Today, Take-Two inked a deal with South Korea's XLGames to make one of the U.S. game company's titles into an MMORPG. Take-Two owns Rockstar Games (Grand Theft Auto) and 2K (BioShock). [via 4Gamer]
From March 12, 2012 to September 30, 2012, the Smithsonian American Art Museum is hosting "The Art of Video Games". Included in the exhibit is BioShock. "The thought of seeing BioShock on display next to Georgia O'Keeffe and Thomas Hart Benton is, well, humbling," said BioShock creator Ken Levine in an official release.
Good news, everyone. I’d given up absolutely all hope of this ever happening, and yet it has. The final DLC for Bioshock 2, Minerva’s Den, was a smart vignette full of nods to System Shock and the history of computing, not to mention being a welcome opportunity to approach the fascinating, doomed society of Rapture from a perspective other than its increasingly fantastical main narrative. This standalone tale of a calculating rogue AI seemed tailor-made for PC gamers… only PC gamers never got it. So it’s with fairly delighted surprise that we discover it’s finally, finally due out on PC almost a year after its console version.
BioShock and BioShock 2 are just $4.99 USD each today via Steam, part of 2K Games' four-day-long sale. Both are totally worth it if you've somehow not played a BioShock game before.
If you're going to be in LA on May 9th, you might want to swing by UC Northridge and check out the Media Composition and Studio Ensemble. They'll be playing the music of Bioshock composer Gary Schyman. [Get Tickets]
In today's Speak-Up on Kotaku, commenter Crushinator ponders the correct length for the single-player story in the increasingly multiplayer-focused first-person shooter genre.
Many of the reviews of Homefront lately have lamented its short single player campaign, and that was enough to make me not want to buy it. I usually enjoy single-player games much more than multiplayer (not counting co-op), and I don't usually want to shell out for a game without a good story-driven experience.
But something Kaos GM David Votypka said struck me as odd. He said they'd consider making the sequel longer if that's what fans wanted. I understand that they needed to balance their resources and wanted to focus on multiplayer, but it got me thinking, if Kaos thought they didn't need to make Homefront all that long, do most FPS fans really want a longer single-player game?
I know not everyone wants to play through a 30-hour epic like Mass Effect or an Elder Scrolls game that could quite possibly never be finished. Some people want a game they can polish off quickly. But even if it has "replay value," paying $60 for five hours of a campaign feels like a rip-off to me. I'm happy with the few multiplayer games I have and don't feel the need to buy yet another Battlefield or Call of Duty clone just for multiplayer.
I've always felt games like Bioshock or Half-Life 2 hit that 15-20 hour sweet spot. Titles like these have such excellent gameplay and pacing that they can sustain a longer campaign without getting stale. When the credits roll they leave the player with the impression that they've just completed a fulfilling journey rather than a quick diversion before the multiplayer.
Am I wrong? Are there people out there who appreciate a longer shooter? Or are most people happy with a six-hour game?
About Speak-Up on Kotaku: Our readers have a lot to say, and sometimes what they have to say has nothing to do with the stories we run. That's why we have a forum on Kotaku called Speak-Up. That's the place to post anecdotes, photos, game tips and hints, and anything you want to share with Kotaku at large. Every weekday we'll pull one of the best Speak-Up posts we can find and highlight it here.