Talk:BioShock/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

setting

Why does this game look more like the 1920s than the early 1960s? Please message me. I am puzzled by this. --Sp0 (talk) 07:35, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

  Because the war broke out in 1958, and before then it was still under 

the sea, making interior design a little hard to change. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.137.93.129 (talk) 17:32, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Ken Levine is Creative Director

Hi I noticed a major error in the Bioshock page but being new to editing Wikipedia (this is my first edit ever)I am not sure how to go about changing it. The error is that Ken Levine is stated as the designer of Bioshock when actually he is the creative director of Bioshock in partnership with John Chey of Irrational Australia (sorry 2k games...ha) What this means is that he worked with teams of designers, artists, and programmers in both Boston and Canberra Australia to bring Bioshock together. He was also responsible for story and character dialogs. While designers were reliant on him to shape the game he was not a designer per se. If you look at the Bioshock credits (Title page, click credits) you will notice people credited as designers. These people (Bill, Dean, Alex, Jorden, Jono and more) worked as a team to design the game. They should be the ones credited with design. Bioshock was the work of over 100 people with the design team numbering around fifteen people. No man, not even Ken Levine, can do it alone! ProseHorse 17:19, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Edit to lead

I've been bold and added the following paragraph to the lead section. Feel free to hack it about a bit, or revert and discuss (WP:BRD).

The game received overwhelmingly positive early reviews, particularly in mainstream press where its sophisticated, "morality-based" storyline, its immersive powers and its Ayn Rand-based dystopian setting were all singled out for praise. Following early reviews, the share price of the publisher, Take-Two, increased 20%.[1]

I notice that this article adopts the convention of quoting sources even in the lead section, but I haven't yet added the sources (we can do that if we agree on a form of words) although the information is all sourced in the interior of the article. --Tony Sidaway 02:12, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Get sources first, then add content. You should know better. It's been deleted. Jeeny 05:41, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

The "early reviews" is questioning. Did later reviews give terrible scores? (I know they didn't, just stating why). I may consider a rewrite as:

The game received overwhelmingly positive reviews, singling out its sophisticated, "morality-based" storyline, immersiveness and its Ayn Rand-based dystopian setting. BioShock sold nearly 1.5 million units in the first two weeks of release, helping to boost Take Two's share price by 20%."

At least, that's my take on it. --Masem 05:45, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

In response to Jeeny, I can only repeat that the sources are all in the interior (I added them myself in these edits: [2] [3] [4]).

In response to Masem, yes that's just me being nitpicky. The WSJ article that mentions the 20% hike in Take Two's share price says this happened a week after early reviews that gave the game a 97% rating on metacritic, and then goes on to say that as reviews have accrued this rating has fallen to 96%. They're talking about the first week of release here, so "early" is a nitpicky but correct word to use there. --Tony Sidaway 17:17, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Saying that Bioshock has a "sophisticated" morality storyline is a very odd way of putting it - I really think that the choice between being either a) a good guy or b) a bad guy is not really indicative of sophisticated morality at all and its use is an implicit insult to games like those from Bioware that have attempted to broaden the impact of moral choices in a game. I think the term should be omitted. Sheering 20:50, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I think it would be reasonable to remove the word "sophisticated". --Tony Sidaway 23:43, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Ken Levine

I noticed Ken Levine being cited and quoted throughout the article but had to go to his Wikipedia article to find out who he is (lead designer for 2K). I've added a phrase identifying him to the lead section. It should be either there or (second preference) in the earliest mention of him in the article. I prefer the lead section because of his obvious prominence in the post-launch phase as a spokesperson for the development team, and the fact that burying the identification in a single section would force the user to search the whole article to find out who he is. --Tony Sidaway 17:36, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Noir?

