Impressions: Bioshock 2 multiplayer

Watching the six-player deathmatch BioShock 2 demo was kind of like watching your beloved family dog sing opera. Mind you, this dog sang opera really well, but still, watching your canine companion sing is a somewhat unsettling experience. For some reason, it's ingrained in our minds that BioShock is meant to be experienced on ones lonesome. When you strip the rich story away from the game and toss in multiplayer elements, you end up with a product that, despite its strengths, seems a bit out of its element.
The multiplayer demo, which was performed by staffers from Digital Extremes, creators of the PS3 version of BioShock and developers of the sequel's multiplayer portion, explained the character customization options that would be featured in the game. Said customization takes place in each player's own personal apartment. From this hub, players can change their appearance, customize their weapons and plasmid loadouts, and check out a few story elements that innervate the multiplayer experience.
You end up with a product that, despite its strengths, seems a bit out of its element.
|
In the demo we saw, the player could listen to an audio log from Sinclair Solutions, the plasmid development corporation for which the player works as a product tester. The log consisted of a brief welcome message and job briefing -- not exactly the basis for the rich story (which takes place before the events of BiosShock) that the 2K has promised, but further story elements which will likely appear in the apartment could ostensibly flesh out the plot.
Each apartment is also equipped with a bathysphere, which lets the player choose game modes and battlegrounds and head into the fray. All of this is optional, of course -- the game will let you choose to do this micromanagement through a standard multiplayer menu, but from what we saw, invoking this option will cause the player to miss a lot of the TLC that Digital Extremes is putting into the multiplayer.
The aforementioned customization includes the ability to change your character's appearance. The character you play as is a survivor of the havoc taking place in the oceanic city -- the player we saw was a former welder (and Sinclair newhire) named Jacob Norris. You can also establish three loadouts, each of which is comprised of two weapons and two plasmids. While waiting to respawn, you can swap between these three loadouts on the fly.

Additional plasmids, tonics and weapons can be unlocked by moving up the ranks in Sinclair Solutions, a feat performed by gaining Adam (or experience points) by killing opponents, hacking turrets or performing other various in-game feats. There are also "trials," or missions that players will try to accomplish to gain more Adam. Yes, it hearkens back to Call of Duty 4, but with genetic mutation in lieu of perks.
Watching this old(ish) dog perform its new trick will take some getting used to.
|
The gameplay (and the visuals, for that matter) look exactly like the original BioShock. There's been a few control modifications -- the most evident being the welcome change to make plasmids and melee attacks off-hand. There's no switching hands mid-combat in the multiplayer mode. Also, the game's health and EVE powerups appear in -- what else? -- Circus of Value stations embedded throughout each arena. Turrets are placed in key areas of the level, and can be hacked by simply holding the A button for a few seconds.
Also, the Big Daddy suit will randomly appear mid-match. The first player to get to it dons the diver suit, becoming a near unstoppable juggernaut. Yes, it looks like it tosses all balance out the window, but the other players will likely turn their focus on the drill-handed elephant the room, which could lend itself to some pretty exciting gameplay moments.
The whole thing looks really neat, and the character customization options, weapon unlocks and story elements have the potential to turn BioShock 2's multiplayer portion into a really compelling online FPS. Still, watching this old(ish) dog perform its new trick will take some getting used to.















Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
MRLN @ Jun 3rd 2009 4:56PM
Despite the fact that little has changed, I'd still get this just to advance the story.
MRLN @ Jun 3rd 2009 4:57PM
Hey look, I didn't say first! I'm such a good listener.
Heh @ Jun 3rd 2009 5:02PM
MRLN - View my avatar at your leisure.
TomCo @ Jun 3rd 2009 6:48PM
Heh - View my avatar at your leisure.
(Its a kitty)
Van Redd @ Jun 3rd 2009 11:54PM
Awww look at the kitty!
Seriously though this seems like great stuff. I have cautious but high hopes.
Dragod @ Jun 3rd 2009 4:56PM
Anyone else feel like it would have been better to lengthen the story rather than throw in a multiplayer? Sure, it may be fun for a while, but in the end, I think I'd rather have another few hours in the awesome world of Rapture.
meledeo @ Jun 3rd 2009 5:07PM
Different development teams. So yes, it probably would have been better to have more single player, but adding the multiplayer isn't afffecting development time of the single player.
