I liked it a lot, but it became so narrative driven over mechanics that I really have no desire to ever play it again. I always associate it with The Last of Us because that is also very narrative driven, but I actually really liked the game mechanics enough that I would love to replay it. When I think back to Bioshock Infinite, I don't remember any memorable gameplay segments. The gameplay wasn't bad, it was just sort of there.
Yeah, though there's other similarities (the bond between the MC who lost a child and a daughter figure with this being possibly the most important facet of the story, the lead voiced by Troy Baker.) I feel ultimately though that Bioshock Infinite's gameplay was kind of half baked and worse yet mainly because it wanted to be both Bioshock AND a modern FPS so you'd get stuff like two gun limits while being able to upgrade them freely in spite of this. It felt like TLoU knew what it wanted to be gameplay-wise and executed that very well. Granted a more gameplay focused game would probably have done a better job, but treating it as an accessible survival game/TPS it did pretty well.
Bioshock Infinite is the only game to have a plot twist that gripped me to the level of MGS2. I think it's the best story based single player game since 2008 when we got Dead Space & MGS4 combo.
Well, certainly if you wanted A TWIST that game delivered, but I feel something like TLoU just executed its story far better, which in hindsight made Bioshock look doubly cheap.
Well, certainly if you wanted A TWIST that game delivered, but I feel something like TLoU just executed its story far better, which in hindsight made Bioshock look doubly cheap.
I didn't really like TLoU's story much at all. I guess I'm just weird because I didn't connect to the characters much at all. Just found them uninteresting.
Infinite's story isn't what I'd call flawless or a masterpiece or anything, but I was much more into it.
Yeah, I said I hated the game earlier but that was mainly absolute frustration from that one boss fight (wello, three technically!) which blew away my tolerance for the combat in the rest of the game. If I had just switched to Easy it'd have probably been fine, so yeah the game was mainly disappointing more than anything else.
I didn't really like TLoU's story much at all. I guess I'm just weird because I didn't connect to the characters much at all. Just found them uninteresting.
Infinite's story isn't what I'd call flawless or a masterpiece or anything, but I was much more into it.
Well, the twist was more... fun I guess, TLoU I thought had a more satisfying story. No grand twists or anything, just better told and executed. I guess it's like the difference between Sixth Sense and There Will Be Blood.
too bad you opened this can of worms tho since it's probably the fastest game on GAF that went from everyone singing its praises to saying they hate it
Look I apologize if it sounded like I was trying to deride those who dissent against this title, but it just bothers me in a world of cut and paste sequels, this game dated to take a real chance and people didn't give it enough credit for that. They could've done a bland generic sequel in the same setting (like BioShock 2) , but instead they built a while new world.
Well, in terms of gameplay it was really bland and took absolutely no chances at all with trying to do something interesting with the gameplay. All they could come up with was to throw waves of bullet sponge enemies at you at all times, in very narrow corridors. I don't feel any need to give them any kind of credit for that.
A bit of a long-read I've typed up here, enter at your peril:
I judge this on a basis of how each game handled the delivery of their mutual core message to the player, which was to me the
exploration of the extent a father will go to save/protect their child from harm
(I hide this because it might potentially spoil Bioshock Infinite for someone). Based on this, I feel The Last of Us was the superior storyteller.
The Last of Us had much better execution, feel and cohesiveness overall. The music, the atmosphere, the style of gameplay, the graphics; it all just blended perfectly into a tight package that delivered its message cleanly and simply. The Last of Us' gameplay world's sparseness of ammunition, supplies and sympathetic life complemented the delivery of the game world's story of moral greys perfectly, and I distinguish between those two worlds very importantly, as I feel Bioshock Infinite had a very tangible disconnect between the two, which is the basis of my gripes with it. I side with The Last of Us despite the post-apocalyptic world of TLOU being a well-travelled trope (the Clickers and Spore mutagen however were a unique take on the traditional zombie epidemic), compared to Bioshock Infinite's very creative Steampunk-inspired sky-city and
multiple-universe-spanning
events.
Bioshock Infinite was just too... Bioshocky. It felt like playing a supreme exaggeration of the series' mechanics. The Vigor powers were classic Bioshock fare, were well-implemented and I have no complaints. However, the guns handled and looked like obnoxious Fisher-Price toys, moreso than those of Bioshock 1 and 2, and took up too much screen-space. The arcade-like shooting/casting/zipping gameplay was very fun, but I felt that it overpowered the gravity of the story; as a result, during the majority of the game I felt a disconnect between the story and gameplay, and viewed each cutscene as a resting break before the next fun shooting section. The more I played Bioshock Infinite, the more I felt like I was playing a simple fun arcade shooter instead of a significant storytelling vessel, and this was further cemented in my mind during the final
Airship wave-survival
section.
