Bioshock Infinite - Review Thread [UP: IGN exclusive split PC/Console review up]

Very disappointing if that's all 1999 mode is. They definitely talked it up big time. It's the only reason I even bought the thing.
He didn't even finished the game in 1999 mode. This review is completely useless to me, he clearly rushed through the game just to get his exclusive shit done in time.
 
The reviewer did mention it; he just said the outright opposite:



I have no idea how you even make that mistake. Did he not bother to ever switch out weapons and simply assumed that option was available? Or is it perhaps a menu option distinct from the radial menu that Maddog missed?

I'm intrigued by this mainly because it would mean a difference between the PC and console versions that is very unusual to see these days.

Haha, holy shit. How can he fuck that up?
 
Wow, fuck that two-weapon limit shit. That's really on some Resistance 2 crap, and that game suffered for it. Superior PC confirmed even further.
 
Hm. Now I'm even more anxious to read a Eurogamer or Edge review. Poorly written (reads as if they didn't have time for a good edit), and the comparison to BioShock is disconcerting. I recently replayed the original and if Infinite isn't the better game, then we have a problem. It hasn't aged well.
 
Lots of overreactions here, seriously. If they gave IGN a perfect 10 you'd say 'omg bought review' now it got a 9.5/9.6 'omg not enough for exclusive review'.
 
It doesnt make sense. Bioshock was already focused tested to simplicity. Are focus testers so dumb a few years later that a weapon wheel makes them shit their pants?

I say we wait for some clarification before flipping out. This makes no sense at all that Bioshock has gotten even more streamlined.
 
Just checked again and it's definitely not a menu option. I could be blind but I really don't think it's an option. What might of happened is the pause menu shows you all of your guns and the reviewer just assumed you could equip them from there but that is definitely not the case.

Edit: When you pick up new guns you very clearly see your old gun drop.

It's very strange indeed. I'd be interested in hearing why they didn't want to go with a radial menu for both weapons and vigors like they did in the other console Bioshock games.

I could see it if strictly limiting weapons was conducive to the way they designed levels and enemy encounters, but when the PC has no such limitations, it seems a bit odd.

Undoubtedly they have good reasons for going the route they did, and I'm glad they saw no need to unnecessarily limit the PC as well.
 
People are flipping out and the game got a 9.4/9.5? lol

As if we needed more evidence that the current review system is completely broken...
 
Lots of overreactions here, seriously. If they gave IGN a perfect 10 you'd say 'omg bought review' now it got a 9.5/9.6 'omg not enough for exclusive review'.
There's no overreaction. People are just trying to gauge the quality of the game from the score. Pointless of course because of its exclusivity status. A review which should be able to tell you that, but it can't because it can't be trusted.
 
There's no overreaction. People are just trying to gauge the quality of the game from the score. Pointless of course because of its exclusivity status. A review which should be able to tell you that, but it can't because it can't be trusted.

Yet it's included in the official review thread.
 
Not sure if anyone has mentioned this but just the fact that he mentions that there is a
twist
is kind of annoying. The fact that I know it's coming will ruin the surprise, no? I could just be sensitive but it was such a huge part of the first game the fact that I didn't know it was coming was a big part of the shock for me.
 
Not sure if anyone has mentioned this but just the fact that he mentions that there is a
twist
is kind of annoying. The fact that I know it's coming will ruin the surprise, no? I could just be sensitive but it was such a huge part of the first game the fact that I didn't know it was coming was a big part of the shock for me.

Yeah, same for me.
 
Not sure if anyone has mentioned this but just the fact that he mentions that there is a
twist
is kind of annoying. The fact that I know it's coming will ruin the surprise, no? I could just be sensitive but it was such a huge part of the first game the fact that I didn't know it was coming was a big part of the shock for me.

It should be a given there is a twist ending at this point considering all their games+dlc included one. Well except
Bishock 2
 
The exclusive review, the most useless of data points but it's all anyone has to discuss at this point, so it works perfectly, even for those who know how worthless it is.
 
Just watched the IGN review - man those console graphics look rough. I'm still going to rent it on Tuesday though, mainly for the plot.
 
No mention at all of how many powers are available, how many can be gained in one playthrough, whether there are any difficult choices, etc...

Basically an uncritical piece of fluff.
 
No mention at all of how many powers are available, how many can be gained in one playthrough, whether there are any difficult choices, etc...

Basically an uncritical piece of fluff.

You're criticizing them for not being something they're not trying to be. As if you expect something different. IGN will always be IGN.

Not that I'm not down with criticism, they opened themselves up to it when they decided to stick their neck out and put up the only review on the entire internet for one of the most hotly anticipated games of the year.

Deru kui wa utareru.
 
I don't believe the 2 weapon limit is absent on PC, wouldn't that change the gameplay too much? Maybe the review worded it wrong and there is still a freaking limit even with KB/M.
 
I don't believe the 2 weapon limit is absent on PC, wouldn't that change the gameplay too much? Maybe the review worded it wrong and there is still a freaking limit even with KB/M.

Definitely. I have a feeling you only scroll through the two weapons on PC also.
 
No mention at all of how many powers are available, how many can be gained in one playthrough...

This is stuff you actually expect from a review... ? It reminds me of the old GFW Radio where the guys are mocking the German press for showing up at events and asking inane numbers questions.
 
He's really an idiot for pointing out
there's a twist ending
.

i know this is a thread about the review but most people probably only looked at the score. so if you consider that a spoiler you might as well spoiler it, right? a lot of folks consider the video review spoilerish but they aren't saying how.
 
i know this is a thread about the review but most people probably only looked at the score. so if you consider that a spoiler you might as well spoiler it, right? a lot of folks consider the video review spiderish but they aren't saying how.

I edited the post but it's been mentioned elsewhere in the thread, and it was in the text of the review, after all. Reviewers should be careful about the things they say when it comes to story-heavy games.
 
And what's up with the 'Tear' stuff? If the IGN review is correct that it sounds as a complete bluff and nowhere near what i had in mind for the mechanic.

In firefights, that means you might have the choice to teleport in any one of a flying gun turret, a wall of cover, a powerful weapon, or a stash of medkits.

That's freaking it? You telling me all the Tears do is again making stuff easy to the player instead of 'summoning' stuff that alter the combat in a significant way?
 
He's really an idiot for pointing out there's a
twist ending
.

I'm going disagree with with this here. Plenty of reviewers do this in both videogames and other mediums. I do agree that the way in which he wrote it was not ideal though...comunicate to the reader that there's
a twist
by allowing him/her to make the assumption.

Some examples...gonna spoiler this since people are sensitive about it
Roger Ebert reviews on Usual Suspects and Sixth Sense

The story builds up to a blinding revelation, which shifts the nature of all that has gone before, and the surprise filled me not with delight but with the feeling that the writer, Christopher McQuarrie, and the director, Bryan Singer, would have been better off unraveling their carefully knit sleeve of fiction and just telling us a story about their characters - those that are real, in any event. I prefer to be amazed by motivation, not manipulation.

I have to admit I was blind-sided by the ending. The solution to many of the film's puzzlements is right there in plain view, and the movie hasn't cheated, but the very boldness of the storytelling carried me right past the crucial hints and right through to the end of the film, where everything takes on an intriguing new dimension. The film was written and directed by M. Night Shyamalan, whose previous film, "Wide Awake," was also about a little boy with a supernatural touch; he mourned his dead grandfather, and demanded an explanation from God. I didn't think that one worked. "The Sixth Sense" has a kind of calm, sneaky self-confidence that allows it to take us down a strange path, intriguingly.
 
+1 for the brilliant positioning in the Levine pic. Reminds me of:

arm-off-out-on-a-limb.jpg
 
I'm going disagree with with this here. Plenty of reviewers do this in both videogames and other mediums. I do agree that the way in which he wrote it was not ideal though...comunicate to the reader that there's
a twist
by allowing him/her to make the assumption.

Some examples...gonna spoiler this since people are sensitive about it
Roger Ebert reviews on Usual Suspects and Sixth Sense

It happens elsewhere and I was harsh, but I really do disagree with the practice. I don't think it's a good idea to
set audience expectations for an incoming twist when you can find any number of other ways to say that the resolution of the story was interesting.

Check out this article

It discusses that while having a story "spoiled" can non-intuitively actually add to one's enjoyment of it, continuously searching for a twist of some sort can in fact be very distracting as it creates a certain tension. "Suspense regarding the outcome may not be critical, and could even impair pleasure by distracting attention from relevant details and aesthetic attributes".

Btw for those scared of the black bars, we're just talking about a certain snippet of the IGN review.
 
I certainly wouldnt watch anything from IGN again, in fact for this game I would rather be in complete dark. I'm sure there are plenty of spoilers in the IGN review video :/
 
how does green man work? do I buy, get steam key and can pre-install on steam? or does game have to be installed on release day?

$60 is too high to justify for a pc game to me, but the greenman deal is tempting
 
Hmm amazon gives $30 2K games credit for pc download version

Credit must be used by 3/26/2014

There is nothing I want right now that I dont have already, any cool 2K games coming out this year?
 
I attempted to just watch the video review and after the first sentence had to X out and laugh myself silly. Fucking embarrassing.
 
This is stuff you actually expect from a review... ? It reminds me of the old GFW Radio where the guys are mocking the German press for showing up at events and asking inane numbers questions.

Yes. Specifically I want to know if there are hard choices to make with respect to powers you gain, which ties directly into how many you can obtain in one playthrough and how many there are. As Ken Levine describes here:

So recently I talked at my old college and feeling like Mr Successful, then this guy says “I’ve got a bone to pick with you, Levine!” He’s giving me a hard time, he says “the problem was none of the decisions I made had any permanence to them. I didn’t have to commit to any decisions.” And I was like “oh!” The clouds parted for me. Except for the Little Sisters, there’s no permanence in your choices. It hadn’t really crystallised for me before, the difference between games we had made before, like System Shock 2, and BioShock.

In System Shock 2 it was the OS upgrades, this sort of this perk system, and you made these choices; I remember staring at it even as I played it and agonising over that decision, worrying that if I made bad decisions I was going to get screwed. And I kind of miss that. Last night I woke up and couldn’t get back to sleep, so I went and played Deus Ex: Human Revolution for a while, then I went back to bed. And I still couldn’t get to sleep, so I picked up my iPhone and started playing Bejewelled. People often ask me “what kind of gamer is your game for?” but I think there are different kinds of gamer in all of us, especially in old-school gamers. There are things we like in modern games, and things we miss from games of yore.

It is tough to have your cake and eat it too, but it occurred to us that there was a real opportunity here to address that old school gamer in a way that was not going to break the bank. I don’t want to oversell what this is, I don’t want “oh my god, it’s two games in one!” because it’s not. It’s a bunch of very carefully, I think pretty well thought-out changes to the way the game is played that is going to make a real difference to how it feels.

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/01/23/youre-going-to-suffer-levine-on-1999-mode/

So yeah I want to know if what he talks about here is actually present or not and in what capacity. IGN didn't even touch on it in their review which makes it pretty much worthless to me and probably others who were left disappointed in Bioshock for the very reasons he describes.
 
Top Bottom