Bioshock coming to PS3!

[njshadow]

Just found out that the PS3 is gonna get some Bioshock goodness!

http://pspupdates.qj.net/Rumor-PSP-to-get-more-MGS-PS3-to-get-BioShock-plus-more-WiiWare/pg/49/aid/107317

[magunwarrior]

"Also noted was that BioShock may be coming to the Sony PlayStation 3 after all. The source says that Microsoft may not have an absolute lock on 2K Games' latest masterpiece, and it's headed to the Sony PS3 in 2008."

Until it's confirmed, I wouldn't get too excited.

[wizmaster]

Yea, lots of weasel words in there. Besides, everyone knows PC gaming is where it's at.

[samureye]

Yea, lots of weasel words in there. Besides, everyone knows PC gaming is where it's at.

Not really, PC gaming sucks. And I am playing Bioshock on PC now.

[satori]

I completely disagree, PC gaming rocks, sadly PC Game supply sucks.

Bioshock on the PS3, while doubtful in my estimation could be really amazing if they decided to support the inherent mouse keyboard support that the PS3 offers. It could give gamers better quality graphics than the 360 enjoyed and perhaps full native widescreen support this time around.

edit: and the link is currently down so I'm thinking that perhaps the story is bogus and has been pulled.

[wizmaster]

I completely disagree, PC gaming rocks, sadly PC Game supply sucks.

Bioshock on the PS3, while doubtful in my estimation could be really amazing if they decided to support the inherent mouse keyboard support that the PS3 offers. It could give gamers better quality graphics than the 360 enjoyed and perhaps full native widescreen support this time around.

edit: and the link is currently down so I'm thinking that perhaps the story is bogus and has been pulled.

It did. I don't want to go into again though. Also, PS3 doesn't mean better graphics. Hell, at this rate it will probably have less FPS at the same graphics quality.

[satori]

It did.
it did what, I'm not clear on this

I don't want to go into again though.
what don't you want to go into again, or is that too much to go into?

Also, PS3 doesn't mean better graphics.
PS3 has the ability to provide better quality graphics, but it's a bitch to build for based on the dev kit that is provided with it. Have a look at DiRT, and that's just to start.
Hell, at this rate it will probably have less FPS at the same graphics quality. No idea where you're pulling that jem from, but again, have a look at DiRT.

[wizmaster]

it did what, I'm not clear on this

what don't you want to go into again, or is that too much to go into?

PS3 has the ability to provide better quality graphics, but it's a bitch to build for based on the dev kit that is provided with it. Have a look at DiRT, and that's just to start.
No idea where you're pulling that jem from, but again, have a look at DiRT.

Pulled it from the Marvel game. Some games have framerate issues but since the PS3 can update they can just issue a fix (assuming they feel like it of course). Getting better graphics should be done as long as the game doesn't suffer otherwise (although I think the kits are getting better). I've seen Dirt but it bored me and I never watched it for long.

As for the not getting into it, I meant widescreen on Bioshock. It was designed for widescreen. Instead of cutting from the sides for standard users, they added onto the top and bottom so they don't miss anything (well, anything from the side). People assumed they didn't do widescreen well because widescreen was just standard with the top and bottom cut off to them. Frankly, I like their method and think it should be used on all games. I'm also assuming this is what you meant since I haven't heard of any other widescreen issue with Bioshock.

[satori]

Pulled it from the Marvel game. Some games have framerate issues but since the PS3 can update they can just issue a fix (assuming they feel like it of course). Getting better graphics should be done as long as the game doesn't suffer otherwise (although I think the kits are getting better). I've seen Dirt but it bored me and I never watched it for long.

As for the not getting into it, I meant widescreen on Bioshock. It was designed for widescreen. Instead of cutting from the sides for standard users, they added onto the top and bottom so they don't miss anything (well, anything from the side). People assumed they didn't do widescreen well because widescreen was just standard with the top and bottom cut off to them. Frankly, I like their method and think it should be used on all games. I'm also assuming this is what you meant since I haven't heard of any other widescreen issue with Bioshock.

I'm not sure what the marvel game is. I wouldn't doubt that people would have issues with framerates, but I would say that they don't understand the development kit (because it's likely needlessly obtuse) but it's clear that the hardware is superior (not because anything Sony designed, but rather because of superior processing power built by others). The development team on Bioshock are more than up to the challenge if they wanted to tackle the PS3 dev kit. regardless of others inabilities to work with it.
The Widescreen issue is well documented, yes we're talking about the same thing. They simply need to allow widescreen without a seeming loss of field of view.

[damnedeyez]

The Widescreen issue is well documented, yes we're talking about the same thing. They simply need to allow widescreen without a seeming loss of field of view.

Simply? I'm not sure how that's possible unless you lose field of view from standard.

[satori]

Simply? I'm not sure how that's possible unless you lose field of view from standard.

simple: the default was widescreen, anyone with a 4:3 ratio then had additional information added to the tops and bottoms of the blacked out former widescreen view to increase their field of view. The idea being that the directoral view stays intact for those with 4:3. What this meant was that rather than the usual loss of fov for 4:3 folks, it was the 16:9 people that lost out. For that reason I'd like to see the 16:9 folks get added content that they didn't have before. As an industry we should be moving to 16:9, rewarding those with lower end tech seems counter productive.