Is this a Film noir style game? Does it worth mentioning? --Varnav 06:46, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Search the reviews. How many refer to it as noir? --Tony Sidaway 11:30, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Update

Just noting that in the part about how the character learns about the rise and fall of rapture, it meantions recordings but fails to talk about ADAM imprints. Which are a visual recording that tells the story as well as recordings. It should be included in the arcitle as well.29/9/07 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ralon silver (talk • contribs) 03:38, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Consider it done. CABAL 17:19, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Possible External Character Influence

I was wondering if anyone else familiar with Stephen King's work noticed the similarities between the little sisters in the game and his story The Little Sisters of Eluria. I was thinking maybe it should be referenced if enough people agree with me. Shaowstrike 12:19, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

It sounds like a good idea. The question is, have any reliable sources noticed the similaritites? If so, we can quote them. If not, it would be original research to make the connection. Sheffield Steel^talk_stalk 13:30, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

FA?

I have done some cleanup work, added some more refs, and added some more content, and I think this might be ready for featured status? Comments? Regards, -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 12:43, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Jumping the gun a little? Consider peer review and nominating for good article status first?Rehevkor 13:37, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

In addition, it'll fail stability, until the 2007 GotY awards come out which BioShock is expected to take several. Also, we have to make sure said patches clear up the cited problems (outside of PS2.0 support) to see if there's any fallout from that. --MASEM 13:54, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm, you make good points. When do those awards come out? -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 23:32, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Some do it December, some do it January or later. Okami is still getting awards, for example. If you are really itching, here's my suggestion:

1. Get the peer review, that'll take a couple weeks to get input
2. Go for a GA, making sure you note that you expect that Awards will expand. This will at least give the article a more critical eye than what peer review does. That'll take to November, likely.
3. Sit and wait for such awards to roll in and add them; after the "big" publicatins (IGN, 1up, Gamestop) announce their end of year stuff, get it into the article and assuming we're pass a GA, go for the FA; more awards might roll in but as long as you show the approach of how they would be added is stable, they'll accept that (articles can be edited after an FA, of course, they just shouldn't be expecting any massive edits).

--MASEM 01:52, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

GA pass. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 08:00, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Timeline Discrepency?

How can the game take place in 1960 when the official FAQ ( http://www.bioshock-online.com/faq/#about ) claims that the game is set 10 years after society collapsed? According to this article, Andrew Ryan didn't assassinate Fontaine until 1958 and the riots and civil war began after that. So presumably, the player arrives at Rapture in the late 60s... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.13.112.144 (talk) 01:40, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

First, I don't believe that's "official" as the site is not 2K games, I may be wrong. However, secondly, the FAQ hasn't been updated since late 2006, so a lot of the story could have changed between now and then, including the timeline. We DO know in game, the riots happened at the very start of 1959, and Jack crashes in 1960 via an onscreen title. --MASEM 01:48, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Small Error

Gameplay section 5th Paragraph. "Electroball", should be "Electrobolt". I can't make the change myself due to protection. Symmetrical 08:26, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Reception/Sequel?

Should info on a sequel but a sub section of reception? While the basis for such is one the games popularity it seems to me that any future developments would be apart of... well development or, like most other articles, beings its own section (small as it is still). Stabby Joe 18:24, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

See your point, but the statement itself is attached to the game's positive reception. It'll probably move at some point (perhaps even to the development section of the game's eventual sequel). Does it need its own sub-heading? I'd just have it following on as the finishing touch of the reception.Someone another 13:51, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

where are the characters list

can someone please tell me what happened to the character's list? It was there a few hours ago. If there's a logical reason why somebody moved it, could you please tell me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sanji 1990 (talk • contribs) 23:54, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Moved to a see also section of the article. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 08:53, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Do we really need a characters list? The current plot / setting section does a good job of identifying the mains ones, the others are colorful background. Please see notability and fictional notability. --MASEM 12:45, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, I see where you are coming from. Maybe an AFD nom would not go amiss...? -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 10:37, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, the sooner it's sorted out the better, what with the GA review and (hopefully) the article going for FA. Someone another 13:46, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Locked

I've locked this again. It is taking a bombarding at least every day; obviously its a popular target being such a well-known game and all. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 10:49, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Newest update

I decided to play Bioshock today after playing The Orange Box for the last week or so and noticed there was an update available... any word on what this does? I thought at first it maybe remedied the frame skipping issue (wishful thinking, mayhaps), or possible allowed you to change the aspect ratio, but I can't find evidence to support either.

