digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

2k Games' Bioshock suffers widespread crashes/errors.

forums.2kgames.com — The posts grow on 2k Games' Bioshock tech support forum. The general consensus? "We are *****" Widespread PC versions of Bioshock have left gamer's with the inability to start the game, play it for more than a few hours (random desktop crashes), and even random reboot crashes (game crashes and system hard reboots itself). Did 2k know about this?

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • xxpor, on 10/10/2007, -14/+22Is anyone else besides me having 10+ min wait times at the load screen, even for the small levels?
    • kiesow567, on 10/10/2007, -2/+36my wait time will be however long it takes me to buy a new pc

      :(
    • Ignignokt01, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8I'm not. And I'm running this on a laptop, dx10.
      • ddfall, on 10/10/2007, -9/+1As am I. New MacBook Pro w/ 8600 GT 256mb @ 1920x1200... flawless...
        • BlackKnight6, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10yea right...I doubt your 8600GT is running "flawlessly" at 1900x1200 when my 7900GTX at 1680x1050 gets between 20-60FPS? Full of *****...
          • ddfall, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Actually, it really is running fine. I've had several people over to check it out and I've been playing it for hours. No issues yet. I've got 4gb of ram, 7200rpm hdd, and a core2duo 2.4ghz santa rosa chips. It's fine...
          • ddfall, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1*Santa Rosa ChipSET. And before you ask... I'm running it under DX10 with Vista Ultimate...
        • mrASSMAN, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Is that with the graphics set at low? With this game it's almost essential to use higher graphical settings.. completely changes the game without it.
    • Elohir, on 10/10/2007, -1/+15I had a quick go last night, my waits aren't 10 minutes, but probably a couple of minutes at least. Far longer than I've seen on any other game. Hopefully it's just a patchable bug.
    • BugMeNot2, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9My load times are extremely quick--around 15 seconds--but the crashes are annoying the hell out of me. Every 30 minutes to an hour the game will hard lock my computer, forcing a restart.

      Windows XP 32-bit / C2D E6600 / 2GB RAM / 7900GT 512MB
      • Gir53457, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8I don't know what happened to my other comment, so If it appears again... Well, ***** ajax or whatever the hell they used to make the comments system.

        I got the demo on Steam and the first level loads fine with high details. But The second level won't load and the game crashes. I got it to load by turning off all the special effects, but it looks like crap. HL:2 on low settings quality.

        7800 OC, 1 GB RAM, AMD 3200 2.1 GHz.
        • brufleth, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5Get more RAM.
          • Gir53457, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3I'm not getting more RAM because I'm building a new PC. But it should not be crashing like this if I can run it on high settings ont he first level and switch it back as soon as the second level loads.
    • Gir53457, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5I got the demo on steam and the first level loads fine and all, but the second level crashes. I got a work around by turning off all the special effects, but everything is all dark (more than it should be) and looks like HL:2 on low settings.
      • geartype2, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6I had the exact same problem, and all you need to do is turn off advanced shader support. All it seems to take away is the spec maps, and those are very unimportant.
    • donwilson2, on 10/10/2007, -9/+4"Did 2k know about this?"

      Yes, they knew about this problem, but willingly let it go, without making a patch, just to steal your monies. They know that nerds don't have a large website (digg.com) to use to get their voice heard.

      Sarcasm has consumed my comment.
      • Mrstupid7, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2This seems to be quite a substantial problem. If 2k didn't know about this it shows their extreme lack of testing and quality assurance.
        • geartype2, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4You'd be amazed how often things like this would get passed. Let's say in a perfect world, they are testing using 20 machines. Some at min specs, some at high specs, and some in the middle. You still have to make the choice of AMD vs. Intel, then ATI. vs. Nvidia, then how many use DX10 cards versus DX9? and those are only the obvious choices.
          • Mrstupid7, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2This is a big name publisher. They could afford many computers. I'd say they should have at least tested 50 computers, half Intel and half AMD. Half of each with varying cards of ATI and Nvidia and varying RAM and driver settings. It's not like you need a new computer for each setting of RAM either.

            There's no excuse for this.
        • washburn085, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Ya, but there is so much error that can be released. When you are at the deadline for a release, you either a) have to hold off and ***** off your customers, or b) look at the % of people affected and maybe only ***** off a lot less. Compare the number of copies sold to the people having problems... ***** of some people, or ***** off all, I'll take some. Also look at the people's specs, I can guarantee you that there are people who are running the same components and some are having issues, some aren't. You also have to look at brands too. While some cards run the same nvidia chip, the rest of the board is different. There are so many options, as a QA Engineer I do not envy them at all. Of course they could have been on digg instead of testing.... back to work for me.
    • thebaron2, on 10/10/2007, -3/+14Who was it that was asking why you'd buy a game on the console instead of PC?

      Here's a big reason.
      • salboacha, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Its ok we saved 10$ and will get a patch in a few days, im not having probelms though so i just saved 10$.
        • adamantium, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4I got it for 50 bucks at circuit city for the 360. I saved 10$ without the high likelihood of a problem.
          • knetworx, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I bought it at Circuit City (for PC) for $40, AND I haven't had any problems. I win!
        • Matteos, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2PC version at newegg. $44.99 FTW
      • thebaron2, on 10/10/2007, -3/+11All I know is that with my 360, I pop in the disc and play. No crashes, no drivers, no patches - just game time.

        And I'm not anti-PC, so don't get me wrong. It's just that a console guarantees less hassle and fuss for what may be a minor tradeoff in graphics detail. And that tradeoff will really only be noticeable if you've got a killer machine that can run everything at a great resolution with all the settings pumped up.

        Easily worth $10. Of course, this is all IMHO and YMMV.
      • nonymous666, on 10/10/2007, -4/+4You mean buy a console like the one I have that's currently sitting in some Microsoft repair center?
    • cerealman, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Not long at all. Acceptable, really. About 30 secs to a minute. nVidia 8800 GTX, Intel DC 6600, 4G RAM, Vista on DX10. Game plays wonderfully. No crash, smooth game. Lots of fun.
    • neoform, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2I still haven't gotten it to launch, I always get "cannot play game at this time, try again later".. whatever the hell that means....... :|
    • nonymous666, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Loads fine for me. Maybe 20 - 30 seconds. I'm playing under 64-bit Vista no less.

      My only (and lame) complaint would be that I wish there was some load progress indicator.
    • nonymous666, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3It's loading fine for me in about 20-30 seconds.

      My only (and lame) complaint would be I wish there was some sort of load progress indicator.
    • Bahimiron, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6Just for reference to help other people out. I've experienced no problems and it runs smooth as silk on my system.

      I have a triple-core 3.2 gHz Xenon powerPC based unit with a Xenos ATI GPU. 512 MB of GDDR3 RAM.
      • Lunarbunny, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1Har har, you're so funny. I guess you like the RROD?
    • Cyber_Akuma, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6No crashing problems on my 360 :)
      • mmockett, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6Sure. For the moment. And then the red time comes. And then you lose. Everything.
    • epsilona01, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1The game actually plays amazingly smooth (graphics turned down a bit) on my older box. AMD64 3200+, 1GB ram, 7600GT 256mb. My friend has an almost identical system (1gb more ram) but he has an ATI x800 256 and it refuses to play the game. He gets his 8800 Ultra today.

