I didn't use it enough
. Relied on the sniper and carbine the whole time. Sometimes shotgun towards the end, though.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Levine: The first half of Bioshock Infinite's Burial at Sea will not have any combat
- Thread starter Courage
- Start date
I didn't use it enough
. Relied on the sniper and carbine the whole time. Sometimes shotgun towards the end, though.Askherserenity
Member
Not sure at what you're implying ; ;
Atraveller
Banned
BI was shit? What?
Spirit of Jazz
Banned
I'm sure more Bioshock 1 style combat would be the focus of the second part so I wouldn't be too concerned. Though as a Bioshock fan are you telling me you've got no interest at all in spending a good chunk of time exploring Rapture before things went to shit?
I didn't use it enough
I enjoyed the sniper and carbine, the only guns that seemed to handle poorly to me were the smgs (much like smgs in most games)
D
Deleted member 80556
Unconfirmed Member
I think you read it wrong. It's the half of the first episode that won't have combat, we don't know much of the second episode aside from the fact that
we play as Elizabeth
Krusenstern
Banned
Oh, I see.
ElfArmy177
Member
The combat. Not the whole game. The combat in Bioshock was about as interesting as Painkiller or Serious Sam. Just because there was a rail to fly around on didn't make it an interesting shooter. Mindless shooting without any thought. Thinking is what made Bioshock 1 so much better. Conserve ammo, specific ammo for certain bosses, certain plasmids would work better than others.
At all times: Bucking Bronco, kill enemies, move to next wave.
ElzarTheBam
Member
I didn't use it enough
Yeah, I relied on the shotgun, until I found out how awesome the hand cannon (fully upgraded) was.
A head exploding death machine.
NeoGAF praising a game then doing a 180? You don't say..
I think it may also be a problem with Normal being the new Easy. I played on 1999 and watching videos of playthroughs on Normal, I don't blame those players for only using guns and perhaps one vigor, because enemies go down quickly and easily.
On the higher difficulties you're encouraged to use everything at your disposal, combining guns, vigors, gear, and Skylines, experimenting more with what you've got and the freedom of movement on offer.
FlyingSaucer
Banned
Good news. The combat was far from being the highlight of the game.
Atraveller
Banned
The combat wasn't "shit". The gunplay is solid enough, better than Bioshock 1, but it didn't stand out when compared to other modern shooter titles. And you get a bigger place to play around the enemies in BI, unlike Bioshock 1, which you were confined to corridors.
Askherserenity
Member
Well, I for one don't think the combat is "sucky" but it was just the way it was implemented after the first 30 or so minutes.
NullPointer
Member
You're right about Normal, but I tried a Hard playthrough and it was way too bullet-spongey for me to enjoy, especially in the early going when you only have enough salts for two uses of vigor tops. Being rushed by half a dozen enemies who take way too many bullets and 3-4 melee swipes to drop, and a fire-man and an auto-turret just wore on me pretty quickly.
I'm certainly no novice to shooters either.
He could've said there'd be less emphasis on combat, but saying the first half has none at all could rob the episode of tension. Thats pretty spoilerish in my book, but what can you do?
BIONIC-ARRRMMM!!
Member
I like how the solution to bad combat is no combat at all. Stahp bein s0 dum Levine.
Atraveller
Banned
Kind of off-topic but, is the "See who quoted me" feature gone for good?
ElfArmy177
Member
Eh, opinions and all. BI was a corridor shooter like any other shooter, just with occasional large areas to shoot in like every other game. Just because there was a "secret room" with generic ammo and health in it to the side of a corridor, doesn't make it much different.
You are forgetting that part of the "combat" in video games has to do with enemies also. There is a reason Big Daddies became a known figure in videogames and the handyman became... well no one even remembers the handyman because it was an uninteresting enemy to fire at.
meltingparappa
Member
Can't wait to walk up to a character model, have it play an mp3 while staring at me, then continue to stare after the sound file ends.
Masterful advancement in videogame storytelling.
Masterful advancement in videogame storytelling.
