Good-bye Irrational Games. Bioshock Infinite developer shutting down.

I'd be willing to bet that Irrational had trouble finding funding for their next game, especially if its gonna have a gestational period anywhere near BSI and a large studio staff. Putting the studio up for sale would prolly only yield interest in the IPs. Didn't they have a round of layoffs when BSI was completed last year also?
 
Well, if you look at early BSI footage and how the game ended up it's obvious that their initial vision was taking too long and they were "encouraged" to move the game along for release. This could very well have to do with this decision.

If you watched early footage and interviews about BSI then you remember that Elizabeth was supposed to be this super important character that would help you in numerous ways. In the old footage we saw this in the form of her augmenting your vigors. In one scene Booker is fighting one of the Big Daddies (I forgot what they were called in BSI) and he TK's a bunch of items, she then heats them up and turns them into a huge ball of molten metal that Booker tosses at the BD. In another scene we see her open a rain cloud and soak about 20 enemies which Booker then electrocutes.

None of this was in the final game, neither were a bunch of other scenes (although these could have just been "concept" scene to keep us guessing about the story, but I doubt it) enemies and encounters. In the end Liz just ends up being a minor criminal (lock picking) and scavenger (health/eve/ammo/money).

So it would not surprise me to find out that 2K pushed them to make a finished product and all the really great ideas had to be scrapped. This would also fall in line with the slow release of DLC as Ken and Co. probably weren't to eager to put more work into a game they didn't feel was theirs to begin with.

In the end tho this is a great move for US, because if Levine can get into a position where he's delivering smaller, more focused games directly to us, with our input then we're sure to see some of the best gaming entertainment in the history of the hobby.


P.S. Bioshock 1 (Story/Characters) > Bioshock 2 (combat/endings) = BSI (combat/characters)

That's my ranking including the best parts of each, IMO of course.
 
Sucks. Ken Levine is a good guy. I would send him Xbox Live messages and he would respond with a voice reply. I wish him luck on his next project and I can understand why huge development teams suck.
 
5e2f753184991e4a78800a037bd13940.gif


I found Bioshock 1 the best out of the trilogy.
 
IdleHands said:
Well, if you look at early BSI footage and how the game ended up it's obvious that their initial vision was taking too long and they were "encouraged" to move the game along for release. This could very well have to do with this decision.

If you watched early footage and interviews about BSI then you remember that Elizabeth was supposed to be this super important character that would help you in numerous ways. In the old footage we saw this in the form of her augmenting your vigors. In one scene Booker is fighting one of the Big Daddies (I forgot what they were called in BSI) and he TK's a bunch of items, she then heats them up and turns them into a huge ball of molten metal that Booker tosses at the BD. In another scene we see her open a rain cloud and soak about 20 enemies which Booker then electrocutes.

None of this was in the final game, neither were a bunch of other scenes (although these could have just been "concept" scene to keep us guessing about the story, but I doubt it) enemies and encounters. In the end Liz just ends up being a minor criminal (lock picking) and scavenger (health/eve/ammo/money).

So it would not surprise me to find out that 2K pushed them to make a finished product and all the really great ideas had to be scrapped. This would also fall in line with the slow release of DLC as Ken and Co. probably weren't to eager to put more work into a game they didn't feel was theirs to begin with.

In the end tho this is a great move for US, because if Levine can get into a position where he's delivering smaller, more focused games directly to us, with our input then we're sure to see some of the best gaming entertainment in the history of the hobby.


P.S. Bioshock 1 (Story/Characters) > Bioshock 2 (combat/endings) = BSI (combat/characters)

That's my ranking including the best parts of each, IMO of course.
Click to expand...

Yeah I remember those previews well, had me super excited for the game. I think, however, that they got to ambitious with the game, in what they envisioned and how to execute it. It was in development for what 6 years or so? If they couldn't get their original vision sorted and working in that time frame, well there comes a time to cut bait. Maybe that's where we got what is BSI, not a terrible game, but not what their initial vision entailed while still consisting of of a good deal of their idea base.
 
