Infinite Multiplayer: Yes or No?

[v3nd3tta]

THERE WILL BE NO MULTIPLAYER, maybe I should ask ken levine himself just to stop this stupid thread. When Irrational made bioshock 1 there was no intention at all in having multiplayer, when 2k Marin worked on the second game, they put multiplayer when they could have made the singleplayer game itself much bigger. When I started playing Bioshock 2 I didn't even feel like I was playing a bioshock game, the same feeling behind the first game was missing as well as the ideas behind the first game. Of course this was because it was made by 2k Marin. Bioshock 2's multiplayer wasn't even that fun anyway in my experience. It didn't need to be in there, it was like as if skyrim or fallout 3 had multiplayer. Bioshock is more of a role playing game just like Fallout 3 or Oblivion, and those kinds of games need a lot of room, if you add multiplayer the role playing experience would shrink into a shorter and become less pleasing, like Bioshock 2.

[Evans0305]

Just to add my 2-cents on this topic (since I already mentioned above about why a co-op wouldn't work), Unless IG decided to somehow include it, I just don't see MP working for this game's story. Its been suggested that Columbia's faction war happens during Booker's arrival, which is almost most of the game, not before, like in the Rapture civil war in the BS2 Multiplayer. Something like a faction MP for Infinite couldn't happen because the placement for it just would be too brief to fit it in there, like if the war happened much later than from the start of the game, or it ends when the game is finished. As fun as it would sound to be a random John Doe for The Founders/Vox Populi with Booker/Elizabeth abilities to fight other opposing players with said abilities, it also doesn't sound like something IG ever considered doing for this game, even as a last minute demand.

v3nd3tta said:THERE WILL BE NO MULTIPLAYER, maybe I should ask ken levine himself just to stop this stupid thread.

Most of us feel that way, too, and this thread would probably end soon, or at least when its close to the release date. Until that happens, we'll more likely see this pop up from time-to-time, wether we like it or not.

[v3nd3tta]

I mean c'mon did half life 2 have OR even need multiplayer? In the retail game that is, they made a separate game for that called Gmod, wich would probably be a good idea for this game, a big sandbox of fun. And for the console gamers there was Half life 2 CTF/Deathmatch (which was also for the PC, gmod wasn't.

[iglegacy_pimpdaddy]

I hope you get to turn into an alpha or something like number two when you got to be a big daddy but. I must say if they do I think it will be interesting

[StudiedApollo8]

Multiplayer was pretty good in Bioshock 2, but it kind of felt like the same old same old. There wasn't anything new you had "team dethmatch" "capture the flag" "deathmatch" and "domination." It would be great if we could see new types of matches, but I'm not sure infiniet would make a good multiplayer game mainly because of the world. Bioshock's multiplayer worked because the environment was solid, Columbia's environment is unstable.

it might work but I'd have to see it before I make my mind up.

[Seasick]

No. Bioshock is Story based, it doesn't need MP. It's one of the things I didn't like about Bioshock 2, actually. The fact that it was focusing a percentage of it's time competing in a market that it didn't belong in, that time could've went towards strengthening the story.

[watchman]

They might have to change some of the dynamics with players using the skylines (versus just running about on the ground).


No tears (unless tehy are static and just really are portals to another location on the map).


Most MP is just a bunch of players acting like maniacs running about blasting everything in sight within a limited circular map.


I dont see why they couldnt reuse parts of Columbia for the many maps (just dont have a seperate DLC for additional ones than most people wont buy and those that do cant find anyone to play on)


The tech tree for the 'nostrums' might allow continual reuse with a recharge mechanism like the eve in BS2MP to allow loadouts with the usual achievement system.


Handyman suits for the Big Daddy suit...


They should add scenarios that require fewer minimum players as in the later times playing BS2MP there were too few people online and you had to wait way to long for games to start with a minimum of 6 even.


1 on 1 scenarios would be a good addition.


I suppose if they made it and offered it as a reasonably priced DLC there would be more than a few players who would buy it so for the company the issue would be how cheaply they could produce it.

[banky00]

No.

[v3nd3tta]

banky00 said:No.

How profound, thats really all the answer that needs to be given

[newro1ism]

Well, You do have 2 factions already... The Vox Populi and The Founders. So... I think it will have a multiplayer componant. Would be awesome to have maps with Skylines, i mean come on... Maybe if they'd appeal it a bit more to the mases with a Multiplayer trailer of some sort. I would play this MP over Cod, BF MoH etc. ANYDAY... Then again I never really played those games.

I mean i'd rather look at my PSN friendslist and see people playing a story based game with a nice multiplayer addition. But really if it's necessary? For me

No.

