Playing through it again now in 2023, it hasn't aged as well as Bioshock 1 or 2, but it's graphic/art style is magnificent and having to decide the right combination of weapon/vigor for the situation adds an edge to it. The story... well, I'll admit I had to read a couple of articles to put all the pieces together. The ending seemed somehow disjointed from the in-game flow of the story when I first played it. I'd say don't expect anything outside of a challenging shooter with good graphics and strong mechanics, and you'll do fine in Columbia.
same here, I love all of them differently. 1 for the atmosphere, 2 for the game play and infinite for the story. Although Bioshock 2 was unfairly hated imo
I'm actually kinda shocked that you didn't mention that bullshit boss, the ghost lady who kept spawning enemies non-stop and soaked up damage like it was nothing. I beat the game in one sitting on hard mode, and my most vivid memory was that fucking boss.
She's easy with the right vigors equipped. Lay down a devil's kiss mine as she's spawning enemies, and they all instantly die the second they hit the ground.
Gggmanlives guess I went in with the wrong guns or something. All I remember was having barely any ammo and salt to take her down, and it became a tedious game of wack the ghost.
I feel that Ken Lavine was second guessing himself a lot in the final year of development, especially looking at how the Boys of Silence had a major promotional push as a big part of the game and even received one of two action figures, but there's only three in the entire game in one small segment. Same with the Handy-Men having all but one of the designs that were in the preview scrapped and having a smaller role too. It also looked like it was supposed to be more open world in that preview. But I enjoyed the game, confusing as fuck storyline with more holes than swiss cheese in a firing range. and that boss fight with Elizabeth's step-mother almost made me quit the game. but it was alright.
The game was clearly designed with the twist first and foremost, and then everything else about the story bent and broken to accommodate it. It's like they were banking on the player being too blown away by the twist to complain... well... I was not blown away, I was pissed, and it did the opposite and soured the whole experience in hindsight. It felt like I was playing this really interesting game, only to have it ripped away from me when you first jump dimensions after the police lockup.
When Bioshock Infinite was first announced, there was an interview with him in... I think it was Game Informer. I'm not sure how easy it would be to track down the article today, but I remember several of the points they touched on. The game we got was nowhere near what Levine had originally envisioned. He wanted a game more like System Shock 2, that had backtracking, RPG elements, and character building that would allow for different ways to progress, based on your skills. I think the reason we instead got a linear, by-the-numbers FPS is because Levine, being only a writer by trade, didn't have a good enough understanding of what would be achievable at the time, given the hardware constraints of the then-current games consoles. He got way too ambitious and neither his team nor the technology were up to the task.
@@Darusamon He wanted to do the same with the first Bioshock, the same thing happened there, maybe he was like 'okay THIS TIME we'll do it right' with Infinite. I don't blame him and the team for messing up both times, trying to balance modern game engines and graphics with complex gameplay is very difficult.
@@Darusamon Yeah that whole thing about the technology not being up to the task MIGHT have been true if we hadn't gotten games like Far Cry 3, Mass Effect 3, Sleeping Dogs, Dishonored, etc... the year before. He also fucking failed hard with the storytelling even tho again, you had games that did tell great stories coming out around the same time like Spec Ops: The Line, Journey, Max Payne 3, etc... Levine did get one thing right; like all Bioshock games the atmosphere, environments, and world-building were fantastic. But the story/characters were just bubba'd to fuck and the gameplay was FAR more shallow than it could/should have been (in fact somehow managing to be even less deep than previous titles).
You are comparing games that are not comparable. Just because some games are open-world doesn't mean hardware could handle the original version of Infinite. Far Cry 3/Sleeping Dogs are open-world games, but no nearly as detailed. You couldn't have open-world and the same level of detail as Bioshock games.
You are aware that the choices with no real consequence is literally part of the story. The idea is that no matter what you choose there will always be a dude, a girl, and a lighthouse.
It is crazy because it makes no sense. They must force the "Booker is Comstock"; "Booker's baptism is a constant event, Booker's post baptism life split into two possibilities when there are infinite possibilities". And then at the post credit: Booker has a normal single father life with Anna. So in some other dimension, Booker take the baptism and found Columbia, Anna lost her fingers...again. Then for some reason, Liz in burial at sea is the only Liz with power.
I enjoyed the game for what it was, knowing full well it was even more removed from being anything System Shock-related in the end. But as someone who studied astrophysics in college and a geek for all things quantum theory etc, the ending of this game always puts a smile on my face, and makes me shed a tear as well.
I found the gameplay of Bioshock Infinite quite fun as well, beat it on 1999 mode and had a blast. I think the combination of the design of the setting and weapons, along with the mobility you can get with the Sky Rails and Gear just makes it so much fun.
Ok here's the thing, you got that quote from Ken Levine completely wrong. He never said that he put the multiverse stuff in the game because it "sounds sophisticated." He put it in the game because it "makes him feel stupid." That is a completely different thing. He put it into the story because he likes it, not because he's trying to impress people with how smart and amazing he is. And besides, when did everybody on the internet suddenly become experts in quantum physics? Here's his original comment: www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1o09p2/we_are_ken_levine_iglevine_and_andres_gonzalez/ Full quote: "I think the Dr. Manhattan sequence in Alan Moore's Watchman was a big inspiration for that aspect of it. Also, I like things that make me feel stupid, and trying to think about Quantum Mechanics always seems to do that."
