Ken Levine: Gamers are retards

[Tagaziel]

I think it's fair to say that Ken Levine is more talented and experienced a game designer than both of us combined. I personally think he made the best of the situation he was in, and that Bioshock tells an awesome story that just didn't know how to end effectively (I could argue the same about SS2, but I won't).

Given that he was the creative director, there wasn't any negative situation he was in. He could do anything, but chose to do what he did.

Can we at least agree that he wasn't calling you a retard? Surely you're humble enough to interpret what he said as something other than an attack on your intelligence.

He didn't call us, true, that was the general idea I got.

Why would he add all this extra of CUT story to the game, if it would only scare away the HUGE majority of gamers that would bring in money for this game. It sounds like he cut so much story that Bioshock isn't the original world it was thought out to be, but even if that so it's not a stab at your intelligence. Does everyone really have the patience or time to explore a world at extreme depths. If they don't they'll feel like they're missing something and didn't get the full experience, but they don't have the time or patience. In the end they feel like they got ripped.

I don't know, maybe he could add it as another optional diary/newspaper/wall of notes/ratman's den? ****, add it as unlockable bonus content to provide Rapture with at least some kind of history.

My hope is that gaming, and gamers themselves, are going to mature quite a bit in the future.

I couldn't have put it better.

Mikael, I sincerely look forward to playing your game when it's released to Candyland in 2030, where things like time and money constraints don't exist, and target markets are secondary to true creative vision. Lollipops and kittens, hooray!

Want cheese with that whine?

The story could've been deeper for sure (a few more diaries here and there); but the game was still an intellectual giant when compared to other shooters on the market.

Haha, I don't think that's really an achievement

 

[Gargantou]

I think we should all disregard Mikael 'Polska' Grizzly's opinions because of the solefact he believes that Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion is a -ROGUELIKE-.

 

[MultiVaC]

Well, I think raytracing or something similar will come long before that. There's a lot of new advances in game technology that aren't too far off.

 

[Gargantou]

Well, I think raytracing or something similar will come long before that. There's a lot of new advances in game technology that aren't too far off.

Well, controlled dreaming is already here in the form of lucid dreaming, but not everyone has the ability to do it, and I've only done it twice in my life.

I'd sell my soul for a switch on my wrist that when tapped immediatly put me into lucid dreaming state, it's awesome being able to consciously shape your own dreams.

 

[Cerpin]

As many others, I too enjoy searching every nook and cranny for details, plot information; anything, really. In that aspect, Bioshock is lacking. Compared to System Shock 2, Planescape Torment, Fallout, Thief - it's lacking.

But Bioshock sold like hotcakes. It's mainstream. It's not so much dumbing down, as introducing something to a new market. I'm positive 80% of the people who bought and played Bioshock never played any of the games I mentioned above, and I'm positive that it was the richest and most complex video game narrative experience they ever had. What better way to introduce complex narrative in games to a wide audience through a smash hit like Bioshock?

Maybe it backfires, who knows? I'm just glad a game like Bioshock, no matter how 'shallow' it is to elitist, can make a stir both critically and comercially.

 

[Gargantou]

We all have accept one thing, gaming is a BUSINESS INDUSTRY these days, atleast for Ken Levine and others whom work at commercial game developers, no matter how much you try to look past it, a business top #1 priority is making PROFIT, expanding, and staying competitive and in business.

You don't make profit, expand and compete by appealing to a small group of gamers who want complex, deep games, you do it, sadly, by appealing to the large group of gamers whom want simple games that are simple tp grasp, understand and play, IMO this is a natural course of evolution as an entertainment industry grows bigger..

Just compare the 90s to the 00s, there's substantially less flight sims that has come out this era than in the 90s, why is that? I believe it probably is because more and more people have gotten access to PCs, consoles etc, and the majority of these people find flight sims too complex, and with the rising cost in game development, it means it's simply not a market that developers want to focus on anymore.

