Bioshock Infinite Catch-All

Scratched wrote:

I just think it's a lame way to justify a game being later being a good thing. There are better ways to justify it, such as 'it would suck if we released it earlier'.

I don't think it's a way of justifying it, just a casual comment on the state of getting older and you have more things competing for what little free time you have. For example, BI was originally releasing hot on the heels of Borderlands 2. I can't imagine I'm the only person who would be interrupting their BL2 progress for BI. So for me, moving the game away from the Fall means I have more time to play the games I'll have recently bought before getting distracted by a hot new shiny thing.

Also, like ccesarano said, February is a lot less packed time of year so they can release BI at a time when people are still recovering from the holiday gaming binge. Remember how everyone was pretty much playing Skyrim from November through February/March? There's a literal dead zone of releases between Oct/November through February/March.

Malor wrote:
perhaps not everyone has tons to play.

Honestly, with Steam sales and such, you'd kind of have to be living under a rock, or be extremely impoverished, not to have more games than you have time for.

One of the truest statements I have seen you make:)

Seriously, even as a console gamer I have a huge backlog, mostly of games that I purchased for under 10$.

A couple of sites are suggesting that this is being done to open up the holiday season for GTA V. Interesting prognositication, but just that; there's no proof behind any of it at this point.

Kid Charlemagne wrote:

A couple of sites are suggesting that this is being done to open up the holiday season for GTA V. Interesting prognositication, but just that; there's no proof behind any of it at this point.

I don't buy it. 2K's got a pretty packed schedule for the end of 2012 already, and GTA V wasn't announced that long ago. There's also the media blackout on BI that's gone into effect, including being pulled from E3, which would suggest some sort of overhaul could be going down. You don't just close up shop on a game that's been on a PR tear up to a major gaming convention and then go dark without a major reason. I know they say it's for polishing reasons, and as seen with Diablo III, which can take a long time, but I wouldn't be terribly surprised if it turns out they're integrating some newer build of the Unreal Engine. Epic's been making a bit of a fuss lately with talk about a new version so I could see Irrational integrating some of the new features into their build much like they did with BioShock 1.

Plus, R* hasn't released a game in the Fall season since the PS2 era. GTAIV, RDR, LA Noire and Max Payne 3 are all Spring/Summer releases.

Duke Nukem Forever

Bioshock Infinite

How about we avoid names that suggest an extensive timeline, Levine?

MisterStatic wrote:

Duke Nukem Forever

Bioshock Infinite

How about we avoid names that suggest an extensive timeline, Levine?

Yeah! Also Half Life 3...oh wait.

Nevin73 wrote:
MisterStatic wrote:

Duke Nukem Forever

Bioshock Infinite

How about we avoid names that suggest an extensive timeline, Levine?

Yeah! Also Half Life 3...oh wait.

Half Life Indefinite

Yeah, I'm honestly fine with it coming in February -- as others are saying, it should be a nice slow month, great time to get some Bioshocking in. I'd rather have it sooner, but it's not the bitter disappointment it might have been, say, five or ten years ago.

Nevin73 wrote:
MisterStatic wrote:

Duke Nukem Forever

Bioshock Infinite

How about we avoid names that suggest an extensive timeline, Levine?

Yeah! Also Half Life 3...oh wait.

Well, half a lifetime can certainly be an extensive length of time, technically speaking, of course.

Why justify it at all? Why are we owed games to be released in some previously announced time frame?

TheGameguru wrote:

Why justify it at all? Why are we owed games to be released in some previously announced time frame?

Presumably because everything that's muttered past the lips of anyone in the games industry is a binding contract. Right?

TheGameguru wrote:

Why justify it at all? Why are we owed games to be released in some previously announced time frame?

Because if you throw out made up features, fact and dates just to build hype, you quickly become Randy Pitchford and your marketing won't be worth $#!+.

Personally, IG can take as much time as they want. They've proven that they know how to polish a game, so they deserve the same trust as more chronical cases of Morbus "when it's done" like Blizzard.

Parallax Abstraction wrote:

It's delayed until February 26th, 2013 now. Was super stoked to play it this year but for this game, they can take as much time as they need to get it right.

That's right before my birthday, good justification to get it as a present.

Luggage wrote:

Personally, IG can take as much time as they want. They've proven that they know how to polish a game, so they deserve the same trust as more chronical cases of Morbus "when it's done" like Blizzard.

That is something. With Bioshock it seems Irrational earned their way into the club of developers who can get the time they need on a project when they ask for it, and 2K seem to be a publisher sympathetic to longer term goals rather than just getting a $60 box out the door ASAP. (This is assuming that BI ends up good)

SallyNasty wrote:

I just hope they aren't waiting so they can add multiplayer:(

*Wibble*

Take with dose of salt, but if true I'm really crossing fingers this is something Irrational wants to do and not something 2K is requesting for another bullet-point on the box.

Luggage wrote:
TheGameguru wrote:

Why justify it at all? Why are we owed games to be released in some previously announced time frame?

