Levine responds to BioShock widescreen concerns |
It goes without saying that internet time is a very strange thing. In the videogame world, it means that information moves instantaneously, but only if the people who're supposed to get that information are online to receive it. That being said, Irrational Games' Ken Levine, the creative director of BioShock (Xbox 360, PC), responded to earlier concerns about problems with BioShock's widescreen by asking for patience and understanding from the public.
Wrote Levine on the 2K Games boards:
Sorry about all the conflict. IG development people (specifically Chris and Rowan who are both on vacation) were trying to take a day off today (we've been working about six months 6-7 days a week). I'm trying to see what everybody's concerns are and consult with the staff.
I know people are frustrated, but we are dealing with internet time here. It wasn't until 7 pm EST that I was able to even talk to anybody in our Australian studio, which is open today (9 AM their time).
I hear you that not everybody was thrilled with the PC launch. And I'm trying to collect information and see what the facts are. PC game development does not function in a matter of seconds or hours, especially when most of the team is on vacation. But I hear you, and we're looking into the issue. I'll only ask you have a bit of understanding as to the time scale that software development issues must occur in.
While widescreen issues may not be a big deal for everyone, those who do enjoy their games in widescreen formats do have their enjoyment somewhat hampered as they aren't seeing the whole picture. What do you think about the whole issue?
The QJ.net Network |
 |
| Site | Feed |
| QJ.NET | RSS |
| Nintendo DS | RSS |
| PlayStation 3 | RSS |
| PSP Updates | RSS |
| Wii | RSS |
| Xbox 360 | RSS |
| MMORPG | RSS |
| Personal Computer Games | RSS |
| iPhone - iPod Touch | RSS |
| QJ.NET Forums | RSS |
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
Comments
Who cares, it looks fantastic on my 1400x900 widescreen tft. So what if there's some stuff missing off the top and bottom. You could just as easily argue that they added that on for the 4:3 users to make up for not having the extra width.
Erm! I care. I didnt spend £££ for a 40" 1080p TV to play a game with less on screen than my old standard 4:3 display. I use widescreen to see more of the world, not a less more clostaphobic view than my old 4:3.
Tell me, why should a 4:3 see less? Because you were stupid and bought an expensive tv-set? 16:9 - ok for cinema movies, but games should be 4:3, because you can see much more ;D
ups, should be a reply to kevins post
Everyone is moving to 16:9... saying that games should be in 4:3 simply because you have a 4:3 monitor is pretty lame. Also note that you CANNOT see much more on a 4:3 screen. 16:9 shows everything the 4:3 does, plus more on the sides. It's only because BioShock is bugged that the top and bottom are cut off. The top and bottom should be the same, and the sides widened. Tell you what, go buy a 16:9 monitor, use it for 1 week, and you will never go back to 4:3 again. Kevin is not 'Stupid' for buying a great product. Are you 'Stupid' for not staying with a 486? This is 2K's mistake. As far as Levine's comments go - If everyone is on vacation, pick up the f-ing phone and call everyone on the team. Tell them they messed up and need to come in. If they start crying about it, tell them to have a coke and a smile and get it done. Problem solved. I should have been the project manager.
Your argument makes no sense. How does someone on a 4:3 see more than a 16:9? I see plenty more with my 16:9. I cant imagine playing say forza 2 on a 4:3. Oh thats right I have, and its rank.
Yes, 4:3 is higher .. so I see more.
and NO - I will not buy a 16:9, because it isn't wide, it's low :)
CsL = What an idiot. Get with the times, jackass.
i just spent 2 grand on a 1080p plasma...not for this crap to happen And CSL...sorry you're poor bro.
C'mon on the week of one of the biggest games this year being launched the dev team is on vacation...My Ass. Just fix the problem
ooh i can't see 45% of the screen. so? like anything is going to happen on only 45% of the screen
KK, let me explain.. Mostly the tv-set allocated space in furnitures is limited in horizontal direction. This means, you can place a tv-set which is 1,50m (e.g.) in width. But the height isn't limited. There is always enough space, to put a 4:3 screen in there. Now tell me what screen is larger .. a 1,50m wide 16:9, or a 1,50m wide 4:3?! The same for projector screens. But I think you don't understand poor idiots thoughts...
You sir are an idiot. It's not about 4:3 seeing less, it's about 16:9 showing MORE. Saying that 4:3 shows more makes no sense at all, since 16:9 shows everything that 4:3 does and then more on the top and bottom. Just because you're poor, the standard isn't set at that, it's set at the current norm for HD gaming, which is 16:9. Hell, even older gen games like God of War 2 had the option for widescreen(and worked right). IMO I've never played a game where I thought, 'Hey, this would be much better fullscreen instead of widescreen.' Please know what you're talking about before posting, and coming off as a moron.
Add New Comment