• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Bioshock Infinite ships over 6 million units

I will never get the dislike such a big part of GAF has for Bioshock Infinite. Dissapointing? Maybe, but on its own it was absolutely bloody fantastic. Haters gonna hate.

33v35dJ.gif


(I think people who love it simply play Bioshock games for their atmosphere, story and design rather than purely for their gameplay or to get a satisfying RPG-ish experience aka System Shock 2, which Infinite wasn't at all nor ever intended to be. Just a matter of wanting different things out of the same game which makes it either GOTY or a mediocre shooter with an imaginative setting)
Heh, I was thinking to ask what games people liked that either hated Bioshock Infinite or loved it. I can definitely tell this backlash isn't recent though, once we had time to get through the game it started to come out, even if it wasn't as pronounced as ME3's since it kind of did the opposite when it came to the ending, blowing a lot of people away even as a cheap sci-fi plot rather than being massive disappointments. If you were disappointed by BI's story it likely came long before the ending itself began to roll, like when it was clear that
it wasn't going to properly tackle the themes it was built up on having before release.

ANYWAYS, throw me in the disappoint camp, Bioshock 1 actually wasn't a bad middle ground between those two camps but I'd like it to have embraced the RPG side a bit more again, and more importantly it could have not devolved into ENDLESS WAVES OF FUCKING ENEMIES WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH MODERN GAME DESIGN THAT SO MANY OF THEM FALL ON THAT BULLSHIT. I'd actually be more forgiving of it as an experience if it didn't feel like erecting those speed bumps so god damn often.

I may as well also answer my own question about what kind of games I prefer: Demon's Souls, Dark Souls, RPGs in general, and if a game is to focus on combat it may as well go all in like CoD, Bayonetta, or Metal Gear Rising do. As in if you remove the combat you have basically nothing left except environments to move around in, while Bioshock Infinite could ostensibly build up the adventure elements more, and with dialed down combat could've probably built up both the adventure and RPG elements and been something distinctive enough from the rest of AAA design. It's a shame the sales weren't enough to be a success, but I kinda hope it serves as a signal that unless you actually can pull GTA/CoD/whatever numbers you need to either be really smart with development (Naughty Dog and Epic) or focus on something cheaper but with a strong enough following to justify (Dark Souls.) Spending forever trying to be both a unique experience and also placate mainstream audiences doesn't seem to be actually successful as a business, even if you can still get some fans from it you can also get a lot who are somewhere in the other ends of the spectrum that aren't satisfied either because they wanted something other than another linear shooter or they have better linear shooters to play.
 
Better comparison would be tlou which released after BI and sold 6 million before BI could do on one platform.

Civ5 is a 4 year old game
The point of the Civ5 comparison is that it's a niche game (turn-based strategy on the supposedly dying PC platform) made on a modest budget that apparently managed to outsell a multi-platform blockbuster with a huge marketing push like 'Bioshock Infinite'.
 
One of my first memories of the game is being in this area filled with water, with ridiculous reflections of absolutely everything and everyone, except your character, who didn't have a reflection at all

I can't go above 2/10 for a game that makes that error.

Okay, now I think you're just taking the piss. Plenty of first person shooters don't have any physical presence for your character. It annoys me too, but I'm not petty enough to mark a game down for such a minor inconsequential feature.

If you think it isn't you need to play more good games.

I play plenty of good games. I thought Infinite was very overrated, but I'm intelligent enough to realise that while I may not have liked it, it's still a good game with lots of positive aspects (most notably world building, art and storytelling).
 
I didnt really hate it .. it was just disappointing. The game didnt work for me as a ego shooter it is a worse game for being a ego shooter, elizabeth was completely unrealistic and the story was not my thing...
oh and i still cant believe that they missed the chance of designing boss fights against songbird i mean wtf :|
 
Wonder if they're going to dish out current gen versions as that seems to be the thing to do. Might help recoup some of the initial investment from a business point of view.
 
GOTY 2013 for me. One of the most powerful experiences I've ever had with a game. I loved every little detail about it, even the combat system.
 
Bioshock and Bioshock Infinite both have terrible gameplay which gets boring the fast, Bioshock 2 is where it's at.
I was surprised with how much I enjoyed Bioshock 2. May've come in with the lowest expectations, left the most pleased. Despite how I railed on BI"s linearity it didn't' bug me as much as I feared in Bioshock 2, but I think the key is that I want levels that don't feel like mostly a march forward. Nevermind that what Bioshock 1 was going for would've been more enjoyable with a proper Metroidvania structure rather than just clearing a level and going back in case you missed anything (which you may've been screwed out of anyway.)
 