      I've had absolutely no issues with the full game, except getting my ass handed to me by some Big Daddies.
    • BradMW, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I like how everyone is saying "my load times are fine, they only take half a minute." ONLY half a minute. Raid with 10krpm drives needs to be a standard if levels are going to be in the gig range now. Hopefully some noise-canceling drives are produced soon.
      • RawOysters, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1You aren't satisfied with a 30 second load time? You must have the patience of a gnat.
    • Yenly, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1e6300 OC'd, 4gb ram, 7900gs... runs alright for me. Load times are very long. =( I really REALLY want to run it at 1024x768 at the highest settings, it looks great, but it almost approaches the 'too choppy for battles' threshold. So 1024x768 medium it is for me. I was hoping for better... =/
    • FyRE666, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0I can't even run the demo - just says "bioshock.exe has stopped...". There's no way I'll be buying this game if they don't bother to do even the most basic bug testing before release. If this ever comes out on PS3 I might get it.
  • hoodwinkedfool, on 11/08/2007, -6/+45Agh! Fun for five minutes- CRASH! Reload, adjust settings, fun for five minutes - CRASH! Reload, adjust settings, fun for five ...
    • ch4os1337, on 10/10/2007, -4/+13Same here dude. but its ever worse for me because you can fix it with the beta driver from both nvidia and ati but i have a 22inch monitor (1650x1050) and the beta drivers really ***** it up. like every other inch vertically is blurry so i have to play on my 19inch. which blows. so to fix it just get the beta drivers http://www.fileplanet.com/180063/180000/fileinfo/ATI-CATALYST-v8.401-Driver-Patch-(For-BioShock---XP) http://www.fileplanet.com/180035/180000/fileinfo/NVIDIA-Beta-Driver-v163.44-(Windows-XP-32bit)
      • knetworx, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Funny that somebody gets dugg down for trying to be helpful and posting links to the drivers.
    • Scruffydan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7I have only played the Demo, but i could not get it to load with the current NVIDIA drivers. However with the beta drivers everything runs smooth.

      Before you complain about crashes, please try the beta drivers
      • jadecristal, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1"Before you complain about crashes, please try the beta drivers?"

        Is this what we've come to now? Games coming out that are so broken that a graphics card company has to release a special driver - beta, meaning it's just for testing purposes - to ***** fix it? Along with the activation BS, 2K can live without my money.
    • EBFoxbat, on 10/10/2007, -4/+25This blows, hard. The quality control in the gaming industry has fallen through the floor in the past few years. ***** ports from xBox 360 to PS3, totally unoptimized versions, exceptionally poor Wii ports. It's ridiculous.

      What's more, you don't even have an option to return a ridiculously crappy game to a store where you bought it.

      Dieing for a PS3 baseball game I bought MLB 2K7. There are honestly better-looking upscalsed PS2 games. I paid $54.99 for it. I returned it and got $13 credit. It's criminal. I'm signing up for gamefly and NEVER buying a game until I thoroughly test it. I'd rather burn $25/month than $60 or $120.'

      The only thing keeping me around is the Blu-Ray player in the PS3 (that and I still get giddy when I boot Linux on it- even though it's also not optimized for the Cell and pretty useless). I can't express my frustration enough with the gaming industy. Gets me almost as ***** as the BR/HD-DVD bantering. No Transformers on BR, FTW, HD DVD SUX0r, grrr.
    • Squill, on 10/10/2007, -4/+7Wow I haven't had any problems....oh yeah it's probably because I have the 360 version. I'm guessing you haven't got to the mad scientist yet? Or the first 'bid daddy' he's a bitch.
      • BigSax, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10I was coming here to be a dick and say something about how glad I am I have the 360 version, you pretty much have that covered. Kudos.
    • marmanukem, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Mine is running fine on PC, no problems yet.
    • jsballardx, on 10/10/2007, -7/+1Wow those PC games are soooo much better than console.
  • Joga5000, on 10/10/2007, -3/+17This is frustrating. I have the (one of many, apparently) widespread problems where when I try to run the game I immediately get a "bioshock.exe has stopped working" message. I've tried everything that's been suggested, but nothing works. Many, many people are having this problem, see some threads on the issue here:
    http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.php?t=589531
    and here:
    http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=42

    I have a Go 7950 GTX, beta 163.44 drivers, latest (August 2007) DirectX update, and 32-bit Vista. I pre-loaded the game via Steam. The demo runs perfectly - it's just the final game that can't even start before it crashes.
    *sigh*

    • mustang460, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6i had the same problem in the demo, put a shortcut on your desktop and add -dx9 to launch options, did the trick for me
    • netdroid9, on 10/10/2007, -17/+1"bioshock.exe has stopped working"

      What a crappy error message. Obviously Bioshock.exe *is* working, otherwise it wouldn't be able to crash and give you a crappy error message.
      • covertbadger, on 10/10/2007, -1/+12What a crappy comment. Obviously bioshock.exe *isn't* working, and that error message is a standard Windows one.
      • knetworx, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

        Normally I'm against laughing at retards, but netdroid9 just made it impossible to hold back.
    • MagicalLobster, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Where did you get the 7950 go drivers from? Obviously dell's website doesn't have them. Can you send me a link?
    • BabyBrumak, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Yeah, where did you get the 163.44 drivers for the Go 7950 GTX? I haven't been able to find them at all.
    • autocrawler, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Reinstall DirectX. Yes, exactly, even if you have just recently updated it-get the DX web redistributive from MS' website and run it. Get VC++ runtime from there, reinstall, and run it.
      That was what fixed that crash for me. Ran flawlessly since.
  • benac, on 10/10/2007, -0/+19I lucked out. I was able to play for about 2 hrs with intermittent crashes (Yeah I call that "lucking out" at this point), Alot of people can't even load it. Now I can't progress any further because of the reboot crash.

    It's an excellent game... when it works.
  • Mortiffer, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4preloaded from steam days ago, had pretty bad problems with steam at the release ,but from the stuff i've heared about other ppl on steam i got lucky. I was delayed about 1hour 45min untill i could play put after that tottaly fine
  • Squeetard, on 10/10/2007, -27/+93Not a single problem with the demo or retail. Sorry about your guys trouble but you are getting a bit sensationalistic by saying it is widespread.
    • JoCliMe, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7I'm not sure how widespread it is, but I got the demo and attempted to play it on my laptop (it crashed after the first cutscene) Tried it on my desktop and it worked wonderfully.
      • shinynew, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Mine crashed on the elevator on the way down.
    • Dundasbro, on 10/10/2007, -13/+7Reading down the comment line you are the only one who has had no problems so far. I think that is widespread.
      • thebaron2, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5People don't go running to message boards to tell everyone that their game *IS* working - of course you'll see more complaints than praise here, that's always its always worked. Always has, always will.
      • MadEnvoy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4As of 8:10 EST 25 other people who dug him up haven't had problems either.
      • MalenfantX, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Or the people without problems are playing Bioshock rather than posting to Digg.

        I believe the problems are widespread, since the latest nvidia driver won't display at 720p on my display, and bioshock is freezing for 30sec-1min at a time, I'll be picking up the 360 version tonight.
    • AngryBacon, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3I tried playing on my desktop. I am able to play for a little, the farthest being getting the fire plasmid, with random crashes. Usually it will crash to desktop, but sometimes it will crash the gfx driver and I have to reboot.
    • koan, on 10/10/2007, -6/+14"getting a bit sensationalistic by saying it is widespread" So your theory is that despite lots of people reporting issues, and you not getting any, that it isn't widespread.

      So you have drawn your conclusion based on a sample set of 1, and dismissed any evidence that opposed your theory.

      You should be a scientist in the pharmaceutical industry.
    • eybear, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4been playing for 3 hours, no crashes.
      core 2 duo e6600
      win xp sp2
      8800 gts
    • isuisorisuaint, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7on a 360 i played for 3 hours straight last night (first night playing) and didn't run into a single issue...except i suck...tough game
    • cloudyprison, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Agreed, no crashes, but I couldn't change the resolution.
    • ozroy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Same. Just stopped playing after 2 hours with no issues. I think it's really good so far.

