientific thinkers and philosophers to create a perfect utopia, which inevitably falls apart leading to a vicious civil war and plenty of opportunities for violence and destruction.

Throughout the distinctively art deco submarine city, its dark dank locations and eerie atmosphere created a great setting for the game. Rapture looks very much like an underwater version of New York or Chicago, complete with skyscrapers, parks, train systems and huge underwater billboards and advertising. The presentation is great, with the city rendered in great detail, plenty of opportunities for some exploration as the player moves through the city. Thankfully there are lots of large panoramic windows allowing for some fantastic views of the city, but its usually not too wise to linger enjoying the view as the city’s fearsome inhabitants are constantly on the prowl.

The sequel is set 8 years after the original, and the effects of these 8 years of neglect and conflict on the city are very evident as it slowly crumbles. Much of the city is in ruins, leaks and damage are much more common and it is obvious that it is only a matter of time before Rapture is reclaimed by the ocean. The two games look very similar with only minor graphical differences between them.

The games combat system is fairly standard, with the usual array of weapons found in many other FPS games today e.g. shotguns, machine guns, rocket launchers etc. Each weapon also features different ammo types such as anti personnel or armour piercing rounds. Bioshock’s main defining combat feature is that of plasmids. With plasmids, the player can bestow upon themselves a number of different abilities, such as electric shock, freeze, incinerate, telekinesis, as well some more unique ones such as insect swarms and the abilities to confuse enemies or security systems. Your plasmids use EVE, which is the equivalent of mana or energy in other games, and can be easily replenished using readily available EVE hypos.

While many of the abilities are far from original, the games combat is lots of fun. Using your weapons and plasmids in interesting combinations during frenetic fire fights can be very rewarding, such as catching grenades thrown at you and hurling them back with telekinesis, or electrocuting someone then impaling them against the wall with a well placed harpoon through the face. The sequel is very similar, but with some noticeable improvements, namely being able to dual wield both your plasmids and weapons. The weapons in the sequel have also been noticeably refined and some fun new ones such as the drill.

The games enemies are known as splicers. These are drug addicted lunatics where the effects of too many plasmids have taken their toll and devolved many of them into rambling lunatics. It would have been nice to have had a bit more variety in the enemies, with the same couple of enemies appearing through the game. But this is not a major concern as they suit the environment well, and listening to their insane ramblings can be quite entertaining before you euthanize them with extreme prejudice.

One of the coolest and most original parts of the game I found were the Big Daddies and Little Sisters. The Little Sisters, are genetically enhanced, brainwashed young girls, whose job it is to wander around Rapture, collecting a substance called ADAM, used to purchase abilities and upgrades, from dead bodies scattered around levels. They are guarded by hulking monsters, known as Big Daddies, who attack anyone who tries to interfere with the Little Sisters’ work. This was a very interesting idea, and one what was executed very well, especially in the first game. It is an unsettling image of an innocent little girl, covered in filthy blood spattered clothes, happily humming to themselves as they stab a large syringe into mutated bodies, all the while completely oblivious to the nightmare surrounding them. The hulking escorts, or Big Daddies, are extremely tough opponents, who make any approach towards their charge a very hazardous proposition indeed. The little girls affectionately call the Big Daddies Mr Bubbles and constantly talk to their monstrous companions in a cute, innocent way, completely in contrast to the reality of the situation.

The player is then given a choice. While you don’t necessarily have to attack the Big Daddy in every instance, you do need to collect ADAM to gain certain abilities that are required in order to progress the game, like needing to gain the incinerate plasmid in order to melt a frozen door. When you finally manage to dispatch a Big Daddy, you can then collect the ADAM from the Little Sister in two ways. By either harvesting them, which results in a large amount of ADAM, but also kills the girl, or by rescuing them, which gives you less ADAM but breaks the brain washing and allows the girl to escape. Now I must say when I initially started playing the game, I planned to be a ruthless bastard to the Little Sisters. But upon seeing the Little Sister run up to the smoking carcass of her Big Daddy crying ‘Wake up Mr Bubbles! Wake up!’, I could not bring myself to do it, and by the end of the game had saved every single one of the girls.

In the second game things are a little different as the players character is type of Big Daddy, and you can carry the Little Sisters around on your back collecting ADAM from bodies. You still have to kill the original Big Daddy in order to ‘adopt’ the Little Sister. This new method of doing things is interesting, but I didn’t feel it made a huge difference to the overall gameplay. The sequel also introduces new types of Big Daddies, and the extremely tough Big Sisters, but they are very rare and you only have to fight a handful throughout the game.