Dragod @ Jun 3rd 2009 5:15PM
Yes, but it's affecting the usable space on the disc. We already are limited to 4.7GBs on the 360 and these block buster titles are sure to use every available byte, and if several hundred megabytes are going to the multiplayer, that's being taken away from the singleplayer.
Matt the Catt @ Jun 3rd 2009 5:39PM
Actually, the games are on DVD9 discs which are somewhere around 9 GB i believe.
Velsar @ Jun 3rd 2009 4:56PM
RPG's and story-based games are NOT supposed to have multiplayer... sigh.
This is an insult, multiplayer ruins EVERYTHING, it allows the Xbox Live community to get its hands all over things, and it also breeds idiocy and immaturity.
I am insulted by this.
Heh @ Jun 3rd 2009 5:01PM
Well it isn't like they had much of a choice. Fans and (potential) customers alike all cried-out for a multiplayer mode, calling the game a "shortcoming" without it. And now look what it's got us. I don't know about you but I NEVER want to see a big daddy teabag someone...ever.
Danjer @ Jun 3rd 2009 5:04PM
Everyone that I talked to about the game never mentioned that the lack of a multiplayer mode made it a "shortcoming". I only heard people talk about how the single player story was so great that it didn't need a multiplayer mode. I loved the first game but this one is shaping up to be a disappointment that doesn't stay true to the original...
Velsar @ Jun 3rd 2009 5:04PM
The first time I saw a Spartan "Tea-Bag" was just stupid, it bespoke of pure idiocy.
IN any case, I NEVER ASKED for multiplayer... and I know no one who did aside from some idiots that were ignored... sigh.
Damned if you do, damned if you don't?
I don't accept that as an excuse.
Asok @ Jun 3rd 2009 5:54PM
Hey, if you don't like it, you don't have to play it. Nobody's forcing you to.
Velsar @ Jun 3rd 2009 5:55PM
They're forcing it into my game, instead of putting MORE content for story in it...
wicko @ Jun 3rd 2009 6:16PM
The development is by 2 seperate companies, 2K doing the campaign, DE doing the MP. It has no effect whatsoever on the campaign content.
Velsar @ Jun 3rd 2009 6:59PM
But it takes up space, space that COULD BE USED for more content.
Adriaan @ Jun 3rd 2009 7:00PM
You could always just...you know, ignore the multiplayer part of the game. It doesn't affect singleplayer, but everybody seems to think it does.
As has been mentioned before, it's a separate development studio that is working inline with 2K, so I wouldn't worry about it too much.
That being said, Bioshock 1 was an incredible game, but after beating it, there was little incentive to go back and play it save to experience the story on another difficulty level. No challenges, unlockables, or anything really worth your while except for achievements. Multiplayer isn't a bad thing, people, where the hell did this idea come from? I understand that there's anxiety over whether or not it'll live up to its predecessor, but let's be honest here, no sequel ever really captures the same magic that the original delivers. It may expand, improve, and even surpass the original in terms of gameplay elements and playability, but can you tell me with a straight face that when you first played Gears of War, or Halo, or Rock Band, you felt the same exact way upon playing a sequel to any of those franchises? I'm guessing probably not. Sure, you're having fun, maybe more fun than the original, but that innovative spark of a new IP experience just doesn't hit as hard.
So if you're seriously worried about multiplayer "ruining" the singleplayer aspect of the game, perhaps you should consider that you're simply getting more bang for your buck, and maybe (if Digital Extremes gets it right) that old tingly feeling again when you experience something radically different in the Bioshock world.
And that's my 2 cents. :)
Dowse @ Jun 6th 2009 8:47PM
You'd assume after one downvoting Velsar would stop talking crap.
bryan @ Jun 3rd 2009 5:04PM
is innervate the right word?
mellie_the_sprite @ Jun 3rd 2009 10:45PM
It's spelt 'innovate', actually. But I wouldn't worry about it. Not too many grammar nazis around here. They'd never survive.
ShortFuse @ Jun 4th 2009 5:40PM
Innervate - To stimulate to action. So, yes they used the correct word in the article.