OK, now I really think you are trolling. I don't like Inifinite either, but this is getting ridiculous.

Things like that drive me crazy. I was just sat there wondering how they could think that was acceptable.

I'm sure most people don't care but it's seriously one of the only things about that game I remember.
 
I was just replaying Bioshock Infinite after failing to complete it the first time around because I strongly disliked it.

I still don't like it.

  • The gunplay is boring and feels like it's on rails (and sometimes literally is).
  • There's so many cliche moments that it makes me gag. That terribly awkward scene with the guitar and Elizabeth singing to the child for example. I cringed so hard at that.
  • Elizabeth has the character depth of a Disney princess.
  • It gives you the illusion of choice way too often. Pick the option to spare someone's life, Elizabeth still has dialogue about how hard it was for you to leave him to die. Heads or tails? Bird or cage? Who cares! It doesn't actually matter, sorry.
  • Did I mention Elizabeth is a 1-dimensional character? Because Elizabeth is a 1-dimensional character.
  • Could they have at least made non-enemy NPCs like citizens and such be somewhat human? They are so incredibly wooden that it literally pulled me out of any sense of immersion that the world was supposed to be giving me. Their faces barely even moved when they talked, and some NPC's faces didn't move at all when speaking. The only thing good about them was the voice acting, but that doesn't make up for the feeling that I'm looking at a god damn barbie doll.

The biggest issue for me was the lack of fun with the gunplay though. That shit is so boring. There was ONE section so far where the rails loop around the battle area and it was actually somewhat fun to jump on them to get out of heated fire fights, and then swoop back in to take out a few enemies. That's happened once though. Every other encounter has just been a.) walk into room, n.) shoot everything and spam vigors, c.) maybe hop onto a hook to get a higher vantage point but you totally don't have to.

So yeah, I did not like that game.
 
The game embodies everything I dislike about last gen AAA games; it's a flash in a pan game with poorly tuned mechanics and a inane story that demands to be taken more seriously than how it treats its own subject matter. But it has teh graphix, "immersion" and "mature" themes so of course people are going to eat it up.

  • The gun-play is boring and feels like it's on rails (and sometimes literally is).
  • There's so many cliche moments that it makes me gag. That terribly awkward scene with the guitar and Elizabeth singing to the child for example. I cringed so hard at that.
  • Elizabeth has the character depth of a Disney princess.
  • It gives you the illusion of choice way too often. Pick the option to spare someone's life, Elizabeth still has dialogue about how hard it was for you to leave him to die. Heads or tails? Bird or cage? Who cares! It doesn't actually matter, sorry.
  • Did I mention Elizabeth is a 1-dimensional character? Because Elizabeth is a 1-dimensional character.
  • Could they have at least made non-enemy NPCs like citizens and such be somewhat human? They are so incredibly wooden that it literally pulled me out of any sense of immersion that the world was supposed to be giving me. Their faces barely even moved when they talked, and some NPC's faces didn't move at all when speaking. The only thing good about them was the voice acting, but that doesn't make up for the feeling that I'm looking at a god damn barbie doll.
Elizabeth's character never washed with me either. People in her situation don't often have the personality of a Disney Princess.

I took the lack of choice as a meta commentary like in MGS2 except done with the elegance of a three year old smearing poop on the walls. The commentary of the ending of the game felt like a copout to a mechanic its writers didn't fully understand.
 
I'm surprised that so many people dislike the combat in this game. I found it to be quite refreshing and really intense. I understand the opinion that it feels quite disconnected from the experience, but is it also boring in itself?

In a world where almost every FPS revolves around using two weapons and taking cover most of the time I think the rail system, powers and the constant movement in Bioshock Infinite really pushed things in a more entertaining direction. I also loved the upgrade system which let you decide exactly how forgiving and difficult the game was going to be. Many games miss that these days.

I played the game on hard and I rarely upgraded any gun so that I would be pushed into constant movement and different weapon strategies. I also played on a PC with max settings and 60fps. Maybe all this affected my view on the combat?
 
Yeah, I can't stand the hate for this game. All the exaggerations, all the posts saying it's the "worst game of 2013," how it's "terrible," etc etc

Are you fucking kidding me? You don't have to like it, but calling it the worst game of 2013? Really, so, out of the thousands of games that came out in 2013, this would be at the very bottom? Compared to all the other shit that you've probably played, it's still so bad that you need to hyperbolize it to such an extent?

