Metareview -- BioShock (Xbox 360, PC)

Well, if you can't ever get to ten, then why not just make reviews go to nine--and make nine the highest number?

Seriously, though--it may not be for everyone; but a game can perfectly execute its intent. The story, the atmosphere, the sound, the graphics, the characters, and the gameplay all come together to make a great game. Not THE great game. A great game. It happens.

I'm sorry, where did I say a game can't get perfect score?

Is BioShock a great game? Absolutely, but is it flawless that deserves a perfect score? NO WAY.

9.7, maybe.

I take it you've beaten the game on all of its difficulties already, kingofwale?

But no game is flawless...Period...No game in existence should get a ten then cuz its always something wrong...Comon man...

I've never played Bioshock, but I personally agree that no game should ever get a "perfect score". Why? Because 10 represents the holy ideal unattainable perfection all artists seek, towards which we can only curve towards but never attain.

If there was such a thing as a real 10/10 game, it'd be the game to end all games. No genres nor audiences would be distinguishible. It would be THE game.

A 10/10 does not mean a game is "perfect" it just means it receives the highest possible recommendation the reviewer could give.

Nobody berates Roger Ebert for giving great movies a "perfect" four stars out of four.

There is no such thing as perfection, and there is certainly no such thing as a perfect review/critique. A 10/10 simply means the reviewer is saying "YOU MUST PLAY THIS GAME!"

People crying that no game deserves a 10 out of 10, you're sheep. All that is, is a person's thoughts on a game. If a game fails to disappoint in any single area, I think it should receive a 10. If there are bad controls, gimmicky gameplay, cliche story or characters... Then you start to knock it.

If you played through the demo, play it again. Take your time, pay attention to all the detail in it. All the care given to each and every aspect of the atmosphere, to the music, to everything. It's incredibly rich. I've made everyone that's visited me in the past week sit through and play the demo and gauge all their reactions, and played through it myself about 5 times now. I honestly can't wait, and if the final version of the game holds up to the demo(which I see it easily surpassing just by continuing the narrative), I would give it a 10/10 myself.

10 out of 10 isn't the end all be all folks. It's just a rating saying "I could find no wrong with this game".

Think of the review score exactly the same way as you would a grade in school. That is how the numbers are designed to work and how critics treat them. A 55% score is considered a complete failure, just like in school. It isn't supposed to be a rating where everything over 50% is above average. A 75% is a C. It is passable (playable), but certainly nothing to tape to the refridgerator.

With that in mind, consider a 100% score as a perfect score on a paper. In the eyes of the grader, you basically did all that they could possibly ask. If you ace a history paper, it doesn't mean you are an omnipotent source of knowledge for precolonial Aztec culture, but it does mean the grader feels you displayed expertise to a level where they could not ask for more.

Don't think of a perfect score as a perfect game. There is no such thing as a perfect game, or a perfect anything for that matter, but there is such thing as a perfect score for a game. It just means the critic thinks your game is as much as they could really ask for. They are suggesting everyone interested should buy the thing.

Some critics will avoid a perfect at all costs because they feel the score implicates perfection. Others give them out freely for a well executed Call of Duty sequel. I think we have all had teachers that fall into either catergory. Personally, I would probably never rate a game over a 98, but I can understand the logic and meaning behind someone giving something a 100, and have no problem with that.

But if any game released in the last year deserves a perfect, that game is Bioshock. It fucking rocks (based on the demo and reviews). We gamers only get a treat like this about once a year, typically. And I have a hunch that Mass Effect may follow right in its footsteps, with Halo about 4 points behind. 360 ftw? Can I say that out loud?

You know what games deserve a 10/10?

The games that deserve 10/10 are the games that have your mouth gaping wide open in awe the instant you begin play. These are the games that are unlike anything we've ever experienced before. Games like FFVII, Resident Evil (the original) and Ninja Gaiden. Games that deserve 10/10 are games that are the defining pinnacle of a genre. They are the games that we look back on 10 years from now and say wow, that was one of the greatest games I've ever played.

