Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

BioShock Patch

A new patch is now available for BioShock, bringing the shooter to version 1.1, adding, among other things, the long-ago promised true support for widescreen monitors (story). There are before-and-after screenshots of the new widescreen mode on VideoGamer.com, and you can find full details on the PC patch as well as the corresponding Xbox 360 update on The Cult of Rapture. The patch comes in two flavors, an English/USK German and another patch for the rest of the world, the English/USK German patch is available from ActionTrip, AtomicGamer, ComputerGames.ro, FanGaming, FileFront, FileShack, Gamer's Hell, and PixelRage; and the worldwide patch is available on ActionTrip, AtomicGamer, ComputerGames.ro, FanGaming, FileFront, FileShack, Gamer's Hell, and PixelRage.

View
55 Replies. 3 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 ] Older >

55. Re: Too, bad. Dec 5, 2007, 22:26 Ecthelion
 
K, so you focused on the question, which was irrelevant anyways, instead of the main points. "Windows 2000 was never meant for average consumers to begin with, and is no longer sold in stores."
I was just answering your question, that's all. If it makes you feel better about yourself for me to admit it wasn't a great example, then fine - it wasn't a great example. It was just something I typed up quickly. It wasn't meant to be a great analogy, but rather another example of something that some people want to continue using past its time.

Why? Because you said so? SM2 is not "obsolete". MOST new games still use and support it. Very very few have tossed it aside altogether and supporting only 3.0. UT3 engine even supports it, but 2k chose not to use it.
Splinter Cell: Double Agent, which came out almost exactly a year ago, was SM3 only. Bioshock is hardly the first in that regard. 2 years ago it would have taken a little foresight to know SM3 was going to take off (although it certainly wouldn't have been much of an assumption, considering the adoption of previous DX technologies), but 1 year ago people would have seen games like Double Agent and thought "if I want to keep playing PC games, I better get one of those SM3 cards!" Once games started supporting SM3 (which was over 2 years ago), even though it wasn't required, anybody could see that an upgrade would be good to plan for in the near future.

Because researching a video card before purchase somehow gives everyone the ability to predict the future? How the fuck would someone buying a video card a year ago know that 2k Games would support only 3.0 with Bioshock a year later?
They wouldn't know about Bioshock specifically, but other games like Double Agent (and Rainbow Six Vegas) started the trend over a year ago. Anyone that had followed either of those games would have been able to see that the SM3 requirement was announced prior to release, which pushes that date even farther back.

I'm confused as to why Bioshock is catching lots of flak for being SM3 only, when it's hardly the first game to do so.

Direct X 9 has been around for 5 years!!! Developers didn't drop DX 8 support for years later. Some even still support Dx8. No game (that I know of) has been made Dx10 only...even Halo 2 and Shadowrun that were Vista exclusive were Dx9. Care to try for another analogy?
When did I say Developers had dropped support for DX9.0c? I don't expect that for another 1 or 2 years (possibly more, depending on what happens with Vista adoption). As far as DX9 is concerned, "obsolete" was perhaps too strong of a word. But it's headed that way.

DX10 has only been out a year - it's too soon to expect DX10-only games. DX9.0c was out for 2 years before we got SM3-only games (as far as I can tell, Double Agent was the first). Anyway, DX9.0c has been out for 3 years now. It's not unreasonable for developers to start making SM3-only games. Back in April of 2006 (over 1.5 years ago), when I upgraded my video card to get better performance out of Oblivion, I specifically looked for a SM3 card, because I knew that it was going to become the norm in a year or two. I didn't have to be clairvoyant to arrive at that conclusion. I saw the technology, saw that SM3-only games were going to come out soon, and decided to upgrade to SM3.

Of course, if ATI had supported SM3 earlier, this wouldn't be much of a problem. But they had SM3 cards out 2 years ago. I would be willing to bet that a large portion of SM2 gamers (as revealed by the Steam survey) haven't upgraded their cards in over 2 years. If you're going to upgrade, why not future-proof as much as you can? I can see not purchasing the top of the line (I've never done it myself), but you should at least go for something that supports new tech that's likely to take off. Next time I upgrade my graphics card, I would certainly look for a DX10 (probably 10.1 by the time I upgrade) card - it's just common sense.