I can understand disappointment but calling it "bad" is just ridiculous. The graphics were gorgeous, the music was stellar, the story was one of the best video game plots of all time, and I don't think anyone can argue against any of that. And it's still "horrible" despite these rather non-subjective characteristics of Infinite?

Were there too many shootbang segments? Absolutely. But was the gunplay actually bad? Not really. I guess GAF is gonna GAF, and all the armchair designers on here will spew hate towards anything remotely popular.
 
Well, the game was hamfistedly trying to portray racism as bad. Except they half-assed it and didn't really explore the concept at all, just briefly presented it to the player.
And then followed it up by having the crazy black lady murder children because... Something. I don't know, we gotta just make sure that both sides are just as evil as each other so you can play the happy medium of a guy who shoots tons of people and feels bad about it.
 
And then followed it up by having the crazy black lady murder children because... Something. I don't know, we gotta just make sure that both sides are just as evil as each other so you can play the happy medium of a guy who shoots tons of people and feels bad about it.
The story of Infinite is bad in the way it ditches all of its side characters after building them up. There's no payoff to any of them. Not the revolutionary, the factory owner, the twins, the big crow thing... They don't do much but pad the story, and are tossed aside with no fanfare.

Then you have the DLCs, which instead of trying to right this wrong, go back and rewrite the original Bioshock in a way only George Lucas would approve of.
 
And then followed it up by having the crazy black lady murder children because... Something. I don't know, we gotta just make sure that both sides are just as evil as each other so you can play the happy medium of a guy who shoots tons of people and feels bad about it.

Because it's showing that extremism of all kinds is toxic? Just like many internet badasses who go the opposite and think they're fighting the good fight.
 
Because it's showing that extremism of all kinds is toxic? Just like many internet badasses who go the opposite and think they're fighting the good fight.

It's not "showing" anything, Daisy Fitzroy was just another random one-dimensional character who shows up for a while to give the player another chapter full of dudes to shoot.
 
Absolutely. But was the gunplay actually bad? Not really.

The gunplay was incredibly boring. The devs thought that adding vigors with cool looking effects would liven it up, but it totally didn't work. Half of the vigors did almost the same exact thing. They disable your target(s) and damage them a bit. The others were so situational that the game practically had to yell in your ear to remind you to use them.
 
It's not "showing" anything, Daisy Fitzroy was just another random one-dimensional character who shows up for a while to give the player another chapter full of dudes to shoot.

Ok, you can say that if you want but the simple fact is they portray her one way for a LONG time before she shows up, and then 'SHOW' that she's basically just as bad as Comstock. I'm not sure what you want from her or what you think isn't being shown to you. I'm not saying it's some super deep aspect of the narrative, but I do think it clearly made sense what the point was:
Yes, Comstock is bad.
Turning into the bad guy is not the answer to other bad people. (Daisy).
That's it.

If you MUST assign something to it, the game spends the first half of the game essentially lampooning religious and political extremism that most people on the internet would happily get behind, and then spends most of the second half showing that if you're an extremist the other way you're just as bad. That's Daisy.

And this was easily the best game last year. Last of Us paled in comparison.
 
Ok, you can say that if you want but the simple fact is they portray her one way for a LONG time before she shows up, and then 'SHOW' that she's basically just as bad as Comstock. I'm not sure what you want from her or what you think isn't being shown to you. I'm not saying it's some super deep aspect of the narrative, but I do think it clearly made sense what the point was:
Yes, Comstock is bad.
Turning into the bad guy is not the answer to other bad people. (Daisy).
That's it.

I still find it bizarre that Ken Levine felt the need to use Fitzroy as some kind of caution/counter-point to the earlier "message" that racism is bad.

EDIT: It's like a movie with several prominent gay characters throwing in a bit about John Wayne Gacy to remind the audience that some gay people are serial killers. It's like... Okay? Why did you think that was a necessary caveat?
 
I liked the start of the game, but then it kinda became a typical FPS snooze party, saved by a strong story.

I'm in agreement, but for me it wasn't saved by a strong story. That last 1/3 was a slog and the twist was so poorly executed that I said out loud, "Oh, Christ, Ken Levine's up his own ass again!"
 
6 million seems so low for a game like BioShock with mass appeal and core appeal... And a shooter...

Not to say that 6 mil is low, just that I thought it always sold at the top end of the spectrum.
 
Ok, you can say that if you want but the simple fact is they portray her one way for a LONG time before she shows up, and then 'SHOW' that she's basically just as bad as Comstock. I'm not sure what you want from her or what you think isn't being shown to you. I'm not saying it's some super deep aspect of the narrative, but I do think it clearly made sense what the point was:
Yes, Comstock is bad.
Turning into the bad guy is not the answer to other bad people. (Daisy).
That's it.