Now, I'm not saying that a clunky arcade shooter can't be a vessel of deep, morally significant story: it worked in Bioshock 1. However, I feel Bioshock Infinite tried too hard, and burnt out in the end, trying to scatter its morsels of lore amongst the flashy action and obscuring its message in the end. The perfect balance between gameplay and storytelling was achieved in Bioshock 1, and was lost in Infinite.
The game also relied far too much on collectible audio logs to relay its story and universe details. In the opening announcement days, I remember a lot of emphasis being placed on Columbia being a city pre-downfall, filled with sane citizens compared to already-wasted Rapture. Why wasn't the populace of Columbia used more effectively to relay the important convoluted story instead of through missable collectibles? Why weren't these NPC's used as the mouthpieces of the narrative instead of being relegated to atmospheric one-liner props and occasional cutscene expositors? Many people required further explanation of the game's events after beating it, resulting in a loss of the gravitas of the game's message; I feel that this could have been avoided if these NPC's, especially the Lutece's, tagged along with the player as companions throughout the game like and along with Elizabeth, and were available to physically be asked questions by Booker, comment on events and say their dialogue 'in person' in front of the player. I believe adding a tangible dynamic presence to story details in the form of a companion NPC cements them in the mind of the player, instead of abstract collectible talking photos of heads.
Although, you might say that that would remove some of the mystery of the Luteces, but I would disagree; having them as a constant presence, albeit speaking to each other in their cryptic banter as they observed and commented on your gameplay actions, would make them seem far more mysterious than appearing on-screen for a few minutes every odd cutscene then disappearing. It would add believability of habitation to the game world as well.
Overall, I felt Bioshock Infinite was far too short and restrictive to fully experience the perceived depth the city showed to the player, and faltered slightly in the delivery of its story. The gaming world won't forget Bioshock Infinite for a long time; but for me personally, I'll remember The Last of Us forever: it impacted me deeper, without unnecessary frills.
Opinions and all, but I can't believe people found TLoU's plot more gripping. Go watch Children of Men or The Road...or The Walking Dead, even...
That isn't to say TLoU didn't execute all of its elements well (it definitely did), but it was hardly this "groundbreaking" thing. Infinite just felt ...refreshing. Sure, it ultimately buckles under the weight of its own narrative ambitions but it at least tried to offer something I've never experienced before. It's very rare that a game remains on the mind days after I finish and that's exactly what happened to me. I agree with the criticism concerning Lady Comstock and the final boss fight (bullshit) ...but both such minuscule parts of the game its hardly worth holding them against it.
This was my first bioshock game... Bought it because it wasn't a sequel to the previous games and I totally loved it. It was my GOTY runner up last year.
I thought it had cool art styles but gameplay boring as hell... Do you even do anything for the first hour? All I remember was skipping a boat scene, some other scene, in a chair, launched into the sky, walking around, Yay kill couple guys, then nope. Bored
I liked it. People seem too obsessed with pressing buttons rather than experiencing. At the end of the day, video games provide experiences just like everything else.
Opinions and all, but I can't believe people found TLoU's plot more gripping. Go watch Children of Men or The Road...or The Walking Dead, even...
That isn't to say TLoU didn't execute all of its elements well (it definitely did), but it was hardly this "groundbreaking" thing. Infinite just felt ...refreshing. Sure, it ultimately buckles under the weight of its own narrative ambitions but it at least tried to offer something I've never experienced before. It's very rare that a game remains on the mind days after I finish and that's exactly what happened to me. I agree with the criticism concerning Lady Comstock and the final boss fight (bullshit) ...but both such minuscule parts of the game its hardly worth holding them against it.
and Infinite's plot has been done to death just go watch Sliders, FRINGE, Stargate, Rick and Morty hell even Community handles the multiverse theory better than Infinite does.
I liked Bioshock Infinite because of its potential, but it ultimately squandered and I think people are more disappointed than they are hateful per se
I can see where the dissenters are coming from, the game sets up this incredible and rich world filled with amazing themes, religious ICONOGRAPHY, patriotic symbologies, race, FRINGE science and quantum physics and supernatural themes and leaves majority of it unexplored.
its real impact doesnt come until the ending, but even that is just sort of dropped on you.
I'm still very much puzzled about what people found so great about Infinite's story and characters.
The setting was really cool as it was the sci-fi setting, but the rollercoster ride through those events felt really rushed to me. There was not a single moment I can recall where I could get to know the characters and empathize. I still can't understand when people say they were "moved" by the game's story. what's the "moving" part about that story?
and Infinite's plot has been done to death just go watch Sliders, FRINGE, Stargate, Rick and Morty hell even Community handles the multiverse theory better than Infinite does.
