• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Bioshock Infinite IGN Review In Progress: A.K.A Console Owners Cry

Vire

Member
IGN started another one of those review and progresses, but unfortunately there was a bit of news in it worth mentioning to GAF at large.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/03/18/bioshock-infinite-review-in-progress
cityintheskyonlinewideusejpg-9f0d67.jpg

Here's the gist of it:

It quickly becomes clear when you start playing Infinite that Columbia is both exactly the same as the original’s underwater utopia of Rapture, yet simultaneously completely different. One is underwater; claustrophobic. The other is endless; the sky is literally the limit. Both are utopias – idealistic clusters of humanity – with cracks beginning to show through beneath the magnificent facades.


Take the time to soak in the sights.

On that note, however, let me warn you console players up front: unlike its jaw-dropping-in-2007 predecessor (I’m not counting BioShock 2 here, as that wasn’t our first trip to Rapture), BioShock Infinite does not have the same technical wow-factor going for it. Yes, Columbia is stunning from a scale, scope, and art-direction perspective, but on a raw graphical level it is a bit underwhelming on the Xbox 360 version I’m starting with. Textures are muddy and low-resolution and the framerate takes regular slight-but-noticeable dips. It reminds me of the console version of Dishonored in that way.

Do these minor issues take away from your experience at all? No, but I’m very curious to check out the PC version during the course of my review. Presuming you throw a beefy enough rig at Infinite, the ol’ mouse-and-keyboard may prove to be the best way to explore Columbia, particularly since, with no multiplayer modes, you don’t have to worry about choosing your platform based on which network your friends will be playing on.

Summary:

Console version has muddy/low resolution textures and regular framerate dips.

Apologies to IGN for original post.
 
I was really hoping the Xbox 360 version would be a good port, but I may want to experience this at its fullest on the PC now. And I don't ever do that, in spite of my high-end PC rig.
 
Not too surprising really, based on how ambitious this game looks. The console versions of Farcry 3 kind of foreshadowed this I think...
 

Fjordson

Member
Unfortunate, but I'm not really surprised. Not that bad console versions are acceptable, but there's not much devs can do at this point with ancient hardware.

Just hope it's not a total mess. Probably going to rent it first now to be sure.
 

Vire

Member
This is really why I think Take-Two needs get in front of their product and show the console version.

I was a bit worried when everything they have shown was from the PC version.

Are they saying it looks worse than Bioshock or just that it doesn't have the same wow-factor anymore? :/

I dunno, I was wondering the same thing myself.
 
Well, Dishonored did have some gross texture work on consoles, but overall I don't feel it negatively effected my experience. If the game is half as good as it seems like it is, it is going to be my first of two Day-1 games this year.
 

benny_a

extra source of jiggaflops
Also I would take anything IGN says with a grain of salt.
Dude it's the year new consoles are coming out. The console versions of current generation multiplatform games aren't going to wow you.

This is entirely expected.

I'm sure it's going to look great on PS3 or 360 to anyone who is used to playing games on those consoles, rather than on a high end PC. Like myself, for example.
That's not automatically true.
God of War Ascension was released this week on PS3 that is looking quite good.
Gears of War Judgment is releasing this week on 360 and is looking quite good.
 

Muffdraul

Member
I'm sure it's going to look great on PS3 or 360 to anyone who is used to playing games on those consoles, rather than on a high end PC. Like myself, for example.
 

hey_it's_that_dog

benevolent sexism
"Columbia is stunning when you look at it but if you autistically stare at individual textures or edges it looks like a console game. 9/10"

What? BioShock has never ben jaw-dropping on console. Its merits were on the great artistic design and overall visuals, but surely not technical.

Also this. I've been replaying a little of Bioshock 1 on PC and it looks awesome, but the individual assets are not particularly high res.
 
What? BioShock has never ben jaw-dropping on console. Its merits were on the great artistic design and overall visuals, but surely not technical.

You are remembering things wrong. No game on consoles looked as good as Bioshock when it was released. MAYBE COD4, maybe...but Bioshock looked a bit better imo.
 

Vire

Member
The game runs worse on 7 year old hardware.
How is this news?

Uncharted 3/God of War Ascension/Gears of War Judgement/Red Dead Redemption all still look pretty fantastic.

So yeah I dunno, if that's a valid point. Granted this is multi-platform.
 

apesh1t

Banned
As a console gamer, I'm used to it. I'm playing Far Cry 3 right now on the 360 and it's kind of harsh on my eyes. I watch HD YouTube videos of the game and it's a visual feast.

I never liked the art style in Bioshock/dishonored anyways. Wasn't even a big fan of the first Bioshock *gasp!*
 

ruxtpin

Banned
I thought Dishonored looked good on the 360...

I'm sure with the next-gen consoles coming out later this year we'll see the game ported over anyhow.
 

nbthedude

Member
Pre-ordered on PC (due to the bonuses). I think it is kind of a given that at the end of a console generation the last games that come out are going to have a hard time keeping pace if the game is in any way pushing the hardware (whether through graphics, environmental systems, or AI).

This bodes well that they didn't throttle back the vision too heavily just to match specs.
 

Jb

Member
Wait, the console version of Dishonored didn't have framerate problems. Murky textures... sure, why not. Isn't he thinking of something else?
 

Jonm1010

Banned
Makes me glad I made the switch to majority PC gaming last year - as much of a technical struggle it was at first for me to stop being fustrated with it.

Glad next gen is right around the corner though.
 

jwk94

Member
What's wrong with their review in progress series? It's informative, and gives you an advances look at the review which isn't too bad when we've got embargoes that go up the day of release.
 

teokrazia

Member
I loved BioShock graphics but it was nothing near a "technical wow-factor".
It was showing clearly his UE2.5 roots, since day one.
 

Amir0x

Banned
i wonder if my HD Radeon 7870 will run this game >:)

haha just kidding poor console-only owners, I remember only mid-way into this past gen I still hadn't got a gaming grade PC. Didn't even know how to build my own. With the help of that neoGAF PC thread, Evilore and others, I built myself a damn mean PC back in 2010. Then since I got comfortable with building it, it became easy to upkeep parts and swap slowly so the expense was much lower over time when I need it. Plus since my brother-in-law gets parts all the time, it also helps.

It's so much better to do it that way, though, slowly upgrading PCs and keeping up with what the games demand than to have to do it all at once, much more manageable. Highly recommend the neoGAF PC Build topics.
 

dark10x

Digital Foundry pixel pusher
Sounds like nearly every console game released in last 3 years.
Not necessarily true. Look at something like Tomb Raider which ran smoothly on consoles while delivering solid visuals. The PC version was fucked up at launch as well.
 
Top Bottom