Okay, so I paraphrased, sorry. Still doesn't change the fact he wrote a story around something he doesn't understand and then amazingly the story ends up being totally stupid. What a shock! I'm not an expert in quantum physics and I never said I was? But I'm also not in charge of writing video games with 8 figure budgets and if I was you can bet I'd write about something I had a basic understanding of.
Gggmanlives I'm not blaming you, it's an obscure comment from literally years ago. I don't expect you to remember it perfectly. I just think it could steer people the wrong way you know? I disagree on the story but I'm in the vast, vast minority on that. I know everybody else hates it.
***** I don't see how it steers people the wrong way. The message is that Levine wrote a story around something he has NO understanding on. That still stands.
Gggmanlives "Sounds sohpisticated" implies pretension and that it was added for the sake of impressing people. That's mischaracterization and isn't exactly fair to the developers or the game itself. And claiming that Levine has "NO" understanding is a bit hyperbolic to say the least. He may not have a PhD in the subject but I'd argue he knows how to use it as an effective storytelling tool. Bioshock Infinite was never trying to be a hard sc-fi authentic take on quantum physics and multiverse theory. It's certainly fair to criticize it's shortcomings in those areas but I do think a lot of people obsess over what was supposed to be a framing device for a character-focused story. Not the centerpiece of everything. For what it's worth I think you gave the game a fair review, just clearing up my thoughts on the matter.
when I was 13, I loved this game to death. Now, it feels very 2013. The linearity of the levels, the 2 weapon limit and the grunting Troy Baker, stumble and fly through the world protagonist all scream 2013. This game didn't age that well, but I still love it because of how it shaped me as a gamer.
I am 31 and the game aged perfetcly. Graphics and story are still briliant, gameplay is fun and diverse and the whole world feels alive and the way it ties in with the other games is just great.
@@mrblonde609 I'm 30 and I think you're both right. The game is very 2013, and I do wish some design choices were indicative of the era rather than the best for the game (e.g. the two weapon limit). But I also think the game holds up well and is still a blast to play.
I spent three years waiting for this game only to be disappointed that what we got was so mediocre. That and the fact that they removed so many elements from the older games left me salty as fuck.
Yeah, combat can be mindless fun on a few instances but they removed so many things and mechanics. And at the end of the day it's not half as fun as Serious Sam, Doom, Bulletstorm or any other shooter in where fun gameplay is the best part of the experience.
Hm... I thought the story was actually really good. I played it multiple times and wasn't confused the second time through. I think it is well-written, especially when compared to other FPS titles. As a whole, I liked this one better than the original (unpopular opinion, I know).
The fact that the only way to stop comstock was to drown booker was really dumb though. If you can open portals to anytime anywhere, why not just go back to the day he visited the army recruiters office and distract him with a hooker or something so he never joins? The whole time she was doing that i was yelling at the screen, "Bad daughter! Don't drown Daddy! Nooooooo! glug glup glug blug...."
I'm with you. I really enjoyed the story as well. Yeah, there were some parts I think didn't add up or were confusing. But they were rare. Usually, I knew what was going on and it was almost always very compelling.
@@climberly The game explains it as constants and variables. Constants never change no matter the timeline. Booker was always going to become Comstock in these timelines, hence why he had to drown in order to eliminate Comstock entirely. There’s no other way. It’s a constant: if Booker is alive in those timelines, he will become Comstock.
So glad to see someone give a positive opinion on the combat years after release. I knew I wasn't crazy when I was having fun with the combat...lol Awesome review as always!!
@@SE7ENSIX what was the foreshadowing that you were comstock and a white supremacist that for someone reason still allowed minorities in his idealized country
@@a-10wartaboo77 It's not at all surprising that Comstock would allow minorities in his idealized country. That's exactly what real white supremacists did a few hundred years ago in Europe and America. Turns out, it's a lot easier to make an "idealized" country when you don't have to pay for labor.
I actually love this game just as much as the first, including the story. Actually my favorite is the story, despite having 'issues'. And this is over 3 years after the game came out. It's just my opinion.
"Challenging game" What? I played through the game on hard difficulty and died 3 times, and one of them was me falling off a platform. Still an amazing game tho.
Kinda Depends on the situation and vigor you used, I found the first Downtown Emporia level long and kinda hard but when you use the Carbine, Reappear and Return to Sender (especially on the Handyman) it was a hellololololot easier
We can sit and analyze every single game we've played. We can look at all the details and find all the flaws that it has. But none of that changes the experience you had with the game. You can tell me all the problems and flaws the game has, it doesn't fucking matter. Bioshock Infinite offered me an experience I will never forget. It's one of the best games I've ever played. The setting, the story, the characters, the gameplay..... it all instantly grabbed me and didn't let me go for a second. I felt a connection with Elizabeth, I loved that character, something that doesn't happen often in games. Back to the Future is my favorite movie, there's many videos out there explaining the things that don't make any sense with the story, explaining the flaws. I couldn't give 2 fucks about that. I adore that movie. So fuck anybody that attacks people for loving something. I love this game.
