2K Games Officially Announces It’s Working On A New Bioshock

24
2K Games Officially Announces It’s Working On A New Bioshock
Image: Bioshock, 2K Games

Today 2K Games announced the formation of a new studio called Cloud Chamber to work on the next BioShock, a game that’s still a few years out from release according to the publisher.

“A collective of storytellers eager to push the frontlines of interactive entertainment by making unique, entertaining and thoughtful experiences that engage the world, Cloud Chamber will build its team at two locations: 2K’s San Francisco Bay Area headquarters in Novato, Calif., as well as in Montréal, Québec, which marks the first-ever Canadian office for a 2K studio,” the company said in a press release. “In addition, 2K announced that Cloud Chamber has started to work on the next iteration of the globally acclaimed BioShock franchise, which will be in development for the next several years.

Cloud Chamber is being headed by Kelley Gilmore, previously of Firaxis Games, acquired by 2K back in 2005 and best known for the Civilisation and XCOM strategy games. While Ken Levine, who directed BioShock 1 and Infinite, isn’t affiliated with the project at all, Gilmore told IGN in an email that series alums Hoagy de la Plante (creative director on BioShock 1 and 2), Scott Sinclair (art director on BioShock 1 and Infinite), and Jonathan Pelling (art team creative director on Infinite) will be working on the new game at Cloud Chamber.

“Our team believes in the beauty and strength of diversity, in both the makeup of the studio and the nature of its thinking,” Gilmore said in the press release. “We are a deeply experienced group of game makers, including many responsible for BioShock’s principal creation, advancement and longstanding notoriety, and honoured to be part of the 2K family as stewards of this iconic franchise.”

The last game in the series, BioShock Infinite, released in 2013. While there hadn’t been a lot of talk about the next game in the series, Kotaku reported last year that some developers at Hangar 13 had gone to work on a new BioShock project code-named Parkside following the release of Mafia III and a turbulent year that eventually resulted in big layoffs.

Comments

      • Really? You liked the poor people are just as bad a rich people plot twist, and the Elizabeth would have been better off had she just remained an uneducated and destitute but ‘authentic’ waif, instead of the well-educated and pampered daughter of a powerful evangelist. And the fact that she effectively committed suicide to achieve that was just kinda hokey?

          • Are you sure you’re not just contradicting for the sake of it? But here ya go, don’t take my word for it:

            Unfortunately, the entire enterprise is undermined by Infinite’s appallingly simplistic portrayal of the rebellion that boils up beneath Finktown. Within the space of a couple of hours, we see Daisy Fitzroy go from downtrodden leader of the Vox to blood-crazed psychopath, smearing her face in the blood of the fallen Fink, and even threatening to murder a child on the grounds that he’ll grow up to be another despotic aristocrat.

            Hence the only non-white character Infinite lends a voice to becomes the exact kind of monstrous caricature portrayed in Comstock’s House of Heroes. We also hear DeWitt repeatedly emphasise that there is no difference whatsoever between Comstock and Fitzroy, which is an astoundingly asinine assertion. Criticising a bloody uprising is fair enough, but to tar racism and revolution with the same brush and then dismiss the entire topic? That isn’t just oversimplification, that’s verging on cowardice.
            https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2016-07-03-three-years-on-how-does-bioshock-infinite-hold-up

            After the credits, there is a little, tiny section, where Booker wakes up in his apartment and hears Anna crying. He goes into her room and calls out “Anna?!” That is where the game really ends.

            Now people may come back with “But Elizabeth disappeared from the scene after drowning Booker,” and while this is true, it makes sense — and is also one of the most depressing parts of the game despite its happy ending. Elizabeth in that form never existed. The girl you went through the entire story with? She never existed. Anna is Elizabeth, but because every outcome of baby Anna’s life was to end up in Columbia with Comstock in that tower and grow up there, when Comstock died and everything he had done and had effected died with him, the adult Elizabeth also went. There was no adult Elizabeth in any other dimension that Comstock wasn’t in. Because he was in every world she was in, when he died, the adult Elizabeth died too, leaving only baby Anna. This means that while Anna will be free to live with Booker, she will never turn into the same person. She will never be able to open tears, as that was an ability given to her by the Lutece twins in Columbia. She may never be able to pick locks (why would she need to learn to do that?), and a lot of her personality that was influenced by being in Columbia will be different. She will never be Elizabeth. She will always be Anna, a completely different human than the one we got to know. So, in a way, Elizabeth did die. That, to me, is a very depressing thing indeed, as Elizabeth was an incredibly crafted character and the best female portrayal in any game I’ve ever played.
            https://venturebeat.com/community/2013/04/19/understanding-bioshock-infinites-ending-ending-explanation/3/

          • the adult Elizabeth also went. There was no adult Elizabeth in any other dimension that Comstock wasn’t in.
            I guess you didn’t play the dlc then?