Maybe if Bioshock had come out when it was supposed to, 2012,it wouldn't have been forgotten already. It would've been immortalized with GotY splits with Journey (I don't think TWD would've gotten any if BI was out in the same year. Unfounded and unprovable opinion.) Adam Sessler said we'd be talking about Bioshock Infinites weaving of narrative and world settings for months. And we did talk about it for months. Four months. Then TLoU came out and did nearly everything BI did well, better. Including narrative and world settings and game play weaving. In my opinion the only thing BI did important was weave an extremely clever meta-narrative about the sameness of video game stories. There's always a girl and always a lighthouse. I do think they squandered that giant twist by not having a large enough audience to consume it. Now the universe is over in regards to that plotline. A wasted opportunity. If it had sold Metal Gear amounts of millions and that was the final game out of 4 or 5 mainline iterations, it would've been remembered as a must play franchise for it's mind blowing build-up and ending. But in terms of the Bioshock Universe as a whole, they jumped the gun and the shark.
I'm still very much puzzled about what people found so great about Infinite's story and characters.
The setting was really cool as it was the sci-fi setting, but the rollercoster ride through those events felt really rushed to me. There was not a single moment I can recall where I could get to know the characters and empathize. I still can't understand when people say they were "moved" by the game's story. what's the "moving" part about that story?
Played the game once and forgot all about it in no time. It was a good game but nowhere near the praise it received with its plot-holed story, non-sympathetic characters and repetitive boring gunplay.
Can't even consider comparing it to TLoU which did everything far better.
This video is all we really need to say that the released B:I really undelivered compared to it's trailers and just in a general sense. The creepy vibe, long ranged battles, cannon set pieces, bar scene, mobs, balls to the wall crazy Songbird, weather effects, Elizabeth's better powers and her breast size.
This is the reason why I mainly try to stay away from early trailers, and why I was so disappointed with the finished product.
I feel like there's a very vocal group of Bayonetta/Dark Souls type folks on GAF who demand extremely complex, carefully choreographed and mechanically precise gameplay from every game they buy. Any time a title falls short of that standard, we're told it has "bad" gameplay.
Others, like me, are much more easily pleased. I loved Bioshock Infinite, combat and all. I enjoyed jumping on Skylines and zipping around the place. I enjoyed switching up my weapons and vigors to try out new combinations. I enjoyed taking different approaches to combat, sometimes going in guns-blazing and other times being more tactical.
I feel like there's a very vocal group of Bayonetta/Dark Souls type folks on GAF who demand extremely complex, carefully choreographed and mechanically precise gameplay from every game they buy. Any time a title falls short of that standard, we're told it has "bad" gameplay.
Others, like me, are much more easily pleased. I loved Bioshock Infinite, combat and all. I enjoyed jumping on Skylines and zipping around the place. I enjoyed switching up my weapons and vigors to try out new combinations. I enjoyed taking different approaches to combat, sometimes going in guns-blazing and other times being more tactical.
Most people aren't mad that the game isn't very complex, they're mad they didn't get what was in the early trailers, why did they change everything? Why aren't rifts used as more of a gameplay mechanic like it was supposed to? Where has all those amazing levels gone? Why isn't the song bird showing up at random moments like he was supposed to? etc. We got a completely other experience than was was planned in the beginning.
And the game just ends up being ''okay'' in almost all aspects.
''REMEMBER THE AMAZING TWIST GUYS?''
Yes, and what else?
This video is all we really need to say that the released B:I really undelivered compared to it's trailers and just in a general sense. The creepy vibe, long ranged battles, cannon set pieces, bar scene, mobs, balls to the wall crazy Songbird, weather effects, Elizabeth's better powers and her breast size.
This is the reason why I mainly try to stay away from early trailers, and why I was so disappointed with the finished product.
Most people aren't mad that the game isn't very complex, they're mad they didn't get what was in the early trailers, why did they change everything? Why aren't rifts used as more of a gameplay mechanic like it was supposed to? Where has all those amazing levels gone? Why isn't the song bird showing up at random moments like he was supposed to? etc. We got a completely other experience than was was planned in the beginning.
And the game just ends up being ''okay'' in almost all aspects.
''REMEMBER THE AMAZING TWIST GUYS?''
Yes, and what else?
People who take early trailers as gospel are their own worst enemies, though. None of us here are new to this; things change during development, and if you're still pining for some early alpha even after we've seen half a dozen newer trailers that more accurately represent the game, you need to rethink your approach.
I feel like there's a very vocal group of Bayonetta/Dark Souls type folks on GAF who demand extremely complex, carefully choreographed and mechanically precise gameplay from every game they buy. Any time a title falls short of that standard, we're told it has "bad" gameplay.
Others, like me, are much more easily pleased. I loved Bioshock Infinite, combat and all. I enjoyed jumping on Skylines and zipping around the place. I enjoyed switching up my weapons and vigors to try out new combinations. I enjoyed taking different approaches to combat, sometimes going in guns-blazing and other times being more tactical.
