I returned from this vegetarian restaurant downtown today after having eaten a meal that looked vaguely like something that fell out of a horse. I remember feeling disappointed at my inability to find pleasure in the “cool” things in life. Things like the trendy vegetarian restaurant downtown. Discouraged, I decided to fire up the Bioshock demo that was released on PSN recently as my first play through had been cut short and I was looking forward to finishing it. Ideally it would allay any concerns I may have had about always being “that guy” that bucks the popular trend just to be different. I bloody hate that guy.
If there’s one thing this game lacks, it’s an overabundance of conveniently placed explosive tanks…oh wait.
Luckily it worked. The demo is amazing, I haven’t fired up a game that felt so epic since Oblivion came out around 2 years ago. When I got that first look at Rapture as the elevator descended on the city I felt completely giddy. Like when I was a little kid and I tried TMNT for the NES for the first time. The demo started on a high point, held my attention to the end and left me wanting more.
Elated at finally having had the chance to try the game everyone’s been talking about for over a year now and looking to share my impressions and get some feedback from my fellow gamers, I headed online. Then I came across this.
Ripten: Bioshock Apparently Looks Bioshitty
…and this.
Giant Bomb: Oh Snap! (Bioshock Screen Comparison)
…and this.
Voodoo Extreme: Bioshock PS3 Graphics All Kinds of Broken
…and the list goes on and on and on. It extends to just about every major (and minor) gaming site on the internet. I hardly blame these guys for reporting the news gamers want to hear. It’s the fan response to articles like these that bothers me.
So apparently I was wrong. The Bioshock demo that I enjoyed so much is actually a big piece of crap and I’m an idiot for enjoying it. Something seems to be amiss here…
Should I enjoy the game less because it doesn’t quite look as good as another version? I seem to recall having a great time playing MK2 and NBA Jam on my old Sega Genesis despite obvious graphical inferiority to the SNES versions. What I don’t recall is anybody actually giving a damn back then. My, my how times have changed.
Real gamers played this on the Genesis with the 3 button controller.
The thing I find really hard to comprehend is how these pixel counters can call themselves “hardcore” gamers when they invest so much time into preparing comparisons like this and defending their console of choice to the death. I can’t imagine they have much time for games at all. Even more baffling is the fact that these are the same people who pretend they’re excited about the pending wiiware release of Cave Story and claim to have “been fans from the beginning” when games like Seiklus and Knytt are mentioned. Presumably this is so they can affirm just how hardcore they really are.
Yeah, right. That same guy who’s looking to start a mass 2KGames boycott over a weak texture in Bioshock is obviously a big Cave Story fan.
Just look at those next-gen graphics!
Remember when Nevermind came out and everyone in the world claimed to have been a huge Nirvana fan from way back when, despite their original album only having sold like 50 000 copies? I smelled a rat then and I smell a rat now.
The casual gaming community has taken a lot of flack since the release of the wii due to the sheer amount of shovelware hitting the market. I say it’s time we strike back. We’re not the ones buying up all those awful wii games that are seeing big sales. Blame that on uninformed parents and Gamestop managers who are pushing them on people just to free up some shelf space. We’re the ones who are out there actually playing the games. Not counting lines of resolution on our TV sets so we can arm ourselves for the inevitable argument over which version of a game is slightly superior under a microscope.
As far as I’m concerned, there’s nothing wrong with being a casual gamer. And there’s no such thing as a hardcore gamer anymore. Just zealots. There are people who play games and then there are zealots who play each other. It’s not hard to spot a zealot; if you’re unsure, just loudly announce how much you loved Assassin’s Creed. A true zealot will shoot Cheetos from their nose and possibly run over his or her own mother with a truck in a desperate bid to tell you just how wrong you are before anyone else does.
An artist with Blizzard was kind enough to throw together this rendering of a Zealot. Watch out for them in the upcoming Starcraft 2.
