Ok, we all know that there are plenty moral choices and ways of gameplay in Bioshock. That mainly answers the question of how I can do things in Bioshock.
But what about the "When?"? Is the gameplay for example that open that I can go everywhere in Rapture just after my arrival? Can I decice when I want to go to the medical pavilion e.g.?
Last edited by Rapture_Tourist; 02-23-2007 at 07:57 PM.
I expect it to be almost identical to SS2 - you can go anywhere you want, but some doors are locked and must be "unlocked" whether through an event or via a key. It fits the bill of "immersion" as well as keeping the player on a certain track for the story narrative to unfold.
yeah I think your right, the more we discover, more places are opened.
I wouldn't want too much freedom right from the start. One of the best things about singleplayer games is the feeling that there's always that next level, a more interesting place still waiting to be discovered. Being able to visit anything anytime would ruin that sense of anticipation.
Linearity can be great if the devs are very focused on what they want to communicate. And scripted events are usually the best moments in a game, the ones you always remember. Think about the first Half-Life... no alternate routes, no nothing. Yet it turned out to be the most exciting ride of that period. So, personally I'd prefer a more linear experience to wandering around aimlessly just to be forced to go back the way you came for a random quest you got in some random place. And then go back again for random quest part 2 and so on...
I imagine the game will be split up in different areas, each one with it's own quests and side-story. You'll be free to explore but only be able to continue to the next big area once you've gone through the main objectives you're required to accomplish there.
I think Irrational should follow the SS2 route when it comes to linearity. Keep us grounded with our objectives and our general direction, but allow us to double-back to areas we have been before. One of the developers mentioned that they are using decks to distinguish the various levels of Rapture.
I would agree that the majority of objectives should be done this way, but would like to see some involving double-backing to places already covered to achieve a portion of a major mission. When retreading an already explored area, adding something like a fresh enemy that has been roused, or a newly surfaced emergency situation is preferable to just sprint back through the level unchallenged. Taunts from Ryan can freshen it up, or like someone mentioned, seeing the environment with a minor change in water level.I imagine the game will be split up in different areas, each one with it's own quests and side-story. You'll be free to explore but only be able to continue to the next big area once you've gone through the main objectives you're required to accomplish there.
Anyone played S.T.A.L.K.E.R. yet? What do you think about that type of non-linearity (bugs aside - I haven't patched yet because I'm halfway through)? I think a lot of interaction with other entities is needed to do this (like in GTA). It's one thing to just wander around, it's another to come across a variety of things to do while wandering.
before anybody starts to post things about Stalker in here, check out this thread ...
Are you trying to be some sort of pseudo-moderator? I've seen like five thread re-directions from you this morning alone LOL He's using STALKER as an example of linearity/non-linearity, which is the topic of this thread.Originally Posted by jackinthebox
STALKER, being a wide open outdoor environment, used the space well IMO. Rapture being more corridor, hallway, and room based will obviously involve less empty traversing than STALKER, but could use a similar model for quest assignment, maybe not being so sandboxed about it, and instead providing directions even a woman can follow.
actually i'm moderator
i just tried to prevent the fact that people would be posting things about Stalker in here... it's ok if he used it as an example
Sorry for any confusion. Will Bioshock's non-linearity be driven by side quests? How else could it be driven? (S.T.A.L.K.E.R. is the only non-linear FPS I've played.)
Have you played System Shock 2? Most of it's non-linearity comes only in the option of being able to go back to previous levels (decks) at will. The primary and most of the secondary objectives maintained forward motion towards new levels anyways, but there was maybe 10% of the time spent retreading over areas previously covered. Enemy respawns when backtracking was the only method used to refresh the experience IIRC.
Deus Ex used this approach as well, but was better at refreshing the places with new content and challenges. Vampire Bloodlines was an FPSRPG game where the non-linearity of it was hugely driven by side quests. It's easier to create a non-linear shooter when large hubs are made with side-quest assignments branching off, such as the cities of Deus Ex & the districts of LA in Bloodlines.
Since Rapture is a city, but a contained city nontheless, I surmise it's non-linearity will fall somwhere in between, being less linear than SS2, but moreso than STALKER or Bloodlines.
Basically, Bioshocks non-linearity could also be driven by primary quests that overlap several levels, including going back to previous ones.
Posting Permissions