The game also contains a unusual system regarding death. Throughout most of the levels are scattered what are called Vita Chambers. These cannot be activated or influenced, and are usually placed in convenient locations around the maps. When the player is killed, and you will be, you automatically respawn at the nearest Vita Chamber. You have no choice over which one you respawn in, but they are common enough that you usually don’t have to trek too far across the map to get back to where you were. When you respawn, you do so with all of your items and weapons as they were the instant you died. I found this to be a little counter productive as I felt it removed much of the penalty of dying, and gave an unfair advantage to the player, as you could just come straight back to the fight as if nothing had happened. One example would be attacking a Big Daddy, causing as much damage as you could, then letting it kill you. You would then respawn, and the Big Daddy would ignore you again, but it would not have regained any of its health while you were free to fill up on health and ammo and then easily dispatch it at you leisure. The only situation where this was otherwise was the final boss in the first game, but by then you should be powerful enough to defeat him without too much trouble on your first or second try.

In terms of replay value, there are a large number of upgrades available to use and customise your character. There are also different endings depending on how you deal with certain situations, namely whether your save or kill the Little Sisters and how you deal with certain NPCs in the game.

The sequel was much easier than the first game, even on hard mode and lacked any sort of bosses, even at the very end of the game. In the first game, Big Daddies were dangerous even toward the very end, but in the sequel, once you are sufficiently powerful, they can be killed quite easily, which I felt undermined the whole point of this aspect of the game. I was also disappointed about the end of the game as it wasn’t that difficult and I felt a bit under whelmed when I finished it. That’s not to say I didn’t enjoy the game, far from it, but I would have liked it to have been a little more challenging.

Despite these quibbles, I did find the games very enjoyable. The city of Rapture is a beautiful and original setting, with great atmosphere and some very satisfying combat and moments. The Big Daddies and Little Sisters were a fun idea, and I thought it was well done. While there wasn’t a great deal of weapons or features I haven’t seen before, the Bioshock games are a worthy addition to my collection.

What is a true gamer?

A few months back, I was having a conversation with a good gamer friend of mine on a topic we have often argued about. Despite our periodic discussions, neither of us will budge from our respective mindsets. My friend has requested he not be named, so for the purpose of this discussion, I shall call him Vrell. So as I was saying, Vrell and I are both avid gamers. Both of us are thoroughly hooked and at the weekends, we can often be found discussing our shared passion over a bag of cans or two. He will say I’m not a true gamer and this, I must say, hurts my feelings, as I consider myself a true gamer to the core. This will usually result in my own broadside of insults, which never really gets us anywhere.

Our main difference of opinion is a fairly common division amongst gamers; single player or multiplayer?

I am personally all about the single player aspect. I often find myself getting completely engrossed in the story, setting and characters as the hours march by into the early morning. For me, a game with a decent plot is like reading a great book where you can influence the story as you go along. An excellent example of the kind of game I mean is the Mass Effect and Elder Scrolls series. I found myself genuinely caring about the characters and story and taking the path I chose in the game very seriously. I have found the games getting more and more compelling as the methods of telling the story have become more and more sophisticated over the years. I am not saying that I have never played and enjoyed multiplayer, I do have a soft spot for a certain Left 4 Dead series, as well as Modern Warfare and the like, but I wouldn’t sit down and play them on a regular basis.

Vrell on the other hand, is a former professional gamer who specialises in shooters, namely Counter Strike, and its numerous offspring. But he also dabbles in strategy games like Starcraft. I have sat over his shoulder several times to watch him play and usually I am left speechless by his skill. His accuracy and speed border on the superhuman and he is often kicked off servers being labelled a cheat when in fact he is actually that good. To say he is better than me is an insult to the act of comparison so I shall not even bother.

Upon getting a new game, Vrell will usually jump straight online to test out the multiplayer maps and all the weapons. While I on the other hand enjoy how the game gradually opens up the weapons and features as the story progresses. He would find this to be boring, while I find this to be an enjoyable part of the game’s experience. Many games have gripping story lines and immersive atmosphere, but lack much a developed multiplayer mode or even leave it out altogether, e.g. Dead Space. These are games that Vrell will usually overlook and genuinely has no interest in playing them. I often find this hard to understand, and that he is denying himself an awesome gaming experience. Vrell is content and set in his ways and I can only wonder at his intentional blissful ignorance.