So I don’t care anymore. I’m saying it. I’ll be “that guy” if I have to. Vegetarian food sucks. I don’t care how trendy it is. Assassin’s Creed was awesome. Everyone just whined about it because it was the cool thing to do. And (are you ready for this one?) Bioshock is an amazing game, no matter what console you play it on. Anyone who’s that concerned about a missing pixel, one or two weak textures or a difference of 1 frame-per-second should be playing games on a $4000 gaming rig, not a console. We all know where the real cutting edge stuff happens. Truthfully, though, if those are they types of things you’re concerned about, maybe you’d be better off just watching movies in Hi-Def instead of playing games. I mean it’s only the visuals that matter right?
I’m off to play some old Genesis games or something to remind me what it is I used to love about gaming in the first place.
The next gen starts when Big Earl says so.
In the meantime, I hope you PS3 owners who don’t have 360s won’t let the bubbling cauldron of hatred that is the internet ruin what’s looking to be a truly great gaming experience for you. And if you ever catch CG counting pixels or posting another pointless comparison video, you have our permission to kick Colin’s ass. He usually hangs out right here.
[/rant]






Spkl
Why are you playing the original toejam and earl?
the xbox sequel has much better graphics.
October 10th, 2008 at 10:46 am
Dan Z
Technically even TJ & Earl 2: Panic on Funkatron had better graphics than the original, but you just can’t beat the classics.
Edit: I mean that’s kind of the point, right?
October 10th, 2008 at 11:46 am
Bassium
I see I joined the right gaming site to help post stuff on, I have been thinking about this issue that the gaming community has become too spoiled with moderately good games, just because a game doesn’t have great graphics the gameplay alone can be awesome. I used to love Mega Man ames (I still do.) Now yes I know Mega Man games are popular games anyways but the originals for the NES didn’t have great graphics by todays standards but truth be told I don’t like most of the new Mega Man games that are like 3-D and stuff. (Mega Man belongs in a 2-D world.)
October 12th, 2008 at 5:29 am
Nemesis
I totally agree Bassium. Games nowadays put too much on graphics and not enough on what matters – the game itself. I prefer to review games that have graphics that are less than normal to show that these games can still be good. I see that CG also holds this view very strongly, so I’m glad to be here
October 12th, 2008 at 6:38 am
panickedthumb
I’ll play devil’s advocate. 2k has been talking about how they’ve put so much work into making the PS3 Bioshock stand on its own, so it is kinda sad that the graphics aren’t as good on the PS3. I was under the impression that the graphics were supposed to be a little better on the PS3, I have played it on 360, but I’ve been holding out for the PS3 version since it was supposed to be better. Now I’ll at least wait for some reviews to come in once the game goes gold, to see how the extras are. If they aren’t that great I might get the 360 version for the better graphics (and because the 360 controller works better with FPS games for me, personally)
THAT SAID, I’m unconvinced by this. I’ve looked at a lot of screenshot comparisons and I had to really strain to see a difference. So unless it’s FAR worse than this in the final game (like, bad enough to break the immersion), I’m going with the PS3. Seriously, the graphics do not make the game, but they help. I have played the bioshock demo, and if it looked worse than the 360 version, it didn’t take away from the atmosphere of the game. It is an amazing game regardless of platform, and I think these people are getting their panties in a bunch over nothing. Assassin’s Creed is awesome, but here’s a case where the PS3 version really suffered. Not because of graphics but because of frequent hang-ups. That’s what people need to be looking for. Does it take away from the actual gameplay? Are you going to have less fun with a slight graphics dip? No!
Like I said, I’ll wait for the reviews to see if it’s much worse, but this level of complaining over ONE TEXTURE is ridiculous.
October 13th, 2008 at 8:07 am
panickedthumb
OK, I found more comparison shots, where they claim the PS3 version is blurry and therefore should be boycotted. It’s absolutely ridiculous.
360:
http://www.ripten.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/bioshockdemo_05_360-1.jpg
PS3:
http://www.ripten.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/bioshockdemo_05_ps3-1.jpg
Number one, this is something not worth nit-picking. And number two, I think it’s a function of the PS3 having better fog/haze. If you look at the Rapture Metro sign, it actually looks more jagged on the 360 version. Again, nothing to write home about, but who cares? Just play games. That’s what we enjoy right?
October 13th, 2008 at 10:34 am