It's games like this that keep up playing. Games like Bioshock give us a reason to keep dumping $60 on a new game every month so that we may hopefully once again arrive back at that amazing feeling of disbelief that we are playing something so groundbreaking, so engaging, and so perfectly crafted that we can't believe our eyes. Saying that a game gets a 10/10 is not saying it is perfect. It is the reviewers way of saying THIS is one of THOSE games. One you simply cannot miss. A 10/10 game is a game that we will remember forever, and will become a role model for the shape of games to come for the next decade. Games that receive this kind of critical acclaim are mimicked beyond recognition, but never duplicated. They set the bar for all of the games to come, taking the greatness of games of the past, while incorporating new elements that somehow derive a masterpiece of game devlelopment.

THAT is how a game gets a 10/10. Nothing is perfect, we all know that. We don't need a score to tell us what is and isn't, but 10/10 is as close to perfection as a game can get.

Hate to say it but kingofwale has a point. Not in the fact that a perfect score should be an unachievable dream but in the fact that, often, perfect tens equate getting caught up in the hype. In fact, usually, when an article is published and asks if these perfects scores were truly deserved, often you'll find the reviewers got caught up far too much in the hype. Halo 2 remains the perfect example.

So truthfully? Whenever a game comes out and gets too good of scores, ala Halo 2 & Twilight Princess, I become a tad doubtful the reviews are legit. And so I'll be sitting on this one a couple months and waiting for the blemishes to show up once the hype clouded glasses fade.

I agree, sometimes certain games do get over rated just a tad. Most often these are the big budget AAA titles. A perfect example of two games that recently were overrated is Resistance and Gears of War. Both games were subject to MASSIVE hype. Gears of War was MS' answer to the PS3 launch, so everyone sort of over anticipated it a bit and in the end gave it high scores because it's reality hadn't yet stuck in yet. In a very similar way the same can be said of Resistance and the circumstances around which it was launched.

However, Bioshock is NOT one of these titles. You know how I know this? I work at gamestop. Now, as ridiculous as that sounds, and I know it does. There is one thing that people do as gamestop, and that is pre-order (sometimes unwillingly) games. You know how many pre-orders I have for Halo 3? 278.

I have 7 for Bioshock. SEVEN. That INCLUDES both PC and XB360. This game is NOT surrounded by huge media hype. No one seemed to really expect much out of Bioshock until word travelled on the net that it was getting scores like 95/100 from respectable magazines such as PC Gamer. Ever since then it's as if people have somewhat remembered that Bioshock existed.

dsub,

I disagree that Halo2 (95), Gears (94), and Resistance (86) were given inflated scores. Halo 2 is still heavily played today. Gears blew away most that played it and many still enjoy it. Resistance was a frakin' launch title.

I hate how people always feel if they don't like something, but others do, then it must be over-rated or somehow the other people are stupid or missing something. You just have to understand that different people have different tastes in things. Gears deserves a 94, despite the fact that many people, especially those without a 360, dislike the game. It is still the most played 360 game.

I agree with Brad Lee. A 10/10 or 100/100 rating is only telling the readers that they really MUST give this game a try. I've played the demo several times now and agree with the 10/10 ratings, but I don't think the game is absolutely perfect. I've found lots of little "annoyances". But that won't deter me from buying the game and enjoying it. I'd love to see them fix things like: that unnatural splash graphic that pops up on the surface of the water over and over again when something's floating, that "striped" look you get when you have fog or mist drifting over an object (you can clearly see the dimensions of the fog or mist), that unnatural sound some objects make when you just barely bump into them (See: the entrance of Rapture when you can bump into all those signs and luggage. If you barely bump into a sign on the floor, you get this loud THUD), just to name a few.

But once again, this does not make the game any less enjoyable, just proves that it's not as perfect as some people seem to think a 10/10 or 100/100 rating suggests.

dsub, you really think a game which isn't picked up by the masses can't be overhyped? Also, Resistance is overhyped? Buh?!? I personally feel the game deserves more praise. Flawless multiplayer, excellent singleplayer, you unlock more and more guns on multiple playthroughs. Not to mention a positively unkillable framerate (ok, sometimes it drops but you gotta practically be going through hell itself to effect that framerate).