If you MUST assign something to it, the game spends the first half of the game essentially lampooning religious and political extremism that most people on the internet would happily get behind, and then spends most of the second half showing that if you're an extremist the other way you're just as bad. That's Daisy.

And this was easily the best game last year. Last of Us paled in comparison.
Daisy doesn't show up that way. She makes a sudden character turn for no explained reason, and kills an innocent so the player doesn't have to feel bad when she's unceremoniously dumped from the story. It's just bad storytelling.
 
Bioshock and Bioshock Infinite both have terrible gameplay which gets boring the fast, Bioshock 2 is where it's at.

I tend to agree with that. Never understood the praise for Irrational's Bioshocks. They're boring and painful to play most of the time. All style no substance.
 
Daisy doesn't show up that way. She makes a sudden character turn for no explained reason, and kills an innocent so the player doesn't have to feel bad when she's unceremoniously dumped from the story. It's just bad storytelling.

Precisely. It's stating a point without backing it up in a logical or coherent manner. The game instead relies on shock and imagery to back up logical leaps, which in turn justifies gameplay. It doesn't begin or stop with Daisy either.
 
I tend to agree with that. Never understood the praise for Irrational's Bioshocks. They're boring and painful to play most of the time. All style no substance.

I liked the first bioshock :) it was fun to plan ahead about how you to fight a big daddy and i liked the atmosphere. But yeah infinite was just not that good imo.
 
On a certain level I don't want to harp on them too much for Fitzroy, since that section of the game seems like a remnant of the rumored rebels vs. authorities multiplayer mode. It was an awkward way of recycling ideas and content that they had obviously put some work into.

It was really just another one of the game's many disappointing twists and turns.
 
I really enjoyed Bioshock 1, it relied heavily on its gameplay and put the games story secondary to that. There isn't too much a story in the original game besides towards the ending and in the voice recordings dotted around. The gameplay was first and foremost with setting being an interesting location.

Bioshock Infinite seemed to be the opposite, the gameplay was changed to be more like every other shooter with only having two weapons and the vigors were much worse compared to the plasmids (even if the vigors were more original). The gun and plasmid/vigor upgrading mechanic was changed for the worse and the lack of backtracking was something I really disliked (Bioshock 2 has this problem as well).

The story in Infinite seemed to become the main point of the game but as a fan of sci-fi shows the mere mention of
alternate realities
is a massive turn off. I've had enough of that from Star Trek and Stargate to know what to expect right now unless Levine really thought outside the box (he didn't).

The game ran terribly on my computer as well, had to stop playing the game about an hour in even though I had it pre-ordered, had to wait for it to hit PS+ before I could finish the game.

Expecting 6 million sales isn't that unrealistic nowadays, but making a worse game than the original Bioshock and expecting those sales is.
 
By far the most overrated game of all time. Was a huge disappointment in every regard.
Lmao. Okay. These hyperbolic statements go both ways. The backlash to this game is just as overstated as the initial love.

I personally thought it was fantastic and only 2nd to Last of Us for my personal GOTY (I'm still catching up on '13 releases though), but I can understand the complaints for sure. Wasn't as great as the original, but it lived up to the hype.
 
I only played Infinite due to PS+, had no interest in it before that, and I ended up liking it.

I thought it had an interesting story that made me want to keep playing.

Gameplay by itself wasn't super engaging, but it was decent enough.
 
The more I think about it, the more of my feelings about BSI change from anger to sadness. The whole project was a runaway train.

It wasn't a BAD game, it was an okay-ish game whose vast potential was wasted in all the wrong places.

And the studio was still shutdown with so many units sold? jezus

Nearly five years in development, high production values, internal drama, and multiple instances of large amounts of work being thrown out will do that, sadly.

Oh, and a $200 million budget split 50/50 between advertising and the actual game.
 
Please tell me you're kidding. I don't like First Person Shooters, yet this one hooked me enough to actually finish it. The game oozes style and the story was pretty good.

Now that I think about it, I think this is the only FPS that I have actually finished...

The story and characters were so cheesy I had to quit the game. "Press A to console." So dumb!
 
I don't understand the huge acclaim this game got. Mediocre gameplay, nonsensical and convoluted story, terrible level design (actually, those things applies to the Bioshock games in general). I guess it looks nice?

Bioshock Infinite feels like a game where the art was designed over a 5-6 year timespan but the gameplay was thrown together in 6 months.
 
Top Bottom