Bioshock

[deanb]

Errm you guys know that this was likely a thing already coming, not bowing into pressure. They did say pretty early on they'd have community chosen covers (obviously didn't furnish it with the detail that it would be a reversible cover like suggested). So no it's not some "oh now they're bowing to the whining fans". (and are we really going with the "you're only a real fan if you buy games for £40"?).

[SomTervo]

What's the original cover like? Haven't seen that.

 

I voted #4. It's the one that is most stand-out, most attention grabbing, most well designed (the aesthetic of a kids drawing- but a kids drawing by a very smart kid indeed- I actually feel is more Bioshock than #6 which is pretty hamfisted, #4 has got a bit of subtext going on), and is the one I'd be most proud to pick off a shelf and show to a pal. Not to mention, I think on a physical box it will look a lot better than just an embedded image on a website on a computer screen. The canvas is what makes the painting, yo.

 

I also actually like #5 just as a throwback to early cinema and hammy post-Victorian/ Industrial advertising. Cool as shit, though yeah a questionable design dynamically.

 

Can't wait to play the game just to find out what the deal is with the bird thing. What's he called again?

Edited December 13, 2012 by kenshi_ryden

[CorgiShinobi]

Can't wait to play the game just to find out what the deal is with the bird thing. What's he called again?

The Songbird.

 

It's essentially the ultimate form of the Big Daddy relationship as far as Infinite goes. It has been the personal protector of Elizabeth ever since she was a small child, and Elizabeth actually doesn't want Booker to hurt Songbird either, or vice versa. It's said to be the most feared creature of Colombia, so when you hear it, soiling yourself would be an understatement.

[deanb]

What's the original cover like? Haven't seen that.

It's on page 4. It's very close to image 3 of the optional covers just minus Elizabeth.

[TheMightyEthan]

Its a fucking game cover and you probably wont buy it unless its less than full price anyways...so shut the fuck up. Most people who buy this on release day or even the first month probably arent going to give a fuck about the cover AKA the real fans who just want to play an amazing fucking game.

 

Yes, I'm sure none of the people complaining about the terrible cover have preorders for the game or anything.

[Saturnine Tenshi]

I didn't read the quoted part of Strangelove's post. Now I feel kinda bad for agreeing with him.

[Strangelove]

Its a fucking game cover and you probably wont buy it unless its less than full price anyways...so shut the fuck up. Most people who buy this on release day or even the first month probably arent going to give a fuck about the cover AKA the real fans who just want to play an amazing fucking game.

 

Yes, I'm sure none of the people complaining about the terrible cover have preorders for the game or anything.

 

I really cant imagine anyone here paying 60 bucks for a game. I figure Im the only one who does(maybe 2 or 3 times a year).

Maybe you mean PC(with some kind of preorder sale or special offer or something), which to me doesnt really count. Which would probably be downloadable, with no cover. Its be a moot point.

Edited December 13, 2012 by Strangelove

[Strangelove]

Errm you guys know that this was likely a thing already coming, not bowing into pressure. They did say pretty early on they'd have community chosen covers (obviously didn't furnish it with the detail that it would be a reversible cover like suggested). So no it's not some "oh now they're bowing to the whining fans". (and are we really going with the "you're only a real fan if you buy games for £40"?).

 

Its not about price to the people who want it. Its about the anticipation of wanting to play the game as quickly as you possible can, 60 dollars being probably the hugest barrier to a lot of people. I personally cant wait till its on sale. I wont. I really want to play it that badly. And I dont give a fuck about the cover because chances are Ill only look at it when I bring it home, when I finish it and put the disc back in and maybe once or twice more when I replay it in a few months or even years. Its fucking stupid to complain about it. There is no gray area or room for discussion - its a fucking cover. The actual game is probably going to be amazing, or at least better than the cover. Get the fuck over it.

 

And Im not directing this abrasive behavior at you, just anyone.

[TheMightyEthan]

Its a fucking game cover and you probably wont buy it unless its less than full price anyways...so shut the fuck up. Most people who buy this on release day or even the first month probably arent going to give a fuck about the cover AKA the real fans who just want to play an amazing fucking game.

