Than can video games ever tell good stories? Or is the concept of a GAME, the concept of needing to have elements where you have action to move the narrative forward, will ultimately be the dagger in games and the art of storytelling?
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Bioshock Infinite, overrated and repeative [spoilers]
- Thread starter Nilaul
- Start date
Than can video games ever tell good stories? Or is the concept of a GAME, the concept of needing to have elements where you have action to move the narrative forward, will ultimately be the dagger in games and the art of storytelling?
Games can if the developer isn't slapping shooting into what's essentially a movie. Papers, Please tells a thoughtful story that comes out of the gameplay and the decisions that the player makes. That might be an extreme example, but I think the bare minimum would be a world that has a level of interaction beyond just shooting at it.
It's gameplay though isn't really consistent of that of a game though.
I mean, sure we have games like Journey, Tell Tales The Walking Dead, Heavy Rain, and many more of that kin that have come out this generation.
Narratives usually excell in these types of games because they ARE STRIPPING away the foundation of what makes video games, video games.
I mean, say what you want, but to me a video game is something like Saints Row. The freedom to do what you choose, the freedom to just lose it all, shoot shit, explode shit, just escape reality in a sense. An to me, that's what made video games so damn appealing as a little kid. That escape that I got.
With games like Papers Please, or Journey, or Heavy Rain, you still get that sense of escape, but it lacks that core video game feeling, and makes it seem so much much more like a visual novel, or a film/game hybrid. Just lots of minimal gamey elements galore.
Saint's Row should not have a linear story. I think that's the biggest fault for the series since it doesn't suit the gameplay at all. If it had been built instead around small narrative moments, which combined with your actions led to one of several possible conclusions, it would be a much better experience. The gameplay wouldn't have to change at all. Instead though, most developers have gameplay and narrative as these two separate things, almost entirely divorced from each other, that feel as if they're crammed together at the last moment before the game ships.
Saint's Row 3 does combine them at the very beginning with the bank robbery, but falls apart after that.
Heavy Rain and Walking Dead are the opposite of what games should be. Heavy Rain contorts gameplay to try to bring it closer in line with the narrative, and is a spectacular failure by feeling more game-y than most games. Walking Dead is a choose your own adventure book where your choices don't matter. It has a good narrative, but the gameplay feels, and is treated like, an appendix. They are so focused on telling their own story that they squeeze the player out.
Saint's Row 3 does combine them at the very beginning with the bank robbery, but falls apart after that.
Heavy Rain and Walking Dead are the opposite of what games should be. Heavy Rain contorts gameplay to try to bring it closer in line with the narrative, and is a spectacular failure by feeling more game-y than most games. Walking Dead is a choose your own adventure book where your choices don't matter. It has a good narrative, but the gameplay feels, and is treated like, an appendix. They are so focused on telling their own story that they squeeze the player out.
SirIgbyCeaser
Banned
You know what I did after i finished bioshock infinite?
I sold it. 1 playthrough was all it required.
And I don't miss it. And I don't care anymore. I hope this isn't a GOTY because this is not the direction I want developers going.
I sold it. 1 playthrough was all it required.
And I don't miss it. And I don't care anymore. I hope this isn't a GOTY because this is not the direction I want developers going.
I don't believe that there is a reasonable interpretation of my post that suggest that I think the problem is that the Vox should have been portrayed as nice.
Yes, having a peacenik rebel group who just wants everybody to live in harmony, fighting against Dr. Comstocknik and his evil robots would be simplistic, thoughtless, and stupid.
It is equally simplistic, thoughtless, and stupid to depict such a cartoonishly evil bogeyman caricature of racism and classism as you find in Columbia's privileged class, opposite an underclass who are, without exception, depicted as hurt, human, downtrodden victims, until the exact second that this war starts, at which point they are universally transformed into mindlessly violent, cruel savages, and then to handwave everything away by basically saying, "Well, they're both violent, therefore they are both morally equivalent".
