• 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.

Bioshock Infinite was a terrible sequel to Bioshock

I just don't get how people can say infinite was "shit". I'll agree that the gameplay wasn't that great but everything else was top notch. Loved the story and was blown away by the finale. Some people are coming off pretentious.
 

Joeku

Member
I just don't get how people can say infinite was "shit". I'll agree that the gameplay wasn't that great but everything else was top notch. Loved the story and was blown away and the finale. Some people are coming off pretentious.

No, that's the game that's coming off as pretentious. Initially convoluted does not equal intelligent. Just because a timeline can be drawn of a story's events does not mean that story is good or free of faults.

Best thing about it is the art design overall. It's goddamn beautiful. Otherwise...eh. Bioshock was a pre-Call of Duty 4 controller-oriented shooter, and it suffers for that. Infinite, though, is a late 360-gen console shooter to a fault. Funnily enough, Bioshock 2 rides that line best.
 

impact

Banned
Bioshock is terrible so I guess they have something in common.

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

as games, yea all three are terrible

I hope Bioshock 1 gets a remake like 10-20 years down the road and they actually get game designers. FPS gunplay should never be that bad. The atmosphere/story are nice, but it's not enough to carry awful gameplay.
 

Joeku

Member
What does it mean? COD4 played almost exactly like COD2. Do you want to say that +10 whenever you get a kill was such a huge gameplay innovation?

No, I mean Call of Duty 4, via its popularity, established a standard control style for console FPS games that almost everything (sans a few exceptions like Halo) followed, and Bioshock came out a month or so before it. FPS games on consoles weren't quite nailed down in feel yet.

Keep in mind the PC version of Bioshock had a weird "16x9 is cut out of the 4x3 view" thing too, like they expected nobody to have HDTVs or widescreen monitors. Not sure if that was ever patched.
 

Meier

Member
Infinite was not a good game. In fact, it was aggressively average at best. The gloss and build up to it clouded a lot of people's judgment.
 

szaromir

Banned
No, I mean Call of Duty 4, via its popularity, established a standard control style for console FPS games that almost everything (sans a few exceptions like Halo) followed, and Bioshock came out a month or so before it. FPS games on consoles weren't quite nailed down in feel yet.
I've really no idea what you're talking about, both Bioshock and COD4(/2) were very minor deviations from the Halo control scheme. Bioshock's controls were indeed not very good, worse than Halo from 2001, and COD4 several months later did not bring any revolution or new standards like you're trying to portray.
 
I think Burial At Sea Part 2 ruined Infinite retroactively for me. It was such a shitshow of an ending. Infinite on its own? The story had faults but it was a hell of a ride. 1 and 2 were better stories thougg.
 

Joeku

Member
I've really no idea what you're talking about, both Bioshock and COD4(/2) were very minor deviations from the Halo control scheme. Bioshock's controls were indeed not very good, worse than Halo from 2001, and COD4 several months later did not bring any revolution or new standards like you're trying to portray.

Call of Duty 4 absolutely set the standard of control that almost every console first-person shooter chased. While not completely innovative, it was tuned and tight enough to become a de facto standard. To make this completely clear what I'm saying is Bioshock controlled poorly, Bioshock Infinite felt derivative to the point of harming its own play, and Bioshock 2 between its control and mechanics walked a fine line of well-tuned fun on a controller. I've no doubt Bio2 (a 2010 game) learned from what previous console shooters did, namely fixing things Bioshock got wrong and learning over three years what console FPS games (read: CoD4 et al) did right.
 

Cat Party

Member
I hated the gameplay but the story wasn't bad at all.

I agree. The gameplay was fun is doses, but was surprisingly tedious. I found myself rushing through the combat to get to get to the exploration. But the story still resonates with me. It was so ambitious, and it worked. Whereas the original Bioshock's story faltered toward the end (after delivering one of the most memorable twists in history), I thought Infinite picked up speed and really delivered.
 
All three Bioshocks suck but infinite is on another level of poor.

Lovely graphics and art style but that's it! Awful awful gun play and handling, Elizabeth doesn't make a great companion (and acts too normal for a girl trapped all her life) and the story is nonsensical coma inducing stuff.

This is one game/series that I'll never understand why is so revered beyond its cool setting.
 

Maximo

Member
Bioshock 1 wasn't exactly well renowned for its pacing or level design either.
Right but Bioshock had everything else going for it, no one part of Bioshock was "amazing" it was the individual parts that made the game good.
Bioshock infinite stripped those parts away and was left with a "arguably" better paced story but with a corridor shooter that didn't even have decent gunplay compared to..well most other FPS at the same time.
 

K.Sabot

Member
Bioshock 2 is my favorite Bioshock game. It's like trading the mystery and novelty of Bioshock 1 and replacing it with improved gameplay and an actual last 1/3rd of a game. And I like the story more.

Infinite... man what a boring game.
 
Right but Bioshock had everything else going for it, no one part of Bioshock was "amazing" it was the individual parts that made the game good.
Bioshock infinite stripped those parts away and was left with a "arguably" better paced story but with a corridor shooter that didn't even have decent gunplay compared to..well most other FPS at the same time.

Bioshock was a corridor shooter with poor gunplay compared to most of its contemporaries as well.
 

Kalentan

Member
I still find the second one the best. I felt that way after I beat the 2nd and even after Infinite.

Mainly cause I loved the more personal story of 2. It didn't rely on a twist and so it makes repeat playthroughs more fun.
 
It always blows my mind in threads like this, when people call a game like this "terrible".
Have any of you played games that reviewed with less than all 10's. It was mediocre for the most part, absolutely. But terrible? I wish i had the same tunnel vision as some of you.
 

McLovin

Member
I liked it, but yeah the combat was bad. If the AI was better it might have fixed it. The story carried the game for me though. I'd play it again (current gen remake) if they made it. It would be nice if they went ahead and fixed the things wrong with it though.
 

Fury451

Banned
I can agree on it being a bad sequel.

I loved the game for what it was, though.

Pretty much how I feel.

I honestly thought the plot was pretty weak too, and not at all what it could have been, but the characters and presentation kept me invested.

I wanted to see a lot more of Columbia though. Felt like a whole world was wasted
 
Dunno, I thought the game was so far up it's own arse that I could smell Ken Levine's smugness every time I opened up the game.

I really didn't like it. It wasn't a smart story but a dumb one that also weakened the impact of Bioshock 1 and even 2.
 

deriks

4-Time GIF/Meme God
What? No. Bioshock Infinite was great. Only the bosses was weird, but I can live with that
 
Infinite was not a good game. In fact, it was aggressively average at best. The gloss and build up to it clouded a lot of people's judgment.
This is how I'd describe it. Gameplay bored me to tears. However, I thought the story was cool, but cool enough to play through it all.
 
Top Bottom