This comment was edited on Dec 5, 22:29.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
54. Re: Too, bad. Dec 5, 2007, 18:14 Krovven
 
Yes, Win2k was sold in stores. I used to work at Staples, and we sold quite a few copies. I remember we still had it in stock (although not on the shelf at that point) as of 2004, at which point I moved and stopped working there.

K, so you focused on the question, which was irrelevant anyways, instead of the main points. "Windows 2000 was never meant for average consumers to begin with, and is no longer sold in stores."

But anyone who bought a SM2 card 1 or 2 years ago should have known it would be obsolete by now.

Why? Because you said so? SM2 is not "obsolete". MOST new games still use and support it. Very very few have tossed it aside altogether and supporting only 3.0. UT3 engine even supports it, but 2k chose not to use it.

Any gamer who buys a graphics card at retail should research the card first. If not, he has no one to blame but himself when the latest games won't run on his card.

Because researching a video card before purchase somehow gives everyone the ability to predict the future? How the fuck would someone buying a video card a year ago know that 2k Games would support only 3.0 with Bioshock a year later?

I'm sure I'll be complaining when developers stop supporting DX9.0c

Direct X 9 has been around for 5 years!!! Developers didn't drop DX 8 support for years later. Some even still support Dx8. No game (that I know of) has been made Dx10 only...even Halo 2 and Shadowrun that were Vista exclusive were Dx9. Care to try for another analogy?


----------------------------------------------------
Currently fragging in Team Fortress 2, Episode 2, Portal and CoH Opposing Fronts.

Join the "Blues News" Steam Community Group. http://steamcommunity.com/groups/bluesnews/
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
53. Re: Too, bad. Dec 5, 2007, 16:30 Ecthelion
 
Windows 2000 was never meant for average consumers to begin with, and is no longer sold in stores...was it ever? Bad comparison.
Yes, Win2k was sold in stores. I used to work at Staples, and we sold quite a few copies. I remember we still had it in stock (although not on the shelf at that point) as of 2004, at which point I moved and stopped working there.

Shader 2.0 cards are still sold in retail. The newest ones are only a 1 to 1.5 years old. Far from being 7 years old.
It reminds me of the GeForce4 MX situation. A lot of clueless gamers bought them, thinking that they had a GeForce4 capable of running the latest and greatest games. At the time, cutting-edge games didn't support them. The difference is that there were quite a few good SM2 cards made after SM3 had debuted, whereas the GeForce4 MX was never a good card. But anyone who bought a SM2 card 1 or 2 years ago should have known it would be obsolete by now.

Any gamer who buys a graphics card at retail should research the card first. If not, he has no one to blame but himself when the latest games won't run on his card.

I'm sure I'll be complaining when developers stop supporting DX9.0c, but I certainly won't blame them for my reluctance to upgrade. Switching to the Xbox is always an option for the people that can't afford to keep upgrading, after all.

This comment was edited on Dec 5, 16:30.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
52. Re: Too, bad. Dec 5, 2007, 14:04 Krovven
 

This is like people who still want support for Windows 2000. You can use it all you want, and there are valid reasons for doing so. But it's totally unreasonable to expect it to be supported after all this time.

Windows 2000 was never meant for average consumers to begin with, and is no longer sold in stores...was it ever? Bad comparison.

Shader 2.0 cards are still sold in retail. The newest ones are only a 1 to 1.5 years old. Far from being 7 years old.

2k Games not including 2.0 support isn't out of laziness, it's because of the cost of providing testing and support for all those other video cards. Time consuming and expensive.

Would I like it if they had...yes. However, if I was in their shoes I would probably make the same business decision. Somewhere you have to decide if you think you will get a large enough return to warrant that extra time and cost for support on older hardware.

And yes, Riley is still an idiot.

----------------------------------------------------
Currently fragging in Team Fortress 2, Episode 2, Portal and CoH Opposing Fronts.

Join the "Blues News" Steam Community Group. http://steamcommunity.com/groups/bluesnews/
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
51. Re: Too, bad. Dec 4, 2007, 23:35 Ecthelion
 
First, that is not true of ATI's entire product line of the past two years. The 1550 models for one are not shader 3.0 compliant. Second, you are ignoring the fact that older cards are still sold in the retail channel even after they have been supplanted by newer models. For example, when I was shopping for a video card last year, I almost chose an ATI X850 model due to its slightly better price/performance ratio compared to similarly priced cards from the same online retailer. I ended up choosing an Nvidia model despite its lower average benchmark performance and fewer pipelines because of its SLI capability. However if I had chosen the ATI card, I would be pissed now since I couldn't run the game with it even though it otherwise has enough power to render this game.
I'm not sure where you're getting your information about the 1550 - according to ATI's website, it supports SM3 (http://ati.amd.com/products/radeonx1550/specs.html). But let's assume that ATI is lying about that and it really isn't. It would hardly be the fault of game developers that video card manufacturers have misleading product lines.