Is it possible to make a civil war/revolution story where the moral lines are not so easily drawn? Yes, of course. Is it more likely and more realistic that a society under that kind of stress will fracture along messy, indistinct lines, and will there be victims, villains, and heroes on all sides? Of course, absolutely. Is the socioeconomic/revolutionary plotline in Bioshock Infinite even remotely sophisticated or mature enough to even begin to broach those sorts of issues? Nooooooope.
VariantX04
Loser slave of the system :(
Why are people suddenly wishing Irrational stuck with the heavily scripted nature of the old demo? I remember all the complaints when it was first revealed. I very much prefer the product we have now, flaws and all. The scripted demo had ambitious ideas but seemed so un-gamey, breaking the flow every few seconds to force you to notice something.
And we can sit here and complain about all the story elements that didn't quite work, but to me, in recent memory, no other game has sucked me into its world quite like BioShock Infinite. The art, the atmosphere, the small touches, and interactions with Elizabeth made this a very unique and memorable experience. That's why this game will stick with me for years to come and will be one of those games I wish I could experience again for the first time.
And we can sit here and complain about all the story elements that didn't quite work, but to me, in recent memory, no other game has sucked me into its world quite like BioShock Infinite. The art, the atmosphere, the small touches, and interactions with Elizabeth made this a very unique and memorable experience. That's why this game will stick with me for years to come and will be one of those games I wish I could experience again for the first time.
Trent Strong
Banned
I agree with this. The reason The Walking Dead is a good story is because it's not really a game.
Dave Meltzer
Banned
I played about 3 hours of Infinite. It's so boring. Just feels like a generic shooter with a kawaii sidekick to pander to your personal sadness.
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
Having action to move a narrative forward is arguably vital to story-telling. Do you mean action as in 'pew-pew-pew'?
It isn't groundbreaking in terms of gameplay, nor is it worthy of a 10/10 score, in my opinion. It is, however, a right rollicking adventure game that is a lot of fun and has a great, immersive story.
Blake'sGrave
Member
this thread is boring and repeative.
Maybe it could be said about every single FPS game this generation. But what is the link with the sense it makes? It doesnt make some sense! The FPS generation is the one that spawned the fewest good FPS games.
Amen!
Well said. Sad state of the direction we are heading if this gets GOTY. The 95 metacritic really does boggle the mind.
What's wrong with a direction that puts incredible atmosphere, characters, writings, and narrative in the forefront?
Pairing it with dull gunplay and unimpressive, bulletspongy enemies.
King Beyond the wall
Member
Thanks for elaborating your initial point. Your main issue appears to be the sudden shift of the Vox from passive into aggressive and their subsequent portrayal as villains after this point. I think that your comment that the game simply 'handwave(s) everything away by basically saying, "Well, they're both violent, therefore they are both morally equivalent"' is unfair. Though the Vox are portrayed as 'downtrodden' they were not simply victims . There had been conflict and fighting long before the events of Bioshock infinite, with Daisy Fitzroy representing this more antagonistic force, and the experienced leadership who would guide the vox after the revolution had begun.
Also, the sudden outburst of violence that the Vox perpetuate is common throughout history. Look at the Russian revolution for example: similar class lines and tensions can be drawn, and I presume that you would agree that the lower classes (who had little food and were worked endlessly in the factories) were also the victims in this regard. But once the revolution and civil war began these victims, who had initialy went on strike for for food and political rights, perpetrated many horrorific atrocities. Revolution is an inherently violent affair were the motives and aims are often lost. I believe that the Russian Revolution/Civil war comparison is the closest resemblance to the Bioshock civil war.
You can sympathise with the plight of the Vox and their motives, but it cannot be denied that a civil war between the two forces would be hugely violent. In this sense I think that Bioshock does a pretty good job with the revolution point, though I agree that it could have been better. In particular, the Vox are portrayed as a simple reaction to the founders, I would have liked them to have had their own ideology and socio-political views.
rosaceadude2112
Member
Basically I feel it had some decent ideas, both in terms of narrative and mechanics, but had no fucking clue what to do with any of them. It's like a Frankenstein monster of half assed or poorly done concepts.