This is what happens when people elevate "exploration" and "immersion", qualities that can be better obtained in many other activities in life, over the actual defining attributes of the medium. When people seriously question why violence/killing/shooting have to make up so much of a FIRST PERSON SHOOTER (an absurd notion that misses the point on the level with questioning the bloodshed in chess- why isn't there a peaceful way to depose the enemy king?!?!?) I have to wonder what elements of actual gaming would be left if the thought is followed through to its end.
Atraveller
Banned
Big Daddies charge and hit, just like handy man, except that Big Daddies are more fearsome looking and less bullet spongy.
Not sure how I feel about this, I enjoy the combat in Bioshock and in Bioshock Infinite. I'll have to wait and see, as long as it's paced right it will be ok and he did say it's the first half and not the entire first DLC.
I can vouch for this, I just finished a playthrough on hard after playing it on medium/normal and it really encourages you to focus on vigor usage and to play around with all you have available. Enemies go down smoothly when you do the right combinations of vigors/guns/tears and it's very satisfying.
The last of us.
BrokenEchelon
Banned
I'm 10,000% ok with this.
ComputerMKII
Banned
They're finally learning.
SoraanTribal
Member
I had fun with Bioshock Infinite's combat (Played on Hard), but I'm okay with this. I can't wait to soak up the atmosphere in pre-fall Rapture.
ElfArmy177
Member
True, but there was more thought to killing them than in BI. Im not saying the shooting was terribly implemented, Im saying it wasn't fun to shoot in the game period. You need to realize that with a first person shooter everything plays a factor in how the player and combat work together... because the point of it is shooting.
BI had nowhere near the atmosphere of Bioshock. Sure it looked pretty, but it wasn't very fun to explore as there was really no exploration needed. As I said, all ammo was generic and required no thought process in taking out enemies. Bioshock had that ability to frighten a player or gather a reaction out of them as they turned creepy corners. Bioshock infinit didn't, it basically had "Im going to take out 30 guys and possibly a handyman in the next room"
Please keep in mind I did finish the game, and did enjoy it - just not nearly as much as Bioshock 1.. or even Dishonored for that matter.
Yes, caused too much server load.
Atraveller
Banned
Irrational successfully created the "creepy" feeling in a seemingly perfect city, but it can't be scarier than the first Bioshock because it was a functioning city, unlike Rapture, which was in ruins. And since Columbia was still populated, there would always be guards posted on the streets. To sum up, given the settings of Columbia, you can not simply replicate the mystery and creepy atmosphere of Rapture. It's not "bad" combat design, this is just BI can not be like Bioshock 1.
Too bad, it was pretty neat.
Shrike_Priest
Member
Okay, you seriously need to define "bullet spongy" here, because if there's one enemy in any game that you could blast full of ammo with nothing happening, it was the Big Daddy. Only anti-armor bullets, incendiary or electric slugs resulted in any actual reaction.
I think the problem with the Handy Men were that you pretty much only saw them in a combat scenario. Big Daddies were many, moved around as NPC and interacted with the environment, as well as having a few different iterations. Handy Men just ran at you. But in terms of combat, the Handy Men are pretty darn close to the rushing Big Daddies, with the addition of having a "weak point"-mechanic.
Also, the backlash at the combat in BI is still a mystery to me. Bucking Bronco + Shotgun was fun as hell, as was using Possession and throwing crows around.
I do think the guns in Bioshock 1/2 were better because you had fewer variants with different ammo, BI had a definite surplus of guns and would have been better off halving the number and actually giving you time to evaluate the different guns. However, when people say it's shit, I just don't understand.
People say "compared to other modern shooters". Which ones are the talking about? Battlefield 3 or MW4? Which in single player amount to "run to cover, peak out behind cover and shoot, cover, peak out behind cover, shoot, run to turret, cut a path to new cover, run to new cover, peak out behind cover, get ordered to pick an RPG and shoot at a tank, pick up an rpg and shoot at a tank".
To me, it feels like there's no other shooter out there that lets me, within ten seconds, place a Murder of Crow booby traps at the entrance to the arena, enslave a robotic George Washington to help me, throw half a dozen enemies in the air, rush up to them with a shotgun blast them out of the sky, run back to the enemies now fighting the crows, melee them, then turn around, finish my George Washington helper-off before he comes back, summon a flying turret and hop on a skyrail to get to higher ground to snipe the rest.