I don't think it's unreasonable or some kind of classist imposition to argue that a video game should have functioning game elements. They're certainly not incompatible with the narrative Levine wants to cram in, either; BI is objectively less of a game than the first Bioshock, which in turn was a retreat from SS2.
It's not like we're talking some kind of sliding scale where a development dollar can ultimately be spent on adding another hit to a combo or hiring a better writer. We're talking about player agency and engagement once the flash wears off; the classic film "show, don't tell" applies just as much to games with a strong narrative, and strong, impactful game elements are the way of "showing" that make video games uniquely appealing.
Bioshock Infinite for me is the biggest disapointment and the biggest hype since a while (nah kidding, Dark Souls 2 is even bigger in the hype train of shitty games)
The scenario is written by a 13 years old boy who reads too much comics.. I Don't want to spoil so if you didn't finish the game don't click it but seriously
And no! In fact the final boss , it's you. What? Bioshock Infinite mixture actually three parallel dimensions. What? In one hero has a daughter . What? In the other , the hero became the villain. What? Guys invent a machine to travel through time . What? And as the bad guy wants a kid, he will steal her kid , a parallel dimension. What? And one day , the guys who invented the machine in time find yourself villain is not cool, so they will look nice to you to get your girl and kill you villain . What? Unfortunately changing dimension you lose your memories . What? And your daughter can open parallel dimensions with her hands , because she lost her little finger in another dimension. What? At the end you learn that all the stars are lights. What? All lights are doors to other dimensions. What? But if you kill someone in one dimension, there will always be another. What? By cons , if you prevent someone born in one dimension, then it is good, it never exist . What? Result of your ten girls from parallel dimensions decide to kill you for any of your parallel versions become the villain. WHAT .
It is still amazing to think that even the most stupid teenagers can understand the deception surrounding Bioshock Infinite; it was written by fans of comics with too much ridiculous plot-twist, empty themes and narrative direction,
performed by omniscient characters on several dimensions
, spouting nonsense and fatalistic ending on a pedantic uroboros, leaving them to do a google searches leading the blind admiration or the deepest disgust ...
It's pure sh*t
And I won't forget how they transform the nice level design and gameplay of the 1 in a boring arena fps fight game ....
BioShock Infinite amazed me. The gameplay was nothing extraordinary, yet its premise, narrative, detailed atmosphere and plot were some of the best in entertainment.
IMO, Infinite was a huge disappointment. The story kinda reminded me of Looper: good in theory, but once you think about it it completely falls apart. And the gameplay, setting and characters were all a major downgrade from BioShock 1 (and even 2).
You were dissapointed by the combat in BioShock Infinite yet placed the BioShock game with the (siginificantly) best combat in the series last of the 3?
While I disagree, as I loved the game, I do wonder if maybe the new Irrational being a small team on a limited budget will take away the issue you are talking about here. Perhaps it will bring more focus.
Yeah, I said I hated the game earlier but that was mainly absolute frustration from that one boss fight (wello, three technically!) which blew away my tolerance for the combat in the rest of the game. If I had just switched to Easy it'd have probably been fine, so yeah the game was mainly disappointing more than anything else.
Well, the twist was more... fun I guess, TLoU I thought had a more satisfying story. No grand twists or anything, just better told and executed. I guess it's like the difference between Sixth Sense and There Will Be Blood.
The problem with both The Last of Us and Bioshock Infinite is that they start out really great with some really unique interactive set pieces and then they go into the same action sequences that we've seen for years, but with slight twists.
The only difference is that Infinite tells everything without a single cutscene, and TLoU tells almost everything with cutscenes. That's what makes me disconnect more from the story in TLoU. I really like both games but I don't agree at all that the narrative was handled in such a better way in TLoU. They both share many similar problems in my opinion.
I like some aspects of the game like the graphics, story and music. But the gameplay itself I'm not a big fan of. I haven't beaten it yet, I'm at the part where
you fight off a bunch of enemies and airships and the bird helps you.
The enemies in this game are damn bullet sponges to the max and that is just not that fun.
I like some aspects of the game like the graphics, story and music. But the gameplay itself I'm not a big fan of. I haven't beaten it yet, I'm at the part where
you fight off a bunch of enemies and airships and the bird helps you.
The enemies in this game are damn bullet sponges to the max and that is just not that fun.
Then it needs much better gameplay for me to remember it with anything other than regret. Getting a kick out of people who think all the negativity is merely backlash and/or people who want game A and got game B instead. The gameplay is simply subpar. I'm somebody who likes to play games, not just watch them, so if your gameplay is weak it doesn't matter how good any other aspect of it is.
BI could have the best story of all time but I'll never know because the gameplay isn't engaging enough to get me past the first hour or two.