      Been using a Macbook Pro
    • Lunarbunny, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0I've messed with stuff and played for a few hours. Only problem I've run into (knock on wood) is shaders and some particle emitters emitting black squares, likely because my 7800GTX only has 256MB of VRAM. 512MB card would probably fix this issue.
      I'm knocking on wood, but I just get lucky with these things...all sorts of games that seem to f*ck up for everybody else (BF2 and the supposed "common" CTDs as an example) just work for me.
    • Stormran, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0This is probably going to be one of those times where the hype of a great game took it to a level a bit too high. Now that the game was out even if there was an issue with the wrench being the wrong color there would be "widespread errors and issues" even though most of these things only effect a small group of people. Yeah there are some WS issues but those can be easily fixed, and true some of this could have been avoided. Just calmly report your problems to 2k and hope that they as a company wish to keep up a good reputation and get the ball rolling on these issues.
    • thorvath, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Widespread or no it appears obvious that the whole "built from the ground up for the PC & X-box" was a sham. It's a port of a 360 right game down to the "Please don't turn off the system while saving" screen. The worst part of the whole affair is they make such a great game that 360 owners are going to forget about after Halo 3 "amazes" them. All for the theoretically more sales. Oh well, after I turned off the shaders it miraculously worked so I am quite enjoying the experience. Here's hoping a patch is coming quickly.
  • odd8all, on 10/10/2007, -6/+17Looks beautiful, runs smooth, crashes every 5 minutes and have to reboot. WTF? Core2 Quad 6600 8800GTS 4gb RAM Vista Home Premium x64bit edition
    • Squeetard, on 10/10/2007, -9/+5264 bit, there's your problem right there.
      • zmjone2992, on 10/10/2007, -27/+6you don't know what you are talking about. so shut up
        • shinynew, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2The only real advantage that 64 bit gives in the consumer's view is that you can load more than 4 GBs of ram, infact you can load absolutely ridiculous amounts of ram with 64 bit. This will be needed in the future, not now.

          The disadvantages are that drivers don't work, OSes and applications have to be recompiled to run in 64 bit.

          get 64 bit in like three years, not now.
        • nonymous666, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1"you can load more than 4 GBs of ram, infact you can load absolutely ridiculous amounts of ram with 64 bit. This will be needed in the future, not now"

          How do you know what we need now? Some of use our PC's for more than just games. I've had zero issus with 64-bit Vista and gaming (other than Starforce copy protection problems on one game) so I have no reason *not* to it.
      • brufleth, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Actually zmjone there have been stability issues with various 64 bit drivers.
        • Rebel44, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1You forgot to say nVidia and Creative drivers...
          It works OK here Q6600 @3,35Ghz 4x1GB RAM HD2900XT Vista Home Premium 64 :)
      • TheYipster, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Actually shinynew, squeetard and brufleth, there are a lot of misconceptions about x64.

        First, you'll find that you need a 64-bit OS for 4 gigs of RAM, not just for more than 4. 32-bit Windows maps memory in a way such that component memory (like the memory in your video card) is mapped to a single 4 gig address space before system memory. So if you put 4 gigs in of RAM in a system running 32 bit XP or Vista, you'll find you'll have 4-gigs minus the amount of video memory you have, sound card memory, etc.

        Second, in the world of Vista, x64 is just as mature and stable as the 32-bit edtion, if not more so due to a newer and better codebase. XP-64, being an odd duck based on Server 2003 with poor application and driver support, is a different story. However, 32-bit apps certainly don't need to be recompiled to run just as well on x64 as the do on 32. Even if you don't have a single 64-bit compiled app, x64 makes perfect sense if you're running 4 gigs of RAM, because the OS will be able to use it all to manage background tasks and to apply it to processes such as Superfetch. I've recommended Vista x64 to anyone with a high end system w/ 4 gigs of RAM, and I've never heard of people having any issues from that x64 recommendation (usually, if there are issues, they're due to running Vista vs XP, but Vista itself has matured greatly over the last 10 months.)

        I've run Vista x64 since building my rig in march, and I must say I'm quite pleased, having no major issues with any games or apps. Starting with the 158.45 drivers, gaming performance has been on par with XP, and with the exception of the 163.13 drivers (163.44 are much better,) driver-stopped-responding issues are a thing of the past. Let's see: Stalker, no problems. FSX, no problems. FEAR, no problems. Prey, no problems. C&C 3, no problems. Supreme Commander, no problems. HL2, aside from some acknowledged driver issues, no problems. Bioshock, except for the widescreen and AA issues, of which 2K I'm sure will fix, no problems.... 4 hours played and the only crash was due to Trillian interrupting the game... turned it off, no problems.

        E6600 @ 3.6ghz / evga NF-68 nforce 680i / 4 gigs PC-64000 RAM @ 4-4-4-12 / 2x nVidia GeForce 8800 GTX in SLI / Dell 2407 widescreen

        Mark.
        • stereoa, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Wall of text.

          I agree, minus Vista doesn't work with Diablo 2. So, I uninstalled it.
        • TheYipster, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Sorry... When I posted I had paragraphs, and all looked right. Now when I'm looking back it's a wall of text... Certainly didn't enter it that way... I suspect the dastardly work of Digg's craaazzzy comment system!
        • Yenly, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Jeeze... nice system there... almost the exact same as my buddies. I bet the game looks amazing! Nice info too
      • nonymous666, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I have 64-bit Vista and have had no problems.

        Only gaming problems I've EVER had with 64-bit Vista is games that uses Starforce, and my understanding is that 32-bit users had the same problems as me.
    • avasol, on 10/10/2007, -15/+1No, it's more like the problem is "Vista"....
    • Gir53457, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7If any of the Vista Trolls have been paying attention, most of the problems are coming from people running rigs with XP and 7K series NVidia cards that didn't get a driver update or ATI cards.
      • OJXs, on 11/08/2007, -0/+2thats a pretty ***** large user base...
    • smhTheory, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0i have a very similar build to yours and i had similar issues, i had to disable dx10 in launch options to get the demo to work, and then it would randomly crash. i installed the new beta drivers and re-installed dx10 shortly before the full game was activated and havent had a single game crash after hours of play.
  • salmizar, on 10/10/2007, -8/+9Purchased from steam. On Load game crashed until adding -dx9 to end of shortcut. Now the game will load but crashes at a moments notice. Beta drivers were no help. Very disappointed.

    M2A-VM, HD 2600 XT, Vista ultimate 64
    • oblivinated, on 10/10/2007, -2/+364. Once again, that's your problem.
    • Stormran, on 10/10/2007, -4/+0And buying anything from Steam.
  • elmopio, on 10/10/2007, -10/+6I have been upset since 10:30am on the 21st of August. It's now 1:05am on the 22ND and I keep crashing after I walk up steps with the wrench. This is getting really frustrating. I and many other folks are beta testers. I built a top of the line machine for this?
  • doublej42, on 10/10/2007, -1/+24x2 3800, 7600 gs, 1gb ram. First level (plane) runs fine, after that it's a nice crash
    • eyefork, on 10/10/2007, -0/+13Into the ocean!
      • lobasuu, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1Grr, no spoilers please!
        • brufleth, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Um...demo much?
        • shinynew, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6if you didnt see that one coming i suggest you never step into the street.
        • gillstr, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I'm sure he was being sarcastic
    • blakeh, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Hey you have the same rig as me!

