Google+

49 comments

  • skeletor-1999 - August 4, 2013 2:55 p.m.

    Isn't this like another rapture where everything developed similarly but like it was in a parallel universe where plasmids were vigours, Adam was salts and instead of an underwater dystopia it is a sky dystopia.
  • thing1amc - April 3, 2013 8:46 a.m.

    "Bioshock 2 feels like a fairly insignificant expansion". Didnt you guys give bioshock 2 a 10 a few years back? I actually liked 2 more than infinite. Make no mistake I think infinite was great, but given the high expectations I had, it was also a bit disappointing. I loved the ending but the story getting there was a bit vague and impersonal (kind of like the original bioshock, which I also like more). Also the only choices you made in the story (the lottery, slade, the necklace) had no impact on the ending, which always ended up in the same place. In the end though, its the combat that was a major step back. While I have no problem with the series stepping away a bit from its comfort zone and taking pointers from some of the big blockbusters like Halo and Call of Duty, they ended up making the combat significantly more linear and, by extension, unexciting. The vigors weren't as fun (I only ever used hypnotize), the guns lacked punch, and the whole "only carry 2 weapons at a time" thing really bugged me (expecially when the weapons werent very cool). Its just sad in my opinion, that infinite had all of these great things going for it, but it just doesnt all quite come together. Anyone agree?
  • ihopethisisnotantistasblood - April 3, 2013 10:04 a.m.

    totally agree, although i used to have a hard time chosing bioshock 1 over 2, after playing infinete i think 1 is the best of the series
  • thing1amc - April 3, 2013 12:14 p.m.

    I'm kinda iffy between 1 and 2. 2 has the best combat of the series, and the most emotionally resonant story, but 1 holds a special place in my heart. and that twist. not even infinite's ending can top that.
  • shinkeidei - April 3, 2013 12:41 p.m.

    Nope, I disagree (that vigor ability is called Possesion no hypnotize and there is a reason I point that out not for being a nazi). In context of the story the ending was not supposed to change, just the subtle ***SPOILERS*** constant and variables, everything even the original Bioshock was supposed to be part of a loop ***SPOILERS OVER***. I actually welcomed the Idea of having only two weapons; on old school shooters I ended up using only one or two weapons regardless so what is the point of carrying a full arsenal? Most of the gamers I know also do the same, in that regard my argument is based on personal preference so, that is just me. I might agree that the combat was linear on the first hour before most of the combat features were unlocked but afterwards every shooting section felt like a mini sandbox with tons of different approaches —especially in Hard and 1999 mode were I had to be more resourceful and thoughtful about my fighting approach— I even went stealth on 1999 mode; most times getting a couple kills before going fuill charge. I disagree with Infinite not coming together as a complete package, actually I think is one of the most realized storytelling games this gen without having to sacrifice fun and solid mechanic. But in the end is all about preferences, and is wonderful to be openly discussing this with other gamers who demand the best experiences! By the way, the reason I corrected the vigor name is because it takes credibility, I´m not saying that you haven´t played Infinite because the rest of your critique points to that but as I read the first line I thought that you only played sections if you played at all. I deservedbeing called a jerk but let it be known that it was not my intention just my interpretations of your post. Happy Gaming!!
  • kingsmikefan - April 3, 2013 9:19 p.m.

    @thing1amc Completely different staff back then. The guy who reviewed that did not write this article and that staff is mostly gone. Also, linear? Most of that game is comprised of combat arenas with multiple ways to fight.
  • phoenixwright13 - June 7, 2013 2:30 p.m.

    I completely agree.
  • LEGOMatrix - April 3, 2013 3:33 a.m.

    Very wise article! Developers should all read! I'm calling it here then, the next true Bioshock: Victorian era, underground city, á la Lovecraft. Changing it up! Keeping it the same!
  • shinkeidei - April 3, 2013 12:43 p.m.

    My thoughts precisely!!
  • taokaka - April 2, 2013 10:08 p.m.