If you want very deep, complex games, there are some great freeware ones out there, such as Dwarf Fortress.

 

[Tagaziel]

Or the upcoming Age of Decadence and Aftefall, which both, ya know, focus on content.

 

[Gargantou]

They still are nothing complexity wise compared to Dwarf Fortress.

But then again, no modern game is, because pulling off Dwarf Fortress would take a huge amount of money if you had to do 3D models for all the items etc.

 

[Nathan]

riiiiiiiiiiight.

 

[KagePrototype]

Given that he was the creative director, there wasn't any negative situation he was in. He could do anything, but chose to do what he did.

Bear in mind that Take 2 was financing the project, so he was probably constrained by the publisher to make back those costs. He had to sell his dev studio to Take 2 for christ's sake.

As many others, I too enjoy searching every nook and cranny for details, plot information; anything, really. In that aspect, Bioshock is lacking. Compared to System Shock 2, Planescape Torment, Fallout, Thief - it's lacking.

See, I thought Bioshock delivered in spades with it's story, especially in the nook and cranny department. It's why I fell in love with it; every single wall in this game tells a story, and there are diaries hidden away that I'm still finding on my 3rd or 4th play-through. And unlike SS2, I thought every single diary had an interesting character behind it.

I just don't understand this criticism that Bioshock is lacking in the story department, I was eating it all up and wholly satisfied with what it told me. The only part of the story that I literally didn't like was the very end. Until then I just couldn't put the controller down. I guess the difference is that I invested in the characters more than you lot, and you were more interested in figuring out how Rapture got built in the first place or something.

And honestly, were you really expecting Planescape or Fallout levels of exposition in this game?

 

[Asknoone]

Bioshock was hit and miss for me. I mean, it's evidently a good game. The art design, Rapture, the whole setting – it was very good. It was far from creepy, which is a shame, but it was still excellent. The trouble I had was with the gameplay and how repetitive and weak it was. It didn't shake things up, it didn't try and fire unique things your way; it was just the same mundane stuff from start to finish.

Levine is right. The final part of the game – arguably the weakest in terms of story because hey, what story – was the strongest gameplay wise. You had to find the Big Daddy parts, escort the little sister, beat Fontaine; the set pieces were unique enough to stand on their own and that is where the rest of the game failed.

 

[Bad^Hat]

Agreed. Stood up against one another, the story and setting are much more robust then the gameplay, I thought. Combined they make a very able game, but if you take them on their own it's easy to poke holes in them. That's more or less the nature of big budget productions with large ambitions, though.

 

[Tagaziel]

Bear in mind that Take 2 was financing the project, so he was probably constrained by the publisher to make back those costs. He had to sell his dev studio to Take 2 for christ's sake.

True that.

See, I thought Bioshock delivered in spades with it's story, especially in the nook and cranny department. It's why I fell in love with it; every single wall in this game tells a story, and there are diaries hidden away that I'm still finding on my 3rd or 4th play-through. And unlike SS2, I thought every single diary had an interesting character behind it.

See, that's the point. It tells the current story, but as it stands, Rapture did not exist before Fontaine's arrival. Except for a single monument commemorating the first building built, there is absolutely no background information.

It's kind of like this:

RAPTURE BUILT

(LONG PERIOD OF ABSOLUTELY NOTHING)

FONTAINE

SHIT FALLS APART

I just don't understand this criticism that Bioshock is lacking in the story department, I was eating it all up and wholly satisfied with what it told me. The only part of the story that I literally didn't like was the very end. Until then I just couldn't put the controller down. I guess the difference is that I invested in the characters more than you lot, and you were more interested in figuring out how Rapture got built in the first place or something.

One of the reasons is that the plot has it's culminating point in Ryan's office, and afterwards it's just the mop up.

Another is that it's nearly impossible to reconstruct what exactly happened, as there is no frame of reference.

And honestly, were you really expecting Planescape or Fallout levels of exposition in this game?