[thewatchmaker]

Please no only co-op multilayer...


I Just Hope

[watchman]

Infinite ... If the terrain is more varied (using the skylines and maybe 'tears' as portals) it might offer something a bit different than your 'run of the mill' Multiplayer.


Most MP is really just a bunch of players running about like maniacs shooting everything in sight with little tactics or strategy -- really just a crack monkey game for 14 year olds with attention deficit problems


I actually found BS2 MP to be more 'realistic' than Call of Duty Modern War2 multiplayer because that game was so sped up (exagerating the network latency) and had weapons that we NOT realistic and gimmicky (pretty sad for a game that allegedly claims to be 'realistic'.)


But the new UE3 mechanism may not work very well with MP as they would probably have to go backwards to using static simplified levels (like all MP FPS games) and lose alot of the look the solo game has -- as well as ditching the effect 'Tears' have and warping the nostrum magic potions as well (since you dont have permanent plasmids)

[deaddoucher]

Yes please. If not I hope they think about fixing and adding $Hit on to BS 2's multiplayer because I love the multiplayer but the lag is terrible I can play past it but come on. And only one map pack and Zigo and Blanche that's all we get. I understand multiplayer shouldn't be a games priority but a little bigger bone would be nice.

[Furyia]

I felt BioShock 2's MP was really underrated. I thoroughly enjoyed playing it and I hope Infinite's MP can live up to it.

[IGlegacy_Felonious]

furyia said:I felt BioShock 2's MP was really underrated. I thoroughly enjoyed playing it and I hope Infinite's MP can live up to it.

No Multiplayer has been announced for Infinite, at least nothing yet.

[resistantraider]

Honestly I think multiplayer would be epic because you could hav those sky line fights and maybe become one of those handymen like how you could become a big daddy in BS2 or level up enough to the high level and gain new abilities like opening tears, plasmids, weapons and more. Id also like to see a heart pounding survival mode it would be similar to RE ORC survive for ten mins but the building is loosing air and its going to collapse. Except everyone can escape or everyone could die.

[desolate]

I liked the Mp simply because it gave you something more to do after you played a couple of runs in bio shock. i would definitely love to see it return.

[watchman]

A question would be : How many people would buy it as DLC (not sure of what price ~$10US) to warrant them doing the development to make it happen ???


Did any onther games do that (not have the MP with the main game release) and how well did that go?


As we saw with the extra maps for BS2, so few people bought them that most people never found enough other players to play on them most of the time. A MP game as DLC would probably do better than that, but it still might cut back the number of total players playing it online.

[melchor]

Multiplayer would be a plus especially if the environment is flexible.


Problem may be that your enemies may be up and down which would make it easier for them to kill you before you could see who is shooting at you.

[dirtytreva]

Yes infinite would be perfect for multiplayer. you already got 2 teams the facists and the comunists fighting so why not have a battle. some fun facts:

-people who say that the multiplayer bothers singleplayer, no it dont, they have 2 diferent teams on the game, multiplayer could be better if SINGLEPLAYER didnt need all the stuff you need to make it better.

- dont call me a hater, i <3 singleplayer, but after you beat on every sifficulty and 100% the game, is it really fan to keep playin. all the twists are revealed and nothing will surprise you, thats why i like BS2 better than BS1, i could play multiplayer with my boi's and go ham. when i beat BS1 (which took me five years.....) i didnt want to play it again cuz i already new all the stuff, and with me i got a problem with dealing with characters when you know whats gonna happen them like die, it bugs me.

-Is it more fun to talk about a game with friends, or play a game with friends.

- now ima love to see some co-op, which wont happen in the main capaine but maybe have a seperate campaine for co-op, it can be like f3ar, one average guy with a gun (Booker) and one crazy super powers paerson ( Elizabeth).

so, ya thats my opinion comment if you got any other good ideas or some critisizm, but plz dont hate.

[banky00]

I do love Bioshock 2 multiplayer, reached top rank on 2 platforms and still play it today but I dont think its right for Bioshock or Irrational Games.

[trugamer97]

The multiplayer in Bioshock 2 was fun and it would be nice to see it back but if it takes away from the single player experience forget it.

[Spata]

dirtytreva said:Yes infinite would be perfect for multiplayer. you already got 2 teams the facists and the comunists fighting so why not have a battle. some fun facts:

-people who say that the multiplayer bothers singleplayer, no it dont, they have 2 diferent teams on the game, multiplayer could be better if SINGLEPLAYER didnt need all the stuff you need to make it better.