BDaddyK said:
I'd be willing to bet that Irrational had trouble finding funding for their next game, especially if its gonna have a gestational period anywhere near BSI and a large studio staff. Putting the studio up for sale would prolly only yield interest in the IPs. Didn't they have a round of layoffs when BSI was completed last year also?
Click to expand...
I think 6 years is just too long for making BSI type of game. I thunk a lot of games are affected (Duke Dukem) when the creators let their perfectionish vision drag down development time.

Well, what done is done, hope their stuff find a good place soon.
 
IdleHands said:
Well, if you look at early BSI footage and how the game ended up it's obvious that their initial vision was taking too long and they were "encouraged" to move the game along for release. This could very well have to do with this decision.

If you watched early footage and interviews about BSI then you remember that Elizabeth was supposed to be this super important character that would help you in numerous ways. In the old footage we saw this in the form of her augmenting your vigors. In one scene Booker is fighting one of the Big Daddies (I forgot what they were called in BSI) and he TK's a bunch of items, she then heats them up and turns them into a huge ball of molten metal that Booker tosses at the BD. In another scene we see her open a rain cloud and soak about 20 enemies which Booker then electrocutes.

None of this was in the final game, neither were a bunch of other scenes (although these could have just been "concept" scene to keep us guessing about the story, but I doubt it) enemies and encounters. In the end Liz just ends up being a minor criminal (lock picking) and scavenger (health/eve/ammo/money).

So it would not surprise me to find out that 2K pushed them to make a finished product and all the really great ideas had to be scrapped. This would also fall in line with the slow release of DLC as Ken and Co. probably weren't to eager to put more work into a game they didn't feel was theirs to begin with.

In the end tho this is a great move for US, because if Levine can get into a position where he's delivering smaller, more focused games directly to us, with our input then we're sure to see some of the best gaming entertainment in the history of the hobby.


P.S. Bioshock 1 (Story/Characters) > Bioshock 2 (combat/endings) = BSI (combat/characters)

That's my ranking including the best parts of each, IMO of course.
Click to expand...
Kevin Levine pulled a Peter Molyneux! :crazy:
 
starseeker said:
I think 6 years is just too long for making BSI type of game. I thunk a lot of games are affected (Duke Dukem) when the creators let their perfectionish vision drag down development time.

Well, what done is done, hope their stuff find a good place soon.
Click to expand...

I agree, that is far to long to develop any game. I don't know any "independent" studio that could self fund a project that long. I don't know the size of the staff through out the whole project, though I'd think it would be in the dozens at least, so that's some major capital burn. The studio as a whole was prolly seen as toxic, who knows if "BSI" made money when it's all said and done. It was prolly a some or none deal with Take Two. Ken Levine seems like a good guy, I don't know him from a hole in the wall, this was prolly a while coming and the public is prolly just hearing about it now. That's the shi**ty thing bout big business, especially in a sector as fickle as game development where yesterday's hit is tomorrow's whipping boy.
 
BDaddyK said:
I agree, that is far to long to develop any game. I don't know any "independent" studio that could self fund a project that long. I don't know the size of the staff through out the whole project, though I'd think it would be in the dozens at least, so that's some major capital burn. The studio as a whole was prolly seen as toxic, who knows if "BSI" made money when it's all said and done. It was prolly a some or none deal with Take Two. Ken Levine seems like a good guy, I don't know him from a hole in the wall, this was prolly a while coming and the public is prolly just hearing about it now. That's the shi**ty thing bout big business, especially in a sector as fickle as game development where yesterday's hit is tomorrow's whipping boy.
Click to expand...
I don't know, it's 15 guys. 15 salaries, 15 people using electricity, 15 people eating company bought food, and 15 people vs 100 people doesn't seem so bad in my opinion. Isn't that the whole point of a long dev cycle and small team?
 
That's one area MS actually does right about its 1st/2nd party studios, not allowing them to drag on too much on the target release date.

Look at GT5 & especially the last Guardian. very poor management.

I laughed when they said it took one person 6 months or something to model a car (premium).

I work in the Auto industry, as a CAD designer, & car designers took shorter time to style a real car from scratch tell you how poorly organize they made their game asserts, when they only really need to replicate an existing design. Not to mention making car styling is much more difficult as the curves & surfaces have to follow certain mathematics formulas, & not free forming like Game 3D.

Hard to imagine how the studio behind Last Guardian can still be around without releasing anything for like 10 years.
 