    On the whole I agree with what this article is saying (mostly, I'll get to what I disagree with in a bit) but I honestly thought bioshock Infinite was a tad disappointing. Before I talk about what I didn't like, I first must say the setting was near perfect, Columbia was a blast to look at and explore, the skylines were great, the combat was fantastic and lastly the sniper, I don't think I need to explain what makes the sniper in this game so amazing. What I didn't like was firstly the trailers fed me lies regarding Elizabeth and the songbird, I believed that Elizabeth would be a bit more innocent, sweet, quirky, childish and on the whole more likeable. I didn't not like her, she just didn't really connect with me as much as I thought she could because she just seemed a bit dull and too serious half of the time. As such I didn't really draw much of an emotional response from her, and seeing as she was meant to be the fulcrum of most emotional scenes I ended up feeling more upset whenever I ran out of ammo for my sniper than at any other point in the game. The rest of the characters were a bit of a mix, Booker, the Lucete twins and Comstock played their parts well throughout the story but important characters like Daisy Fitzroy and Cornelius Slate felt undercooked. Another issue I had with the game was the songbird, the trailers made me think it'd play a much larger role where he was to impose a constant ominous threat over Booker and Elizabeth but instead gives up until the last hour of the game. However none of this compares to the crushing disappointment which was the overly pretentious ending. The article was good but I kind of slightly disagree with "Make a complete game, not a trilogy component". I'm going to use mass effect as an example for this, the series as a whole is undoubtedly one of the best series in gaming and each of the games on their own are some of the best of this generation. However each game is most certainly a component of a trilogy but they work together so well that the final trilogy is much more grand and spectacular than any single game could ever hope to be. On the whole I think the message you're suggesting would ultimately lead us to a better gaming landscape as a whole but would rob us of spectacular sagas like mass effect.
  • Redeater - April 2, 2013 11:26 p.m.

    Those are pretty good points but if I may address the one about the trailers. I fell in love with that 10 minute gameplay trailer. Was I disappointed? You bet, but you should take into account that the game was delayed for an entire year. Ken Levine said that the things that were cut were cut for a reason and we wouldn't be seeing them in DLC. If the game had been released sans trailer peoples expectations would be lower but we would still have a game that is scored countless 10's. Sure I was a touch upset after I finished the game and realized that there was a lot on the cutting room floor but you know what would have upset me even more? Getting another Aliens:CM. So take that as you will. I'm not trying to justify the bait and switch but I am saying that we did get one of the highest scoring Metacritic games ever. So in the end, is that such a bad thing?
  • taokaka - April 3, 2013 1:55 a.m.

    Good points, if all the preview material was cut to keep it from being another Aliens:CM then I can forgive it even if I highly doubt that's the case. My disappointment mostly stems from the fact I had already fallen in love with a different Elizabeth, I was excited to save that dying horse and I was pumped to see more of the man giving his patriotic speech to a bunch of empty chairs. They replaced it with a lot of stuff which was probably just as good, it was just that I was pumped to play a different game, a game that'll sadly never see a release. The game was just different to what I was expecting, overall I still believe that bioshock infinite deserves most of the praise it gets, it's far from perfect but I don't regret playing it.
  • taokaka - April 3, 2013 2:02 a.m.

    Why are my replies screwed up?
  • taokaka - April 3, 2013 2:05 a.m.

    By the way this reply is for redeater
  • shinkeidei - April 3, 2013 12:52 p.m.

    My feelings too. Although I did love Elizabeth and I loved how the world around her changed her and impacted her. Thus not becoming a one dimensional bimbo.
  • Fox_Mulder - April 2, 2013 11:30 p.m.

    There's a difference between pretentious and complex.
  • taokaka - April 3, 2013 1:46 a.m.

    Unfortunately I felt that it was the former of the two, however I don't feel it's a bad ending just that it tries so much to go against convention that it forgets to actually entertain. It abandoned the the active plot to focus on some of the questions hinted at earlier in the game. It proceeds to then have Elizabeth make an out of character philosophical monologue accompanied by striking images which given the chance could be much more effective than Elizabeth explaining everything to you if given just a few words to accompany it. This annoyed me greatly because the story up until that point had operated under less is more, instead of choosing lengthy dialogue to tell a story it conveyed its story through setting and this completely goes the other way. I'm mostly annoyed by the plot abandonment which actually highly reminds me of the show neon genesis evangelion which is widely renowned for having one of the worst endings across any media ever. However I think the ending has one saving grace, its relationship and symbolism regarding the previous bioshock games caused me to speculate how the games are related. And I suppose if it got me to think then it's some sort of victory for the ending. (my theory is Booker is Andrew Ryan)
  • taokaka - April 3, 2013 2:06 a.m.

    This reply is for Fox_Mulder
  • shinkeidei - April 3, 2013 12:50 p.m.

    Sorry to kiil your speculations, but Booker dies. I actually think Booker and Ryan are the same person on diametrally different universes as the whole lighthouse allegory suggests. And the fact that we sit here discussing this makes the ending one of the best endings ever. Even if we just disagree in how much we liked it. Ken Levine and Irrational predicted this, I imagined it was highly divise in the studio as well.
  • Hobogonigal - April 2, 2013 11:34 p.m.

    Preferring the hand cannon magnum myself over the sniper rifle. I'll reply with either an agreeing response or an argument as soon as I manage to finish this damn game!!!

Showing 1-20 of 49 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000