Danjer @ Jun 3rd 2009 5:02PM
Oh man... I don't think I'm going to buy this game... Instead of the way it should work, as it has with the other games at E3, the more I hear about this game, the more I don't want to play it and want to just remember the original Bioshock while not acknowledging this game...
ShortFuse @ Jun 3rd 2009 5:02PM
I don't get how adding multiplayer to a game ruins it. You can easily avoid it by not playing multiplayer. I think it will be fun but if it isn't, I'll stick to the single player campaign.
Danjer @ Jun 3rd 2009 5:06PM
It's not the multiplayer that has the potential ruin it because, yes, that can be avoided. But, the gameplay that I have seen so far doesn't look innovative like the first game was. It is merely updating some of the plasmids and letting you play as a big daddy which comes off as a gimmick to me... I just don't think that the world of Rapture needs to revisited unless there is a prequel novel or something like that.
Bazooka Dave @ Jun 3rd 2009 5:19PM
Yah... I don't get that logic either. Okay...you don't like multiplayer. Okay, you wish they would have extended the game instead. I understand that complaint (even though I personally am excited for multiplayer) but to say that you won't get the game because of it, that's just weird.
Danjer @ Jun 3rd 2009 5:26PM
I'm actually a huge fan of multiplayer. I play Halo 3, Call of Duty 4, Gears of War 2 (sparingly) and a few others that aren't in the shooter genre but Bioshock just doesn't strike me as a game that lends itself to multiplayer. I could be wrong and maybe I will be. I'm not basing my "probably not going to purchase" based on the fact that this game has a multiplayer mode and I never said that.
I'm just saying that from reading about the multiplayer and what the modes are going to be like, it only adds to the pile of detractions that I'm seeing about this game. Ken Levine isn't involved, it's going back to Rapture with little changes, you play as a Big Daddy with constant "protect" or "escort" missions if you want to save the Little Sisters and multiple other problems that take the exploration fun out of Bioshock.
I'm not faulting the new team that's working on it and the point I was making is that maybe it wasn't such a good idea to revisit Rapture in the first place. The first game did everything you could ever want and I just don't see how Bioshock 2 can expand upon it and be equal or better than the original which is what I thought sequels were all about...
Eric E @ Jun 4th 2009 11:29AM
I for one hate it cause of trophies.
I like getting platinum, but i've never gotten a multiplayer trophy. So i can't get platinum in games that have multi. trophies. So i also dont bother getting all the story trophies.
its not that i couldn't get any, but theres no way im getting all multi trophies.
I REALLLY HOPE Uncharted 2 and Bioshock (my top 2 this fall) dont do this but i know they will. (itsn't the reward/level system enough? why have Multiplayer trophies)
Uncharted 1 w/ rewards/trophies/medals was a perfect system.
But i hate multiplayer and thats my opinion, if i like it maybe i would want/understand the trophy part. (you can get #1 in match but just playing when no one else is or whatever, story trophies are the same for everyone)
That said, Uncharted 2 Co-Op was quite fun (the 1 of 10 times i got matched w/ competent People and we finally beat it)
Competitive looks fun, but just isn't to me, not yet at least, but i'll keep trying cause i love uncharted that much. TF2 on the Orange box was the only one i played here and there.
thanks for letting me say my peace and since it is an unpopular opinion please vote down immediately....
bioadam @ Jun 3rd 2009 5:07PM
I gotta' say I was not a fan of COD4's perks system for multiplayer. Gameplay over Xbox-Live is hard enough for n00bs who don't know the maps, guns, and tricks as well as the seasoned vets. Throw in the perk system and you have multiplayer that really is not all that fun for new players. It's like posting a sign that says "new players need not apply" or "play Halo 3 instead".
Paul @ Jun 3rd 2009 5:36PM
i totally agree with you. the way cod4's multiplayer was structured was the main reason i never really got into it like everyone in the world did.......
Mike @ Jun 3rd 2009 5:17PM
I hope this turns out good.
Betaface @ Jun 3rd 2009 5:42PM
inFamous went well without . Just sayin'
343 Guilty Fart @ Jun 3rd 2009 5:23PM
So do we get to flash the bios in BiosShock?