I would love this game if it was some kind of adventure, point-and-click or Myst-like, game about puzzles, talking to people, exploring and looking at things, not a shooting game. Elizabeth is an awesome and interesting character, maybe writen on purpose to be like that (she is kinda Disney princess, I agree on that) but it just works and I can live with that. But gameplay is what breaks it for me, it is average shooter with simplistic combat and compared to previous Bioshock or even System Shock games, not that interesting enemies, I am more RTS/CRPG/JRPG guy, so FPS must be really good to hold my interest and I finished Bioshock Infinite just because of Elizabeth's story (with ending that I don't like at all), not because I liked gameplay like in Bioshock 1 or mainly 2. Give me Shadow Warrior Classic or Doom 2 or Quake 2/4 anyday before this.
so... we can tell you all of the flaws, actual flaws, as close to objective criticism as possible, but you still love the game, GUESS WHAT THATS FINE MY NIGGA, liking or disliking something has NOTHING to do with the actual quality of the product, regardless of the unique experience it gave you, you can't say that the experience won't get hurt in the process when it clearly has for some people, just not for you, (using you own words) "it doesn't fucking matter" if you think it's the second coming of jesus christ, it's still gonna be a GOOD (not amazing) GAME with some notable issues and areas where it lacks in development. my point being: I feel it's important for us to make the distinction between what we like and what we can call good, so that we can create and/or maintain some sort of standards, or at least to keep pushing the industry forward, bcs I kinda feel that this game pushed it sideways ;( P.S.: i absolutely loved the game too, played it twice, liked it even more the second time, but just like mr Gmanlives, I have to call it a guilty pleasure because of the obvious shortcomings anyways your comment is 2 years old but I felt compelled to respond, much love, cheers
Or, I guess, shoot him in the head. Loot his corpse automatically hoovering up food, salt and money without thinking or caring. Yeah, this gameplay ain't that great.
HideNZeke Actually they kinda do. Devil's Kiss functions in almost every way like a molotov cocktail. I think a lot of games that use molotov cocktails had the devil's kiss animation pasted by mods in and it worked. So many of these powers that vigours granted, they are seen elsewhere. Look if you are referring to the lootable objects thing, there's a subtly to this, the subtle factor is how it doesn't matter what you find... you hoover it up. Just click and hoover. There's almost nothing special. You are in this wonderful world of fabulous architecture yet where does the game's design draw the player's attention? To the dead bodies and trash cans. Why the fuck are trash-cans searchable? There should never be anything of value in a trash can. Finding items isn't special, you need huge amounts of money to get anything done yet you accumulate wealth at a drip-drip rate. Instead of a few big paydays in important places it's just a constant grind. To me the sound that defines Bioshock Infinite is that "munch munch much, ching ching ching and glug glug glub bwoom" of food, money and salts. Yes, there were safes, which were a lot of effort for... only about as much as you get from hoovering through two rooms. Why couldn't these safes be the ENTIRE payday? How about you find a weapon upgrade IN one of those safes! And fucking randomised passive upgrades. What. The. Fuck. Most of the upgrades stink but some are excellent. YET IT IS COMPLETELY RANDOM WHAT YOU GET! Oh you might get the clothing that causes shocking bursts with overkill, or you may NEVER get it. This isn't putting the game under a microscope, I'm not analysing the clipping in reload animations. I'm actually giving a fuck about fundamentally how the game works.
Raymond The Crow It wasn't a particularly good feature there, but at least there wasn't so much reason to draw player's attention up and away. The simplification of the system Bioshock had only makes the less than perfect scavenging system tip into truly counter productive. Bioshock infinite could be improved so much by a few simple mods: -No searchable trash cans, boxes, or other mundane items. -Auto-pick up of ammo from bodies -All wealth concentrated in safes and locked rooms -Lockpicks are found on bodies of elite type enemies. And more reason to look up. There are no snipers, very few aerial threats. Hell, Bioschock had me looking up for security cameras, enemies who could walk on the cieling, yet there was not even a single fight with a biplane. The Songbird was NEVER interacted with outside of a cutscene or heavily scripted sequence. Hell, for massive portions of the game Songbird disappeared and was forgotten. The game really feels on rails, there wasn't anything like an airship to airship chase exchanging gunfire. This doesn't make Bioshock Infinite a bad game, it makes it a mediocre game. I mean it's not better than what should be the standard to beat: Half Life 2.
Great review! I thought that Infinites story was entertaining enough to keep me playing and the relationship between Booker and Elizabeth was very interesting.
It laid down more turf than it can track. Shock 1 was so good because it was focused: the agency of the individual in a society betrayed by full-blown Objectivist capitalized individualism. Infinite juggles bouts of Americana jingoism, racism, classism & complete social upheaval in one sitting & then they throw in time travel & player agency in a Triple-A linear narrative. It throws a lot of balls in the air & I can understand it coming off pretty scattershot if one is not fully engaged with its world and story. I still love it though! And I think the mark of a good story is in a way if you can enjoy & celebrate it in spite of its facts which I can do gladly.
Bioshock Infinite is my favorite game of all time. The story, the writing, the setting, the environments, the music, the combat, the vigors, the acting, the pacing are all just out of this world phenomenal.
