**//The Official Bioshock Thread//**

Thanks for the links and getbot. I was running at 1.2mb/s over wifi with that thing, pretty insane!

Although it probably doesn't matter much to most, my desktop played it perfectly on maxed settings:

e6600 (3.0ghz)
8800gts 640mb (625/900)
2x1gb DDR2 800 (835)

I did notice quite a bit of tearing, but v-sync was off. Turned it on and it cleaned up with no problems.

 

DX10 is hardly the only version that claims additional performance. DX9.0c also claimed additional performance doing the exact same tasks as DX9.0. Farcry had a DX9.0c patch, but I don't remember if it actually brought performance increases. Similarly DX8.1 claimed performance increases over DX8 by doing things in fewer passes.

It depends on the game. The creators of World in Conflict have stated that their DX10 path is designed for 8800 level cards to push them to their limits rather than being a higher performance path.

 

Dx10 is going to have some major growing pains, both in code and in hardware, remember the GF3? It was already sent out to pasture before any real DX8 titles came out, at least we have titles making use of the hardware already.

 

Please read and come back and discuss.

http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/11/08/what_direct3d_10_is_all_about/index.html


just in case you were not aware...

Version numbers usually indicate the severity of code changes...
thus 9.0 to 9.0c would be a minor feature add to existing code
where 9.0c to DX10 is in fact a much larger difference.


Note that World in Conflict woudl be best served by truly using the efficiency of dx10 as well... a piece of hardware used efficiently would indeed be able to actually take ANY card to its outermost limit.

note you'd have to want to go out of business to program something a low percentage of gamers have available... they will scale the settings and image quality just like every other game company does.

 

The game just stops doing anything after I go to New game and select difficulty...just a blank screen (and faint loading screen) and it freezes.

im running vista, comp specs in sig. any ideas?

 

Just ran a DX10 trial of Bioshock. It ran pretty well for the most part. Even when the frames dropped to 15-18 it still felt playable. I'll try a DX9 run through either tonight or tomorrow.

Note: Despite what I've heard everyone say, I did not update my driver to the new 163.44 version. I had attempted to, but it constantly gave me errors so I just kept it at the 15x.xx I have currently installed.

 

wow, those are AMAZING screens

 

Whoa, excellent pictures! I'm waiting for nvidia's 9800 GTX...If bioshock 3 or 2 came out...it'd be like, WOW!!

 

running the new drivers?
163.44 fixes many bugs and I required that and the modded inf from www.laptopvideo2go.com to fix the problem you described with the laptop listed in my sig.

 

yeah thats how it looks on 360 too...really nice graphics

 

I don't think the 360's quality can be compared to a PC's.

 

So beautiful...

Thanks for the screenshots and fps results.

 

man...but that's runnin on an 8700GT not an 8600GT ><

nice pictures though =]

 

dude i run it the exact same thing. i just knucle down the resolution.

For some reason it just doesnt look as good as it seems. But its probably just me in shock that my computer can produce something that awsome. But i feel like my settings just arnt turned up enough. i feel like i can turn something else up.

Btw are u sure DX 10 is enabled?

 

8700M GT can handle the game/demo in DX 10 mode, the game runs very smooth too.

 

I played the demo very well on my GeForce 8600M GT, but the retail game runs so much slower...I'm a bit concerned as this is one of the few games I have actually bought and it runs very slowly...

Why, oh why, would they fool me into thinking it would run as well as the demo did...?

 

You're running the game under DX 10 or 9 ?

 

Unfortunately the 163.44 drivers let you enable SLI but it's not working. It will show SLI enabled but when you run games/benchmarks only 1 GPU is working.

 

sweet screens

 

Well on the demo I could run it on max DX10 settings at 1280x720, now I'm running it on medium DX9 at 1024x640 and I still get fewer frames per second in the retail game...I'm hoping it's a patchable bug of some sort.

 

I like that the 163.44 gives you better bioshock (much better in my case) performance AND lets you overclock.

 

I´d like to see some pictures showing the differences between dx9 and dx10 =).

 

Yeah, me too.

 

Try adding force global lighting. I liked the ambience better that way (creepier).

 

How do I go about running the demo in DX9? I'd like to see how it performs.