The fact is that Irrational could have written a second set of shaders for Bioshock that are shader model 2.0 compatible just as Epic did with UT3.
But that wouldn't be cost or time effective. Epic has designed UT3 to be playable on a wide range of machines. Bioshock, on the other hand, was always designed to be cutting edge. The question remains - how many people have hardware capable of running Bioshock (except the video card) and are still using SM2.0 cards? SM3.0 is becoming the norm in games now, and developers are not going to continue devoting time to making their games SM2.0 compatible. If you had chosen a X850 last year, you would have ended up unable to play Bioshock due to your lack of research. One can argue that gamers shouldn't have to research their video card purchases, but they do. That's the world we live in.

This is like people who still want support for Windows 2000. You can use it all you want, and there are valid reasons for doing so. But it's totally unreasonable to expect it to be supported after all this time.

This comment was edited on Dec 4, 23:36.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
50. Re: No subject Dec 4, 2007, 22:06 Syntarsus
 
It couldn't "find the original file" when patching.
It still said update completed.
When I start the game it says version 1.1.
My options are all weird, keep getting a widescreen and windowed mode.
And the game keeps crashing when loading or starting a new game.
Yay.
Fuck.
Same deal here. Although for me it still says version 1.0 on the title screen. I guess the patch fucked up my install. That's just great seeing as how we only get three of em. Fuck 2K.

Did you install the German/English patch? I did, and got the same thing. Then I installed the worldwide patch (*without* reinstalling the game) and it worked. One difference I noticed is the ENG/GER version says it's for the censored version of the game, while the worldwide is for the uncensored. I guess if the gore looks rather vivid and you hear F-bombs coming from the splicers and audio recordings, you've got the uncensored version.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
49. Re: Too, bad. Dec 4, 2007, 21:58 >U
 
but ATI has had SM3 cards for 2 years
First, that is not true of ATI's entire product line of the past two years. The 1550 models for one are not shader 3.0 compliant. Second, you are ignoring the fact that older cards are still sold in the retail channel even after they have been supplanted by newer models. For example, when I was shopping for a video card last year, I almost chose an ATI X850 model due to its slightly better price/performance ratio compared to similarly priced cards from the same online retailer. I ended up choosing an Nvidia model despite its lower average benchmark performance and fewer pipelines because of its SLI capability. However if I had chosen the ATI card, I would be pissed now since I couldn't run the game with it even though it otherwise has enough power to render this game.

The fact is that Irrational could have written a second set of shaders for Bioshock that are shader model 2.0 compatible just as Epic did with UT3.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
48. Re: Too, bad. Dec 4, 2007, 21:22 Ecthelion
 
I guess it's possible m$ and nivida are paying extra to prevent them from implementing 2.0+, as is often done for different reasons.
I realize the conspiracy theory explanation is always the popular choice these days, but could it be that they thought their target market consisted of people with fairly new computers (meaning they have SM3 cards)? How many people have a computer powerful enough to run the game, but don't have a SM3 card?

I certainly understand some people not being able to upgrade very often (I haven't in over a year myself), but ATI has had SM3 cards for 2 years, and nVidia has had SM3 cards for 3 years. This isn't a new, cutting-edge technology like DX10. If people want to play current PC games, it's well past the time they upgraded. The same thing will be true of DX10 in another 2 or 3 years.

EDIT: Enahs is right about the 3 endings. I only played through once, but I watched all three endings by viewing the BIK files. As he said, two of them have the same video, and only slightly different audio.


This comment was edited on Dec 4, 21:25.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
47. Re: No subject Dec 4, 2007, 20:56 sponge
 
Such a bunch of whiny bitches.

What's whiny about not wanting developers to half-ass a feature in a game, and to do it properly? It's a bug, a bug that in my case made me feel slightly motion sick, and it had to be fixed.

This comment was edited on Dec 4, 20:57.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
46. No subject Dec 4, 2007, 20:40 xXBatmanXx
 
Such a bunch of whiny bitches.

