Maximum PC BioShock 2 RSS Feed

BioShock 2 Finally Surfacing in February 2010

Nathan Grayson — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 22:12:59 -0500

We’ve known for a while now that 2010 will be the year of our return to Rapture, but beyond that, things have been a bit hazy. No more, though. Today, Take-Two finally spotted the light at the end of the tunnel.

February 9, 2010. That’s the day you’ll be getting your Bathysphere in gear and descending into the madness of Rapture once again, according to a press release we received from Take-Two. Sure, you’ll only find a scrap of paper that says “IOU BioShock 2” under the Christmas tree this year, but at least now we know the wait won't be too painful.

If that’s still too much for you, though, fret not! There’s plenty of other <size descriptor> <family member> related entertainment available to hold you over until Big Daddy, Big Sister, and Little Sister make their February debut. For instance, you could run over to your local Blockbuster and pick up Big Momma’s House 2. We’ve heard great things about that porcine piece of celluloid. Or, we suppose, you could just play BioShock again, but what fun would that be?

BioShock 2, Max Payne 3 Delayed into 2010

Nathan Grayson — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 04:41:12 -0500

Take-Two kicked off the week by announcing that BioShock 2 and Max Payne 3 – both originally scheduled to hit in 2009 – have taken a tumble into the first half of 2010.

“The decision to shift a release date is never an easy one, especially with a product as highly anticipated as BioShock 2. We felt that it was essential to invest the additional time to ensure that this title will deliver what its fans expect and deserve,” said Take-Two CEO Ben Feder.

“As a result, we will now be launching sequels to several of our strongest franchises - including BioShock 2, Mafia II, Max Payne 3 and Red Dead Redemption - during the next fiscal year.”

As a result of that result, Take-Two’s 2009 is looking pretty sparse. We’re all for heart-pounding finishes, but Take-Two’s all-or-nothing 2010 plan is just wild. This is like when action heroes fall from great distances, only to fire off their grappling hooks at the last feasible second; sure, you know the hero’s not going to make any sort of craterous impact, but damn, Take-Two, 2010 had better be the best year ever. After all, Spider Man can’t swing by and catch everyone.

And if 2010 doesn't go your way, we imagine a number of your investors will be plumeting from buildings hoping not for someone to catch them, but for death's sweet, concrete-flavored embrace.

The Game Boy: Who Invited the Bald Space Marine to Book Club?

Nathan Grayson — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 12:10:48 -0500

Last week was just full of surprises. (RIP, all.) Thankfully, though, one shining, heroic force swooped in to save the world from snowballing into complete unpredictability. That final bastion of normalcy – that conqueror of chaos -- was, of course, Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen.

The film – which starred explosions, Shia Labeouf, and explosions (but unfortunately, not Shia Labeouf exploding) – defiantly dodged negative reviews, negative word of mouth, and a near-negative Metacritic score to gross $112,000,000 in its opening weekend. Yep – nothing like a vapid, needless summer blockbuster to restore your faith in the world by destroying your faith in humanity. The movie’s success, though? Not surprising in the least. It’s a loud, action-packed film with more carnage than meaningful dialog. It’s simple, easily digested cheese. People eat that stuff up.

But then, no one expected Transformers to tug at our heartstrings and revolutionize storytelling as we know it. That’d just be silly; I mean, it’s a movie about robots fighting. Clearly, all eyes here are focused on the action – no time to roll them at the plot.

So then, how come we often expect tear-jerking, thought-provoking tales from big-budget videogames with premises nearly as dramatically inhospitable as Transformers? Why do we expect triple-A videogames – which, at this point, are quickly sneaking into movie territory in terms of development costs – to mold angry men, gunfire, and shrapnel into spellbinding tales when our prior buying tastes (see, for instance: Transformers) have shown that all we want is a loose thread to hold the action together? Especially when other story genres (you know, anything that's not action) lend themselves far better to interesting plots, untethered by the need for a five-minute shootout every six minutes?

