Originally posted by DanZeke25
Nevermind I got it. I finally figured out how to read the Tenenbaum said last. I had to go to Little Wonders to get something.It was still a bug though, because I got the achievement for Becoming a Big Daddy twice.
EDIT:
Spoiler:
I remember hearing that only people with Ryan's DNA can use the Vita Chambers(since you are his son, you can use them) So I think it's possible he returned to the nearest Vita Chamber and only god knows where he went after that.
It's not a bug. There are several objectives related to that goal.
You should check the objectives screen more and cycle through them.
As for mouse- easier or not, it's still simply plain better.
Originally posted by ESB -1138
No, it didn't. Halo 1 and 2 on the Xbox had no form of an autoaim. I know this is for Halo 3 but the buttons really haven't changed:
Yes, they both did. If your cross-hairs landed on an enemy it would follow them as they moved a little bit, like a weak magnet. The PC version of Halo:CE didn't have this, however. That's why on Halo 1 for the PC you could score 1-hit kill headshots with the pistol.
I was going to put this in the Halo 3 thread, but well, its about Bioshock so no.
But if anybody has been in the Halo 3 thread, you would find this funny.
http://www.joystiq.com/2007/09/06/bioshock-gets-the-zero-punctuation-treatment/
Originally posted by Smasandian
I was going to put this in the Halo 3 thread, but well, its about Bioshock so no.But if anybody has been in the Halo 3 thread, you would find this funny.
http://www.joystiq.com/2007/09/06/bioshock-gets-the-zero-punctuation-treatment/
It's all true, too. Though every game has its flaws, and Bioshock's still an excellent game.
Does anyone want to tell me what was hidden in that link that hadn't been said and refuted a million times?
"It's too easy!", that's not a game flaw. That's a player-derived perception of a game and entirely subjective. Unless we're talking about subjective flaws here, in which case nobody is claiming the game is perfect, just that it has pushed certain boundaries in modern gaming. In terms of graphics, as one of the "humourous" quotes suggested, you probably won't look at certain games the same again after having seen what CAN be done.
It's just stupid "Bioshock has got a lot of praise, so I'm gonna go the opposite way to balance it out.". If you've got an argument against the game, at least have one that lasts more than a paragraph and works.
I find Halo boring beyond belief, that's not a Halo flaw, it's fun to some people.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Does anyone want to tell me what was hidden in that link that hadn't been said and refuted a million times?"It's too easy!", that's not a game flaw. That's a player-derived perception of a game and entirely subjective. Unless we're talking about subjective flaws here, in which case nobody is claiming the game is perfect, just that it has pushed certain boundaries in modern gaming. In terms of graphics, as one of the "humourous" quotes suggested, you probably won't look at certain games the same again after having seen what CAN be done.
It's just stupid "Bioshock has got a lot of praise, so I'm gonna go the opposite way to balance it out.". If you've got an argument against the game, at least have one that lasts more than a paragraph and works.
I find Halo boring beyond belief, that's not a Halo flaw, it's fun to some people.
-AC
Most reviews say it's too easy because there are no consequences or penalties for dying, which I can understand entirely.
It is too easy. When you can walk up to a Big Daddy and just keep whacking it with a wrench because you know you'll pop out of a revive-o-matic with no penalty when it kills you, that's the difficulty AND atmosphere broken. When those machines are in practically every other room, even moreso. As it is, I would feel perfectly justified with using an invincibilty cheat because I'm already invincible - I'm just taking out the middle man of the vita-chamber.
It's a good game, but it's not an astounding herald of a new generation of gaming nirvana.
Originally posted by H. S. 6
Most reviews say it's too easy because there are no consequences or penalties for dying, which I can understand entirely.
That doesn't necessarily make it easy. It's not easy to kill Big Daddies, hence why you respawn a lot.
If you mean that the respawning renders the Big Daddies less imposing and fearsome, then fine. If there was no respawn, you'd be complaining.
Originally posted by General Kaliero
When you can walk up to a Big Daddy and just keep whacking it with a wrench because you know you'll pop out of a revive-o-matic with no penalty when it kills you, that's the difficulty AND atmosphere broken. When those machines are in practically every other room, even moreso.
Have you been playing on Easy? Cos they're far from in every other room.
And if you actually do that to a Big Daddy, you're ruining the atmosphere for yourself. If you do that rather than try to take it out without being killed, then it's your own problem.
Big Daddies aren't easy to kill. You can't have it both ways.
-AC
Originally posted by Smasandian
Playing on regular setting, or medium as its called and I had no trouble killing Big Daddies.I hate those stupid chambers, totally take away any sort of challenge in the game.
Here comes the bandwagon of "Let's all diss the chambers, since that's about to become the accepted view.".
Has anyone here killed a Big Daddy on first try?
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Here comes the bandwagon of "Let's all diss the chambers, since that's about to become the accepted view.".Has anyone here killed a Big Daddy on first try?
-AC
Yes.
And yes, it does, unfortunately, take away the tension to many scenarios with the Big Daddies. That much is rather undeniable. You didn't have to be too concerned with using cover or strategy with the plasmids, when you knew you could simply respawn and repeat the process until he was put down. I'd say that's a flaw in the system.
EDIT: The removal of the chambers would be an improvement, in my opinion. While the Big Daddies were certainly a challenge, they weren't impossible to put down without having to respawn. Personally, I think many gamers would welcome the challenge, and there's always Easy mode for those who thought it was too hard.
Originally posted by H. S. 6
Yes.And yes, it does, unfortunately, take away the tension to many scenarios with the Big Daddies. That much is rather undeniable. You didn't have to be too concerned with using cover or strategy with the plasmids, when you knew you could simply respawn and repeat the process until he was put down. I'd say that's a flaw in the system.
EDIT: The removal of the chambers would be an improvement, in my opinion. While the Big Daddies were certainly a challenge, they weren't impossible to put down without having to respawn. Personally, I think many gamers would welcome the challenge, and there's always easy for those who thought it was too hard.
It's not undeniable, nothing was ruined for me. I didn't go in and fight them cheaply so I could be respawned, that's ruining the game and abusing the vita chambers for your own benefit, it's not their fault you chose to play that way. It's like someone said, you might as well use an invincibility cheat if you're gonna play that cheaply.
Well then what's your issue? You're saying it was too easy, but not. It's a nonsense argument. If they aren't impossible to put down without respawning, and ARE a challenge, what's your issue? Did you try to die so you could be respawned or something?
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
It's not undeniable, nothing was ruined for me. I didn't go in and fight them cheaply so I could be respawned, that's ruining the game and abusing the vita chambers for your own benefit, it's not their fault you chose to play that way. It's like someone said, you might as well use an invincibility cheat if you're gonna play that cheaply.Well then what's your issue? You're saying it was too easy, but not. It's a nonsense argument. If they aren't impossible to put down without respawning, and ARE a challenge, what's your issue? Did you try to die so you could be respawned or something?
-AC
It's not as if I ran out swinging the wrench, as someone said earlier. However, you didn't have to be over cautious taking cover, using the environment for your advantage, strategizing, etc. when, perhaps even subconsciously, you knew that if you were killed, you'd be respawned anyway. This took away from the environment and tension the developers obviously took time to build up.
I think you misunderstand what I meant in my edit. I was saying that the Big Daddies were a challenge to kill without dying, but it wasn't altogether impossible. In other words, the removal of the Vita-Chambers would force players to fight strategically, penalize them if they lost, and help to strengthen the sense of intimidation Big Daddies were supposed to inspire.