The update was quite small (in terms of download time required) so I guess it's not much, whatever it's supposed to do.142.162.84.23 04:25, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

GA pass

Face it, it's easily a GA - it's virtually a FA, it just needs a bit of copyediting and it could pass FAC. One thing that does bum me a bit is the use of two or more sources on one point. For example "The game received overwhelmingly positive reviews,[13][14] particularly in mainstream press where its "morality-based" storyline, immersive powers and Ayn Rand-inspired dystopian setting were all singled out for praise.[15][16][17]" - One sentence does NOT need five sources, especially in the lead. The lead shouldn't have any sources! Other than this, it's a GA, so I've passed it. Well done, and good luck at FAC. Dihydrogen Monoxide (H₂O) 07:16, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 07:33, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

hay if there not bad why remove them. it just means we make sure were right before writing (mostly) (Ralon silver 23:19, 3 November 2007 (UTC))

Metropolis

I seem to remember someone commenting on the similarities between the art style of the game and Fritz Lang's film Metropolis (could simply be the 'art deco' connection though). Has anyone else seen this? Or did I imagine it? --Thaddius 14:17, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I would say that the connection is a little loose, with the similarities between the two stemming more from similar premise on steampunk science fiction than upon BioShock borrowing any intrinsic aesthetic elements from Metropolis. (Washboardplayer (talk) 05:24, 17 November 2007 (UTC))

Well, assuming I didn't imagine reading this in a magazine, it's verifiable so it wouldn't matter if someone felt the connection was loose. Metropolis was en embodiment of the futurist aesthetic, which Bioshock borrows heavily from. I'm not trying to start adding original research to the article. I simply remember reading an article where someone made this connection and was wondering if anyone else had read it. If the article does turn up and it gets integrated into the wikipedia Bioshock article, you can criticize it all you want. --Thaddius (talk) 13:55, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Game of the year edition?

In the rumor mill of EGM, they mentioned that the exclusive features that were going to be in the PS3 version were going into a game of the year edition of bioshock. Any one hear anything else.75.69.70.83

Aldous Huxley More Influential? (refferences to other works)

The article states that bioshock was influenced greatly by Orwell's 1984 but I cannot help but notice that it seems to have much more in common with many works by Aldous Huxley as well as containing at least one direct refference to his work. A list of said contentions is provided below and I would greatly appreciate any additions.

1. The notion of the main characters conditioning and history is quite similar to the process in Huxley's Brave New World.

2. At one point the character Fontaine speaks the line "Crome yellow" as this phrase is used to and incapacitate the main character. Chrome Yellow was in fact Aldous Huxley's first novel and the reference to it seems to suggest a large dgree of influence from his writing.

3. The ever important drugs/currency ADAM and EVE resemble the drug soma from Huxley's Brave New World

I am certain there exist other refferences as well, but these are the only three I remember in detail.

I would like to have this added to the article but cannot do it myself due to page restrictions.

Thanks for listening.

Gargamel23 02:32, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I think you may be reading a bit into the game that is not there. 1) I think the background and process metioned for the conditioning fits that used in a LOT of dystopian fiction. 2) I believe that the phrase that Fontaine uses is "Code Yellow", not "Crome Yellow". 3) Adam and Eve did not induce dreams or psychosis as the primary effect. They are a tool for genetic modification which appears to have some side effects. True, the side effects were exploited by some, but that was not the original source of the discovery. Slavlin 19:51, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Huxley wrote at least three utopian or dystopian novels: Brave New World, Ape and Essence, and Island. I would be surprised if Levine had not read at least the first two, which are both dystopian fiction. Whether he has carried conscious references to Huxley into this game (as he certainly had done in the case of Ayn Rand's writings) is another matter. --Tony Sidaway 20:16, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Criticism section

Regarding the recent additions (the "why should your brother play for free" comment) to this section...