9:38 can it even be considered a guilty pleasure though? I love the game and feel no guilt when i say that. I mean just looking at the overwhelmingly positive reviews on steam, Positive (51,806) Negative (2,527), I know i'm not alone. The highest rated negative reviews on steam bring up valid points but none of them are any reason to really hinder my experience with the game even though it may to others (and i just disagree with a lot of the points they make). There are a lot of people that hate this game and they usually voice their opinion about it but most people that love the game stay quiet about it and don't feel the need to talk about how great the game is so the haters are the ones that stand out.
Is that the case with many, many other games? I can't always tell if a game is all around "hated" because I see people either bashing or praising it whenever they say something at all.
I can see your point. I didnt know people hated Infinite tbh, until i saw posts like Infinite is overrated. Most critically acclaimed games have that problem, and the Bioshock series has more scrutiny.
Mr. Bubbles Its different for every game but you can get the most general or common opinion on a game by looking at metacritic or steam reviews or reviews on youtube. There are always people that dislike a certain game that is considered good by most people, but some are just more out there than others depending on the game or a greater number of people that dislike it. Bioshock infinite is a special case because it is mostly universally praised by gamers and critics but there are a lot of people that dislike the game and voice their opinion on it even though they are a minority. With pretty much every game though you can get a general idea of what the game will be like before you play it. It just depends on where you look.
leonthesleepy yeh you are not really gonna find people hating on last of us for example. There are definitely some that do but they are so few and far between all the people that love the game they are not even noticed. The people that dislike infinite are much easier to find.
People call the shooting boring because the actual shooting has zero weight, animations are weak and player feedback on the bulletsponges some call enemies is almost non existent. Ohh also vigors are terribly designed as you can/should just roll with one the entire game, most of them do the exact same thing just with different animations - Stun, extra dmg that's pretty much it.
Great vid, personally a couple of things I thought were letdowns was the weapon upgrade system and those as you say hand-me-down guns. I would have loved it if the upgrades were actually fun like in Bio1 where the weapons would visually reflect their enhancements rather than just being simple stat boosts, get rid of the vox guns altogether and give us more varied and interesting upgrades imo. Still I enjoyed my time with it, solid gameplay and amazing visuals.
The problem is that it comes out of nowhere and hijacks the story halfway through the game, and then hijacks it again at the very end to basically render the entire journey pointless. There's a good and a bad way of doing such a story, Bioshock Infinite feels like it wasn't originally supposed to be what it ended up being, and that much of the original story was altered to accommodate the twist ending during the games development cycle. In fact, I'd put money on that being the case...
Gggmanlives, i respect your opinion, but let me not agree on the competent shooting part. If anything, Bioshock Infinite is a game where the shooting feels like a complete after thought. Ken Levine wanted to tell a story. The shooting was there just for the mass appeal, a triple AAA title and you don't shoot at things?? Impossible! Many have expressed their opinion about Infinite having the art and design of a game they could consider showing it to people previously not interesting in games at all. And then the the borring and shooting part starts ruining everything. The limited slots weapons system combined with weapon upgrading is a terrible, terrible idea. On one side it forces you to marry a weapon, on another it puts you into situations to throw out your whatever upgraded gun you've got and pick-up some unupgraded gun just because the situation calls for that. I don't understand what gameplay wise the deves tried to achieve with this. It's an artificial limitation. And the regenerating health system... Halo all over again.. Vigors. Sandard collection of spells here: stun, summon, mind control. Jeez, this is 2013, we've seen stuff like this for over a decade. Charge spell? No innovation either, (see Mass Effect 2, Team Fortress 2 demoman ability). Combining spells with guns, we've seen that before Infinite and many games have done a much better job at actually making the gameplay FUN. In terms of gameplay Infinite cannot compete even with conteporary games like Dishonored. Now that game had some FUN abilities. For me, Infinite was a game that tried to do too many things at once and failed at all of them except for the art direction. You've recently played Doom. Look at how competent and confident this game is at what it does. No bullshit. No meaningless exposition, thrilling gameplay.
I respectfully disagree, I think Bioshock Infinite's combat was fun, exciting and just a blast. The rails alone were unique and the vigor combinations were nice to use too. I enjoy games that put a spin on standard shooting, and Infinite went a touch beyond other the titles. Sure it could have gone further, and yes the weapon upgrade system was nonsense, but I don't think calling the combat bad, is a valid criticism. I did play Bioshock, and yes the combat was far more complex there, but that was basically an immersive sim, Infinite removed everything that would have slowed down combat and delivered a different experience. Perhaps that is what you are looking for, an immersive with a lot of choices sim and not a fun shooter with little strategy,
What an amazing game. I remember I was introduced to it while playing the demo which was on Hitman Blood Money disc. Amazing game which made a forecast of what was yet to come from Rocksteady Studios.
***** it would of made a interesting series but due to it being drowned out by everything else on the PS2 it never had any sequels as a result. But then again with some games dieing due to there terrible sequels it might be better this way.
OMG I tried remembering what that game was called over the years, that's a good ass game! It was such a long time ago when I played it. wish it was on Steam so I could play it again :/
i think on GoG you can put in suggestions on what game they could put up on the website so i would guess try there if you want it on the PC. Other than that if you have a PS3 that can still run PS2 games then i guess just try and find a copy but that might be quite hard.