The Alex @ Jun 3rd 2009 5:25PM
"We're sure the lot of you would rather hear about the intricacies of the single player campaign of BioShock 2 that we divined from our time with the game at E3 "
Really? I personally don't want to hear a thing about the single player campaign. I played the first game and it was amazing, and I have little doubt that this title will follow in it's footsteps in terms of graphics, gameplay and story.
Why do people insist on learning every detail about a game before they get a chance to play through it themselves? Oh well, really, it's their loss in the end.
I guess in a way, people are looking more for reassuances that the game is up to par with the first one, so in that respect, I can understand; but vague statements will work here, i.e. "It's as (good, better or worse) than the first game".
Just some rambling thoughts.
---
excited for multiplayer though :)
Joey @ Jun 3rd 2009 5:30PM
Dogs sing opera OR if Assasin's Creed tried to do multiplayer...
Maybe if we give them a biscuit or get Pavlov in here it'll round out nicely...
samik @ Jun 3rd 2009 5:34PM
The closest parallel is Uncharted (as a story driven single-player only title). Uncharted has done a pretty good job on its coop and multiplayer by all accounts - but seems like Bioshock has not done the move to multiplayer as well.
Geoffrey Sperl @ Jun 3rd 2009 5:41PM
Considering the multiplayer is supposed to take place before BioShock, I think this makes the most sense with the world as it stands.
Now, whether this Sinclair Solutions thing makes the most sense is another question. I would think that the multiplayer could easily start with a cinematic or recording recounting the New Year's Eve attack and how things began to dissolve in the city. Then, in team-based multiplayer, you have Ryan's team versus Atlas's (otherwise it would just be every man/woman for themselves) in a less-destroyed version of Rapture.
I would especially like it if the players get to experience being a Splicer of their choosing...
Snake Robot Podium @ Jun 3rd 2009 5:55PM
Bioshock was my first 360 game, so maybe that adds to me wanting multi-player in the first one. Mostly, i just wanted to use the plasmids on my friends.
Moe @ Jun 3rd 2009 5:58PM
seriously. As a splicer, you could jump really high, climb things and do other cool stuff that Jack never got around to doing. Wouldn't it make sense to have splicer deathmatch?
Hi My Name is Jerry @ Jun 3rd 2009 6:18PM
I'm excited! :D
nothing bad was said about it so this is good news. If it blows, oh well, there's a campaign to play.Everyone wins.
spritethirstman @ Jun 3rd 2009 6:24PM
Anyone else feel that a multiplayer 'dressing room' is focusing in the wrong direction?
birthday is 1990 @ Jun 3rd 2009 7:34PM
I wouldn't mind some horde mode...
Zach @ Jun 3rd 2009 9:07PM
CAN'T WAIT FOR NEW HALO GAMES COMING UP !!!!!
steven(PSN: small_hands) @ Jun 4th 2009 6:59AM
I dunno, Im not a huge multiplayer fan myself, never really got addicted to multiplayer experience (except MGS3 multiplayer and WoW but thats not the point) I think I'll most likely skip the multiplayer aspect. Still going to get this game though bioshock is one of my favourite games and I have faith that this will be a damn good game!
bryan @ Jun 4th 2009 8:28AM
umm....innervate is a real word. It means to supply or stimulate..
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&defl=en&q=define:innervate&ei=tL0nSu_MFduwtgeRxO3gBg&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title
J @ Jun 12th 2009 8:28AM
I think multiplayer is not important as i will get the ps3 after the ps4 comes out because the games will be cheap by then, just like the ps2 is now. And by then it will be a short time before multiplayer is dropped on many ps3 titles. Only then will the most popular multiplayer games be supported still.
Skree000 @ Aug 26th 2009 6:31PM
fearing MP is ruining the potential of SP because 'it takes up space on the disc that could otherwise be devoted to make SP more awesome' is silly. The only way to fill up a 9gb disc without expanding the production time is by using larger textures, 4096's for everything, etc. And the downside of that is memory usage and loadtimes go through the roof, and the consoles/pc performance will suffer astronomically. So yeah, you can fill the disc either thru oversized textures, or uncompressed videos... sure you can fill up the disc with bloated SP assets... but the overall experience improvement will be marginal at best. Filling up the space with an entirely new MP mode and all its trimmings is smart and efficient.
Once and for all guys, seriously... MP is NOT in any way detracting from the production or quality level of SP. 2k is doing its own thing with SP, half a continent away.