Well, the origin of that expectation is at least somewhat explicable, though the expectation itself is highly outdated. Here’s why. In the beginning, when the big pixel bang occurred, shattering into millions of tiny pixels and creating the videogame universe as we know it, videogames were cheap and easy-ish to develop. Then, as technology became more complex, more time, money, and people were required to build a high-quality, easily marketable videogame. Thing is, the industry’s growth from bite-sized, big-spirited money muncher into a multi-stomached money devouring machine occurred somewhat subtly over the years. Since the industry’s inception, interesting plots, risky innovations, and blockbusters have all come from the same game publishers. Thus, it’s only natural that we expect them to continue down the path of evolving plots and huge risks, even though the industry’s finally reached the point where it’s not financially feasible to do so.

However, for big publishers, there’s a light at the end of this tunnel. Videogame storytelling techniques and technologies can now produce a story roughly equivalent in quality to that of a typical summer blockbuster. Sure, it may not be a Promised Land composed primarily of Holy Grails, but as noted earlier, for most potential players, it’ll do. And “most” is the operative term here. With the so-called “casual” boom now replacing many publishers’ eyes with dollar signs, catering to the niche that wants a brain-scrambler of a tale just isn’t appealing. Instead, simple stories are where it’s at, so that buzz-phrases like “More guns!” and “Xtreme graphics” stand out all the more.

Take, for instance, the sordid saga that is BioShock 2. The first game in the series made no bones about its use of Rapture as a representation of an Objectivist utopia gone horribly wrong. In fact, designer Ken Levine wouldn’t shut up about it. BioShock 2, meanwhile, has, so far, focused its marketing on the player’s ability to be a Big Daddy, a hulking diver’s suit filled with fury, sporting a motherf***ing drill for a hand. Awesome? You betcha. A conduit for the dripping, vulnerable sense of dread that coated BioShock 1? Probably not. And even if 2K Marin’s merely keeping BioShock 2’s deep story hush-hush for now, the fact that it’s not a high enough priority to be heavily promoted is telling. The sad truth is, many mainstream gamers failed to appreciate BioShock 1’s strides in videogame storytelling, but they loved setting baddies aflame with a snap of their fingers. 2K Marin’s taking that ball and rolling with it.

Thankfully, story in games is far from a dying art form. In actuality, I’d say the field is more exciting than ever. It’s just changed locations, is all. With major publishers now understandably risk-averse, the indie gaming scene has risen up to take on the role of mad scientist. Every day, independent devs produce strange and exciting experiments – both in story and gameplay – on teensy budgets.

If you’re into the more esoteric (perhaps even pretentious) side of things, you may have recently taken a shine to Braid, an indie game whose drip-fed story intertwines beautifully with its time-bending gameplay. Or how about The Passage, a five minute game about the trials and tribulations of an entire lifetime? Both of the aforementioned games have received more publicity than most titles of their standing through promotions on Steam, Xbox Live Arcade, and iTunes. But hey, if you’re indie, you’re probably in it for the love of the game anyway – though cash is a nice bonus.

Here’s my point, though: Both of those games are storytellers first, and everything else second. Sure, they may not be all that “fun” in the traditional sense, but with games like these, that’s not necessarily a priority. Guns, bald space marines, and cackling villains are nowhere to be found here. Obviously, then, theses games are not for everyone, though I’d urge you all to give them a try. Fun or not – they use interactivity to spin yarns unspinnable in other mediums, conveying messages not just about their characters, but also the player.

And even if that’s not your thing, there are plenty of other stories to be told through videogames. You just have to know where to look for them. The majority of big-budget games may have found a comfortable rut, but elsewhere, people will always be trying new things. It seems, then, that the most exciting chapter in the story of videogaming is only beginning.

The Game Boy: How Hardcore Gamers Wrecked My E3

Nathan Grayson — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 17:30:57 -0500

There was something different about this year’s E3. Ok, aside from the 30,000 or so extra people and the occasional, chuckle-inducing swine flu masks strapped to the faces of germophobic show-goers. It was something subtle – invisible, even – but it happened with a great deal of frequency.

It was cheering.