The two weapon limit was the trend at the time, Call of Duty and Halo made that almost mandatory for shooters. I am sure 2K Games (or whoever the hell told Irrational what to do) told Ken Levine and his crew that they needed to make it a two weapon limit, Because they were trying to attract the most players possible. I remember seeing lots of interviews where Levine said that certain things had to be changed, because of Publishers saying "the game wouldn't sell as well if XY or Z was not changed." I could be misremembering this, and Irrational may have been completely free to do whatever they wanted, but I think I'm correct. If I ever make my own video on the topic I will be sure to research it thoroughly.
Regardless it was a really stupid idea. I remember I enjoyed the full-auto machine gun. So I spent money on it. Then I never saw the damn thing. So I became very hesitant to upgrade guns. Those are two mechanics that are at odds with each other
there is always an "Underwater Rock" in every review on Bioshock Infinite, that "Underwater Rock" is a video called Bioshock Infinite Critique By Matthewmatosis. now, that video came 3 years ago and alot of people plagiarised that idea from him, so im always very nervous watching review on Bioshock infinite, but i think Gggmanlives knows that as well so he pionts that out, i like it, thats good.
I went to watch that Matthewmatosis video, out of curiosity. Because saying that this game is the worst goes beyond me. That guy misses the point so much that he compares Bioshock Infinite with Abe's Odyssey ... wtf And I don't want to be rude but by the look of his gameplay capture, I can tell the guy is a noob. Many of the complaints he has confirm this. That's good you brought up the Matthewmatosis review. It helps understand how NOT to take Bioshock Infinite, if you wanna enjoy it for what it is.
Great review. I did not expect a nuanced, balanced perspective from this game since everybody seems to review this game in extremes. Don't agree with everything you said because I kinda really enjoy the story, but you nailed it on the gameplay front.
It goes a bit off the rails with some of the multiple realities stuff. There's a point where Lady Comstock comes to "life" as a ghost who can fly around resurrecting other people, except it's not really Lady Comstock, it's a mixture of Lady Comstock and Elizabeth's feelings towards Lady Comstock. Mind you, this happens shortly after Booker dies and comes back through a tear to an alternate reality in which he wasn't killed, so why Lady Comstock gets cool ghost powers and Booker doesn't is a bit of a mystery. And like pretty much every other mystery in the game, it pretty much boils down to the fact that travelling through different realities has never happened in real life, so when Ken Levine allows people in his video game to travel through different realities, he can make the rules for doing so as ridiculous and arbitrary as he wants. I wanted to be more invested in what was going on, but it's hard to care about my hero's quest when I have the knowledge that at any point anyone can do anything for any reason and completely nullify my quest and the reason I was on it. All of that said, the story is still pretty good in my opinion. It's presented very well, it has a lot of cool twists, and the main characters are very compelling. Plus, I have to admire how ambitious it is. It's a very complicated story with countless mysteries and moving parts, and it basically ties everything together in a way that makes sense (at least insofar as it obeys its own ridiculous, arbitrary ruleset). When compared to the stories told by most other first-person shooters, BioShock Infinite's story definitely sets itself apart... It's just pretentious and convoluted as hell.
I have to somewhat disagree with the review, i really miss the hacking and exploring of the first 2 bioshocks. I also feel like they removed a lot of the RPG elements, sure you have those clothes that give you stat boosts but you can only wear 3 items or so, while in bioshock 1 and even more so 2 you had a shitton of tonics of wich you can equip multiples of. Bioshock Infinite is really only good when it comes to athmosphere and its world including art direction and graphics.
I can never work out why I loved the game's story as much as I did - I guess I didn't see the twists coming but I genuinely still feel it's the best story I've played. Maybe it's just the way it made me feel at the time as a lot of people seem to disagree!
I didn't think it was bad but it just seemed meh. I really didn't like the g fact that they limited your weapons and plasmids to two a piece. And the use of the shield just instantly reminded me of Halo and other more casual-focused FPS.
Competency of shooting mechanics in the game is pretty questionable. That burst rifle you get in the revolution timeline is a crime against God. But boy is Elizabeth fine.
If someone could link one of those 40 minute videos that tears apart Bioshock Infinite's story, that would be great, I love those types of videos. But even then, I have a feeling that most points of contention in the story are plot holes and/or logical inconsistencies, and that these sort of issues are more secondary to the main focus which is the world building and character development, which I feel Bioshock Infinite does really well.
I agree entirely. Despite being all over the place, the game managed to get its story together by the end and had a decent conclusion. However the world you explored was probably more interesting for me than the narrative concerning Elisabeth.
I don't understand why they didn't include a map to give players a sense of direction, considering there's a decent amount of optional exploration, the big open ended environements are really beautiful but i ultimately felt disappointed because 80% of the reason why it was done this way, is to accomodate for the rails and combat.
You can't have played it on Hard. On Normal it just becane too easy, there was no challenge. You weren't a PI, you were RoboCop with psychic powers. On the flipside, on Hard every enemy turned into a complete bullet sponge with perfect hitscan aim. And you barely had any ammo. So the game turned into a cover shooter where all you did was pop out of cover to fire off a few shits while you yourself instantly get hit in the face, duck back behind cover and recharge the shield, rinse and repeat. And the boss fights with the big daddy dudes sere just frustrating to no end. This is what a lot of people had issues with. The game was either way too easy, or frustratingly unfair.