      Now we know why the pc demo was delayed! It must have taken them those extra couple days just to get the first level to work properly X.x
      Why oh why did take2 not bug test this game before releasing it to the public ?
      I'm really glad I didn't pre-load this on steam. I came close, but my pirate nature won out in the end :]
  • ahatter, on 10/10/2007, -32/+27this is why i prefer console gaming
    • Brutus013, on 10/10/2007, -13/+2Yeah, except for the fact the Xbox 360 version starts stuttering very badly after a few hours.
      • Hale, on 10/10/2007, -2/+11Funny how only gamespot on one test box saw this, and now you think it happens to everyone. Isn't it more likely that maybe their xbox was just overheating? Their description of "after a few hours" certainly inspires confidence.
      • avasol, on 10/10/2007, -5/+5FCS: @Hale
        You are absolutely right, only that you're wrong in assuming it's OK that the console overheats itself.
        It's not OK to have a console that overheats in this day and age. Not OK at all.
        • kyrios1, on 10/10/2007, -5/+1So I guess it's not okay for laptops to overheat themselves anymore? Nor cell phones? Not even desktop computers right? Shut the ***** up.
          • Mrstupid7, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3No, it is not OK for that to happen.
      • slcsu, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I have it on Xbox 360... and works perfect, for hours... and hours..
    • pentak, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7legitimate point
    • Gir53457, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I've concluded on buying BS (lol BS) with my XBox in a few weeks for 2 reasons. 1 is because it won't work for my computers properly even tho it can run it at med-hi settings, it won't. And 2 is it's Wolfenstien on my dad's AutoCAD box all over again. I'm getting motion sickness and I need to sit further away from the screen, but I can't.
    • mxcl, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Yay lets digg him down because we don't agree with him. This kind of argument can promote interesting conversation, but we all know that has no place on digg.
    • EmperorAwesome, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3This is why I prefer my PC games be developed for the PC, rather than ported over after focusing on making it perfect on some proprietary hardware as a top priority.
      • slcsu, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0Um, I believe it was developed on the PC platform first.

        I've been a PC gamer since the introduction of graphics, and so I know that glitches and CTDs are quite common in PC games. That's what you get in an open architecture environment running all kinds of different hardware and drivers. That's why I got this on my Xbox 360. No problems.
    • LMN8R, on 10/10/2007, -6/+1At least with PC gaming you don't need to live in fear of the 50+% chance that your system will all-out die. And if a part does die, you don't need to wait weeks upon weeks to get the new part.


      As for me, I've had no problems with the game at all.
      • Verugan, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I could buy 2 360's for the price of your computer.
        • yifes, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I could too, but then I wouldn't have a computer to browse digg and comment on how much computers cost =[
      • slcsu, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0We here have all had 360s almost since day 1... no problems. So far that's a 0% chance here. I think that's more hype than reality by those who don't even own a console. Not to mention, when was the last time you got a 3 year warranty on components?
    • picalicious, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Yea people, just get a 360 it's cheaper now.
  • irvin666, on 10/10/2007, -8/+3My bioshock demo was missing textures and spouting out white squares lol. Also, the sound was skipping. (usually a BIG indicator that my proc is just not fast enough)

    no way that my computer could be slow. Here are my specs for it, anyone else with the equivelent specs got to run theirs smoothly?

    AMD 64 3200+
    radeon x850 AGP8x
    1GB DDR400 ECC
    Windows Vista Ultimate
    • robbiekhan, on 10/10/2007, -11/+1What has CPU usage got to do with sound skipping?

      Bioshock is perfectly fine, you NEED an EAX soundcard to get decent sound, you NEED to update your gfx drivers to fix gfx glitches (ATI do not have a new driver out yet, nvidia do)

      The games load times will be large if you have only 1gb of ram and a single core cpu.

      Articles like this just make the game sound bad, it does not state any of the positive feedback because ther eis more positive than negative and I had no issues at all on my 8800gts system on the demo.
      • Tsen, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4"you NEED an EAX soundcard..."
        Oh, bull. Integrated sound is pretty damned good nowadays. I still find it hard to justify spending $50 on a soundcard. Especially when the money could be put towards more (and perhaps faster) RAM and a better gfx card.
        • therightclique, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2yes, onboard sound cards are adequate, but there's a huge difference between onboard and after market (creative labs) sound cards. huge. instantly noticeable. EAX makes a world of difference if you actually have 5.1
          • ferrofluid, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Correct, most onboard AC97 motherboards have merely DACs and use software CODECs to do the grunt work,
            hardware PCI shuffle the grunt work to the sound card, some cheap soundcards (also modems) are CODEC too beware.
            In days of yore 10% speed increase in a game used to be gained from putting in a decent soundcard.
            these days CPUs are fast enough, but our lovely OSes dont do software sound fast enough to avoid skipping generally esp if RAM is scarce.
      • Gir53457, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Agreed. ***** built in audio and it sounds fine, I have almost the same setup as you except it's an NVidia card. You should make sure you are using the newest drivers, but otherwise you could just have a bad install.
      • Optimaximal, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1> What has CPU usage got to do with sound skipping?

        Just look at the Steam hardware survey. The majority of PCs in the world have their sound hardware built onto the motherboard. Unless it's an APU like NVidia's defunct Soundstorm, the CPU is going to be handling the work, ergo the CPU speed will have an effect on sound processing and a lack of CPU grunt will cause the sound to skip.
      • cgjamj, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2If your CPU is maxed out, it can absolutely affect sound. You are correct about the load times in regards to 1GB of memory, but a single or multi-core CPU should have not make any difference. Also, he didn't mention his hard drive. Could be an older, slower drive and could possibley even be using the wrong drivers/settings and therefore not running in the correct DMA mode.
      • cgjamj, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1If your CPU is maxed out, it can absolutely affect sound. You are correct about the load times in regards to 1GB of memory, but a single or multi-core CPU should have not make any difference. Also, he didn't mention his hard drive. Could be an older, slower drive and could possibley even be using the wrong drivers/settings and therefore not running in the correct DMA mode.
    • markwilcox, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7get a new gfx card.
    • gavroche, on 10/10/2007, -1/+14You need an ATI X1300 or higher, your graphic card is the problem.
      • irvin666, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I dugg you up, you are right about the card problem. Now to see if they still build AGP cards that high =P
    • CrankyHippo, on 10/10/2007, -7/+2Your not the only one with an ATI card having problems, it seems 2k sold out to nvidia and ***** us over. Hopefully either 2k or this guy who got the textures to work in 20min!!! will complety make the game possible to play with PS2

      http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5689
    • GenerousLinus, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1I have the same processor and RAM, but a 7800gs AGP. I was able to run the demo at 1680x1050 with all settings on max. Wasn't super smooth but way playable. I'd say 30 fps. No glitches or sound skipping (which i do get in hl2). Running WinXP btw. Also, is the x850 a shader model 3.0 card? That is required to play the game.
      • therightclique, on 10/10/2007, -5/+1if it was 30fps it was by definition "super smooth". you CANNOT differentiate 30 from 60fps.
        • Price, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Actually I CAN differentiate 30 from 60fps. Quite easily actually.

          Not that 30fps is bad, of course.
        • Mrstupid7, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Anything above around 70 is pointless. I guess you're blind though.
          • b0wl0fud0n, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4That's not true depending on your monitor. If your monitor can handle refresh rates greater than 70hz, you will be able to notice the fps difference.
        • BrandonMills, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Pretty easy to see the difference. Just play any DDR before 5th mix. It's like night and day.
    • magiclava, on 10/10/2007, -5/+0I think Vista is your problem there. I have a lowish spec machine (64 amd 3200 cpu, 1gb ram, nvidia 6800, intergrated sound), and Vista trashes it completely. I get the same stuttering sound, but when i switched to Windows XP on the same machine the stuttering disappeared! This pretty much sums it up for all my games!