I am very concerned about how this part of the article is coming across - mind you, I am passionate about the game and the problems with various issues in this section worry me from the standpoint of the future of gaming. However, as a Wikipedia editor, without the present additions, the section is very anti-2K games, mainly due to their lack of response for some of the topics, but at best, it at most a neutral POV. The current additions, which basically call out someone that claimed to be a 2K employee that basically insulted people is a valid concern, but I think it goes into too much pleading on the user side, and really a non-neutral POV; in addition, it's basically the fact that its tangentially related to BioShock - yes, it came about because BioShock had the copyprot, but its more an issue about copyprot in general than a specific technical issue with BioShock - that I don't think it needs to be stated in as much detail as presently provided.

I argue for the inclusion of this Criticism section, but I've also had to edit it a couple times to drastically cut down to remove much of the POV biasing that had been there. I think its fair to leave references of this incident as part of the whole SeceROM issue, but I'd edit away the specific mention of what happened in the forum (as I've already had to do with the widescreen vs full screen issue that started with a forum comment as well.). --MASEM 16:39, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

A few things, in no particular order (but numbered all the same):

1. The section is supposed to document criticisms of the game, and the per-user activation is one thing that was (and still is) criticized. This criticism is due in no small part to the controversy that surrounded the aforementioned forum post and the coverage it received. The forum post itself is notable, whereas the numerous posts relating to the widescreen issue were all generic and received no specific coverage themselves. (Other than "numerous users complaining about blah blah blah...")
2. If anything the inclusion of the forum post and the company response is more neutral and non-POV than any of the other issues mentioned in the section; while it does show the user side of things, it also gives "time" to the company's viewpoint as well, specifically that they aren't trying to extort money from the user base and that such viewpoints are not acceptable as far as they're concerned.
3. You mention BioShock and "copyprot" as separate things, but this issue is specific to the activation scheme used and orchestrated by 2K Games specifically for this title; it is completely separate from SecuROM and very specific to BioShock, as I know of no other games with this problem.

That's all -- Y|yukichigai (_ramble argue ^check) 17:13, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

The coverage that you are using is from only somewhat notable sources - the other issues have been covered by reliable gaming sources so verified by them, while the core of the issue is a forum post, and forums should not really be used as amin support articles. This is not to say that the whole "each user must activate" problem isn't significant - the insignificant part is that a questionable post by someone claiming to be a 2K employee statement and the subsequent commenting on that person is really getting too much into the details as that points to no resolution of the "each user must activate" issue. What we should be adding to source this is how this is different from other games out there - if it is unique to BioShock, there should be a good reliable source that editorializes on that point (I haven't found one in a casaul search). Again, talking about the contractor/forum post is distracting from the issue, and for WP, we want to talk about why "activation per user" is a big deal for gamers. --MASEM 02:46, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

inuniverse

Perhaps the person who added the inuniverse tag would like to clarify precisely what the problem was? Rehevkor (talk) 23:38, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Copy protection/DRM

Mere minutes after I fixed the error in the article claiming that SecuROM was copy protection "software", it was reverted [5]. According to wikipeida, copy protection is a hardware-related protection, while DRM includes software. Moreover, I'm not aware of SecuROM preventing actually physical copying of discs, I'm only aware of the software related online activation issues it entails. Additionally, the online activation Manages the amount of times one has the Rights to install their Digital product. In short, I would encourage those wishing to revert my edit to do basic research on the terms "copy protection" and "Digital Rights Management" before making an accusation that an established editor is trying to insert their Opinion or Original Research. Honestly, I'm shocked this article was able to get featured with such a basic error. -Aknorals 06:51, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

If we are going off what other WP articles state:

• SecuROM is CD/DVD copy protection product. Additionally, SecuROM doesn't prevent copying of disks but does prevent those disks from being used to actually launch the game -- that is, it uses low-level hardware API to check special data density published on the original media that a user-published disk cannot achieve.
• copy protection lists both hardware and software approaches, specifically calling out Steam's method.