The first game that really set the bar for me was the original Half-Life. When this game came out way back in 1998, I was for the first time in my life in possession of a PC that was capable of playing the latest games. So with this in mind, I went and bought Half-Life, knowing nothing much about it other than that it had gotten some great reviews. Bear in mind that before this time, my only experience of an FPS was Doom and its sequels. I know there are examples of games with a developed storyline that were out years before Half-Life, e.g. System Shock, but these games never really achieved the same level of widespread success as Half-Life. Half-Life’s opening sequence is well known and regarded, and for good reason. The fact that the game began with the player as the scientist Gordon Freeman enjoying his train ride to work was something I had never seen before. I was instantly amazed and to this date Half-Life remains for me one of the best examples of story telling and suspense I have ever experienced. While the game itself was very linear, it still managed to raise the bar to new heights in the FPS experience with its atmosphere and intelligent story telling. Half-Life also spawned Counter Strike, which has since gained legendary status and is the game that lies closest to Vrell’s corrupted heart. So this is one game that we can both agree on but for different reasons.

We have often argued about what drives developers to create new games. I am usually of the opinion that the single player campaign is the most important part of the game where the graphics, controls and features are designed to give the player the best experience possible. Many new features and graphical advancements are only really appreciable in the single player campaign as the game gradually reveals them in the order and manner intended by the developer. Vrell will argue that the games combat system, controls and interface are refined through multiplayer, and that this is the way the games are intended to be played. As games have grown in quality and scope, highly detailed and immersive graphics have now become the norm. Who could forget the gloom and frightening atmosphere of Doom 3? The game lovingly presented eerie locations and gruesome enemies to great effect, being a genuinely scary experience. Vrell, while appreciating the graphics, will often miss the finer detail and much of the atmosphere as he cuts a bloody path through noobs and pros alike. The frenetic pace of multiplayer usually does not give one the time to stand around and appreciate the view.

So which is the correct answer? I guess this is an argument with no true right or wrong. Both single player and multiplayer are integral parts of modern computer games. While some games do focus more on one aspect, other hugely popular titles give as much attention to both areas e.g. Starcraft, Call of Duty and Halo and are loved by gamers in both camps. So in conclusion, having thought about this topic without Vrell mocking my gaming style as I try to make my point, I think modern games have all benefited from both single player and multiplayer oriented development. Perhaps the next time I sit down and play a multiplayer game, I will try to see the fast pace and carnage in a more respectful manner and appreciate it for what it is. Vrell will unlikely reciprocate, but that’s ok, I wouldn’t expect a multiplayer asshole like him to change his opinion :)

Ludology - First Impressions

When I first heard this term, upon reading about my embryonic Masters Degree some weeks ago, I was quite surprised that Wikipedia did not immediately have a nice concise definition to sate my curiosity. So I decided to leave it and wait and see how our first class would turn out. I was pleased to see that despite my lack of understanding on the precise nature of the subject, it turned out to be a very interesting and fun experience. The first order of the day, to create a board game from scratch using nothing more that 7 random objects, paper and governed by just 7 rules, was a unique experience.

My very first board game I felt was a decent first go and had much potential. Of course, quickly hammering out rules so that they are readily understandable to someone who didn’t just spend the previous 15 minutes writing them tends to be a little more difficult than I initially thought.

When we were given the rather brief time of only 15 minutes to come up a game from scratch, I was uncertain I would be able to come up with something workable. I remember saying to myself, ‘This is impossible, I haven’t played a board game in years!’ But, despite this, I was surprised at how fast I managed to come up with my simple game.

Being a geek of cosmic proportions, my mind immediately pulled some memories from deep within the nether regions of my brain about a game I was obsessed with as a boy, Warhammer. This table top war game has inspired many recent video games, Dawn of War, Firewarrior, Space Marine, Mark of Chaos to name but a few. I loved the dark and gritty setting of the games, and the wanton carnage and slaughter as legions of my little painted soldiers fell to weapons of preposterous nature over the roll of a die.

So with this in mind, I busily threw together a game that involved some strategy and of course, violence. Although you needed some stretch of imagination to picture a random construct of ill fitting, knock-off lego bricks as valiant warriors defending their base. After some much needed input from another classmate, and like-minded fellow, we managed to refine the rules somewhat to result in a basic game that worked. Almost. So this construct was thrust upon my classmates who obviously needed a stretch of the imagination and some wise council from myself to get the ball rolling.

I found myself constantly looking over my shoulder wanting to explain rules or aspects that were not very clear. This was obviously against the spirit of the whole exercise, but as my class mates got to grips with what I had written I began to actually pay attention to the game I was given to play. This game was unusual and completely different to what I had created, but was no less innovative and interesting.

It was cool to see how different minds and their resultant thoughts could produce such a variety of unique games, some based on well known games formula, others completely random and new. I was reassured that this course will be an interesting one, and I am really looking forward to some of the things I will learn over the course of the next year. I am also looking forward to the idea of some board game nights in the local tavern, where good cheer and fine mead will undoubtedly unlock the creative game geniuses trapped in us all!