Last edited:
starseeker said:
That's one area MS actually does right about its 1st/2nd party studios, not allowing them to drag on too much on the target release date.

Look at GT5 & especially the last Guardian. very poor management.

I laughed when they said it took one person 6 months or something to model a car (premium).

I work in the Auto industry, as a CAD designer, & car designers took shorter time to style a real car from scratch tell you how poorly organize they made their game asserts, when they only really need to replicate an existing design. Not to mention making car styling is much more difficult as the curves & surfaces have to follow certain mathematics formulas, & not free forming like Game 3D.

Hard to imagine how the studio behind Last Guardian can still be around without releasing anything for like 10 years.
Click to expand...
Seriously though, that's the job you want as a modeler.
 
sharkboy1200 said:
I don't know, it's 15 guys. 15 salaries, 15 people using electricity, 15 people eating company bought food, and 15 people vs 100 people doesn't seem so bad in my opinion. Isn't that the whole point of a long dev cycle and small team?
Click to expand...

He's laying off all but 15 employees
 
Last edited:
sharkboy1200 said:
I'm saying it should still be relatively cheap to develop a game like Infinite with just 15 people in 6 years, but who knows, maybe I'm just not taking into account new tech and whatnot.
Click to expand...
Maybe, but that not the case here. He has a much bigger team than 15 people.
 
sharkboy1200 said:
I'm saying it should still be relatively cheap to develop a game like Infinite with just 15 people in 6 years, but who knows, maybe I'm just not taking into account new tech and whatnot.
Click to expand...

That's prolly the real reason he's only taking 15 of his previous employees with him for whatever they're making next.
 
You can only speculate on the financial aspects.

What is known about BSI's developments fits the stated reason, as well as the potential for having funding troubles.

BSI's development was long and didn't go very well.

Which could have exhausted Ken Levine.. who does control some aspect of his "company" despite it also basically being a 2K studio.

Or despite BSI doing well financially to the outside world, could have led to 2K asking Levine not to do any more big AAA projects... because it did become a risk in the end, and clearly was not properly project managed.

Either way he decided to take his company in a different direction and do some smaller scale development. He could have been forced into it, or maybe it was all on his own. I find judging the man sort of ridiculous. He brought the core team into 2K and he is keeping his core team. Development teams and companies shrink/grow all the time.. 1 failed project can leave everyone jobless and with a bad mark on their resume.. this way the employees can pursue other ventures with a great track record behind them.

And if you don't want to potentially have to move a lot or do a lot of remote/virtual work.. don't go into the games industry. These are known factors.. teams get huge, then layoffs happen after release.. studios open/close/move across countries or to different countries, etc. It's the nature of the beast, and Ken Levine choosing to shrink his company is hardly some horrible offense to the employees who after BS1 released really already would have known their jobs might be cut.
 
not surprising, infinite seemed like it was in dev hell and didn't have the numbers they needed.
 
Wrong move IMO, you don't kill the dev, you change the management and work enviroenment. This team actually made a farily unique game, they just needed to focus time a bit better. How can you break up the team that created BIoshock amonst the other games they have created? Someone needed to form up all the talent into a new studio, but now I guess they are being poached. Bad for us gamers
 
Forget about Ken, Jackie Fhan is back!

On a side note: Thankfully, this website doesn't support animated gif for avator.
 
starseeker said:
Forget about Ken, Jackie Fhan is back!

On a side note: Thankfully, this website doesn't support animated gif for avator.
Click to expand...
That deserves it's own thread. That news is bigger than this thread.
 
Actually when I read again, I can't help but think its Ken"s decision more than financial. Look at what he wrote. It has one paragraph about layoff, & the rest of the long article is all about himself.

Hardly looking like the type of statement a sensible person will write, if one has no choice but to close the company & force to lay off over 100 people.

Its fair clear in my opinion, that is mostly his decision close down Irrational, then financial difficulties.

Anyway, here some comments from Gamspot Feebackula here. Very Funny & I agree with most people, especially the host comments.
http://www.gamespot.com/videos/feedbackula-irrational-closure-commotion/2300-6417347/http://www.gamespot.com/videos/feedbackula-irrational-closure-commotion/2300-6417347/
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back