I played on hard and I quit the game in unbearable frustration after 6 hours of play, and then I proceeded to wonder what the fuck is everyone talking about and how could they think this piece of shit is a good game. Turns out I should've played it on normal maybe? Hard was really really frustrating you hit the nail on the head with this insight.
Neutrino Increasing What are you, a cliché-spewing machine? Hard is hard. Challenging is challenging. Unfair is neither. If it's unfair, it's unfair. Popping your head up to get instantly shot by a hitscan enemy that magically knows exactly where you are, feels unfair. And then enemies take hundreds of bullets before they go down, which doesn't require skill or planning. It just requres Autism-level amounts of patience. And it completely negates most the game's features like the Vigors. At that point, yeah maybe the game is "hard" in the same way that trying to flip over a steam train with your bare hands is hard. But it's neither fun or rewarding or challenging. It's just tedious, slow, boring and frustrating.
MrJenssen So true man, best word for the game on hard is tedious. Enemy breaks your shield in about a millisecond, go behind cover, wait for your shield to recharge, pop out and maybe kill one dude while your shield depletes again, repeat ad nauseum.
***** Yes I think maybe playing the game on Normal would be better for you (and I should have done that too when I completed the game). There's not much challenge to it, but at least you get some cool action sequences as long as you intentionally vary things up with the weapons and vigors.
This was the first game in the series for me, and when I first played it, I counted it one of the best games I'd ever touched. The ending confused the hell out of me, but after looking up a plot explanation on RU-vid and going back for a second playthrough, I didn't feel like it was TOO confusing. The visuals and shooting mechanics are exactly as described in this video (i.e. very very good). Overall, I'd still give this game a 9/10
Love seeing these videos in my sub box, you always knock them out of the park and offer your own unique perspective on the games you review. Keep it up man, absolutely dig the content you make and congrats on over 50,000 subs!
They are in a FLOATING CITY, but the plot for the first half of the game is "fuck this city, I want to go to Paris!" why? What pretentious shite is this? Wrapping the gameplay around this is amazingly tedious story is an amazing downer. And the game came out a decade after Half Life 2, but fails to come close to the quality of pacing.
Treblaine becuase the city authority are really evil and a lot of evil things go on in the city like executions at carnivals like the one booker takes part in. That's why they want to leave. Also, booker was tasked with bringing Elizabeth back alive so he's chasing her and she wants to leave because she has been trapped in a tower all her life.
This game wasn't the worst game I've ever played, it was just average to me. There was just something about it that was not settling right with me. I can't quite put my finger on what it could be. The game definitely feels pretentious though.
I liked all of them. Infinite was a whole different experience but I liked the crazy environments. I have to admit I kinda ignored the storyline for the most part, so I probably enjoyed it more than others because I didn't really care about the story
2K Games: Hmm you know what people wanted more out of Bioshock? Linear shooting and level design with little to no replayabilty! Who cares that its impossible to die or fail, its not like we could go bankrupt!
Yeah, and dont forget to change the old school arsenal of guns and powers for the call of duty, 2 weapon limit and regenarating health, that would blow them away!
funnט enough, they actually tried to appeal to the casual audience, they even did the "guy with a gun" cover art to appeal to the mass audience, which is a shame.
Pff, for me it was a boring 2deep4me. The only thing i liked was the inital sequence, ala Half-Life, but when the shooting started eveything went downhill
I was actually enjoying the game up until you go through the first alternate dimension, then the game decided give you a ton of weapons you wouldnt use, and the story took a nose dive.
The whole game seemed to revolve solely around the twist, which was as paper thin as it was contrived and stupid. You're either a person who sees no faults in time travel/dimensional stories or you're someone who sees through all the bullshit and can't not say 'wtf was that?!'
System Shock 1: made a mattress System Shock 2: made a whole bed Bioshock 1: slept in the bed Bioshock 2: shit in the bed Bioshock Infinite: pissed in the bed
One of my favorite things about Bioshock was the open levels you could wander around and explore, so my biggest issue with Infinite is the way it just shuffles you from arena to arena. I'm not saying you're wrong, I just want you to see where the people who complain about the level design are coming from.
I love this game, and I agree with you in most areas. I actually like the story, but it IS confusing, and it's clearly missing some bits here and there... But MAN, it's a fucking fun game! The shooting is sooooo satisfying that I don't even mind the two weapon limit!
Really? Cause I didn't like Fallout 4 at all but quite liked Infinite. At least Infinite stuck to the series' roots. Like creative world design, environmental storytelling and exploration. Sure the shooting isn't exactly the same but that's the part of Shock games I care the least about and It was pretty decent fun in Infinite.
fallout 4 is still fun as hell, and is still loyal to the post apocalypse setting and open-world mechanics. so no, you can't compare it to infinite shitshock the only real comparison is dumbing down the story
A few months after it's release. Because it was so praised people starting shitting on it. Some bring up valid points but most are just sheep that hate the game because another person said so.
Look anywhere outside of a major outlet. Errant Signal, Matthew Matosis, Superbunnyhop, and every single youtube comment all decided in unison that Bioshock Infinite is the worst game ever created and anybody who liked it only plays CoD and Battlefield. Most people are sheep who have been blindly regurgitating the same points from MM's video this whole time.