          • You mean the shoehored mess of an add-on that isn’t even clearly canon, that made a half arsed attempt for a bit of fanservice and cash-in by dropping everyone into the Rapture for… no apparent reason. The DLC that made everyone into even bigger arseholes than they already were in the original games? The DLC that tried to address all the obvious criticisms of Infinite and failed miserably? Yeah, I played it.

          • Your post history is one streaming pile of pent up bile and I’m the one who is outraged? LOL

            I’m just making a comment on an aspect of a game that I didn’t especially like, and talking about games is kinda the point of this website, eh?

            And it’s really irrelevant whether you disagree with the opinion pieces, I was just responding to the claim that the plot elements weren’t in the game at all when they were in fact the core story arc.

          • I don’t like GaaS and MTX and how they prey on the vulnerable.

            A little bit different than trashing a critically acclaimed game like Bioshock Infinite.

            But sure, we all have different tastes. I was just trying to engage with you in my first post. Then you gave your snarky response and eyes made a ‘Tina Fey-esque’ roll.

          • @chinesefood fair enough. Tone of voice doesn’t translate well on the internet, particularly not at 1am.

            For the record, I loved aspects of BInfinite, particularly Elizabeth, which made Evil Elizabeth and self-important cynicism passing for profundity all the more jarring.

            I suspect that a lot of the excessive praise the game received had to do with the fact that many reviewers are also twenty something and the other guys are just as bad as these guys and wouldn’t life have been better if my mum had been different speaks to a pretty typical cynicism of early adulthood once one starts dealing with adult responsibilities.

          • @chinesefood and, for what it’s worth, I like the game well enough that I’m still bitter about it six years later. Ain’t too many games I can say that about.

          • I don’t think it’s fair to suggest that contrarianism is behind anyone liking the game, or reading it in a different way. And both of those articles contain, to me, pretty glaring errors.

            The major change to Fitzroy occurs after they go through a tear, so we’re seeing two different versions of Fitzroy. Which suggests to me that her actions are primarily a means to explore utilitarian ethics and moral relativism – rather than race and revolution as the article suggests. In any event, Booker is correct in pointing out that both Comstock and Fitzroy both believe that the ends justify the means (similar to President Snow / Coin from the hunger games I guess).

            re: Elizabeth/Anna: Elizabeth isn’t dead if Anna exists; neither Booker nor Elizabeth die at the end, and no-one is committing suicide. Those readings only makes sense if you don’t consider the lighthouse analogy or the post credits scene.

            As far as the second article goes, author is focusing on character traits that derive from her environment – opening tears and lockpicking – instead of the core of her character. Yes she probably won’t be able to pick locks any more…but is that really the important take away from her character? In terms of whether she’s better off as Anna or Elizabeth – or as you put it, eneducated/destitute v. pampered/educated (no offence, but…yikes!). The better question is – bird or cage? She is exhaustively characterised as someone that does not like her gilded cage at all, irrespective of the potential benefits it may provide her.

          • All of which is a much more interesting discussion, thanks.

            I am running out of energy on this one, so forgive me if I only focus on Anna here, but one can’t disassociate one’s personality from one’s memories. Sure, Anna is genetically Elizabeth, but this is no more meaningful than one identical twin separated at birth is identical to her sister.

            In any practical sense the timeline in which Elizabeth kicks arse simply disappears. Anyone intentionally destroying their own memories has a death wish, and Elizabeth who otherwise takes such delight in things shows no evidence of being suicidal.

            Further, it’s impossible to imagine what Elizabeth thinks she might gain from restarting her timeline in a poverty stricken house as a baby with no memories with a father who has shown no evidence one way or another of being able to care for her. What’s her future in this case? About the best she can imagine given the 19th century world created here is to marry a baker, or otherwise a not insignificant chance of a life of prostitution and/or death from starvation or disease.