I was expecting quality from a game stated to be heavily influenced by Objectivist philosophy.

Levine is right. The final part of the game ? arguably the weakest in terms of story because hey, what story ? was the strongest gameplay wise. You had to find the Big Daddy parts, escort the little sister, beat Fontaine; the set pieces were unique enough to stand on their own and that is where the rest of the game failed.

To bad you don't really become a big daddy - you're just a freak with a mutilated throat with a helmet, suit and boots instead of an unstoppable protector.

 

[Direwolf]

See, I thought Bioshock delivered in spades with it's story, especially in the nook and cranny department. It's why I fell in love with it; every single wall in this game tells a story, and there are diaries hidden away that I'm still finding on my 3rd or 4th play-through. And unlike SS2, I thought every single diary had an interesting character behind it.

I just don't understand this criticism that Bioshock is lacking in the story department, I was eating it all up and wholly satisfied with what it told me. The only part of the story that I literally didn't like was the very end. Until then I just couldn't put the controller down. I guess the difference is that I invested in the characters more than you lot, and you were more interested in figuring out how Rapture got built in the first place or something.

And honestly, were you really expecting Planescape or Fallout levels of exposition in this game?

This pretty much echoes my feelings, although I didn't think there was anything missing from the end of the game either (and with the good ending it all ties together very well). Reading comments criticizing Bioshock for being too dumb is just baffling to me.

 

[jondy]

Bioshock's story was great.

...but did no one else find the escort mission at the end absolute pants?

 

[Gray Fox]

You know I'm seeing a lot of talk but still no futile internet petitions, demanding the extra story be released.

 

[Gargantou]

The likelyhood of it being released, even with a petition, is extremely low, there's most certainly all kinda copyright stuff, and all sorta people they have to go through, you know, it's not just 1 guy that decides hey lets release it, it's probably covered by NDAs, and there'd be a shitload of paperwork to release it.

 

[jondy]

The likelyhood of it being released, even with a petition, is extremely low, there's most certainly all kinda copyright stuff, and all sorta people they have to go through, you know, it's not just 1 guy that decides hey lets release it, it's probably covered by NDAs, and there'd be a shitload of paperwork to release it.

You don't get Gray Fox, huh. I like him better since he went on that trolling rampage.

 

[Direwolf]

I seriously doubt that they actually worked up the whole story, wrote it all in, and then went at the script with a pair of scissors cutting all of it out. All stories go through changes over time, and any bits that they never put in the game were likely more along the lines of "what if Andrew Ryan and Calvin Coolidge were actually the same person and he engineered an economic depression in Europe to get people to live in Rapture?"

 

[clarky003]

Well I find his words utterly ridiculous. Not everyone who plays a game is a ****ing moron who can't hack complex plots. Infact to the contrary that's what everyone moans about on here, not enough detail in storytelling.

That kindof conclusion by developers, more practical or not, just makes them sound like capitalist douchebags.

 

[Fliko]

To bad you don't really become a big daddy - you're just a freak with a mutilated throat with a helmet, suit and boots instead of an unstoppable protector.

That was a rather disappointing part of the game. Reading the achievement list on the 360 totally made me all excited to become a Big Daddy.

 

[Asknoone]

Well I find his words utterly ridiculous. Not everyone who plays a game is a ****ing moron who can't hack complex plots.

I don't think that's quite the point Clarks.

 

[Cormeh]

Part of the richness of Bioshock's story was trying to imagine a lot and piece most of it together using the audio diaries. That gave the game great perspective for me, because it's a method that allows the player to think somewhat, rather than spelling everything out, fairly similar (NOT EXACTLY THE SAME) to/as the presentation of Half Life 2.

I don't see why everyone here feels so insulted by this.

 

[Absinthe]

There seems to be a lot of indignation on this forum as of late when it comes to dev comments, most of which I don't entirely understand. Especially when they're saying things this community has already accepted in the past.