SecuROM is "software" (stuff executed on the processor, no physical device beyond what one would expect) that prevents the use of copies (copy restriction) through both hardware and software means. Without going into the specifics and providing the Wikilinks for securom and copy protection, the article is fine stating that SecuROM is "software" (if the game came with a dongle, that's the only way it changes to "hardware").--MASEM 14:36, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

I had no diagreement with the idea that SecROM is software. In fact, calling it software was one of the things that disagreed with the opening section of the copy protection article. There appears to be conflicts inside Wikipedia with regards to the definitions of DRM and copy protection. The fact that promoters of DRM have the habit of calling everything copy protection, regardless of what controls are put in place, further muddies the waters here. The fact we can't trust the corporate parties involved to give honest information (see also: sony rootkit) doesn't help either.

"The term is also often related to and/or confused with the concept of digital rights management. Digital rights management is a more general term because it includes all sorts of management of works, including copy restrictions. Copy protection may include measures that are not digital. A more likely description to this is "technical protection measures" (TPM), which is often defined as the use of technological tools in order to restrict the use and/or access to a work." As much of the controversy in this case was related to one's inability to reinstall the game infinite times, and the reliance on external servers for activations, rather than actual prevention of copied discs from being read - as well as the fact that DRM is the more general term - I would think that DRM would be the better term here. -Aknorals 01:07, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

In all SecuROM materials I could find, the company describes SecuROM, the product, as a "copy control solution" or a "copy protection system". The only context it ever uses the term Digital Rights Management is when describing the features of the product. i.e.

SecuROM version 7 and above now offers several DRM features. This provides a protection that can be customized to suit each market’s needs. The following DRM options are available [...]

It's pretty clear that the only primary source for this issue considers its technology to be copy-protection, which has recently started to include DRM features. Aknorals, I understand your issues with Copy Protection being a subset of DRM and all that, but don't you agree that when classifying something in a taxonomy, it's best to use the most specific term? For example, the article classifies Bioshock as a "first-person shooter video game". If I were to replace that phrase with "Computer software," it would still be accurate, and it would be more general, but it wouldn't be as descriptive. So unless you have a reason why the less specific term DRM is more descriptive, as well as a citation to back your claims that is more authoritative than a primary source, I think we should stick with 'Copy Protection'. references: [6], [7] -₪-Hemidemisemiquaver (talk) 18:15, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Primary sources are only considered reliable about a subject to a certain extent. It is secondary and tertiary sources where we get reliable information concerning what categories subjects fall into. For example, the folks at CoolWebSearch will assert up and down that they merely provide "affiliate services", but anybody else will tell you they make spyware. Similarly, it's not hard to see why the company defines SecuRom as copy protection, as many users find the term DRM off-putting. -- Y|yukichigai (_ramble argue ^check) 22:28, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

If you look at their factsheet I linked to, which is targeted at potential customers, not end-users, they proudly make many references to DRM, so it's unlikely that they're too worried about backlash from being associated with the term. I agree with the fact that CoolWebSearch is going to be deceptive about what business its in, but SecuROM makes no bones about their business. Users hate them, and that's a selling point for many publishers. So IMO the comparison with spyware vendors is not apt, since your argument rests on the assumption that they have something to hide. -₪-Hemidemisemiquaver (talk) 23:39, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

"Articles should rely on reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy." -WP:SOURCES // SecuROM's site is not a third-part source, nor can it be considered reliable (sales pitches aren't reliable), nor do they have a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. I'll have dig it up, but I'm pretty sure most of the third-party, reliable sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy were calling it DRM. [8] [9] [10] [11]

"If consumers even know there's a DRM, what it is, and how it works, we've already failed." -Peter Lee // Whether SecuROM considers the version of their product put in BioShock to be primarily copy-protection or DRM is largely irrelevant, as even the company admits it contains DRM. These DRM features was the cause of the controversy, not the copy-protection features.