***** All i got from that video was sheep in the comments calling the game trash after someone pointed out flaws that barely anyone has thought of or mentioned beforehand. The critiques in the video were very minuscule to the overall game that it doesn't effect the experience until you completely analyse it after to find it's flaws which you can do with anything. 'I just watched everything wrong with dark knight wow the movie is not as good as i thought it was after this person pointed out all these flaws that i didn't know about its overrated now' I had no problems with that video it was one guys opinion but all the people in the comments treating it as fact and acting like they knew those flaws when in reality they didn't.
I only started playing games again a year ago, after a decade long break for school and work, and Bioshock Infinite was one of the first games I played after coming back. I was floored by it. Now understandably I haven't really played anything else for like TEN YEARS so I was completely out of the loop, but this game will always hold a special place to me because I was very, very impressed and haven't seen anything like it for a long time at that point. I still think I'd really enjoy it if I went back to it.
iron mask of hell Or they left answers to be resolved in the DLC. Y'know? So you'd want to buy them and play them and find out what was going on and how this universe tied into the whole universe.
Johnny Organ And that's what i hate about today's DLC's because you have to buy them just so the story makes sense. It's a poor decision and you should not have to buy DLC to continue a story. It's basically pulling an EA.
+iron mask of hell you dont actually need the DLC to explain the story. all of it was in the base game. when I saw the ending all those bits in the voxophone and the "choices" made sense.
In my opinion people vastly overrate stories in games, especially in more action-oriented genres where the story is often the same no matter what. I mean how many times can you really enjoy the same scripted segments over and over?
I love this game, one of my goat. I just started a new playthrough today. The story isn't perfect but they tried to tie up loose ends and bring the bioshock story, as a whole, to a sorta satisfying end with burial at sea. End the initial moment, while you're getting the big picture, is great.
The binary choices not making any meaningful difference is part of the story and theming. The level design is the same way: often two choices of path, but always leading to the same place. Kinda reminds you of Booker and Comstock's duality, doesn't it? I swear, the number of people who diss this story without even fully understanding it is amazing.
My problems with the game are the lack of evolution and how much the game tries to lie to you that it has a companion AI. Third game in the series and I did not see ONE puzzle - combat, walking, combat, walking. And this game just screams puzzles - it has so many magic abilities and a physics engine, yet not a single puzzle to let you rest from the combat. I did not see anything new in the basic combat mechanics either, and I don't count the battle field manipulating ability. Third game in the series - I was expecting something more, like more options to approach areas. And don't tel me "The girl is a good AI!", because that is a complete lie. Have you played Half Life 2? That is actual companion AI, which fights for you, despite how basic it is. Here, you get extra ammo/mana/health only when you are running low on them. Tears are only activated when you want to, making this ability your personal ability. Elizabeth is nothing more than an object in the world. And this is a wasted opportunity for a unique AI. An AI, which does more than shoot for you, but decides independently from you when to manipulate the battle field and when to spawn a machine to fight for you. The game is good, despite my disappointments, but I think we can all agree how much more the game could have been. I am sure we can all agree how the further a game franchise goes, the more the gameplay is expected to evolve. And that is what Bioshock Infinite needed.
Bioshock was indeed much much more complex and I feel like a lot of people went into Infinite wanting that experience, but Infinite is far more fast paced and removed the majority of immersive elements. In a sense it dumbed down the formula, but it also added other elements that simply encouraged a different, faster playstyle and turned the game into a run and gun shooter instead of an rpg with progression elements. I personally really liked this change, and although I still prefer the original, Infinite jumps into something new. I bet if it had the same immersive elements people would complain that it's too similar....
Gman I give you much respect for trying to remain as objective as possible in this review, not letting all of the RU-vid reviews and scores (both negative trolls and positive shills), interfere with your review. You were able to separate what's good about the game objectively (the combat and world design), from what people were ranting about the story online, because of the reasons you mentioned. Good job 👍
A game where there is a more interesting but less efficient way to play is a textbook example of a gimmick. If spamming a Vigor and shooting is far more effective than chaining powers together, it's not playing the game wrong, it's bad design. Good design means the best way to play is also the most fun by the design naturally encouraging you to play that way.
Completely agree. There's a huge difference between "This story is an illogical piece of shit." And "I don't get it, so I think it's bad because it makes me feel dumb."
I have never played a Bioshock game but I just picked up Infinite on the PS Store for $13 in 2024. About to jump on and see what I've been missing out on all these years! Looks interesting.
How did Bioshock 2 feel more like a Bioshock game? It had no atmosphere and a dull story with lazy-ass sound design. Sure the actual shooting is probably the best of the series but playing a Bioshock game for the shooting is like watching The Raid for the story. I mean sure, it's there but it's not what the game is focusing on.
***** Totally disagree. It had a better story than Infinate and it was pretty much like Bio 1 with a few different mechanics. Bio Infinate was just a normal FPS and lost the heart that made it unique.
Jamie Wallace I just don't get that. Delta is a blank slate and they never do anything interesting with him and Lamb is, no exaggeration one of the worst villains in any game out there, in my opinion of course. I did like some of the episodic sections of the game like sirens alley and Fontaine futuristics. But the main story of the game was just incredibly boring. Minerva's Den was the best thing to come out of Bioshock 2. Now that actually felt like a Bioshock story.