If the enemies take three shots or eight to kill, that's kinda beside the point.
Oh, and to get back on topic. Kudos to Ken Levine for doing a non-combat episode. Hope he manages to make it engaging. But this is the same thing all over again. With B:I, people blasted him for it not being Bioshock 3, and said the combat was shit. Now he takes away combat, and some people say "what the hell, you can't do that". Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
rosaceadude2112
Member
the handyman is probably the worst melee enemy I've ever encountered in an fps.
It's only the first half of part 1 that has no combat, so there will still be combat as Booker.
I agree, and as far as the Handymen themselves, all but one were featured in arenas with Skylines. Many of those arenas also had environmental elements like the Tesla coils which you could use to lure and immobilize the Handyman nearby with Murder of Crows and/or Undertow, as he's fried while you take potshots at his heart. You could also gauge where he was about to land when jumping off the Skyline and lay some traps at his feet. When he recovers, get back on the Skyline and mess with him some more.
I loved the Handymen fights due to how incredibly aggressive, hard-hitting, and super-mobile they were and how you were encouraged to play with the Skylines and various environmental triggers to fuck with them as they scream in impotent rage. They were enjoyably tense confrontations.
-COOLIO-
The Everyman
but if i were looking for a shooter then i would like to know that half of the game isn't about shooting.
personally, i'm psyched for this though.
Atraveller
Banned
I never said Big Daddies are not bullet spongy, I just said they are less bullet spongy, and I believe crossbow and freeze worked just as well.
Also your post reminded me, the reason that Big Daddies are an icon of the series is because they also play a part in the narrative. Tied in together with Adam(which leads to the downfall of Rapture) and the little sisters, heck, you even get to pretend to be one, hard to ignore them at this point I'd say.
StevePharma
Member
1st half being instafail escort stealth section through Rapture.
blindrocket
Member
That's what I was thinking. hah
Dynamite Ringo Matsuri
Member
I had a lot of fun with the combat in BI, but I'm honestly okay with this. Exploring Rapture in its heyday sounds like it'll be fascinating
Atraveller
Banned
That was hardly a spoiler.
NullPointer
Member
Also true. Good point.
NinjamicWZ
Banned
imo Infinite would have been a better game if you played as Elizabeth and gameplay was something more conceptually realized and mechanically innovative as far as dimension shifting goes... story and world was great, but "The Adventures of Gunman's Eyeballs" just fell flat for me as the excitement passed and I was able to step back and process how I felt about the game in retrospect. It ultimately felt like a mod of supreme presentation quality. It may have been less people's cups of tea that way, but it definitely would have been mine.
NullPointer
Member
I need to read more stories like these, as it does make me feel like I was playing it wrong. But outside of the larger skyline areas I didn't feel like I had to time to really experiment. I was getting rushed or bombarded or turreted and spent most of my time reacting, and on normal just about any reaction will do.
So, uh, what will we be doing? In Bioshock, exploring is usually for loot: guns ands money and upgrades that, surprise, relate to combat.
There better be some masterfully set up storied environments. Hopefully not just a bunch of audio logs.
God forbid the game becomes a stealth game. The one part in Infinite was interesting, but I hope it stays "the one part."
Also, I wish I could rent this DLC, lol.
I didn't think the combat in Infinite was amazing, but it was still fun, and definitely an improvement over Bioshock 1.
There better be some masterfully set up storied environments. Hopefully not just a bunch of audio logs.
God forbid the game becomes a stealth game. The one part in Infinite was interesting, but I hope it stays "the one part."
Also, I wish I could rent this DLC, lol.
I didn't think the combat in Infinite was amazing, but it was still fun, and definitely an improvement over Bioshock 1.
ElzarTheBam
Member
Experimenting in BI is never spelt out to the player.That's the best thing about it.
For instance, someone on my twitter was surprised (after finishing the game) to see that the game had vigor combinations.
I also forgot about gears, they can completely change the way you play the game as much as the weapons/vigors.
Portugeezer
Member
Bioshock Infinite is not a good shooter.