"The technology in question is an example of Digital Restrictions Management (DRM)--technology designed to restrict the public. Describing it as "copyright protection" puts a favorable spin on a mechanism intended to deny the public the exercise of those rights which copyright law has not yet denied them." --Richard Matthew Stallman // Whether Wikipedia uses the same terminology as it's sources is unimportant, as it is only important that Wikipedia use terminology that agrees with itself.

Now, if you want to nitpick, you can say "BioShock for the PC (both the retail version and that available through Steam) utilizes DRM-containing SecuROM software, and requires internet activation to complete installation." or whatever, but it is important to correctly convey to the reader the fact that the DRM features were what caused the controversy. -Aknorals (talk) 02:04, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

<un-dent> Just to butt in here, but the premise of this section seems incorrect. The statement According to wikipeida, copy protection is a hardware-related protection is wrong on many levels. Firstly, wikipedia states that copy protection can be hardware- or media-based. Secondly, copy protection can in fact be implemented in many ways including pure software or data-driven approaches, although the latter have fallen out of favour recently following advances in data duplication technologies. The term "copy protection" is significantly older than DRM and - given that the purpose of SecuROM is not to restrict the user's rights but to prevent unauthorised copies of the game being played - it is a more appropriate term, particularly since this in the context of a video game, not film or music. Of course, if there are reliable sources that say "SecuROM is DRM not copy protection and the DRM aspect caused a controversy" then go ahead and cite them. Sheffield Steel^talk_stalk 04:50, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

X-Plays review

X-play gave it a 5 out of 5 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.163.161.227 (talk) 21:26, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Hardware criticsm?

BioShock was also criticized for not supporting Pixel shader 2.0b video cards (such as the Radeon X800/X850), which were considered high-end graphics cards in 2004–2005, and accounted for about 24% of surveyed hardware collected through Valve's Steam platform at the time of BioShock's release. User efforts to create a Pixel shader 2.0-compatible version of the software have met with some success,[113] but 2K Games has issued no statements regarding possible Pixel shader 2.0 support being added by an official patch.[114]

Is this even a criticism? I smell a scent of original research trying validate this "problem," notably the statements: "considered high end graphics cards in 2004 - 2005" and "accounted for about 24% of the surveyed hardware". Now those two claims could've been easily cited, but what the writer did was connecting the dots and generating somehow it was a "problem", or to be specific, a notable "criticism". There is no link to a reputable or reliable source that mentions this problem. Personally, I don't consider technological advancements, or in this case, obsoleteness, to be a criticism unless the "technology gap" between the product and consumers has a very wide margin --BirdKr (talk) 13:45, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Of course it is a criticism - certain gaming authorities panned BioShock's technological side for this reason, or at least made demeaning comments about it. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 07:40, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

PC User - Top 100 List

Article seems to be locked, no? Thought it might be worth mentioning for the awards section that PC User Australia gave it 'Game of the Year' for 2007 in its Top 100 list in its January 2008 issue.--- - Nicko (talk) 12:44, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Song is missing... I think.