      BTW, XP did not stop the same crash i get with Bioshock. I can play the demo all the way up to the arriving at Rapture, but then it just bombs out after the load screen.
    • swytz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I had the same problem at first (missing textures, white squares).. then I upgraded to the beta drivers and everything has worked fine since, not a single graphical glitch. I'm using an FX-62 cpu with 7900GTX gpu.
    • BrandonMills, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Er, you don't have SM 3.0. Of course you have problems.
    • Boomh4u3r, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Wow..Running Vista Ultimate on I gb of RAM? I can't imagine how painful that is...And why Do you even have Vista to begin with on a AGP gfx card?

      I have AMD 64 3200+ 2gb RAM...ATI x1600..and Vista Home Premium runs fantastic...You just need to upgrade
      • renegadeafk, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I run ultimate on 1 GB RAM perfectly, it is no slower than XP was and it runs great. AGP 7600GS runs vista fine (Besides you can get up to 7950 on AGP)....Bioshock ran great medium settings 1440x900 30 fps. p4 3.0Ghz, 7600GS, 1 GB RAM, Vista Ultimate.
    • irvin666, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Holy crap, I bought a 400 dollar card just for the reason of lacking SM 3.0?

      damn that sucks, well, I DID have this card since 2005, so I guess it served it's purpose for some time, now only if i can find an AGP vid card these days...
  • JKVM, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Joga5000, I have the same configuration exactly (same video card, drivers, etc), and the exact same issues, apart from running XP instead of Vista. It's even the same down to the demo working, but the release crashing, and with the same error. Post something here if you fix your issues, because I'm sure they'll fix mine as well.
  • ravi7791, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1I couldn't change my resolution. It would crash after moving the slider. Running a oc'd 3.4ghz pentium D, x1600 graphics, 1gb ram on Vista.
    • MalDON, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8oc'd probably your problem. Don't modify your stuff then complain.
    • brufleth, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Most of the people with complaints are running Vista and/or they are barely meeting min system requirements or are below them.
      • yournamehere, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1i'm running vista without a problem
  • Hermitwise, on 10/10/2007, -16/+68I love my 360 :3
    • byronm, on 10/10/2007, -6/+6ditto
    • markwilcox, on 10/10/2007, -15/+93 red lights in 3... 2... 1....
      • Hermitwise, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12It's okay, I have many towels.
        • markwilcox, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3Oh, ok sweet. I have a 360 and a good PC so i'm getting if for PC & borrowing my mates 360 version for gamerpoints =P
      • slcsu, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0No such problems here. I have the model with the new heatsink. That's so last gen.
    • shoover, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Played for 3 hours last night, no problems!
    • godd4242, on 10/10/2007, -0/+13 hours?

      wimp

      I played for a solid 10 but now I'm stuck.
    • slcsu, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Xbox 360. No problems. Runs great for hours on end. Amazing graphics. and I have $2500 gaming PC... why?
    • yifes, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0that 3 in the emoticon is either a really funky moustache or a tiny pair of balls.
  • masterofgrond, on 10/10/2007, -6/+18Runs like a dream, no issues at all.
    E6850
    8800GTX
    2gb OCZ platinum
    Vista Ultimate 32 bit
    • Bartboy919, on 10/10/2007, -3/+9Stop making my 802 MHz system feel bad!
      • GliTCH82, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9That sucks man, and it would be funny if it wasn't sad. What the hell are you doing on this page anyway, torturing yourself?
      • mrASSMAN, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I didn't know 800MHz could run Digg. Your system must be straining..
    • hawkspur, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2E6700
      X1950 XTX
      2Gb SuperTalent
      Win XP Pro

      No problems whatsoever besides AVG detecting the setup.exe as a trojan :P. I guess it's just bugging out for a lot of people.
    • Beaver6813, on 10/10/2007, -4/+1Same spec as me ;-)
    • ZeRux, on 10/10/2007, -9/+6I thought to myself "what a l33t rig" when I read your specs, until I read the Vista line.
      • markwilcox, on 10/10/2007, -5/+1I'm sure he's dual booting and running Vista for DX10. Stop trying to be cool, because you're not.
        • kyrios1, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1I'm guaranteeing he isn't.
        • ZeRux, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1And I'm sure the Earth is flat lol
        • yournamehere, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1You do realize by spouting this dribble you make yourself look like idiots, right? anyone of the MANY people that have Vista that I know have no issues. Most, if not all of these people are admin, box jockies, programmers, etc. There is nothing wrong with Vista. I've been running it for months without issue. UAC was disabled with one click which is the 'nagging' everyone is blasting it for. Other than that the OS is better than when XP came out (before SP1). In fact it's much much better than XP was before it's SP1.

          • theaceoffire, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2"In fact it's much much better than XP was before it's SP1."

            Ok.

            Is it much much better than XP SP2?

            Then I am ok for now.
      • masterofgrond, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Yeah, actually I AM dual booting. Kthx.
    • MASTERPL, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4And the E-penis size competition has begun.
      • barkingmoonbat, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0In that case, I have E6600 oc to 3.6ghz, 2 gigs RAM, 2x 8800GTX. So my e-***** is pretty big, althogh not as big as some. I've only played the demo and it worked fine. Load time was about 10 seconds.
    • darkened, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1I'm glad my system is almost exactly the same as yours except I have a GTS super clocked, equivalenet single core proc and well of course the superior WinxpPro
    • Bartboy919, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1When my new proc comes Friday I will have my new system up

      Intel C2D e6750
      2GB RAM
      250 GB HDD
      8800GTS 640 MB
      Vista Ultimate 32-bit
  • agent42, on 10/10/2007, -6/+6Occasional crashes, maybe one every 2 hours.

    QX6700
    8800GTS (playing 1920x1200)
    2gb corsair
    WinXP Pro
    • kyrios1, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0Seems the 8800 model seems to be working for people.
    • ddfall, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1You got a DX 10 card but didn't go with a dual boot Vista or something to take advantage of the expensive video card? I'm sorry.
      • blakeh, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I wonder if anyone will be able to crack DX10 so we can run it on XP.. Vista is too much of a pain.
  • JKVM, on 10/10/2007, -4/+6Things I've tried:

    1. Screwing with the msvcr80.dll DLL, putting it into system32, and the BioShock release folder.

    2. Latest DirectX Runtimes (August 2007) [url]http://download.microsoft.com/download/1/7/1/1718ccc4-6315-4d8e-9543-8e28a4e18c4c/dxwebsetup.exe[/url]

    3. Verifying Steam cache, redownloading game from Steam.

    4. Tried loading both different versions of the Visual C++ 2005 Redistributables:

    [url]http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=32bc1bee-a3f9-4c13-9c99-220b62a191ee&displaylang=en[/url]

    and SP1:

    [url]http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=200b2fd9-ae1a-4a14-984d-389c36f85647&displaylang=en[/url]

    5. Loaded the latest nVidia BioShock specific drivers (163.44). [url]http://www.nvidia.com/object/winxp_2k_163.44.html[/url] or in my case since I'm running a laptop (GeForce Go 7950 GTX) [url]http://www.laptopvideo2go.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=14561[/url]

    6. Adding -dx9 to the bioshock.exe shortcut.

    None if this worked. Other notes... The Demo works PERFECTLY. This is on an XP machine, not Vista.