 

Yes, I'm sure none of the people complaining about the terrible cover have preorders for the game or anything.

 

I really cant imagine anyone here paying 60 bucks for a game. I figure Im the only one who does(maybe 2 or 3 times a year).

Maybe you mean PC(with some kind of preorder sale or special offer or something), which to me doesnt really count. Which would probably be downloadable, with no cover. Its be a moot point.

 

I buy games for full price at launch all the time. Just in the last month or so I can think of Far Cry 3, Halo 4, Assassin's Creed 3, Assassin's Creed Liberation, New Super Mario Bros U, and Scribblenauts Unlimited (regretted that one). Granted it's a dense release time right now, and that's a lot more than normal for a similar time frame, but I do buy them. And I wasn't speaking just about this forum, but about all the people complaining about the cover. You made it sound like only people who won't be buying it at launch are complaining, when I really really doubt that's the case.

 

*Edit* - Also, the fact that the game's probably going to be good makes the bad cover worse. If some shitty game has a shitty cover, who the fuck cares? Like you said, we're not going to buy those anyway. It's the ones that we expect to love, and want to keep on our shelf that we care if they look nice.

Edited December 13, 2012 by TheMightyEthan

[Saturnine Tenshi]

I regularly pay full price for games. o: Just not PC games. It's much easier to find a PC game on sale.

[toxicitizen]

I really cant imagine anyone here paying 60 bucks for a game. I figure Im the only one who does(maybe 2 or 3 times a year).

 

Lol. How do you figure that? I buy full priced games multiples times a year. Actually more than 2 or 3.

 

Admittedly, lately I've been reverting to PC as my main platform so while I've been buying games at launch I can somtimes get them cheaper, but I still bought a bunch of 60$ games this year.

[Hot Heart]

I don't like the implications of all these new covers. Maybe they've put too much thought into the game. And what's with the poll? Can't they make their own minds up? Makes you wonder how scatterbrained the final game will be, especially if they can't even keep a consistent art style on the covers.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

Makes you wonder how scatterbrained the final game will be, especially if they can't even keep a consistent art style on the covers.

 

What? Have you never seen concept art? Plenty of it will be done in completely different styles than the game itself. I mean what the fuck. They're artists. They create and create until it gets focused. After you get that focus you can do spins on it for promotional work like this. It's an absolutely gigantic jump to think that a game is scatterbrained because the fucking cover art doesn't look the same for all of the choices. This is seriously the worst thing I've read all day and I've even been on Reddit today!

[Hot Heart]

Haha. Dude, it's a fucking parody of what happened a few (hundred) pages ago.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

Thank fuck.

[SomTervo]

I'm afraid FDS, I gotta say that was pretty classic Hottie pastiche behaviour. Should'a picked up on it!

 

The Songbird.

 

It's essentially the ultimate form of the Big Daddy relationship as far as Infinite goes. It has been the personal protector of Elizabeth ever since she was a small child, and Elizabeth actually doesn't want Booker to hurt Songbird either, or vice versa. It's said to be the most feared creature of Colombia, so when you hear it, soiling yourself would be an understatement.

 

Yeah man, I remember what the Songbird is all about, just not what his name is. Ty.

 

What's the original cover like? Haven't seen that.

It's on page 4. It's very close to image 3 of the optional covers just minus Elizabeth.

 

Ah, good shout. Don't like it. Prefer #3 up there.

[Waldorf and Statler]

I didn't realize that the game took place in my home country of Colombia. At least according to you guys.

[CorgiShinobi]

Well, I meant Columbia.

 

You know, in an alternate universe where the sportswear company went all poticial and constructed a floating city out of their highly advanced fabric. There's no way the Songbird could fly without wings made of winter coats!

[Waldorf and Statler]

It'd be awesome if someone could do a study/estimation about how much it would cost to build one of the cities from Bioshock irl. I'd say Columbia is out of the question as keeping something of that size afloat requires more technology and fuel that we are capable of, but Rapture could definitely be made. Even if to a lesser extent. Would humans have a hard time adapting to pressure? Or would it already be pressurized? How deep into the ocean is it? How do they get around the city besides walking? Do splicers like to add salt n pepper to their food or are they tired of extra splices? These are all burning questions my nerdy mind needs answered.