Because if you throw out made up features, fact and dates just to build hype, you quickly become Peter Molyneux and your marketing won't be worth $#!+.

Fixed in the direction I thought you were going.

shoptroll wrote:

*Wibble*

That website's design is so horrible it made my eyes feel wobbly and I couldn't even bare to try reading the article.

I'll be honest, I did enjoy the multiplayer of Bioshock 2 despite the fact that it felt like a completely different game than the first. It was CLEARLY made by a totally different team. But I liked that, and my biggest regret of being a solo-player style gamer first and multiplayer second is that I don't get more time with stuff like Bioshock 2.

That said, the best multiplayer they could have done was a style of Horde mode where everyone had to defend the Little Sister from all kinds of A.I. opponents. Too bad they didn't do that. I doubt Infinite will have similar enough mechanics for that sort of thing to work.

Either way, multiplayer will be more of a side dish to the real reason I'm playing the game: single player entree.

ccesarano wrote:

That website's design is so horrible it made my eyes feel wobbly and I couldn't even bare to try reading the article.

Haha. It's Blues. They've been around since we were diapers (and haven't changed their design in over a decade) :p

Either way, multiplayer will be more of a side dish to the real reason I'm playing the game: single player entree.

That's my opinion as well, it's just my usual concern about whether or not it's a good use of their resources. As in, was Mass Effect 3's multiplayer worth the amount of time spent on it? Are people still playing that a month later?

If they're doing something interesting with the multiplayer I'm sure it'll be worth checking out. I'm just worried/cynical that it's one of those "we need multiplayer for stickiness" things that CEOs/marketing like to tout.

Slightly bummed (was really looking forward to the game). I'm happy to wait longer for a better experience, however.

Put me in the Slightly Relieved camp...this fall is looking to be much easier on my wallet than it often is. The only for-sure buy will be AC3, so maybe I can actually make some progress on my enormous backlog.

Happytime Harry wrote:

Half Life Indefinite

Awesome.

f*cking multiplayer.

I think it's the first time I can remember the three games I'm most looking forward to have all been delayed.

Bioshock Infinite: October -> February
Space Rangers HD: A War Apart: September -> December
King's Bounty: Warriors of the North: April/May -> June 24

BadKen wrote:

f*cking multiplayer.

I had an amusing image of Mr. Levine popping in here and saying "Guys, now I do love GamersWithJobs, so I'll tip you off on a secret; the single-player-only component of Infinite is going to be released in October for $40. That's your campaign with cutscene, dialog, the whole works. Then, the multiplayer-enabled features (leaderboards, dress-up dolls, achievements, challenges, co-op, deathmatch, hide the sausage, capture the flag, king of the hill, trophies) will be released for an additional $60 in February. I'm Ken Levine!"

Puce Moose wrote:

I think it's the first time I can remember the three games I'm most looking forward to have all been delayed.

Bioshock Infinite: October -> February
Space Rangers HD: A War Apart: September -> December
King's Bounty: Warriors of the North: April/May -> June 24

BadKen wrote:

f*cking multiplayer.

I had an amusing image of Mr. Levine popping in here and saying "Guys, now I do love GamersWithJobs, so I'll tip you off on a secret; the single-player-only component of Infinite is going to be released in October for $40. That's your campaign with cutscene, dialog, the whole works. Then, the multiplayer-enabled features (leaderboards, dress-up dolls, achievements, challenges, co-op, deathmatch, hide the sausage, capture the flag, king of the hill, trophies) will be released for an additional $60 in February. I'm Ken Levine, Bitches!"

FTFY

I think the man has his tag if he makes gets up to the requisite post count
(Oh, and if you decide to use my idea, Mr. Levine, I meant an extra $20 for a *total* of $60. Yeah.)

Puce Moose wrote:

I had an amusing image of Mr. Levine popping in here and saying "Guys, now I do love GamersWithJobs, so I'll tip you off on a secret; the single-player-only component of Infinite is going to be released in October for $40. That's your campaign with cutscene, dialog, the whole works. Then, the multiplayer-enabled features (leaderboards, dress-up dolls, achievements, challenges, co-op, deathmatch, hide the sausage, capture the flag, king of the hill, trophies) will be released for an additional $60 in February. I'm Ken Levine!"

If there is a mode called "hide the sausage" it might be the first time I ever play online multiplayer in a console game.

whoops

I'm not sure if this was covered, but it looks like they dropped Stephen Russell, the guy who voiced Garrett, in favor of Troy Baker. Did anyone else notice this? I thought the voice in the full 15-minute gameplay trailer must be a stand-in, but from the Wiki page, it looks like that's going to be the real deal.

If this was covered, my apologies, I've deliberately tried to keep my exposure low on this game.

Huh? It's been Troy Baker all along. Stephen Russell was just involved in early voice work sessions.

Ohhh, okay, I thought he was the real choice.

When I heard about MP being possible, I sent Levine a tweets asking them to make all plasmids available from the beginning. I got the impression there wasn't much of a BS2 MP community, which, presumably, made it hard to unlock things.