Are you for real? Playing an FPS game for the history? And playing a bioshock game only for it at that? The plot tries a lot in giving you reasons to use and integrate the different gameplay mechanics that you are going to put into practice through the game. The plot isnt there only to tell you a history, is there to introduce you to the gameplay at all times. It is not entirely focused on history, its a mixed bag thats there to give you a complete experience. I can also say that BIO2 doesnt do this that much since it expects that you already played the previous game for the most part. When people say that they hated Bioshock infinite is mostly because the plot was all over the place and really didnt introduce (or even cared) about the gameplay. Take for example the guns you encounter through BIO 1 and 2, they are all unique in the way you get them, often giving you an enviromental setting that showed you its applications. Infinite threw that away(exept for the sky hook somewhat), on BS infinite weapons where just there. Infinite only cared about vigors,that werent introduced as clearly as plasmids i might add. Vigors really felt like something that had to be there because the previous games had them. TL;DR: Bioshock 1/2 tried to introduce gameplay elements through the history and setting. Bioshock prior to infinites release was always a complete experience that didnt neglect neither plot nor gameplay, making it a series where both elements were pretty important and neither could go without the other.
That's a fair argument, but I find Bioshock Infinate is a Bioshock game in name only. It didn't feel like a Bioshock game and two weapons at a time ala Duke Nukem Forever!? I am sorry, I did enjoy it but it was a let down for me.
The thing about your choices being ultimately meaningless in the game is actually a plot point. The twins allude to that from the beginning with their experiments (coin toss, etc.). I'm a sucker for time travel and multi-dimension stories, so I liked it a lot.
@@SadTown99 Don't know much about SOMA other than it's a Horror game, if I'm not mistaken. Tell me just, is it one of those "hide and run" Horror games or can you fight back? Because I hate games where I can not defend myself.
@@KommandeurMumm I wouldn’t say it’s a horror game unfortunately, that’s my favorite genre. I’d call it “ Exploration & Stealth “ with an eerie aesthetic and suspense. There are no weapons to defend yourself, but it’s not a typical run & hide for hours game either… You will still have to from time to time but it’s so much deeper than that. If you truly like time travel & multi dimensional mind bending concepts I promise SOMA will hook you in quickly, a master crafted story indeed.
True, but was that done intentionally to avoid the work of different endings, and allowing choice? debatable, but choice does make for a more interesting game regardless of the philosophical question itself. The end of the day its about making a fun game.
it's not the shooting people were complaining about, it was the idiotic choice to implement a two weapon system, alongside shitty, boring, overpriced upgrades that don't change the look of your weapon, a low ammo count, awful AI, bullet sponge enemies and then arbitrarily doubling the amount of weapons later in the story, making your upgraded weapons rarer and useless, these issues just made it a chore to play imo. I know the AI wasn't any better in BS1 or 2, but they don't have an excuse for not improving it. The story is a whole different mess, but it's not the shooting itself that was the problem.
Gggmanlives, since you did Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare and Black Ops III, can you do the other two Modern Warfare and Black Ops games? Very good review, hope to see more in the future, keep it up!
I thought that it was one of 2013's top games. I loved the story, symbolism and allegory. It's hard to follow the story but it does make sense in the end. Gameplay too was great I thought. Although the reason for the vigors existing isn't explained or contextualised like the plasmids.
The entire thing falls apart the moment you consider how such a society would function for more than two minutes. These places would be dead after ten days.
@@123doomdoom Well, yes. The comment more considered the "realistic" point; if we do suspend our disbeliefs, they work. However, I do like the idea of arriving when the society is JUST about to fall apart due to shortages, bullets are more plentiful than food and the entire society is on the edges.
@@lovaszaron3138 i see your point, but if you turned up and there was no action or drama in a game it wouldnt be a very exciting game. If the society was at its peak and a utopia and you strolled through, found elizineth and left the game would suck.
Gggmanlives Isn't it? I honestly enjoy your reviews, but you do have a habit of raising other peoples reviews, saying "These douchebags honestly believe THIS" and then not going into too much detail about why they're reviews are objectively incorrect. It was a bit weird here, were the reviews you mentioned were anonymous, so we had no idea of getting a reference for what you were talking about. Again, I enjoy your content, but I would appreciate it if you discussed more on why you disagree with contemporary reviews.
***** I didn't bring up anyone's reviews, mate. What are you talking about? I said I read an article where someone called it worst game they'd played in recent years. That's not a review though.
I don't like this game. the shooting lack necessary weight and enemies are very bullet sponge. they did this on purpose to force you use the magic system, but it becomes repetitive fast.
When the shooting doesn't feel like shooting, then yeah, the shooting is definitely boring. Which is a big issue for a first-person shooter. Deal with it.
The point is not to get you "rekt", but dismissing any critics about the shooting mechanics isn't very productive and won't make them disappear. If you compare them to any other solid FPS, maybe you can at least try to understand why so many people feel they're lacking something.
I wrote that dismissing any critics about the shooting wasn't productive. I didn't say the shooting wasn't productive. Anyway, what I mean is that shooting in bioshock games doesn't feel like shooting. The "weapon feel" reminds of water pistols. They don't seem to be able to coin it properly.