Clapping, laughter, excitement. By and large, at this year’s show, people really, really liked what they saw. This should be a good thing, but in my cranky, cantankerous opinion, it’s not. Why? Because every last cheer, whistle, and imitation air horn blast sounded in raucous approval of the status quo. Another FPS. Another God of War clone. “Our game is a lot like Half-Life, but mixed with Halo,” developers would cheerily exclaim, bathing in the glow of audience members’ beaming smiles.

From me, however, E3’s flood of samey shooters and risk-free sequels elicited only one reaction: a quiet cry of “Down with the hardcore.” Allow me to explain.

As I mentioned earlier, most every big ticket title at this year’s E3 was some sort of rehash, sequel, or clone. Here’s a quick list of particularly obvious offenders: Modern Warfare 2, BioShock 2, Left 4 Dead 2, Halo: ODST, Halo: Reach, Dante’s Inferno, Metal Gear Solid: Rising, Assassin’s Creed 2, Crysis 2, Mass Effect 2, Alpha Protocol, etc, etc, etc. That’s not to say that my fanboy froth isn’t overflowing for many of those games; it is. I came away from E3 jumpy (though that might’ve been the fault of LA’s less-than-friendly neighborhoods) and excited as could be. However, I’m excited for me. Right now. I’m not, however, excited for the future of the gaming industry.

E3 showed me that the industry has finally solved the puzzle that is the hardcore gamer. And now, like the savvy players it serves, the industry intends to exploit the crap out of its newly acquired knowledge. See, as it turns out, the solution to said puzzle isn’t all that difficult. Just stop giving hardcore gamers what you think is best and instead hand them everything they ask for on a silver platter. Oh, and use the word “hardcore” a lot. Every other sentence, if you can.

And what do hardcore gamers appear to want, as evidenced by sales numbers and – of course – cheers? More of the same. But bigger. Like, with more dudes and cooler guns. Oh, and graphics! Don’t forget those. Never forget those. Don’t worry, though; E3 delivered in spades.

My favorite bit occurred when Sony announced its new ~~worst kept secret ever~~ motion controller, and immediately proceeded to shy away from innovative, interesting uses for the bleeding-edge tech, instead opting to show us how it could be used for a – you guessed it – first-person shooter.

But what else would Sony have demoed its take on the waggle wand with, you ask? Surely not casual games, you probably wince, as the words dance through your Mountain Dew-hardened hardcore body like some kind of foreign virus. Well, to be perfectly honest, yeah – I’d have been much happier if most companies hadn’t treated their casual titles like attic-dwelling high school dropouts who don’t even get a place on the family Christmas card.

At least casual gamers haven’t been “solved” yet. Hardcore gamers are two parts FPS, one part RTS, one part Action, with sequels scattered liberally throughout, but casual gamers aren’t so easy. So long as non-gamers and casual gamers still exist, developers and publishers will have to try. Creativity and new ideas are the only way to lure in potential buyers who, thus far, have proved impervious to the industry’s advances. And for now, I’m thinking tiny timewasters and other games typically dismissed as casual fare will provide the best – and maybe only -- glimpses of novel gameplay ideas we’ll get from big, triple-A publishers. Which is a huge shame, because whether you like their games or not, those big-name studios are bursting with talent, a resource that – unlike the bland tastes of the hardcore gamer – isn’t being adequately mined.

Maybe when (if?) the economy is resuscitated back into stable condition, big-budget games might get a new infusion of creativity, but even then, companies like money. So long as we keep spending, they’ll keep dishing out the same stale goods. But beyond that unlikely avenue, is there hope? Perhaps. Maybe, due to increasing development costs, major publishers will eventually scale back development anyway, hopefully leading to more innovation. Or maybe this is the beginning of the fabled Indie Revolution, where indie games become our only source of innovative nourishment while multimillion dollar corporations, well, do exactly as I outlined in this article. Who knows?

All I can say for sure is this: Hardcore gaming as it is now – at least, in the eyes of big-name publishers – is caught in a big, uninteresting loop. Companies have solved the hardcore gamer puzzle, and now they’re receiving their monetary prize. Hardcore gamers, from what I can tell, couldn’t be happier.

Man, getting exactly what you purportedly want really sucks.