But regardless, Bioshock is not a masses darling but a media darling. Like Katamari Damacy, the media are the ones hyping this one up. I mean, hell. I remember Psychonauts and the hype revolving around that. Somehow, I was expecting something completely new and never seen before. But aside from the packaging, it was a textbook study of a platformer. Funny, wellcrated, and unique, but the gameplay did NOT standout. And I was hearing from everyone how I was a bastard for not instantly grabbing Tim Schafer's unit and giving a few licks over this game. And now? Two years later? The way I felt is being reflected by the media now that the hype is gone.

To me, these review scores look TOO good. Like everyone jumped on the hype wagon. Like GTA:SA. Eventually, the blemishes will come to surface and THEN I'll look into it. I mean, hell. In this thread alone, people are saying there are annoyances or issues and still they would give it a perfect 10. And do you really think professional game reviewers are immune from fanboy behavior?

Um why is it rediculous? I don't know if you've ever read how reviewers rate a product...but they rarely rate based on a generalization of what the game should be, rather they score the game based on whether it serves it storyline purpose and how well it executes its advertised intent.

Its like buying anything else, if you buy a 1080p television that is advertised at having the capability to run a 1080p signal over component but doesn't actually do so in real world testing (a la recent Sony fiasco with 360 1080p) then you would not be giving the set a very good score because it does not fulfill its intended purpose.

However, Bioshock is able to tell its story in a well-paced manner and still contain all the eye candy and interesting game play qualities that you would expect. Hence why it recieved a 10/10. Have you even played the demo? I think you would change ur mind if u did.

Sorry, bearattack, that one is going to go way over the heads of the crowd here, who have barely evolved a step past glue-sniffing.

I'd like to think I can be intelligent without having read very long critically panned books.

There was a screenshot from bioshock that had "Atlas was right" spraypainted on a wall.

LOL Me To! *Still waiting to win my copy*

The Game is Awesome, But these score's are Killing it...

2K Boston and 2K Australia.

Wait a minute, are these reviews based on the demo, or preview code?

I can't wait to see what gamespot give it... could be TP all over again... probably not as bad though.

I finished the game today, and yes, there is definitely a story that goes along with the character you play. And a very good one at that.

Irrational sent retail copies in advance to about a dozen reputable gaming publications. The reviews are all written by people who have played through the game in its entirety at least once.

Bio-Shock will be awesome...I hope some day PS# guys get this game because this will be the best game in the Xbox library until that other game comes out....Forgot what its called.........

Maybe the guy with the PS# will prefer the PC version with higher resolution and keyboard/mouse combo???? I know I do!

Halo's and Bioshock's sales numbers will determine which game is better, sadly. Marketing hype is a beeyotch.

Here's to 'Great' games.

Don't know many people with gaming rigs that will run a resolution of 1900x1080 in progressive scan. Not quite sure how you're basing computers are going to run it at a higher resolution... Hell, most monitors 22" and below, LCDs at least, cap out at 1680 x 1050 resolution...

Which by my count, is less than 1900 x 1080.

But hey, I guess being logical isn't your bag. Sucks when someone throws the facts at you. I'm sure there is about a 4% of gamers that will play this on PC that will run a resolution higher than 1080p, but that's gonna be a very slim minority.

Christopher7xii:

PCs use 16x10 ratio resolutions for widescreen, usually. That means the comparative PC resolution is 1920x1200, slightly higher than the 1080p. I know Dell 24" monitors support that, at least.

Anyway, unless I'm mistaken, the 360 only supports 720p in Bioshock. So what you're talking really is 1280x720 vs the PC's resolutions. A gaming PC that can run Bioshock would probably have a monitor that supported at least 1600x1200, if not 1680x1050 or even 1920x1200, so yes: Computers have superior resolution.

The Xbox 360 has a PC that can run Bioshock beat on price, though :)

Well, the PC version is clearly a bit better. But Bioshock on 360 for those of us without a PC is a damn good constellation prize. ;)

A PC that can run Bioshock, that is. I clearly have a computer.

I love constellation prizes.

The xbox 360 doesn't really do 1080p though, the console just upscans, which is basically what a 1080p TV would do if you sent it a 720p signal, the only difference is that a chip inside the console and not the TV does the math.

Anyway, I'll probably get this on PC, and play at the aforementioned 1920x1200 :)

I saw a comment somewhere that nailed Gamespot's rating method:
Wait until everyone else reviews a game, take the average score and then subtract 10%.