Supporter of the Cell Phone Jamming movement.
 
Avatar 10714
 
In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. / Few men have virtue enough to withstand the highest bidder.
Playing: New dad
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
45. Re: No subject Dec 4, 2007, 20:20 Yakumo
 
'Once you go widescreen you'll never go back!'

I did :p

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
44. Re: No subject Dec 4, 2007, 19:13 PHJF
 
Hooray, now I can stop using bioshockFOV.exe!!!

Oh wait, I deleted the game over a month ago
 
Avatar 17251
 
Steam + PSN: PHJF
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
43. No subject Dec 4, 2007, 18:36 cronik
 
I don't understand how this game didn't come with proper widescreen support in the first place, I mean we are talking 2007 here and surely 9 out of 10 gamers are using widescreens now.

Once you go widescreen you'll never go back!

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
42. Re: Too, bad. Dec 4, 2007, 18:31 Acleacius
 
Shader 2.0 is supported in U3 engine and there is a fan made Shader 2.0b, though I have looked in a couple of months, it worked great 2 months ago.

This was done without access to the design tools in about a month by guys doing it part time, while it took much longer than the widescreen it obviously was more complicated.
So maybe your definition of trivial is different than what is possible.
I guess it's possible m$ and nivida are paying extra to prevent them from implementing 2.0+, as is often done for different reasons.

http://bioshocksm2.blogspot.com/


This comment was edited on Dec 4, 18:32.
 
The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders.That is easy.All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger.It works the same way in any country.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
41. Re: No subject Dec 4, 2007, 17:44 Krovven
 
Why is the online activation such an issue.

See the two posts about their install getting messed up...

I guess the patch fucked up my install. That's just great seeing as how we only get three of em. Fuck 2K.

That's why. Not so much the online activation I have a problem with as it is the limited installs and having to download and use an external utility to recapture those installs. It's a silly restriction that does nothing more than annoy people.

Which BTW, they have upped to 5 installs if I'm not mistaken.

----------------------------------------------------
Currently fragging in Team Fortress 2, Episode 2, Portal and CoH Opposing Fronts.

Join the "Blues News" Steam Community Group. http://steamcommunity.com/groups/bluesnews/
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
40. Re: Widescreen Dec 4, 2007, 17:43 Enahs
 
Still don't get how gamers can release fixes or a work arond faster than people who get paid to do the work.

Uhh, because they did not want to pay for QA for 50 different patches, so they waited until all the "critical" things in their eyes were ready to go in one patch?

I think it was stupid to not put out an official temporary workaround while not being a full patch though.



Alternating Logo (GreaseMonkey script):
http://www.ualr.edu/szsullivan/scripts_/BluesNewslogo.user.js
 
Avatar 15513
 
I am free of all prejudice. I hate everyone equally.
- W. C. Fields
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
39. Re: No subject Dec 4, 2007, 17:42 g_mann
 
Wow the DLC is crap

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
38. Widescreen Dec 4, 2007, 17:39 4D-Boxing
 
I thought these guys said there was no widescreen issue with the game when it came out.

Still don't get how gamers can release fixes or a work arond faster than people who get paid to do the work.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
37. Re: No subject Dec 4, 2007, 17:28 Enahs
 
Enahs if you check the (think it's bik files) there are only 2 endings. And if I'm not mistaken they are full movie bik files (video and audio).

Wrong. You check it. There are three. Two have the same video, with different audio (same words, different tone). You go look. I have seen all "three".


HarvestedGathers.bik : 48,237,976 bytes
KilledGathers.bik : 39,927,076 bytes
SavedGathers.bik : 46,869,420 bytes

Three different endings, technically. Though again, two are nearly identical.

Alternating Logo (GreaseMonkey script):
http://www.ualr.edu/szsullivan/scripts_/BluesNewslogo.user.js


This comment was edited on Dec 4, 17:34.
 
Avatar 15513
 
I am free of all prejudice. I hate everyone equally.
- W. C. Fields
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
36. Re: No subject Dec 4, 2007, 17:20 The Half Elf
 
Enahs if you check the (think it's bik files) there are only 2 endings. And if I'm not mistaken they are full movie bik files (video and audio).

 
Avatar 12670
 
"I've never seen a feature like this before. It warms your ass. It's wonderful" -Walter Bishop
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
55 Replies. 3 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 ] Older >


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo