next »

[ChevyRay]

Just trash this if there's already a topic, search didn't give me anything (actually it gave me a topic in the wrong forum from september... so whatever).



DISCUSS

Just played & finished the game on the weekend. I hadn't finished either of the first two. Tried playing the first game and didn't like it at all. This one I managed to make it through.

Some moments were super fun for me, and some really frustrating. I loathed the respawn system. Every time I died, it'd just spawn me in a safe place and the battle would still be going... so instead of getting to retry and try the battle with a different loadout or from a new angle, I just grinded my way through all the tough fights by just dying over and over and whittling the enemy down.

I could've gotten around this and I know it's possible to pick up new guns during a fight, but it's awkward and I didn't want to reload the save.

Story stuff was meh, didn't really like most of it, and hated when I had to make dumb choices that I knew were going to be meaningless (as usual). Main character's commentary was like a grindstone to the face annoying, and I didn't like having to watch that coin-pass cutscene a billion times (though I supposed I could've just ignored it... but I wanted the money).

The scenery artwork was fucking amazing, and that bird thing. Some moments I was like holy shit games have gotten beautiful. But all the human inhabitants have a really bad case of VGDF (Video Game Dead Face) that makes me just sigh sadly when they're trying to act like anything but robots, because it doesn't work.

My favorite loadout: Sniper Rifle & Hand Cannon (that cannon is fucking powerful). At the end it was really shitty though so I had to switch to Shotgun & RPG for the end fights.

My favorite magic: The charge attack & the one that tosses guys up in the air. Though for fights with tons of guys I'd always switch back to crows because it'd give me time to run up close and melee/hand-cannon them (or run away and snipe).

How'd you guys fair? Also if you're in this topic and didn't want anything spoiled, I'm not even gonna warn you, you deserve it.

[ham and brie]

I wish whatever is the next thematic sequel would move well away from structuring the gameplay around killing a bunch of dumb NPCs in arenas and instead make something out of learning about the world and interacting with its society. Perhaps if they made it less of an action game they'd also not have a crap death mechanic.

[ChevyRay]

Heh, I found the society and world to be the weaker part of the two, so that'd be a bad choice in my eyes. It looked good, at least.

[deathtotheweird]

Few gripes I had were that rarely I felt I was in a city in the sky. There are a few things early that are awe-inspiring, but then after that it just feels slacker. Compared to BioShock where the water is oppressive and everywhere, Infinite's setting didn't really wow me.

Vigors and SALTS went mostly unexplained, and they felt out of place. In Rapture with it's unrestricted science backdrop and the discovery of ADAM, Plasmids made sense. Splicers were a more interesting enemy, their incoherent ramblings were a lot more interesting to fight against despite their comparatively less functional AI.

Comstock and the story itself just dropped off for 80% of the game, and there were much fewer audiologs than previous *Shock entries so there was little to fill in the gap. Character development was all over the place, with someone who is relatively unimportant to the main story like Fink getting as many audiologs as someone like Daisy who was much more relevant to the plot. Slate and his little bits in the beginning were interesting as they fleshed out some of Booker's back story a bit, but the execution just seems a bit off.

The combat was slightly improved, but I disliked the low ammo pools and only being able to carry two weapons. Which basically meant I had to switch guns around, but playing in 1999 mode I could only afford to upgrade certain guns. And it's a waste of a slot if I'm carrying around something with no ammo, so I was forced to use guns I didn't upgrade which made combat more difficult than I would have preferred at times.

Like you said the AI was terrible. Elizabeth never reacted to things I did unless it was scripted. I could basically walk up to any non-combatant NPC and mash his brains in without her reacting, then she'll give me a quarter. Okay?

But the graphics and art direction were incredible, the skyhook was a fun (if a bit unnecessary) gimmick and in general the combat felt solid. I did personally enjoy the story. I tend to not be too hard on games with technically bad stories as long as they are told well. And aside from the slow pacing in the middle, Infinite's story was told very well.

Overall it's a slightly above average game I'd recommend to anyone who likes first person shooters and appreciates a well told story. For someone like me, it's hard to get better than that since very few games blend the two that well.

[Blademasterbobo]

I liked it up till the ending. The ending sorta ruined it for me, and I don't understand why so many people are as happy as they are about it. Almost every conversation about the ending has people acting ecstatic (and surprised? wtf) with how it turned out.

"GotY wat a deep and surprising and cool story gams are art lololololol" <- every conversation on reddit about bioshock infinite

It's disappointing (here's a link that mostly sums up why) and it's predictable and cliched and awful. Time travel / multiverse stories that end with the main character repeating their journey or killing themselves are overdone and stupid. It makes everything the protagonist did pointless (on top of the pointlessness inherent in it taking place in a multiverse setting.) Plus, Elizabeth and Booker basically stop acting like themselves for the last part of the game.

Here's where I explained why I think it's shit in a bit more depth.

[deathtotheweird]

The ending wasn't that great, but it wasn't especially bad either (like BioShock's ending was).

I appreciate how well told it was. The multiple rowing scenes, the walk around the infinite lighthouses, the baptism scene, etc. all really flowed well into each other into the end. It was very impressive to experience. I think the game had a perfect blend of foreshadowing, exposition, subtext, narrative, and interaction that I really can't think of anything else in the gaming sphere that rivals it.

Now I wouldn't go so far as call it the Citizen Kane of gaming like others are but I think it's a pretty good example of how to do story-telling in games right.

[TheLastBanana]

The game certainly has its flaws, but I think it was overall a pretty good experience.

I'm especially happy with the way that they handled Elizabeth. She didn't feel like she was in the way, which was one of my main concerns about having an entire game where you have an AI following you around. Obviously she didn't handle every event, but for the most part, she did actually feel like a person interacting with the environment (leaning against things, sitting in chairs, and actually looking for lockipcks, for instance). Again, the execution wasn't perfect, but she's definitely up there in terms of AI characters that actually seem human.

The combat was pretty good, though I felt like some of the enemies were just bullet sponges, especially on hard mode. Like allen said, it basically just meant you'd empty your whole bullet reserve with one gun and then move onto the next one, which the rest of the gameplay elements didn't encourage (mostly the fact that you can only afford to upgrade certain guns). It wasn't even really a matter of lining up your shots properly, because the enemies twitch around enough that reliably getting a headshot with anything other than the sniper is pretty difficult. That said, I thought the acrobatic element of combat was a nice touch, and the part near the end where you're jumping between airships was particularly cool.

[Blademasterbobo]

I thought it was impressive, too. When I'm talking about the ending sucking, I mostly mean the story elements / implications. I think part of why some of the final bits don't make sense is that they had to shoehorn the story to fit with the ending scenes they wanted to do. Which I guess is fine, it was pretty cool to watch that stuff going on, even if the ending sucked. I'm not sure it says anything good about gaming when the part of the game people found most impressive was almost entirely scripted, though.

[ham and brie]

Here's where I explained why I think it's shit in a bit more depth.

I think your interpretation of the ending as pointless isn't how most people see it.

It seemed to me that once Elizabeth had her powers back, thanks to what they did in the game, she was able to use the power to let Booker choose to destroy the timeline in which he went through with the baptism. Which means no timeline in which Comstock went to buy a baby from a deadbeat parallel version of himself. Booker is returned to the point in his timeline where it would have happened, but this time it won't, and he probably remembers what he experienced, so is likely to reform his ways.

[Blademasterbobo]

Even if they intended for that to be the "proper" interpretation, which I seriously doubt, Elizabeth, the only likable character in the game, is still completely erased. It's not a happy ending, either way. And you still erased a ton of events / places / people from existence, just to end up in a reality that likely existed somewhere in the multiverse anyways, so yeah, it's still going through a series of pointless events that, for all intents and purposes, never happened.

And regardless of all of that, the ending is still pretty damn overdone.

edit:
Why does nobody consider the implications of the story beyond what the game shoves in your face? You removed an infinite number of people from existence in order to save a smaller yet still infinite number of people from dying in an infinite number of New Yorks. Yeah, not only is that pointless, it's uh... not exactly morally superior to Comstock causing the destruction of New York.

[Blademasterbobo]

One theory I saw that I like a lot, though, is that the events of the game are different from all of Booker's other attempts because you, the player, observed them. Even if the devs didn't intend for that to be a Thing, it's still a pretty neat idea.

[Fallsburg]

As I continue to think on it, the more I think that pretty much everything in the game is there because Bioshock had it, not because it makes sense.

Bioshock, for all its faults, was a cohesive, holistic game.  The political commentary, the Plasmids, the enemies, the plot, all of them tied into each other and made sense. 

Infinite, on the other hand, has all of those things, but they don't make any fucking sense together.  The political commentary seems completely shoe-horned in.  Fuck, the whole Daisy section of the game could be erased and the plot would stay exactly the same.  So too with all of the political commentary. One could change it from Magical-Jingoist-Sky-Racists to Magical-Isolationist-Sky-Men's-Right's-Activists (or whatever) and the plot could stay exactly the same.

[s0]

As I continue to think on it, the more I think that pretty much everything in the game is there because Bioshock had it, not because it makes sense.

Bioshock, for all its faults, was a cohesive, holistic game.  The political commentary, the Plasmids, the enemies, the plot, all of them tied into each other and made sense.  

everything in bioshock 1 was there because it was in system shock 2 lol. they even recycled the entire plot p much exactly. also im sorry but the "political commentary" wasn't very deep at all. what makes magical jingoist sky racists different from magical underwater ayn rand worshippers? you could do what bioshock did with p much every political ideology in existence.

i haven't played infinite yet, just saying.

[deathtotheweird]

Yeah, but Bioshock managed to blend them in with the story and make sense of them. In Infinite they're just kind of thrown in with little explanation at the end. So their entire existence feels completely contrived. Vigors are fun so I don't care, but they should have put a little bit more effort in justifying their existence.

Also seems weird that with vigors and all this technology the people of Columbia still have faith. Though I suppose the technology being so advanced would probably seem a miracle to them, so maybe it's not that weird.

Why does nobody consider the implications of the story beyond what the game shoves in your face? You removed an infinite number of people from existence in order to save a smaller yet still infinite number of people from dying in an infinite number of New Yorks. Yeah, not only is that pointless, it's uh... not exactly morally superior to Comstock causing the destruction of New York. Tongue

It's not pointless, it's saving countless people from the pain and torture of an apocalypse scenario. It's not like the people of New York in Comstock's timelines cease to exist, it's that Comstock ceases to exist. The timelines themselves aren't erased, but Comstock is erased from them. Obviously some people will cease to exist, people that were born as a result of Comstock/Columbia or who were otherwise affected by his existence, but that number is probably small in comparison to the death and destruction perpetuated by Comstock.

The implications of the ending are simple. In all the timelines where Comstock exists, he now no longer does. He no longer creates Columbia, he doesn't kidnap Anna, and he doesn't go on his crazy apocalypse mission killing everyone on Earth. As a result, we get to see Booker back in his office with his daughter again and Earth isn't destroyed (in Comstock's timelines and possibly others because he did have access to Elizabeth's powers and the tears, so potentially the apocalypse of the entire universe). Obviously you disagree, but that's a satisfying conclusion to me.

[shinygerbil]

I loved it. GOTY in my own very personal opinion. I liked the story, the setting, the characters - the world.

Note that this is very different from me saying these things were technically impressive or infallibly executed - because this is a **video game**!!

Case in point, the opening. I've heard such varying opinions on it, from "it was horrible because there were coins everywhere and the loot glint made them obvious and my gamer OCD kicked in and I couldn't enjoy the scenery" to "there are coins to pick up, because this is a video game, and it is revelling in the fact that it is a video game, hooray for video games! We love them". Which is correct?!?! Answers on a post card please.

Oh, wait, it's subjective! Haha never mind. I personally didn't find glinting coins and game mechanics to get in the way of the story; if you did, I might recommend this other form of media called "film". Or maybe try Metal Gear Solid. Or go on youtube for a let's play.

Re: Elizabeth and her scriptedness - well, what did you expect exactly? A real Turing-certified AI? Of course she's scripted. Yes, maybe I smirked at the occasional inappropriate"hey, I found a penny!" but she was mostly successful as a lively, animated sidekick. Oh, and she often reacts with horror if you do a melee execution, to my own personal glee.

The game was full of nice touches. The now-famous Barbershop Quartet Bit - which I walked right past until I belatedly recognised the song and spun around to watch the rest - really is beautiful. And it's by no means an isolated example. The scenery is gorgeous, the art direction is stunning. I found myself taking screenshots like a tourist would take photos. I liked so many little things - like, after you go through your first tear, all the enemies really do have nosebleeds, not just the scripted ones. Sure there were plenty of duds - every hotdog stand has THE SAME GUY standing there selling hotdogs. And the almost magical locks placed in the dead centre of doors, even if that is not where a lock would be position on said door. It's jarring, sure, but it's not a reason to ignore all the positives.

As for the ending...I thought it was nicely pulled off. I liked the rowing scenes, lighthouses, baptisms, etc. The brief trip to Rapture made me happy. Story-wise I thought it was acceptable; I had a slight feeling of "...is this a cop-out?" but, well, I'm experiencing somebody else's story, not writing my own. When I read a book I enjoy wondering what the author was thinking/intending and I do so without the need to make my own fanfic ending. Same with this. If it's a sad ending, so what? Some endings are sad.

At the very end - when Booker goes to open the door with the possibility of his daughter behind it - I don't see that as the closure and deletion of all the previous stories; it is a doorway to an infinite array of new possibilities. The obvious clue is in the name of the game - though people see its application to the events leading up to the end, they fail to apply it to the events post-ending. Multiple universes really are infinite - if a finite number cease to exist, an infinite number still exist. Who knows what will happen? Will there be another Lutece? Another Columbia? Though I often see "ambiguous" endings as a cheap way out, part of me still appreciates them for what they are on occasion.

Bobo, your link to the reddit thread misses the point. It's not about creating/finding the perfect universe - it's about destroying the ones which are not acceptable. Due to Elizabeth's peculiar circumstances, she can 'feel' what is happening to other Elizabeths in other universes, who haven't been saved by Booker. And as a result, Comstock must be removed. Sure, it's hard to appreciate that as people who are unable to peek into other universes, but for Elizabeth, these other Elizabeths and Comstocks are all too real - as are the events which occur in their universes. She can feel them not only through human empathy, but also probably as a direct echo of these other Elizabeth's feelings, in much the same way that the soldiers encountered after travelling through the tears could feel their own deaths.

And hey, given that it is not explicitly stated (though it may be strongly hinted) that all Elizabeths are destroyed, and given the truly infinite nature of multiple universes, perhaps now we are in a universe where there is no Comstock but there will be Luteces and Elizabeths free of suffering, and happiness for all. It is not outside the scope of the game, surely! Given "our" Elizabeth's penchant for invading multiple universes, perhaps she has somehow escaped extinction. After all we are talking about the stuff of science fiction here.

(While I was writing this, allen said it in a much better way)

I can't argue against the predictable/cliché nature of the ending, but to me that doesn't really matter - it was well told, and I enjoyed it, and I can't really ask for much more than that. Overall I still consider it to be a towering achievement which few other games rival.

[Fallsburg]

everything in bioshock 1 was there because it was in system shock 2 lol. they even recycled the entire plot p much exactly. also im sorry but the "political commentary" wasn't very deep at all. what makes magical jingoist sky racists different from magical underwater ayn rand worshippers? you could do what bioshock did with p much every political ideology in existence.

i haven't played infinite yet, just saying.

Wait, what?  I really see very little of System Shock 2 in Bioshock.  Audio logs and being told what to do by a disembodied voice who is just using you, and that's about it.

As for the political commentary, yeah, Bioshock's was not particularly deep, but it at least made an attempt.  And while the commentary wasn't particularly insightful, it at least took self-interest and Objectivism to the logical conclusion.  
Infinite's only point seems to be "people in power suck," which is completely toothless.  The only maybe real point that Infinite makes is when Elizabeth is excited by the prospect of the revolution because it'll be like in Les Miserables (the point being the idealization of revolution vs. the actuality in which score settling and reprisals occur).  

Maybe it's the raging liberal in me, but the handling of Daisy pissed the fuck out of me.  Here's a person trying to stop her brethren from being treated like subhumans by people who have been extracting every ounce of value out of them and then throwing them away.  People who paint the president who ended slavery quite literally as a devil and erect statues honoring his assassin.  And then the game throws up some bullshit false-equivalency shit and makes it so the only person who doesn't believe in anything is the good guy (despite killing hundreds, if not thousands, of people).  The moral of the game is "Having strong feelings about the implicit slavery of people makes you an asshole, but if you don't have strong feelings about it, it doesn't matter what you do"

The reason Bioshock is different than Infinite due to the integration of the commentary and the gameplay.
Plasmids (as a way of raising oneself above others, a product of rational science without concern about other ethical or moral consideration)
Gaining at the expense others (Big Brothers and Little Sisters being made subhuman)
The resurrection chambers and Bathyspheres being keyed to Ryan (self-interest)
All of these make sense in a world of magical underwater ayn rand worshippers.  

Meanwhile, the story, gameplay, and setting of Infinite are all separate entities and any of them could be swapped without affecting the others.  Nothing in the DeWitt-Elizabeth-Lutece-Comstock plot relies on anything unique to Columbia (or at least anything related to Columbia could easily be swapped out without affecting anything else).  Similarly, the vigors have nothing to do with the setting (beyond calling them vigors and having them marketed in the way of snake-oil salesman).

  

[deathtotheweird]

Wait, what?  I really see very little of System Shock 2 in Bioshock.  Audio logs and being told what to do by a disembodied voice who is just using you, and that's about it.

There are so many similarities between Bioshock and System Shock 2 that it almost feels like he was trying to remake the game, just in a different setting. It's not really a bad thing, but it's a bit obvious.

You have the plasmids/psionics. The similar player revive mechanics, the vending machines and upgrade facilities, the enemies in the game being controlled by Ryan/The Many. Of course the audiologs and the disembodied voice who ultimately betrays you. The space setting quite analogous to the underwater setting. Both have systems to research enemies. And both games even start out with a blocked path, requiring a wrench to break it apart to progress.

There are probably more but those are what I can think of at the top of my head.

[s0]

wasn't there an interview with ken levine where he said something to the effect that the plan for bioshock was to make a more mainstream version of ss2? and yeah like allen said, there are A TON of similarities. the difference is more in focus. ss2 is more of an "rpg" and more of a horror game and bioshock is more of a shooter. also obv splicers= hybrids, andrew ryan= xerxes, atlas/fontaine = dr polito/shodan

btw i still think that mechanically and atmospherically ss2 is the better game (even despite the dum weapon repair mechanic and the imbalances in the leveling system)  but bioshock has the cooler setting (i played ss2 after bioshock)

[Fallsburg]

ss2 is more of an "rpg" and more of a horror game and bioshock is more of a shooter.

I guess it's the difference in tone, because as you said, I always thought of SS2 as more of a horror game and Bioshock as more of a shooter.  It could just be that it's been a long time since I've played SS2, but I feel like combat in that was much more costly and avoidable.  Ammo, health (and resurrection) were much more precious and costly, which made the game feel much more tense.  Throw in the weapon repairing, and the calculus of who to fight, when, and how was much more involved than Bioshock's.  

I guess that they felt different enough that I didn't feel like Bioshock was aping System Shock, and more that it was paying homage to it.  I don't feel that way about Infinite, but I'll agree that it's a tenuous line.

EDIT:
Also, I didn't really use the Psionics (I seem to remember being a hacker with a fully kitted out assault rifle), whereas one can't go through Bioshock without using Plasmids.  So while I understand that both of them are effectively magic powers, Bioshock was designed such that Plasmids play an integral part, but in System Shock 2 they are just one of the many options available to the player.

[deathtotheweird]

BioShock throws so much ammo and money at you, you really don't need to use the plasmids for combat if you don't want to. But you're right at plasmids feeling a part of the game world, especially when comparing it to psionics and vigors which just seem there for the hell of it.

I think if you played SS2 again and compared it to Bioshock you would agree with us that it borders on being a remake.