            I very much get the bird or cage analogy, which is obviously something the devs were going for, but the analogy only makes sense in a first world middle class welfare state world view, and that is not the world Elizabeth or Anna live in.

            In any practical sense a poor girl child in a highly stratified and unequal society has no more autonomy than Elizabeth does, and in any case, the whole arc of the game is Elizabeth breaking out of her cage and gaining precisely the autonomy that she craves and then… giving the lot away, for what?

          • I saw it as a sort of self-sacrifice. Like, she saw what would happen were she to become the Lamb of Columbia and just noped the fuck out. But yeah, the fact that she’s making the decision to essentially erase herself – knowingly too, she’s explaining all the multiverse shit to Booker at the end so she must be aware of the decision she’s making – it’s a powerful statement on her idealism I guess. She won’t allow it to happen, even if that means ceasing to exist in the process. Which is a good counterpoint to the means to an end justifications we see from Comstock and Fitzroy – I can’t imagine either of them sacrificing themselves for the good of Columbia, or the wider world in general. Another part of it is maybe that she’s saying, if I can only exist in a cage I’d prefer to not exist at all, or at the very least to take the chance that there’s something better on offer – or even like, better to die on your feet than live on your knees, sort of thing.

            I may have been over thinking this over the last 6 years or so lol

          • Within the space of a couple of hours, we see Daisy Fitzroy go from downtrodden leader of the Vox to blood-crazed psychopath, smearing her face in the blood of the fallen Fink, and even threatening to murder a child on the grounds that he’ll grow up to be another despotic aristocrat.

            This is just wrong. That’s what appears to happen but it is later revealed that Fitzroy selflessly sacrificed herself and her morals to push Elizabeth to realise her true power and give her the resolve to confront Comstock.

            To fail to grasp that shows that opinion piece didn’t put into enough effort to even consider the full story so forgive me if I don’t read or address the rest of what was written.

          • LOL. The Burial at Sea DLC was a poor attempt to rewrite some of the shitty decisions the devs made in putting together the main game precisely in response to the criticisms I have made.

            It doesn’t change the shitty choices they made in making the main game, in fact, that the devs felt the need to shoehorn a trivial cut scene in later to provide some shitty justification of their choices only proves the criticism.

            Seriously, the most likely outcome from acting like a crazed psychopath and smearing your own face in someone else’s blood is to push Elizabeth to realise her true power? Well, okay boomer.

          • Do you have any evidence that that plot line was retconned and shoehorned in? I’d say for the amount of drafting and back grounding done for any narrative project of this scope and budget that it was more likely written that way from the start. And that seems like an excellent thing for DLC to do – build on the main game and have some revelations of its own.

            And yes, I think in the fiction of that world, that narrative choice made sense. And an “ok boomer” meme reference? Yikes. I mean you took a guess but it didn’t pay off.

          • @mogwai You didn’t get the memo? “Okay boomer” now is used as an expression of exhaustion when dealing with anyone, regardless of age, who spouts off some garbage that is self-evidentally implausible as if they have all the answers in the universe and everyone else is just a clueless twit. To put it in terms perhaps your generation might better understand, what-ever.

          • @angorafish

            “Okay boomer” now is used as an expression of exhaustion when dealing with anyone, regardless of age, who spouts off some garbage that is self-evidentally implausible as if they have all the answers in the universe and everyone else is just a clueless twit.

            Wow. That’s what you took from my posts? My opinion that the game was good and the story made self-contained sense is self-evidentially implausible garbage? I don’t even know where to start with that.

            I’m not sure why you’re so vehemently trying to convince everyone Infinite was bad. Sure, you don’t like it, that’s cool. Lots of people do, though.

          • @mogwai No, I didn’t take it from your posts as a whole, it was a reference to your point that I described in my previous sentence. The sentence you apparently didn’t bother to read.

          • @angorafish

            Seriously, the most likely outcome from acting like a crazed psychopath and smearing your own face in someone else’s blood is to push Elizabeth to realise her true power?

            This sentence? If so, I disagree and I said previously that I think it made narrative sense. YMMV. I think this has run its course.

Log in to comment on this story!