Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Bioshock: Infinite Multiplayer Modes Supposedly Axed

By - Source: Kotaku | B 15 comments

Irrational Games is having some struggles with Bioshock: Infinite.

Bioshock: Infinite is experiencing some development pains, according to Kotaku's inside sources at the developer, Irrational Games.

First announced back in 2010, Infinite's a release that's greatly anticipated by the gaming world. After the disappointment of Bioshock 2, players hope that Infinite will be something of the same tree as the well-received original.

In the past few years of development, the Infinite team has seen quite a few key departures from the creative team. However, according to Irrational founder and creative director Ken Levine, despite the departures, most of the old guard of the creative team from Bioshock 1 still remain:

"As far as the team itself, the lead artist, the art director, the creative director, the lead effects artist, the senior sound guy, the lead programer and the lead AI programmer from BioShock 1 are all on BioShock Infinite. I don't think there's a single senior BioShock team member that isn't here, which I think is amazing and a testament to their commitment to the studio. And there are a ton of amazing people who weren't on BioShock 1 that are on BioShock Infinite."

In the midst of these departures, Irrational Games was also forced to delay the game from an anticipated Fall 2012 release to 2013.

Now, according to Kotaku, the multiplayer modes in development for the game have been cancelledd. Though multiplayer was never a certainty for the final product, it was apparently a large focus for the Irrational Team. The developed hoped that multiplayer would deter players from trading in the game as quickly as had been done with the original.

There were two multiplayer modes that Irrational had planned. One was apparently a cooperative tower defense mode and the other a co-op mode where four players work together to go through single player maps. Unfortunately, neither worked out and both ended up getting scrapped.

Despite the slew of bad news, there's some good coming for Irrational. Rod Fergusson of Gears of War fame has departed Epic Games to help aboard at Irrational with Infinite. For now, we can only hope that Irrational scrapping those multiplayer modes will mean an amazing single player experience—like the original—for Infinite come 2013.

 

Contact Us for News Tips, Corrections and Feedback

Discuss
Ask a Category Expert

Create a new thread in the News comments forum about this subject

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

This thread is closed for comments
  • 3 Hide
    alidan , August 12, 2012 4:40 AM
    a gears of war person going to help infinite... i dont like that, not one bit...

    that said, multiplayer being axed isnt bad, considering bioshock didn't lend itself well to that.
  • 4 Hide
    sp0nger , August 12, 2012 5:19 AM
    Bioshock 1 was amazing for its single player, if bioshock infinite holds up to that as it appears it will the single player is all i need!

    still saddens me tho that there having problems!
  • 4 Hide
    mayankleoboy1 , August 12, 2012 5:35 AM
    it would be great if single player could have a co-op game play.
  • Display all 15 comments.
  • 0 Hide
    bryonhowley , August 12, 2012 6:18 AM
    This can only be good I can't stand multilayer in any game anyway it is of no use.
  • 5 Hide
    Anonymous , August 12, 2012 7:58 AM
    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.
  • 0 Hide
    unksol , August 12, 2012 8:18 AM
    I could see coop being a fun option, but bioshock is about single player. I happened to enjoy bioshock 2 as well.

    What's with the last paragraph though? "A slew of bad news"? where? The only bad news I saw was the bit about a gears off war developer joining up...
  • 0 Hide
    billcat479 , August 12, 2012 8:35 AM
    I agree with some that keeping their eye on a good single player game is a better choice. That first game had such a neat setting and game play and story made it a total immmersion experience.
    If they get into trying to make it good for one player and multi player some times the game gets lost trying to get them both to work well.
    I have never been a real fan for mult-player games unless they were designed that way from the start. It's kind of why Unreal tourn. was such a great on line game because that was what they worked towards and so made it well.
    I loved the first bio-shock for it's uniqueness.
    There were no games that had such a new and weird setting and game play I almost felt I was part of the game and it always made me feel like I was in the Overlook Hotel from the Shining when I was in that game. What a feeling and what a game that was.
    They just couldn't get back into it with the second one and I hate it, well, disliked it more accurate. It had it's moments but it lost the immersion factor that the first one did and it was not easy to play. Could never seem to get the right control setup on the game. It was too bad.
  • 0 Hide
    belardo , August 12, 2012 8:49 AM
    So after 2-3 players... the game is never played again. And with their DRM... the game cannot be re-sold as a used title.
  • 0 Hide
    TrantaLocked , August 12, 2012 9:15 AM
    Lol, disappointment of BioShock 2? Holy crap. I wonder if an average score of 88/100 is a DISAPPOINTMENT.
  • -2 Hide
    Anonymous , August 12, 2012 12:40 PM
    I liked Bioshock 2 better. Guns and player hand models were so badly drawn and animated in the first one... Enemy models also were all the same, stuttering, out of synch with the whole world rendering frequency and with terrible terrible animations as well, 10 years old quake 2 did better job, but i guess that was the unreal engine 2.5 problems...
  • 0 Hide
    leakingpaint , August 12, 2012 1:16 PM
    Bioshock 2 was a great game - not as good as the first but then I can't really say many games were better than the original Bioshock.

    Multiplayer should be axed if it's interfering with the single player development. Same with Dead Space, not all games need online, some games were brilliant because devs put all their focus on only the main aspects - good gameplay and great story.

    How long did diablo 3 take? and yet is it an equal to the original series? Irrational is a good company and I can't wait to see what the original devs of bioshock 1 have started to fix and perfect.
  • 0 Hide
    icemunk , August 12, 2012 1:35 PM
    Awwwwwwww
  • 0 Hide
    leongrado , August 12, 2012 4:34 PM
    Tower defense/ horde mode doesn't seem like a terrible idea but yeah, I can see why developers want their games to have multiplayer. Unless they're an open world game with a hundred hours of content like Skyrim, they're going to get traded in.
  • 0 Hide
    arcu86 , August 12, 2012 7:09 PM
    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.
  • 0 Hide
    alidan , August 12, 2012 11:18 PM
    superkfaim 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.


    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.

    arcu86Okay 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.


    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.