 

[Direwolf]

I don't think that's quite the point Clarks.

Exactly. I've heard Ken Levine talk several times on podcasts, and he often expresses his feelings on the topic of video game stories. He sees the problem as being that in an interactive medium it's very difficult to make a really complex story and still retain the things that make games enjoyable other than a story. You can load up on narrative and make a plot that is truly a work of art, but you'll lose the player's ability to define any of the story themselves. Which is why they ended up with Bioshock's system: tell a good story that has a point and some interesting philosophy in it, but don't force it on the player or nail down every little detail, so if they miss something they can just continue to piece it together.

 

[Asuka]

This topic bothers me but i also see every ones points. A game like Deus Ex will probably never be released unless for some miracle someone feels like taking a multi million dollar risk and it does well. I mean look at Metal Gear Solid a perfect example of a EXTREAMLY complex story, long dialog and weird game play. But it sells MILLIONS! Now look at how they fixed their problem, they are basically making it the game of all games. FPS, 3rd person, action, stealth, story, game play the list goes on. Its a game of all games.

Name a few games that had insane depth and story:

Deus Ex
Metal Gear Solid Series
Mass Effect

Still Life? (Do adventure games count, i dunno)

Legacy of Kain Soul Reaver - From what i remember it had a great deep story. Haven't played part 2 yet.

Max Payne? (This is where we start to loss the integrated game play and story. Great story but not really integrated into the game.

BioShock - and here we are a product of a developer who wanted a deep and complicated story but ended up making the best of what they had to work with. (at least they did it)

Half-Life Series
Shadow of the Colossus

Both of these games are a completely different ballgame when it comes to telling stories. Its almost 100% Game play and environment oriented.

So i can only think of 3 games that truly have that kind of story telling, name a few i might have missed.

I really want more games like the top 3. At least we have a few developers with the power to create games like this still every 3 years or more :/

 

[Gargantou]

I wouldn't really say Mass Effect has a deep story..
It's universe is no more indepth than say Halo's, though naturally with Mass Effect being an RPG it goes into greater detail, but there is alot of 'depth' to the Halo universe, especially if you read the novels etc.

 

[<RJMC>]

the wholething of that "I like toimaginate the history using thses clues etc..." is tgat then whats the point of the story?

when you care about a story is cuz you want it to be told,its like if you where watching scenes of star wars but the whole universe and things are not mentioned "oooh why these dudes have mental powers? lets use imagination!"

 

[Direwolf]

Metal Gear is actually probably an example of the damage you can do if you push the story too far. Weirdness aside, theres plenty of people who have no interest in those games because of the huge amount of story you are forced to absorb over the course of it. It edges closer to something as an interactive movie/game hybrid than what we normally think of as a game.

I've still bought them and played them all multiple times, but I'm hardly what you'd call the average player, and the same goes for almost everyone in this thread.

 

[CptStern]

dont forget that in some instances what story is there is so laughably bad that it doesnt even reach the level of a comic book ..an archie comic book at that ..I have yet to play a game where I've said upon completion "wow that was a great story" ..in fact I have a built in test for good story telling ..if I can remember anything about it after watching/playing it it's bound to be good

it's like a really bad Michael Bay movie where the plot is so insignificant that if you were to describe what the plot was about you do so iusing a couple of words

the Rock: soldiers take over prison, heroes save the day

armaggeddon: really big rock threatens to kill earth, heroes save the day



that reminds me how much I hate michael bay ..I've seen the Rock twice and I still dont know what happens beyond that brief discription ..the story is that forgettable ..I even had to look it up to make sre I wasnt mixing it up with Con-Air (I was)

 

[Asuka]

Metal Gear is actually probably an example of the damage you can do if you push the story too far. Weirdness aside, theres plenty of people who have no interest in those games because of the huge amount of story you are forced to absorb over the course of it. It edges closer to something as an interactive movie/game hybrid than what we normally think of as a game.