 

Even more than how much the Death Star would cost in terms of cash and natural resources.

[TheMightyEthan]

We know people could adapt to the pressure fine at least, because we have done (much much smaller scale) expeditions to very deep places before. Also, if you REALLY wanted to get ridiculous you could completely over-engineer the structures to be able to withstand having normal atmospheric pressures inside, but I don't think we have the materials technology to do that yet.

[deanb]

A floating city is much more feasible than an underwater one. Fuel is pretty much the only major issue*. You're not having to build it to withstand hundreds of atmospheres, and should shit hit the fan you're able to escape a falling city much simpler than flooding under-the-sea one. It's also much simpler to get people and supplies to, no dealings with the bends and submarines are much fewer in number than aircraft.

 

*though you can supply electricity via wind turbines, and an underwater city lacking any natural sunlight would require constant lighting which eats up a fair chunk of fuel too.

[TheMightyEthan]

I would actually argue that the structural problems of trying to support a large city in the air would be greater than the structural problems of protecting against pressure.

 

We simply don't have the technology to make something like that fly. Look how big the lift surfaces have to be compared to the useable area of something like an airplane or helicopter. Or how huge the sacs have to be compared to the cabin in something like a dirigible. Fuel/power is definitely a concern, but I don't necessarily think it's the biggest one, weight ratios are.

 

As for power in an undersea city, just use a nuclear reactor. Simple.

[deanb]

The Mil V-12 exists (40 years ago too). And that's pretty damn big. And without the bonus support of lots of hot air/helium. We';ve also made vast leaps and bounds in structural engineering,able to create buildings that extend over half a mile into the sky without crushing in on themselves, and bridges are getting longer every year too, mainly in China as well and they strike me as a country crazy enough to be bale to pull something like this off.

 

Submersible wise there's Sealab, which ended in failure once they tried to get near 150M below, nowhere near the depth you'd want for Rapture given that'd have plenty of the buildings sticking out above the water, and nowhere near the size you'd want for even a small village never mind a city (they're smaller than the helicopter even).

[SomTervo]

Pfft, don't quote Sealab as a legit piece of evidence.

 

 

(On topic: idk who to agree with more. So air pressure is obv the biggest ish for underwater depth, whereas maintaining structural integrity while afloat is the biggest ish for a floating fortress. Fuel is an ish for both, the floating fortress probably more so, has to move etc.

 

But isn't air pressure still an issue for the floating fortress? I imagine technically an underwater city would be easier to make structurally/ economically- but practically probably the more difficult of the two. You'd have to piecemeal pressurize and build and pressurize and build for fucking years to construct it. Whereas a flying thing you just build and take off. I think they're both obviously pretty unrealistic at this point, so I'm just going for "what if we did have the means in the first place" approach. )

Edited December 18, 2012 by kenshi_ryden

[TheMightyEthan]

Pressure wouldn't be near as much an issue for a flying city. Sure there are air pressure changes as you go higher, but they're not nearly as big as going underwater, and you can go up a couple miles into the sky before you start needing to pressurize stuff.

 

To put it in perspective, at sealevel the atmospheric pressure is one atmosphere, and you have to go up something like 50 miles to get down to basically zero atmospheres (a reduction in pressure of one atmosphere). On the other hand, if you're going underwater you only have to go down 33 feet to get an increase in pressure of one atmosphere (to two atmospheres total) and it continues to increase at one atmosphere for every 33 feet as long as you keep going down.

 

So a major problem with tall buildings underwater like we see in Rapture is that each floor would have to be pressurized separately, because the pressures from the outside would be so different for each of them.

 

@Dean: Los Angeles class submarines have depths of up to nearly 300 meters considered to be within their normal operating range, so clearly we can build structures that can go deeper than 150 meters. Park one of those on the ocean floor, instant underwater base.