- dont call me a hater, i <3 singleplayer, but after you beat on every sifficulty and 100% the game, is it really fan to keep playin. all the twists are revealed and nothing will surprise you, thats why i like BS2 better than BS1, i could play multiplayer with my boi's and go ham. when i beat BS1 (which took me five years.....) i didnt want to play it again cuz i already new all the stuff, and with me i got a problem with dealing with characters when you know whats gonna happen them like die, it bugs me.

-Is it more fun to talk about a game with friends, or play a game with friends.

- now ima love to see some co-op, which wont happen in the main capaine but maybe have a seperate campaine for co-op, it can be like f3ar, one average guy with a gun (Booker) and one crazy super powers paerson ( Elizabeth).

so, ya thats my opinion comment if you got any other good ideas or some critisizm, but plz dont hate.

[dirtytreva]

@spata

HAHAHA XD!!!!!!! im not sure i was serious either, i was a lil.......ya

but i thought multiplayer was fun, and i wouldnt mind it, but i can live without it, but co-op wouldnt be bad, but do what splinter cell did and have a seperate campaign, have one guy with a gun and another guy who uses vigor powers. and this would actually be good for deathmatch style stuff, it can have its own storyline sorta like BS2's. did. like while bookers story is about him trying to fight and escape columbia, the mp can be that you FIGHT in the civil war as either founder or voxy. and i would like to have customizable characters ( the only thing i didnt like about bs2's mp was that it had characters, kinda kills the point of multiplayer making it feel like its you and not someone else.)

[strawhatmoose]

Yes bioshock was kind of short for me (but still great fun), and it would be cool to have multiplayer as a side dish to the singleplayer so you can play it when you feel like it. Just make it like bioshock 2 multiplayer (vox populi vs founders). And put in like awesome game modes like turf war and one where you get a set amount of based and each team has to push the other back and capture the bases as they go (war from world at war). And something could spawn in a random place like the big daddy suit from BS2- maybe a pepper mill. I don't know if they'll do it but it would be cool, especially with new and semi-original game modes.

[strawhatmoose]

Yes bioshock was kind of short for me (but still great fun), and it would be cool to have multiplayer as a side dish to the singleplayer so you can play it when you feel like it. Just make it like bioshock 2 multiplayer (vox populi vs founders). And put in like awesome game modes like turf war and one where you get a set amount of based and each team has to push the other back and capture the bases as they go (war from world at war). And something could spawn in a random place like the big daddy suit from BS2- maybe a pepper mill. I don't know if they'll do it but it would be cool, especially with new and semi-original game modes.

[dirtytreva]

strawhatmoose said:Yes bioshock was kind of short for me (but still great fun), and it would be cool to have multiplayer as a side dish to the singleplayer so you can play it when you feel like it. Just make it like bioshock 2 multiplayer (vox populi vs founders). And put in like awesome game modes like turf war and one where you get a set amount of based and each team has to push the other back and capture the bases as they go (war from world at war). And something could spawn in a random place like the big daddy suit from BS2- maybe a pepper mill. I don't know if they'll do it but it would be cool, especially with new and semi-original game modes.

this boi got a point, just a sidedish by a differant develeper or maybe irrational since they can make everything amazin.

[dirtytreva]

[XxSn1p3dxX]

evans0305 said:

xxsn1p3dxx said:

japester said:How so, linedgoat? Elizabeth opens tears but isn't good in combat. Booker is good in combat (and can use vigors), but can't open tears. Booker might be fun to play as a co-op character, but Elizabeth seems too limited. Unless they added more skills to her repertoire. Even so, her tears ability seems to have a significant cooldown, so she'd have a lot of time to fill.

I'm not saying it's impossible--it just seems unlikely. Sounds like it would require a major reworking, and that doesn't strike me as something IG would do just to get co-op added. If they found a more natural fit, then I could see it happening. <img />

You seem to have forgotten that Elizabeth doesn't only just create tears, but she also has plasmids like powers like telekinesis, so if they were to give her a bunch of plasmid powers, then I could definitely see Elizabeth as a worthy player in co-op, reminds you sort of Subject Delta and Eleanor working together, doesn't it?

But that goes back to what japester said about her limitation of using those abilities as well. Elizabeth may have abilities, but they're also limited in her usage of them, so unlike Eleanore from BS2, she can't just keep using them all the time whenever you call her. Even if there was this kind of multiplayer, the 2nd player as Elizabeth would have to wait out every few minutes before they're able to use their abilities again.

If it was like Fear 3, there will have to be some unique attributes to Elizabeth then just tears; tears are like special support abilities that help boost the players capabilities! Elizabeth should be able to wield vigors and nostrums like Booker, but at a greater capability to show the unique differences between both characters and also how balanced they are. Elizabeth can wield tears and better powerful vigors than Booker, and Booker can wield weapons and vigors! >

[losstarot]

Oh crap, seems like they're serious about this after all w(￣_￣;w ￢o(￣-￣ﾒ)

http://kotaku.com/bioshock/

[watchman]

losstarot said:Oh crap, seems like they're serious about this after all w(?_?;w ?o(?-??)