[damnedeyez]

As an industry we should be moving to 16:9, rewarding those with lower end tech seems counter productive.

I have issues with the idea of biasing it in either direction.


::backspaces:: Actually, it's been argued enough...I don't need to add my two cents in to the mix. Glad to see it might come to the PS3 though, even though I've already played it on PC.

[johnnysix]

I really don't get all this stuff about the field of view. The content was designed for a 16:9 ratio and that's what counts. It's not as if the designers are hiding things outside of the 16:9 player's point of view. If it was a twitch game like counterstrike or quake 3, or a multiplayer game full stop, I could perhaps see some players having an unfair advantage but I really don't understand where all the hate is for this. These guys decided to make a game that works well in both ratios, they should be thanked. Also, as a PS3 owner, I don't always buy that the Sony system is the 360 eater some people like to say it is. Many developers have lauded the power of the 360's graphics processing system and memory. I think when each system is written to it's strengths, there's not much between them.

[satori]

I really don't get all this stuff about the field of view. The content was designed for a 16:9 ratio and that's what counts. It's not as if the designers are hiding things outside of the 16:9 player's point of view. If it was a twitch game like counterstrike or quake 3, or a multiplayer game full stop, I could perhaps see some players having an unfair advantage but I really don't understand where all the hate is for this. These guys decided to make a game that works well in both ratios, they should be thanked. Also, as a PS3 owner, I don't always buy that the Sony system is the 360 eater some people like to say it is. Many developers have lauded the power of the 360's graphics processing system and memory. I think when each system is written to it's strengths, there's not much between them.

hang on, I don't think that the PS3 is a 360 "eater" as you put it. Yes the 360 is a fantastic gaming machine and MS has done far more and far better with the 360 than sony has done with the PS3. What I said was that the PS3 has superior hardware with more and better processors. We still don't have a Gears of War to point to on the PS3 so superior hardware has hardly made a difference there. The 360 is 720p while the PS3 can do 1080p. Lets not turn this into some kind of polarized system war. As far as I'm concerned the 360 is a far more attractive system, I'm simply saying that they have the potential to do more with the PS3 if they want to.

On the field of view, we should move to widescreen as an industry and a community because it's a superior platform for everything. What they did doesn't have to be rehashed over and over again, we all know what they did and how they did it. If you listen to the PC Gamer podcast from the week after the release you can hear the interview with Ken Levine lead designer he explains the initial concerns with what they were going to attempt and why it ended up working, my point is, along with many others, why not simply stretch that view out to the left and right to improve the view for widescreen.

[johnnysix]

hang on, I don't think that the PS3 is a 360 "eater" as you put it. Yes the 360 is a fantastic gaming machine and MS has done far more and far better with the 360 than sony has done with the PS3. What I said was that the PS3 has superior hardware with more and better processors. We still don't have a Gears of War to point to on the PS3 so superior hardware has hardly made a difference there. The 360 is 720p while the PS3 can do 1080p. Lets not turn this into some kind of polarized system war. As far as I'm concerned the 360 is a far more attractive system, I'm simply saying that they have the potential to do more with the PS3 if they want to.

On the field of view, we should move to widescreen as an industry and a community because it's a superior platform for everything. What they did doesn't have to be rehashed over and over again, we all know what they did and how they did it. If you listen to the PC Gamer podcast from the week after the release you can hear the interview with Ken Levine lead designer he explains the initial concerns with what they were going to attempt and why it ended up working, my point is, along with many others, why not simply stretch that view out to the left and right to improve the view for widescreen.

I didn't intend to make this into a system war post, there's been tons of that on these forums already. My "360 eater" comment was aimed at some of the media, in terms of gaming magazines etc. Also, I'm pretty sure the 360 does do 1080p. I would agree that if you don't have a widescreen display at the moment and have a next gen console, your not getting the most out of your system.

It would be good to see the game move to PS3. The wider audience the game can get, the better. I would say it's up there near Call of Duty 4 and Mario Galaxy as "game of the year" material so far.

[satori]

ok, it turns out that the X-Box Elite did update to offer full 1080p, but if you don't have an elite your at 1080i.

[darthender]

Haha, you guys totally "went into it".

[ryudo]

Sorry guys no Bioshock for you
http://www.joystiq.com/2007/11/14/2k-games-no-bioshock-on-ps3-stop-asking/

[damnedeyez]

On the field of view, we should move to widescreen as an industry and a community because it's a superior platform for everything.


No, not necessarily everything. That it's usually combined with HD and higher resolutions sure, that movies are filmed in wider aspects most definitely...and if you sit close enough for the immersion factor and peripheral vision for FPS then yes. But, purely as an aspect ratio, no it's not superior for everything. That's mainly a matter of opinion.

[njshadow]

Sorry guys no Bioshock for you
http://www.joystiq.com/2007/11/14/2k-games-no-bioshock-on-ps3-stop-asking/

Ahhh, oh well, I tried. :)