    Add your notes here if you have anything to contribute:
    http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/showthread.php?p=123292
    • Alex2, on 10/10/2007, -7/+0Sure, just get an Xbox.
    • betterth, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Mine wouldn't work until I played in a window. Now, I've been playing for six hours straight not a single issue. Try windowed mode.
      • blakeh, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Seems like a poor solution. The game is a work of art, we shouldn't be forced to play it in a 1024x768 window.. take2 better get working on a patch..
  • doublej42, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Fixed it, got the DX9 august update (it exists it's just hard to find) and turned down all the settings in graphics.
  • JKVM, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2Sorry for [URL] tags... Edit button didn't work.
  • DaveSWFC, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Runs great with GFX settings set to high on a Athlon XP 3200, Radeon X1950 pro, 2GB ram, and Windows XP. I really thought I'd have to finally get rid of the Athlon XP and AGP with this one, but guess its gonna live on for another few years yet.
  • vdubski, on 10/10/2007, -8/+3The demo runs perfect for me.

    Athlon 3800 X2
    8800GTS
    2gb Crucial Ballistix
    XP SP2
    • Koldkompress, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7People are reporting problems with the retail version, not the demo.
  • jwmazz05, on 10/10/2007, -10/+5i, for one, would not recommend using beta drivers. they're beta for a reason.....
    • markwilcox, on 10/10/2007, -10/+4you're stupid.
    • GliTCH82, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7They're beta because they are a proposed fix to the previous ***** non-beta drivers. So either way you're *****, and you just kind of go with what works best for you at the current point in time. Welcome to Graphics Hell™
    • kyrios1, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2I, for one, would not recommend that you use a computer ever again.
  • DFENS, on 10/10/2007, -5/+2I'm getting reboot-necessary crashes with mine, every time i restart it up, the same general area.

    AM2 socket +4200 oc'd to 2.81 ghz (stable)
    dual 8800's in SLI
    2 gigs ram
    Vista 64 ultimate.

    It's not a big deal though. I'm just gonna wait for a patch - hopefully they fix the widescreen b.s. and actually add support for REAL eax, not the crap sound they went with.

    Overall, meh. The story is great though - that's the only part i'm kinda mad about - i do want to know where the story goes. The game I could take or leave.
    • BinaryJay, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Guess what? Nobody cares about your overclock (stable) or your ub0r video cards in SLI.
  • iveywk, on 10/10/2007, -11/+25This is why I stopped PC gaming, that and the bi-monthly $1000 upgrades... Not that it matters, I'm sure my 360 will RRoD when I get it tomorrow.
    • zmjone2992, on 10/10/2007, -7/+1only if you choose to (which i do). you can run games on older machines if you have a lower res monitor. still pretty good
    • Koldkompress, on 10/10/2007, -3/+12If you were spending $1000 every two months, maybe you're just going over the top.
      You don't *Need* to be on the cutting edge, every single time. Doing that is a sure way of burning extra money. I wouldn't pay the extra $100-200 to get a 10% performance boost on a much cheaper card.
      You can pick up a decent [Plays all the current games, maybe not on the highest setting] for $600-1500, which can last you for at least a year.
    • neoform, on 10/10/2007, -4/+4Playing a shooter on a console is horrible. You can't move quickly or have responsive aiming, FPS were made for PCs.. not consoles.
      • BrandonMills, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Point out the obvious to console players, and they dig you down. What's funny? Sooner or later, they'll end up with the same controls, and then they'll be praising them, like we *never* told them about them on the PC. You know, the same way they acted *surprised* when they played Halo. Yes Virginia, better FPS controls do exist.
        • slcsu, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I've been a PC gamer since the introduction of graphics, and I prefer mouse/keyboard for FPS. But I also play FPSs on my Xbox360 and they are a lot of fun too. Yes, the controller takes a little bit of getting used to if you're from the PC world like myself, but it's still great fun. As long as I'm not competing against anyone with Mouse/Keyboard, that's fine with me. I also like playing on my couch on a 42" HD LCDTV together with friends. I can't do that on my PC. My PC games = loner anti-social activity.
    • blakeh, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Console control's suck for more than just FPS games.. Try RTS, RPG... The mouse/keyboard combo is better in almost every single case. Excepting games like street fighter.. And maybe flight sims. But I mean, who plays those games anymore anyways :p
      • slcsu, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I agree, but console games are still fun as hell. And they have their pros. Do you have a 42" monitor and can play with all your friends that come over on the couch without buying a second PC just for them? Each system has it's pros and cons. It's like comparing apples to sea monkeys.
    • yifes, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Um... a $1000 new computer every two years is more than enough to play any games released on medium settings. If you want to spend 6 grand a year so you can play everything on max, that's your choice. Complaining about how much performance parts will cost you is like complaining why Porsches' are so expensive.
  • Trat, on 10/10/2007, -28/+4Haha, Windows Vista sucks.
    • therightclique, on 10/10/2007, -6/+2you have an extremely valid point and these assholes digg you down.
      • Boomh4u3r, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Awww.You can't run Vista? (tear).../sarcasm
  • SystmBetatester, on 10/10/2007, -15/+3how about upgrading your lame ass pcs? or maybe go with the 360 version? i had no problem with neither version.
    • kyrios1, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2"i had no problem with neither version."

      I can see why you had no problem with it when you didn't use it.
  • useful, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3works fine for me
    amd64 and geforce6
    • johnhummel, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I've been running it at 800x600 on a 2.4 Ghz Pentium III - no issues so far save for a little sound synching in the demo. Still makes me consider getting a 360 so I don't have to futz with it, or wait for the mythical PS3 version.
  • anoriega, on 10/10/2007, -18/+6Seems like most of the people having problems are on Vista - BOO ***** HOO, get XP or stop whining about it. Vista blows for gaming, even with high-end *****. Bioshock works great for me on 1024x768, high detail, and XP SP2 on an Athlon 64 4000+, 2GB of PC3200, and a 7800 GS AGP.

    On the other hand, if you're on XP, I feel bad for you if it's not a problem with your hardware.
    • Ignignokt01, on 10/10/2007, -2/+15Actually, it seems like people having the problems are running XP. L2READ

      And stop spreading the vista FUD about lowered game performance, the differences in all critical comparisons i've read from tech sites described a performance loss in 1-3%. THATS BARELY ANYTHING. God you guys need to stop bitching about an OS you've probably yet to use, or at least benchmark with. I'm running this game nearly maxed out on a LAPTOP running Vista, and i've had NO issues at all.
    • salmonmoose, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Also, you don't get the full experience with XP, the game supports DX10.

      That said, it running beautifully on the review machine I have on my desk at the moment, but it's a dual quad core, with 1.5gigs of video ram :)
      • therightclique, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2there is NO noticeable difference with this game in DX10. the developers have more or less stated this on several occasions.
  • CrankyHippo, on 10/10/2007, -1/+13ANYONE WITH A ATI CARD HEADS UP!

    Sorry about the all caps, but i personally have the x800xl radeon and i too was having a problem with the textures and mouse not showing up. This happens in the full game not just the demo. Heres a Link to the 2k forum were someone is trying to fix it.

    http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5689

    This problem should have either been fully addressed or more clearly stated, if you have an ATI card that does not support Pixel Shader 3.0, then Bioshock will not run properly. So basically a big ***** middle finger to 48% of the users on steam. Get the word out, even with the new drivers still doesn't work

    • palehorse864, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I tried the demo and had that problem on an X850 XT, I expected the game to explicitly kick me out before the menu though because I knew before downloading the demo that my system didn't meet the requirements.

      If you downloaded from steam, it gives the minimum system requirements in the steam store so you can check your specs against those. I matched up on everything except that I don't have a radeon x1300 or greater.