<a>http://kotaku.com/bioshock/

</a>

Like when making a movie .... you hear that they are just now 'selecting actors' it means that the movie aint gonna be released for a lonnnng time.


MP for Infinite would be a seperate product --- which if paid DLC will likely mean alot of people WONT buy it and after the usual rush period you wont be finding that many people to play in the lobby.


I suggest they offer 2 player ( and 4 player) scenatios so that people wont wind of spending most of their time in MP waiting for enough players to start a game.

[telbere]

To everyone saying "boi" your opinion counts for nothing because of that bit of spelling murder.


4v4 or 1v1 but not any of the options used in bs2, and it needs to be loaded with lots of the common npc you would normally have in the game.

[watchman]

US Marines land on the 'rogue' city of Columbia and try to seize control of it (its an embarassment to the US who wants to 'handle it'.)

You are in that Marine force.

You get points for killing those who resist (and the Vox Populi arent there because they dont want to be) and negatives for killing 'civilians' ...

A big turkey shoot (until some of the heavy hitters are turned loose)

Alternate might be Booker on his return reports and the Pinkertons are hired to handle it 'quietly'.

Scenario for 1+ players

[zapnic]

Just for PC and f2p

simple
and dont use gfwl is pure ☺☺☺☺

[Kirkreng]

Why would it be F2P?

[Vito_Lucente]

Co-op might be fun in BS:I, but not deathmatch or any other competitive multiplayer. I think if it was done well, Infinite could have a really good co-op campaign.

[watchman]

Why would it be F2P?

It probably would not be (no profit motive for company to develop and I doubt they could nickel and dime players enough using a 'Store' to pay for MP) ---- UNLESS they tacked it onto Infinite 2 (and that because they already know that the sequel just isnt going to be enough different from Infinite 1)

*** Spoiler *** Elizabeth is Booker's Mother <----- plots 'twists' like that we really dont need.....

[watchman]

Co-op might be fun in BS:I, but not deathmatch or any other competitive multiplayer. I think if it was done well, Infinite could have a really good co-op campaign.

That at least would have potential for being a more interesting MP (but how big a group could you really have on your one 'side' without pretty much ditching/disrupting the 'tear' aspect (which will be a major factor in the main game) But then BS2MP hadnt alot to do with the way the Bioshock games operated (pretty much just running around blasting each other as most MPs are).

Co-op is usually the most challenging but then they have to start building the plot sequencing just like in the single player game - which being extensive you might as well just offer a Co-op 2 player option in the main game and reuse it all (1 Elizabeth and 1 Booker)

[Ryans Rapture]

Honestly, I don't know what to say but what's been said a 100 times by different people.... but I'll try.

I'm a big multiplayer fan, and a big Bioshock fan. So it's easy to say, I was hooked for over a year on Bioshock 2. But less than 2 months for Bioshock 1.
I beat it. Beat it on hard again. And sometimes just left it on for the atmosphere. Overall though? The experience fell short when all you could do was talk about it and wait for the movie to get some money behind it. (Not that THAT's looking too good now...)

Anyways, as far as multiplayer "taking the story experience away". That's preeetty ridiculous.

Point taken, it's hard to make a multiplayer relevant AND make you care about it as some sort of story add-on. But Bioshock 2 did that really well! I listened to those unlocked audio diaries plenty of times, enjoyed the announcer who congratulated you every few levels, loved the secret "place crash" ending, and the apartment was an epic way to make you feel like a citizen! (Though they could have expanded that SO much more...)

So should Bioshock Infinite have a multiplayer? Yes. It would:
- Bring in more players.
- Be suited with the factions/ environment
- Be story connected with the great team of Irrational
- Give us general players something to go back to

That's just my two cents. Though whatever happens, it's still going to be a great game.

[watchman]

and the apartment was an epic way to make you feel like a citizen! (Though they could have expanded that SO much more...)

I would have liked to see a different newspaper in the machine with Headlines relevant to your MP level, an expanding pile of weapons on the table (as your level enabled them), a few trophies for the walls would have been nice. A few more odd things swimming by outside the window (recycle stuff from the solo game...) All those are pretty static (not too much effort to do within budget restarints).

Neat would have been going to the adjacent (locked up) apartment and using it as a test firing range for your loadouts (trashing the place ... lots of breakables etc...)


If they ever do the MMORPG I hope to see the apartment back again (pretty ritzy place). Private bathyshpere station and all.