Gaming BioShock: Gameplay, Graphics & Performance

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Tim S, 30 Aug 2007.

  1. Tim S

    Tim S Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    8 Nov 2001
    Posts:
    18,879
    Likes Received:
    76
  2. Jamie

    Jamie ex-Bit-Tech code junkie

    Joined:
    12 Mar 2001
    Posts:
    8,180
    Likes Received:
    54
    Really gutted that the xbox 360 version is dx9, the water sounds like it looks much better in dx10
     
  3. DougEdey

    DougEdey I pwn all your storage

    Joined:
    5 Jul 2005
    Posts:
    13,933
    Likes Received:
    33
    Agree with Jamie. /me is upset.

    But they did completely redesign the water engine from the ground up, I can see why!
     
  4. wuyanxu

    wuyanxu still wants Homeworld 3

    Joined:
    15 Aug 2007
    Posts:
    10,536
    Likes Received:
    223
    PC gaming Cheesecake!

    nice to see you didn't get tricked by Bioshock's Vista Dx10-but-Dx10-is-diabled Dx9 mode
     
  5. Ramble

    Ramble Ginger Nut

    Joined:
    5 Dec 2005
    Posts:
    5,527
    Likes Received:
    26
    What sort of frames do you get with mid range stuff on HQ?
     
  6. Tim S

    Tim S Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    8 Nov 2001
    Posts:
    18,879
    Likes Received:
    76
    I recall the 8600 GTS was getting around 25-30fps (and was pretty choppy) at 1280x1024 with DX10. :)
     
  7. TomD22

    TomD22 New Member

    Joined:
    24 Oct 2006
    Posts:
    65
    Likes Received:
    0
    I wonder if you could provide a little detail on the effects of "force global lighting"?

    I've had it off since I read at some point (I forget where, possibly the widescreengamers forum) that this actually reduces the lighting quality - forces static global lights as opposed to having dynamic lights, which would make sense actually seeing as it's disabled by default even if you choose the highest graphics quality settings. But your review suggests that it's better to turn it on. Just curious who's right, and whether you investigated the difference in-game between the two :)
     
  8. Ramble

    Ramble Ginger Nut

    Joined:
    5 Dec 2005
    Posts:
    5,527
    Likes Received:
    26
    That's correct, global lighting makes the game look worse, but it does improve performance.
     
  9. Tim S

    Tim S Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    8 Nov 2001
    Posts:
    18,879
    Likes Received:
    76
    I actually felt the game looked better with it turned on and I saw lower performance with it turned on too. :)

    Image quality is all subjective of course, but during the bits I tested, it was more intensive with it on than off.
     
  10. GamingHobo

    GamingHobo New Member

    Joined:
    20 Apr 2007
    Posts:
    139
    Likes Received:
    0
    Frankly I'm more than happy to sacrifice a few water effects for the 360 version. I still think it's the definitive version of the game, i.e. the way the game was designed to be played - as evidenced by the balance of difficulty. Moreover, if the original FOV was the one the developers decided on then that's the one I want to use, not the one decided upon by some widescreen zealots who got themselves in a tizzy because it's not what *they* wanted.
     
  11. CardJoe

    CardJoe Freelance Journalist

    Joined:
    3 Apr 2007
    Posts:
    11,343
    Likes Received:
    292
    "The way it was meant to be played?" Don't get me started on this arguement again, mr Nvidia :p

    FPS games naturally lend themselves to a PC, it is what the ex-looking glass team has experience in, it's what previous games they have done have been on (like System Shock 2, which was very similar to BioShock).

    However, given that there are optimisations for the game under different platforms and that the game is still enjoyable under both, I'd take it that BioShock didn't really have an intended primary platform. It was made for both. Saying it was made for the 360 only implies that the PC version was an afterthought for the developers and that it gives a lesser experience to the PC version, which is blatantly not true.

    Don't make me come over there...(really, I just had lunch and I can't be arsed to walk around my desk right now...)
     
  12. Bindibadgi

    Bindibadgi Tired. Forever tired.

    Joined:
    12 Mar 2001
    Posts:
    36,303
    Likes Received:
    417
    /strokes ex-looking glass employees.
     
  13. kenco_uk

    kenco_uk I unsuccessfully then tried again

    Joined:
    28 Nov 2003
    Posts:
    9,696
    Likes Received:
    308
    Last para - page 6 - "does a good job of creating the a realistic-looking shadow" - omit 'a'.

    Nice review :) I wonder if there'll be a re-release of the game without securom in the near future?
     
  14. CardJoe

    CardJoe Freelance Journalist

    Joined:
    3 Apr 2007
    Posts:
    11,343
    Likes Received:
    292
    NO! *slaps bindi*

    THEY'RE MINE!
     
  15. Bindibadgi

    Bindibadgi Tired. Forever tired.

    Joined:
    12 Mar 2001
    Posts:
    36,303
    Likes Received:
    417
    Oi! Respect your elders!

    /bundles them into a bag and takes them home.
     
  16. xion

    xion New Member

    Joined:
    23 Aug 2006
    Posts:
    165
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree that the world detail is pretty damn good, But there seem to be some pretty big oversights... Anyone else think the NPC's ("Actors") seem, well, rough... for want of a better word, the detail is really lacking there, and the ragdoll dead NPC's twitch like there're leaves in the wind. The distortion effect of the water/window barrier is so in your face false it takes the shine off the obvious effort used throughout the rest of the levels. Dont get me wrong i think the concept is great, and will be playing this for some time, it just didn't feel polished.

    Perhaps it was all the hype, but i was expecting my lowly e6400/2gb/x1950pro to run home crying instead of playing at max with decent FPS. (hey not complaining!) although not all of us have a 30" tft to play it on... 1280*1024 will have to do me 'till funds allow ::p
     
  17. Tim S

    Tim S Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    8 Nov 2001
    Posts:
    18,879
    Likes Received:
    76
    Thanks for picking that one up... one we missed :blush:

    I dunno, we can only hope I guess :)
     
  18. Ramble

    Ramble Ginger Nut

    Joined:
    5 Dec 2005
    Posts:
    5,527
    Likes Received:
    26
    I wouldn't say in your face but I can't recall water every actually behaving like that.
     
  19. CardJoe

    CardJoe Freelance Journalist

    Joined:
    3 Apr 2007
    Posts:
    11,343
    Likes Received:
    292
    NOOOOOOOOOOOoooooo! :waah:
     
  20. Seraphim Works

    Seraphim Works New Member

    Joined:
    18 Apr 2007
    Posts:
    167
    Likes Received:
    3
    Curiosity and lack of desire to download an enormous demo on a 0.5mb connection means I'm forced to ask this.
    Has anyone got any idea how this will play with the following at 1680 x 1050?

    x1950pro
    2gb
    *mutters something about a p4 at 3.2ghz and scurries away*

    Is it worth my while, or should I just wait until I finally get hold of a new mobo and a q6600 (Finally, CAD rendering won't be a mission)?
     
Tags: Add Tags

Share This Page