      Also, this doesn't need to be a warning for "ANYONE WITH A [sic] ATI CARD" as it only affects those with a card below an X1300 or those using an X1550 (Not sure why that one doesn't work.)
      • hawkspur, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1
        Minimum System Requirements:
        CPU: Pentium 4 2.4GHz Single Core processor
        System RAM: 1GB
        Video Card: Direct X 9.0c compliant video card with 128MB RAM (NVIDIA 6600 or better/ATI X1300 or better, excluding ATI X1550).
        Sound Card: 100% direct X 9.0c compatible sound card
        Hard disk space: 8GB free space
      • Optimaximal, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2To summarise, the majority of graphical corruption problems only seem to be affecting people with cards that only support Shader Model 2.0, which is to be expected because we are talking a game based on the Unreal 3.0 Engine as it stipulates Shader Model 3.0 as a requirement.

        Shader Model 3.0 has been pretty much standard in NVidia graphics cards for nigh-on 3 years/2 generations now and it's hardly the fault of them, the developers or Microsoft that ATI took so long to release a true SM3 card.

        Move with the times people.
        • Kamill85, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Wrong, READ THE ***** MANUAL of the Unreal Engine 3.0, it DOES support SM2, this feature was just removed by the devs of BioShock, since they were paid by NVIDIA (their logo is all over the game). It's just a slap in the ATI's face.
        • Optimaximal, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2where the ***** am I supposed to get the 'manual' for Unreal 3.0? I have btter things to do than read up on the nitty-gritty technical specs of a game engine.

          My point still stands though - it's should not be about the developers dumbing down the visual capabilities of the game in order to cater for either old systems or companies who cannot be arsed to release technically capable and comparable products.
          ATI took almost a year to develop a card that supports even the same standards as a NVidia 6200, which you can buy for £30 (or whatever silly price they are).

          This is the whole thing thats wrong with the PC market - the stagnation of the industry by trying to cater for technology luddites who think Pentium 2s and Dial-Up is the 21st Century (thank you Intel GMA). This is the one good thing about the next-gen console market, as its spurring game development along at a faster pace - dumbed down gameplay not withstanding :/.
      • Thepirateking, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Thank you. Now I know why it won't display my mouse. I wanted to try the demo even though it's going to run like ass on my system. Ahh the life of a grown up where buying top notch PC parts just to play a game or two just doesn't cut it. Ahh well back to FFXI and Galciv II I go.
    • Bensch, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Sounds like an ATI problem, not a 2K Games problem.
    • washburn085, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Read the min sys requirements that hawkspur was generous enough to post...
    • cgjamj, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Dude, thanks for the info! I have the same card and wanted to try the PC demo, but was having the same issue you listed. Even though I can't play it, at least I have an a better understanding of what's going on. I will be upgrading to an 8800GTS soon, but I'm pretty sure nVidia will be releasing new cards soon, which should drop current prices. Looks like I'll just have to get the 360 version unless I'm willing to wait until sometime next month or even October for the new video card.
    • scottbuzz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0You should have read the Minimum System Requirements. Your video card doesn't make the cut. It doesn't support an integral feature of the graphics engine at all. Hence the lack of mouse and textures.
    • mrvendetta1, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Yea i have a radeon 9600 and i have the same problem, i am pretty sure i make the cut, thanks for the info, i have a pentium 4 2.4 ghz, 100 gigs of ram, and the driver fixes installed, so there has got to be another reason than a requirment problem.
      • Lunarbunny, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2You are henceforth banned from speaking like you know anything about your computer. If you read, a 9600 does NOT meet requirements (and is now becoming ancient) and your CPU barely meets reqs. Also, I know for a fact you do not have 100GB of RAM. That's your hard drive size. Only items like heavy-duty servers and research computers have anywhere around 100GB of RAM. My guess, with those specs, is 512MB or at most 1GB of RAM.
  • smurf22, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6No problems here.

    WIndows XP SP2
    AMD 5400
    EVGA 8800 gtx
    2gb of ram
  • dissident, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3this made me think of the game stalker, because I've played it for probably 20 hours now without one crash... it does freeze on occasion for about 3-4 seconds then go again, but never an outright crash... and with shadows turned off, it runs absolutely smooth as silk.
  • zackiyp, on 10/10/2007, -13/+4Mine's playing smooth.


    Xbox 360 Premium
    • zackiyp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Haha, wow. I guess no one can take a joke.
    • slcsu, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Seriously. Runs smooth and looks brilliant on my 360 in HD. 5.1 digital surround sound and a comfy couch really helps too. You can actually enjoy the game with friends. I also game on my PC, but no one likes to huddle over my shoulder to watch.
  • JordanAustin, on 10/10/2007, -14/+39Am I the only person disgusted with the amount of disrespect on the forums?
    I understand the game isn't working for several people, but CAPS all around? HERES THE TORRENT, HERES THE FIX, 2k FIX IT NOW, 2K SUX. People want to play a game a company busts it's balls to make, but they act like spoiled children in the forums, talk about a slap in the face for one of the best games of all time.
    • Egoist, on 10/10/2007, -3/+17Because they *are* all spoiled children who do the same to every game that comes out. Has anyone ever seen a major PC game that didn't require downloading a patch after installing from CD because v1.0 barely runs?

      I would have been more surprised if the game didn't have *any* problems.
      • hawkspur, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6Exactly! I'm running the game without any problems but looks like a patch is needed.

        The people who are complaining about the game crashing when their system specs don't meet the req's make me lol :P
      • jer2eydevil88, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4This is exactly how I remember Half Life 2 launching, bugs galore and that was only if you could actually activate your copy... Good times...
      • blakeh, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1True enough, but you'd think with such an expensive development budget that they would have been able to test it on more systems. A lot of the people complaining do meet the system requirements.
    • therightclique, on 10/10/2007, -1/+12could this be because they just paid $50 for something that doesn't work AT ALL?!?!?!?!? yeah. probably. for a lot of people $50 is hard to come by. i make about $14 an hour and shelling out $50 is hard for me and a lot of people only make $8 an hour and still bought the game. they have a right to be angry when a game they paid a lot of money for is behaving like Windows ME.
      • brufleth, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3That's the nature of PC gaming. Not trying to be a jerk but when you have as many different system configurations as snowflakes it isn't to get everything to 100% on the first go.
      • Chicken, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Well thats why they should have betas to fix bugs and essentially get it ready for shipping.
      • slcsu, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0Solution = Xbox 360. I still game on my PC, but I understand the difficulties, like in the Battlefield series... eeesh.
    • CptBuck, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2yeah, more like the makers of this game slapping me in the face for not product testing. If your releasing a AAA shooter it should work for everyone from mid to high range right out of the box, or in my case right off steam. I BSOD'd after the first level for driver issues, fine, my drivers, i accept that. Then the load times are very long, why i don't know, and now it crashes on me every few minutes. This just shouldn't happen. It's not like i overclocked and now im whining about my computer melting. Its their fault, it should work.
    • Sirocco, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Ya know, if a game doesn't run properly on spec'd hardware it's not a very good game at all, now is it? Oh, and while they are at it they can fix the lame SecuROM *****.
    • FyRE666, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0I don't think the company "busted its balls" when they've obviously not done proper bug testing on different hardware. I've never seen a game with so many angry users before. Glad the demo doesn't even work for me really, otherwise I might have wasted my money. If this happened on a console game the players would immediately be taking their copies back and it would be removed from sale.
  • darkedict, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9Is anyone else having problems with the xbox version? The game froze loading up, and then the DVD drive failed (unreadable disk error), and now the entire dvd drive is dead. sigh.
    • Sandtiger, on 10/10/2007, -5/+2Welcome to SafeROM
    • therightclique, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1good thing you got the performance service plan!!!
    • dBLiSS, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2No problems or crashes with the Xbox version.
    • chicagojosh, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1My copy is working fine.
    • slcsu, on 11/08/2007, -1/+1My copy is working PERFECT on the Xbox 360. And trust me, we've been working that thing like a Bangkok wh0re on 2 for 1 night.
    • dbdudley, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Man, that's not Bioshock related - it has to do witht he hardware. That happened to me with NHL '07. Still in the midst of dealing with Microsoft to get my console back.
  • eyefork, on 10/10/2007, -10/+6I am laughing
  • Lane, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8Of course they knew about the problems, this wonderful thing called beta testing finds them out! now... does that mean that they fixed everything that they found so that the release version is perfect? Clearly not. Its no comfort and a terrible excuse but patch will be out very soon thats for sure.
  • eyefork, on 10/10/2007, -11/+4Ok it wasnt working so i borrowed some RAM and upgraded to 512MB, still not working WTF
    • JordanAustin, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3I thought the minimum requirement was a gig. Unsure though.
      • eyefork, on 10/10/2007, -5/+2You mean HDD?
        • hawkspur, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3The game's stated minimum RAM requirement is 1GB.

