Interview BioShock Q&A on IGN

[Saint_Proverbius]

Tags: BioShock; Irrational Games; Ken Levine

<a href="http://pc.ign.com/">PC.IGN</a> has an <A href="http://pc.ign.com/articles/556/556421p1.html">interview</A> with <b>Ken Levine</b> about their spiritual successor to <i>System Shock</i> they're calling <b>BioShock</b>. Here's a bit on why publishers are wankers:
<br>
<br>
<blockquote><b>IGNPC: Right after hearing about BioShock, some avid fans of Shock history started to worry that it may be the Invisible War to the System Shock series. Exactly how faithfully complex will BioShock be when compared to SS2? Will it be "mass market friendly" (that's a nice way of saying dumb and simple)?
<br>
<br>
Ken Levine:</b> The primary reason we nurtured BioShock for so long prior to bringing it to the publishing community title was that so we could firmly establish the game's identity and design.
<br>
<br>
If we wanted to make a BioShock-lite, we could have done that; an action shooter set in the BioShock universe. I think we've all heard that tune before. And if the publisher is paying the bills from day one, and they have a substantial financial investment, it's only natural to assume they'd want to drive the product in a direction they view will be most profitable. And to make that determination, the marketing department generally becomes heavily involved early on in the design process. While that works great for an existing franchise, such as Tribes and SWAT (where Sierra brought tremendous knowledge of those brands to the table), the design goals of BioShock aren't necessarily something your average marketing person will jump at. Until Grand Theft Auto came along and proved such games could be financially successful, you couldn't even discuss terms like "emergence" and "open-ended." You had to sneak them in between making AVIs featuring hot chicks and bullet-time.
<br>
<br>
That's changing now. Gamers clearly get these design principles, and that's why the reaction to the announcement of BioShock was so broad. People want to play that type of game. They crave innovation. And that's what Irrational is committed to delivering.</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
How about an open ended AVI of hot chicks in bullet time?
<br>
<br>
Thanks, <b>Ken</b>!
<br>

 

[Spazmo]

They actually pretty much did the same with FFvtTR. It only got a publisher in the last couple months. Most of the work on it was self-funded. It's a pretty sound plan, because few publishers will turn down already complete games that they just have to QA and distribute.

 

[Shevek]

How could IGN slam Invisible War for being dumbed down after giving it a 9.0?

Anywho, it sounds good to me. Still, the description of the game at IGN doesnt seem as cool as the hard scifi of System Shock.

 

[EEVIAC]

I guess VD is vindicated somewhat when even IGN is calling the mass-market dumb and simple.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

How could IGN slam Invisible War for being dumbed down after giving it a 9.0?

Shhh.. You're not supposed to remember that.

They did the same thing with NWN, saying the single player campaign was the best role playing game ever made, then saying it was lackluster in their interviews about the expansions.

 

[Odin]

How could IGN slam Invisible War for being dumbed down after giving it a 9.0?

Shhh.. You're not supposed to remember that.

They did the same thing with NWN, saying the single player campaign was the best role playing game ever made, then saying it was lackluster in their interviews about the expansions.

Haha, evidence of PR ass licking is always fun!

 

[RGE]

Maybe they like the stuff at first, and then later notice that a lot of people don't like the stuff, and so they decide to represent those people? I suppose that would say something of the taste in games their people have.

But perhaps ass licking is more likely than really out of touch reviewers?

 

[Odin]

Maybe they like the stuff at first, and then later notice that a lot of people don't like the stuff, and so they decide to represent those people? I suppose that would say something of the taste in games their people have.

But perhaps ass licking is more likely than really out of touch reviewers?

Reviewers shouldn't be that unstable (changing viewpoints just to please a certain crowd).. It's PR ass licking, plain and simple..

 

[Ortchel]

The only good thing about Invisible War was how everything in the game world was filled with helium, it was really entertaining throwing people into basketball hoops for a couple hours.

 

[RGE]

I didn't mean that they changed their viewpoint to please anyone. I meant that they first liked the game, and when people say the game sucks they have second thoughts about the game. Or perhaps they think that it's more accurate to describe the game according to what most of the fans think of it rather than sticking to their initial judgement. I mean, they could just be really lousy at reviewing games, while not being quite oblivious enough to not eventually notice when their reviews are out of touch with reality.

And then again, perhaps it's not the same person who reviewed DX:IW (Steve Butts) and who now interviewed Ken Levine about BioShock. Perhaps this interviewer always thought DX:IW was crappy and also doesn't like games being dumbed down for the mass market. That IGN rated an apparently sucky game at 9.0 certainly indicates PR ass licking, but this long afterwards I don't think their inconsistency is evidence of anything, really.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

The only good thing about Invisible War was how everything in the game world was filled with helium, it was really entertaining throwing people into basketball hoops for a couple hours.

Or stabbing someone and watch them fly. I don't think NG Resonance had ever gotten so high before I stabbed her.