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
I'd have to agree with his point. As much historical precedence as there is for this, I found the shift of the Vox from downtrodden to ultra-nuts narratively unsatisfying. It didn't ruin the game by any means, but it did shake my suspension of disbelief. We don't get to see their nuts (oo-er) and bolts like we do with The Founders.
The game almost literally points out at one point that "Oh well, they are building guns and shit, so they must be as bad as Comstock's lot" without ever giving a more thorough explanation. If more time had been spent with them instead of running about looking for guns and Schrodinger's Embolism victims, the Vox could've been a lost less simplistic and jarring, but, y'know, budgets and that.
rosaceadude2112
Member
I like shooters. I don't like Bioshock Infinite. Bwuh??!? Zuh???!;? How are this possible??!
Conciliator
Banned
I am somewhat sympathetic to OP's complaints. Infinite is kind of like the world's greatest spectacle shooter. It's to its credit that it transcends the form but it's a still a form that typically bores me to tears.
Ol No Bones
Banned
I liked it a lot but I agree with this. Not a bad game but probably not a great game.
dark_prinny
Banned
I agree.
AstroZombie
Banned
Bioshock Infinite isn't very good as a pure shooter. Half the weapons are garbage, half the vigors have near identical effects, the calling in from other dimensions is basically summoning an auto turret occasionally, and most combat scenarios are arena battles against enemies with terrible AI. The skyhook stuff is interesting, but it's criminally underused. While the handiman is the least fun to fight enemy in the history of videogames.
rosaceadude2112
Member
I have to thank the fuckin lord it isn't a movie or book. The story would be completely unbearable if I didn't get to blast some fools.
Nothing about Bioshock Infinite's gameplay is worse/more repetitive than in games such as CoD or Halo. In fact, BI is a better and more interesting shooter (albeit with flaws). It's just that the narrative outshines the gameplay so much.
Game is great.
Gaf likes to bitch about great games.
Business as usual.
Game is great.
Gaf likes to bitch about great games.
Business as usual.
Your level-headed, non-contrarian and reasonable opinions have no place in this thread.
75%? Is most of the game boss fights? Or do you not understand percentages?
CreateNowSleepLater
Member
If you think this game is boring I don't know what you expect from a video game. The story is the grab, the setting IS the story. Could is have been better? Sure but it has one of the best stories told this gen that creates a canon for all Bioshock's going forward.
oh well then it must be a troll thread
i thoroughly enjoyed my time playing inifinte. definitely better than 2, up there with 1.
Not at all. Not even remotely.
The problem is that Bioshock Infinite sets out to be a high-concept shooter. It tries to have it both ways, but doesn't transcend the shooter genre nor does it succeed as a high-concept game. The reason folks complain about its shooter-ness isn't because we don't like shooters. It's because it's utterly out of place and out of step with the rest of the game. It's an utterly conventional and pedestrian shooter. As a consequence, its grand concepts and plot bear too much of the burden of carrying the "grandness" of the game, so when the plot comes crashing down in the back half, it all falls to pieces.
It was a fun experience, and I admire the craft involved. But this isn't the "soaring" experience it aims to be. It's an uneven game with moments of greatness and awe-inspiring ambition intermingling with moments of maddening design and hackneyed writing. I think it's a game that everyone should play, but that doesn't mean I think it's great. It's absolutely thrilling at its best, and even its failures are fascinating.
Riposte
Member
This only works if you think smashing together hundreds of likely unrefined opinions amounts to something worth paying attention to.
Ha. Depends whether or not you find the GOTY voting to be a "consensus" or a "symptom." I tend to see it as the latter. We're not taste-makers.
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
I dunno about that. Booker is a violent man with a violent past. I think it's totally in character for him to murder his way through Columbia especially considering
it is literally all his past sins and failures made real.
Spehornoob
Member
I fell to the hype and picked up BioShock Infinite to try it out a week or so ago. The storytelling is absolutely fantastic and makes it a great experience, but I agree that the gameplay and enemy encounter design can be pretty lacking. Truth is, for me, the combat is the least interesting part of the game. I don't think it hurts the game too much (the storytelling and presentation more than make up for it), and it's certainly better than the original BioShock (which I found so boring to play that I couldn't finish it), but I think it's a valid criticism of the game.