        • eyefork, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6I poured some salt water on my motherboard to try and speed things up, I cant afford more RAM.
    • hawkspur, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7Yeah, it's kinda important to read the minimum system requirements for a game before installing it then complaining that it doesn't work.
    • addictedd, on 10/10/2007, -1/+10that is really stupid, 512MB Ram? keep borrowing..
    • shdwghst457, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2if your computer's old enough to "upgrade" to 512mb, throw it out. 1gb is the scraping by minimum these days, 2gb for real games. also hawkspur has a point: read that stuff on the box, it helps. and don't go "i got it on steam i dont have a box stfu" on me steam shows sys req's too if i remember correctly. sell your pc, buy a mac and a 360.
      • gadgetuk, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Shh, over here.... *i think he was having a little joke*
    • ubuntuedgy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Not to beat a dead horse, but damn dude; 512MB? Please upgrade and stop baby Jesus from crying. Any new game needs at least 1 gig. 2 is much more preferable. Don't neglect CPU or video either.
      • Optimaximal, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2**DANGER** **DANGER**

        !!! Immunity to sarcasm and/or wit detected !!!
    • nonymous666, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1The game doesn't use all that much RAM. Just do a ctrl-alt-delete when in the game and bring up task manager. For me, the bioshock.exe hovers around 400MB. That's nothing compared to games like BF2, Dark Messiah, etc. that I've seen hit 1.5GB of RAM.
  • Midvicious, on 10/10/2007, -21/+1Listen, this is not rhetoric. Seriously, just listen...

    Don't use Vista to play games. Ever. Ever. ***** ever.
    • kyrios1, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4You fail.
    • reed311, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I use it everyday to play games. Don't use Ubuntu is more like it.
  • JKVM, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Anyone with Securom problems, see here: http://forums.2kgames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5757
    • Sandtiger, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1I did until I disabled my firewall and ran the game as administrator. That let me get it activated. Now if the !@#$% game would run without crashing to the desktop all the time!
  • Harboggles, on 10/10/2007, -12/+5This is why you buy it for Xbox. I just beat it. Played from 1PM-1aM (with some breaks) and not 1 crash.
    • therightclique, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4playing games through on EASY must be a blast.
      • Optimaximal, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5It must also be great to play games for 12 hours straight without a care in the world. Just wait until you turn 16 and get a job... you'll long for such free time!
    • lcstein, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Go out and get some fresh air! 12 hours playing a game! That's just sick!
    • evilregis, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Oh, to be a teenager. I don't think I can accumulate 12 free hours in a work-week let alone in a single day.
      • washburn085, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Amen, i played from 9pm - 1am, and I am feeling it today
    • slcsu, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0No crashes here either on my 360. I did not come close to finishing, though I paused it quite often to do other things.

  • aaneton, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Hmm... I played the Demo yesterday through. No problems whatsoever. I even accidentally alt+tabbed to desktop and the game kept running in the background and I was able to resume. Maybe I'm just lucky with my configuration. AMD64x2 , ati 1600, 1gb ram, winxp sp2
    • Spuy767, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0I'd say you got damn lucky that you were even able to run it with a 1600.
      • aaneton, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1actually at 1280x1024 all details high Bioshock run smoothly... I was surprised myself I ran so well. I usually upgrade my computer once I get a game that's not playable anymore. I upgraded to this when I got oblivion. And of course ati 1600 = ati X1600 ;)
    • dillibob, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1maybe the demo is fine? because i have a a fairly plain comp (7600 GT, 2.8 ghz, 1 gig of ram) and the demo runs fairly fine for me on medium. it freezed up every once and a while on high so i changed it down. so i think that maybe the demo is fine?
  • Alex2, on 10/10/2007, -10/+94I like how digg covers the launch of this game in a 24 hour period

    ZOMG! DEMO LEAKED TO BIT TORRENT

    ZOMG DOWNLOAD DEMO!

    ZOMG! BEST GAME EVAR!!!!

    ZOMG! only rated 9/10! WTF!!

    ZOMG! THIS GAME SUXORZ!
  • fugazied, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4no crashes here. The load screens can be slow though. GREAT game.
  • DroogInPhoenix, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Except for having to get the SN number in a few times, it runs great.
    XP, quad core, 8800gtx, 4 gigs of ram.
  • Vistrix, on 10/10/2007, -3/+12Do people even know they need to install the latest BETA drivers for both ATI & Nvidia?

    Theres a reason why they delayed the demo. The beta drivers work perfectly with Bioshock.
    • EbowUK, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1My 7900GTX runs it just fine with the Oct 2006 drivers.
    • Kamakazi15, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2When I installed it, it told me to download the drivers right after the game finished installing.
    • RawOysters, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I am running Nvidia drivers from 2006 and it runs fine.
  • Lyte9731, on 10/10/2007, -5/+7I wouldn't say the issue is widespread. Usually in massive popular releases, a small % of the population will have issues with compatibility, and it seems like this is the case. The vocal people having the issue will vocalize the loudest, so it seems like the problems are widespread. A vast majority (and all the 360 players) are probably playing just fine.
    • dBLiSS, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1Flamebait:

      I bet it's just the nooobs that can't get it to run anyway!
      • PabloTweaks, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Sorry to bust your bubble, but this is a widespread problem ( as acknowledged by 2K games!!). You cant have state of the art hardware and expect a game to just simply not work? 360 version works because Microsoft themselves test every game prior to release (as do Sony and Nitendo). Oh, and I am by no means a noob, and it doesn't work for me. The game is not tested propoerly because they had to get it out before the deadline, the damn auto update servers didn't work for days either!
    • NSMike, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Most people don't seem to get this. When someone has something to complain about, they complain. If there's nothing to complain about, you don't go around yelling, "Hey everyone, my copy is working fine!"
      • MiDri, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Good idea is to take every person that is having a problem and add 9 people that are not, so you have a nice 1/10 ratio -- then things don't seem so bad.
  • TripcodeMel, on 10/10/2007, -6/+2C2D 6600, 2GB DDR667, 7600 GT.

    No problems. Runs silky-smooth on my drivers from March. itt: failmore
  • HautePie, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Works fine on my G3 iMAc
    • shdwghst457, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0works better on my apple IIs, 640k ram, dual floppy drives.
  • chrispiss1186, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I could barely get the demo to work. Menus, cutscenes, loading screens, etc worked fine but once the actual gameplay started, most everything was scrambled. Example: after the plane crash, the only thing visible in the level were the flames, some chunky neon colored squares, and water textures that looked like they were out of Doom.

    My xbox 360 one works fine though :)
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 173 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.