[citation][nom]superkfa[/nom]im with alidan, GOW developer will ruin bioshock, gears of war is boring action, while bioshock has an interesting story to it, and that is essential to the success of the game.that being said the multiplayer was never a big part of bioshock, its like multiplayer for god of war... just useless and loosing the point to the game.[/citation]
as long as the gears of war guy isn't involved in story, and is only there to make the action feel better, work better, i do believe that's the only way that could be beneficial, granted i saw nothing wrong with bioshock 1 in that regard, i never played 2 and it wasn't made by them so lets not bring that game up.
[citation][nom]arcu86[/nom]Okay so 2-3 years of development for selling a game at $60 a pop. Some people only buy multiplayers games... Rather then adding on a 5-6 months finish grinding out the multiplayer content to sell more copies of their game, they scrap it. So they can move on to a new game. I just don't think this is a wise decision. Sounds like they are pushing the budge so close they can't afford to keep going with it, but at the same time losing money for scraping extra features. Perhaps scrapping was a smart move but I would have to firmly disagree.[/citation]
bioshock 2, did anyone here play that more than just as a "i wonder what we have here" kind of deal? and has anyone played it recently? from what i read after 2 months online was absolutely dead.
unless you want to go full military shooter and lock away almost everything by rank or some crap, you dont play a fps for more than a few weeks. only a few that dont have unlocks survive longer than that.