You're mistaking motivation for mechanics. It isn't the fact that Booker shoots people that is out of place, it's how the shooting actually works.
What is bad about it? I found it to be at least on par with the best games in the genre as far as mechanics go. I even found it way more varied and fun than any CoD or Halo game, for example.
The truth is: it's the dissonance between a narrative that is better than in any other shooter out there and the conventional (but generally well realized) shooting mechanics, that doesn't sit well with some players. That doesn't mean it's not a very good game, however.
I replayed BS1 myself recently and actually it's extremely comparable - from mechanics to AI. The biggest difference is how the levels are laid out.
And I remember people trashing Bioshock1's AI at the time but suddenly it's "amazing". Go figure. I'm sure if there is another Bioshock game at some point in the future, Infinite's AI will be amazing, too.
I like to call this the "Jeff Gerstmann-effect".
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
Ah, I misunderstood your point. So how do you think the mechanics detract from the game, what were they lacking exactly?
Not the best shooter in the world by any means, but there were plenty of interesting combat options. Also, I have to say, firing the Handcannon is tasty. Probably one of my favourite guns in gaming outside of Max Payne 3's 1911s.
I am playing through Bioshock again (the original), taking my time, hacking everything, laying traps for Rosies etc. The game is so much better than Infinite. The enemy AI is AMAZING, the audio diaries are amazing and the level of "play" and experimentation in the game is on another level. Infinite doesn't compare.
Why does it matter if a game is overrated anyway? Saying 'I don't think this game is as good as a lot of other people think it is' says next to nothing about the quality of the game.
Besides, if you are playing games like Bioshock Infinite and mainly complaining about their gameplay and mechanics (which isn't bad, but I can see why some people like the OP don't see it as 'great') this game might not have been your cup of tea in the first place. I'm not one of them, but I think the OP is a 'Gameplay first, everything else is less important' kind of person. Nothing wrong with that of course, but you guys are better off sticking to other great shooters like Bulletstorm which have far more focus on their mechanics. A game where it's all about the captivating world and interesting story, even if you recognize those are good, like Bioshock Infinte will simply never grab your attention as much as a gameplay-centric game.
Finally, about the 'repetitive' part of the OP's review: I think you simply weren't being creative enough with the Vigors. There are a lot of possibilities and the more you think outside of the box the more fun the game becomes, but you need to want to see them. If you play it with the mindset of a standard shooter then of course it will be a very stale experience, but play it as if you're a wizard with a gun instead of a soldier with some magic tricks and I guarantee you'll have a tremendous amount of fun more than before.
Besides, if you are playing games like Bioshock Infinite and mainly complaining about their gameplay and mechanics (which isn't bad, but I can see why some people like the OP don't see it as 'great') this game might not have been your cup of tea in the first place. I'm not one of them, but I think the OP is a 'Gameplay first, everything else is less important' kind of person. Nothing wrong with that of course, but you guys are better off sticking to other great shooters like Bulletstorm which have far more focus on their mechanics. A game where it's all about the captivating world and interesting story, even if you recognize those are good, like Bioshock Infinte will simply never grab your attention as much as a gameplay-centric game.
Finally, about the 'repetitive' part of the OP's review: I think you simply weren't being creative enough with the Vigors. There are a lot of possibilities and the more you think outside of the box the more fun the game becomes, but you need to want to see them. If you play it with the mindset of a standard shooter then of course it will be a very stale experience, but play it as if you're a wizard with a gun instead of a soldier with some magic tricks and I guarantee you'll have a tremendous amount of fun more than before.
Joe Shlabotnik
Banned
This is still quite arguably a shortcoming of the game design. And yes, there is a happy medium between forcing a player to execute specific designer-intended "strategies" and making all but the most rudimentary tactics completely unnecessary.
Can you give examples? Because I found this next to impossible in Bioshock Infinite. Charms, firebombs, and crows were what I used 90% of the time, since all the other powers didn't seem as efficient use of salts. The bullet shield one was cool, but it came so late in the game that I only really used it against that stupid ghost.
You mean Demon's Souls