 

Anyone else notice that the 163.44 drivers cause the mouse to lag sometimes?

 

If you're running in dx10 by default go into your display options and turn off the DX10 Textures and then you'll be playing in DX9.

 

No offence but when some of your screens are running at 13fps I don't think you should be feeling you can turn anything up, I'd be more thinking you need to start turning things down.

edit: Wait, sorry, never mind, thought you were the person who posted screens, my apologies. But seriously, I feel this thread is just another misleading one thats become sadly typical on NBR. Threads showcasing the 'power' of new generation cards when in reality, it's just not able to cope with what people are passing off as playable. One of the screens is 13 frames, others in the late teens! That is not what you want to see. Bioshock runs at about 25fps average on my notebook too, but that's only because thats the best I can squeeze out of it at the lowest settings! Obviously, the 8700 cannot squeeze at bioshock at the settings you've configured either....they need adjusting.

 

Personally I'd go with the 360. I have a G1S which is one of the best laptop gaming systems, yet Bioshock can be pretty slow. Playable, but not as good as the 360 version.

 

PC would be my choice.

 

PC would be the choice if you had a nice PC, but in this case I'd say 360.

 

my buddy has Sony Vaio FZ with the intel 965 chipset. is there anyway to get bioshock to work?
Intel T7100 (1.8hz c2d)
2gb ram
Intel 965 express chip

 

PC. I can play it at quite high settings, so you should too. And then it'll look good.

 

He has a GMA x3100? Then no Minimum radeon x1300/geforce 6600. There'd be no real point anyways.

 

How do you run at dx9.

 

I'm going with the X360 version. I tried the demo on two PCs: my Asus S969S laptop w/ 8600 GS and my desktop Athlon X2 4200 w/ 6800 GT. The game ran okay at 1024x768 resolution on both systems, but not nearly as fast or nice looking as on the X360.

 

Also, I don't know you guys, but for me a shooter is meant to be played with a MOUSE.

 

Try th 163.44 drivers and OC'ing, and turning off dx10. You get a nice jump in performance.

 

go into the options>display and turn off the DirectX 10 Detail Surfaces.
that's the only thing that's DX10 about Bioshock, every other thing is DX9.

 

He can still try. There was a comment over at the VR-Zone forum where someone tried the new non-beta 14.31 drivers for XP enabling full hardware DX9.0c support and they claimed BioShock was just playable at 800x600 with low settings.

http://downloadcenter.intel.com/Det...lName=Windows*%20XP Professional&lang=eng

The 14.31 drivers only work for XP though. Vista drivers will take a while longer. (I don't believed the previous pre-beta drivers work with BioShock).

 

Maybe... if the x3100 get's to the around x1300 level it could reach. It might have incompabilities with the card thuogh.

 

Found a thread over at gamespot that compares DX9 and DX10 of the game... Although most people said they looked pretty much the same... And the guy with 8800GTS saids he prefer playing in DX9 because it runs much faster than DX10. lol

 

I'd say go with the PC. With tweaking of the settings and your drivers, it should be an overall nicer experience than the console version.

 

Well this is strange.

I seem to be unable to run the setup.exe file (which you use to install the demo)

downloaded it twice from different sources (in case of corrupted zip file)

and each time i try to run it i get

"windows cannot access the specified device, path or file. You may not have the appropriate permissions to access the file"

First thing i thought was my user account didnt have the access rights but im administrator level hrmm.
Ive never had a problem with a pc game before this.
Winxp sp2

I checked on the 2k forums and i seem to be the only one with this error

any ideas?

 

I found DX10 slightly faster than DX9 tbh.

 

Try Right-Clicking and Running as an Administrator.

 

i dont get that choice i can either

run as.... the current user account me (which is administrator level anyway)

or another user account which i create (dont have option as administrator here)

 

I have the 360 version, which, I must say, I imagine to be more enjoyable on my 56" LCD TV than on my 17" laptop screen... lol

 

We need some side to side screenshots of dx 9 and dx 10. I think that some of those shots look altittle better then my dx 9 (the plains tail might look better, blood looked more realistic) but i could be wrong, i have no idea.

 

They have them here
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/bioshock/show_msgs.php?topic_id=m-1-37654379&pid=924919

There's a difference, but it's not large. merely small details and whatnot