I've still bought them and played them all multiple times, but I'm hardly what you'd call the average player, and the same goes for almost everyone in this thread.

That's 100% opinion, there are millions out there that love the 30 mins cut scenes. Pretty much all my friends cant wait to be apart of it again. It feels like a interactive movie with breaks being the cut scenes and game play being the momentum forward. Which is why they keep making the games and which is why they have such a huge budget. If they cut that core out of Metal Gear Solid it just wouldn't be the same game.

 

[<RJMC>]

dont forget that in some instances what story is there is so laughably bad that it doesnt even reach the level of a comic book ..an archie comic book at that ..I have yet to play a game where I've said upon completion "wow that was a great story" ..in fact I have a built in test for good story telling ..if I can remember anything about it after watching/playing it it's bound to be good

it's like a really bad Michael Bay movie where the plot is so insignificant that if you were to describe what the plot was about you do so iusing a couple of words

the Rock: soldiers take over prison, heroes save the day

armaggeddon: really big rock threatens to kill earth, heroes save the day



that reminds me how much I hate michael bay ..I've seen the Rock twice and I still dont know what happens beyond that brief discription ..the story is that forgettable ..I even had to look it up to make sre I wasnt mixing it up with Con-Air (I was)

well thats because the major point of some games is things like that of "hero save the day"

 

[Fliko]

Metal Gear is actually probably an example of the damage you can do if you push the story too far. Weirdness aside, theres plenty of people who have no interest in those games because of the huge amount of story you are forced to absorb over the course of it. It edges closer to something as an interactive movie/game hybrid than what we normally think of as a game.

I've still bought them and played them all multiple times, but I'm hardly what you'd call the average player, and the same goes for almost everyone in this thread.

Extremely true. It is pretty much an interactive movie. I love it that way and lots other do but as a game the gameplay isn't that great...

 

[Asknoone]

Metal Gear Solid – as good as it is – does it all completely wrong. Kojima's design is flawed; a failure to integrate gameplay and story. Instead the two are completely separate beasts.

 

[Paulaner]

This discussion makes me think about a situation: in the past years, Role Playing Games were Role Playing Games. Now all RPGs are action-RPGs. Is this related to presumed gamers retardness?

 

[Sulkdodds]

Levine is totally right yo.

 

[Darkside55]

ITT people who can't read, misconstrue someone's point to fuel their butthurt persecution complex argument, compare the game in question to others citing how said game could be made SO MUCH BETTER, think they know better than the game's developer, and should really just shut up because they don't realize the parts cut were unnecessary and stupid. See: wheelchair dogs.

When you make your wheelchair dog game spanning decades and civil war citywide revolutions with volumes of backstory and DETAILS, JUST LIKE SYSTEM SHOCK 2, let me know, Grizz. I'm sure it'll be a market hit.

 

[Direwolf]

Some of the ending bits from Metal Gear 3 made me realize what astounding potential is there for making a game thats both as cinematic as Metal Gear and still give the player something to do. Particularly I always remember the sidecar chase down the runway. It looks like a cutscene but you're in control and mowing down bad guys. It will change camera angles, and even cut away for a look at the bad guy, but it keeps you engaged too.

 

[Gargantou]

Direwolf, Metal Gear SOLID 3, foo'.

 

[Tagaziel]

ITT people who can't read, misconstrue someone's point to fuel their butthurt persecution complex argument, compare the game in question to others citing how said game could be made SO MUCH BETTER, think they know better than the game's developer, and should really just shut up because they don't realize the parts cut were unnecessary and stupid. See: wheelchair dogs.

When you make your wheelchair dog game spanning decades and civil war citywide revolutions with volumes of backstory and DETAILS, JUST LIKE SYSTEM SHOCK 2, let me know, Grizz. I'm sure it'll be a market hit.

The day I listen to ranting maniacs from psychiatric institutions is not today.