The song that plays near the very start of the game - when you're entering the bathosphere to go down into Rapture. I believe the song is 'La Mer' (it's on Mr. Beans Holiday if you want a reference, the song that ends the film). --- - Nicko (talk) 12:54, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

No, it's not missing, it's listed as: 'La Mer (Beyond the Sea Instrumental) - Django Reinhardt' (Which, BTW is not the same version of the song as was in Mr. Beans Holiday, that was the original Charles Trenet version). 124.179.252.180 (talk) 03:32, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

download

there has been new conten downloadable from xboxlive its some new plasmids this is not in the article though —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.109.31.47 (talk • contribs)

This is mentioned under "updates" (the PC and 360 patch are effectively the same new content). --MASEM 03:24, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Ending Error

I believe the article is incorrect when it says that if a player kills *any* little sisters, they will recieve the "bad ending". I killed at least one and received the "good ending". But I'm not sure how many you do need to kill in order to get the "bad ending". I'll go look around, I guess. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.39.167.219 (talk) 23:26, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

the number has been reported betwen 1-3 but i've played "good" 2 times but killed 2 sisters and then only 1. the former got no bad ending but the latter did. very confusing —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.31.85.242 (talk) 10:54, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Someone suggested that it actually all depends on what you do to the very first little sister in the game. If you save it, then kill all others, then you'll still get the good ending, same if you kill it then save all others; you'll get the evil ending. If you just ignore the first one, you'll get the bad ending (evil ending with sad tone) —Preceding unsigned comment added by DrTheKay (talk • contribs) 07:07, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Thats not true. I killed the first little sister and saved the rest and got the good ending. If you harvest only one, or no little sisters, and save the rest you get the good ending. If you harvest more than one little sister you get the bad ending. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.86.33.74 (talk) 16:57, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

It would be best to find a reliable source to verify this. — Satori Son 13:36, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

The official Walkthrough I've got (the book) cites 1 little sister as the limit, and the first little sister has no more impact than any other sister. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.21.97.131 (talk) 02:34, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

It's Windows, not PC

Windows is the platform. Not PC. See: Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/PC game

speaks rohith. 15:00, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Couple of points

1. "ADAM can be obtained in several ways, most prominently the harvesting of "Little Sisters" after defeating their bodyguards, the "Big Daddies", who are large, heavily armored, genetically enhanced humans wearing diving suits. EVE acts as fuel for "active plasmids" in a manner similar to magic points in other games, while money allows the purchase of items and ammunition, as well as paying to override security elements, such as bots or turrets. It is here that morality is implemented as an aspect of the gameplay; the player can chose to either rescue the Little Sisters, or harvest their ADAM. While both choices have their advantages, this element of conflicting morals has an impact on the storyline, and, among other things, on the difficulty of the game itself." --> The sentences in bold should be placed before the description of EVE?
2. There is no express mention of the gene bank. Chensiyuan (talk) 04:51, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Adam can be obtained in several ways

There are only two ways to get ADAM, from Tennenbaum and a Little Sister. I don't think the qualifies as several.75.121.36.237 (talk) 15:58, 28 March 2008 (UTC)Arbiter099

Disproportionate criticism

I feel that there is too much negative criticism and focus on hardware issues. I played the game several times and found no bugs whatsoever, several updates have been released and the game should work for everyone who has the recommended specs. Also the game received very high appraisal so it seems weird for the game to have more focus on negative than positive criticism. Feyre (talk) 04:20, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Seconded. Chensiyuan (talk) 12:34, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Direct X 9/10 Comparison

Hey, there is a difference between the quality of such as things as smoke effects, water ripples, and shadow quality between the two different versions. The article also says that 'video options' can be used to switch between the two. The 'video option' responsible for this is actually broken as described here:

http://www.tweakguides.com/Bioshock_6.htm

The author also links to the source cited here, proving there is little difference, and comments that such comparisons may not be so accurate.

The source is: http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2174758,00.asp

Furthermore, the video seen here: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2209023500883849090&hl=en

clearly shows a difference. As you can see, it's significantly harder to capture in screenshots. While the difference may be minor, the article makes it seem so minor as to be non-existant. Regardless, the 'video option' still doesn't work.

(Greglo (talk) 09:48, 30 December 2007 (UTC))