Could someone explain BioShock Infinite to me?

[Bluuz]

This is by no means a hate thread but I want to understand what the big deal around the game is.

I first heard about the game around the time it came out and after seeing numerous glamour pics of Columbia and upon a friend's recommendation (and considering my Never Settle Coupon), I decided to give the game a try.

The game was good: had pretty visuals, a nice atmosphere, and I liked the tease with the anti organized religion message.

But nothing really stood out as great, and aside from the one jump scare, there was nothing really memorable about the game. 

The shooting and enemies were repetitive, and the vigors seemed to be either "near useless" or "easy mode: on." The story was meh: I've seen or read about it before. Strangely enough, the thing that irritated me the most was how you could never run out of ammunition, Elizabeth would simply throw you a clip when you needed it. 

 

So I finished the game, read up on the lore and interpretations of the ending and moved on. Imagine my bewilderment when I see "Game of the Year" nominations for a single person shooter. It also didn't help that the game I played immediately after was Dark Souls, a game that kept me up at night and had me day dreaming on what would happen next.  Did I miss something in BS:Infinite or am I just so out of touch with what everyone else enjoys? 

[Morpheus]

Yeah I'm playing it right now too it's eh... I expected more from a "game of the year" type game

[BlackOutCrisis]

I had a blast in Inifnite (granted I played at the hardest difficulty I could without beating it first), there was also alot of little things that I enjoyed like Elizabeth's AI is one of the best in any game to date. Also the writing just kind of sucked me into the game. It didn't do anything revolutionary in terms of gameplay but it didn't do anything horribly wrong. Don't get me wrong here, I'm not a fanboy I'm just too lazy to go into the little bad things about it lol.

[nathanhd123]

I also think Elizabeth is a great character, and the fact she actually helps you makes it so much better than games where you are escorting a person who is constantly getting in the way and is as much use as a sack of potatoes.

[Bluuz]

I also think Elizabeth is a great character, and the fact she actually helps you makes it so much better than games where you are escorting a person who is constantly getting in the way and is as much use as a sack of potatoes.

Helpful npcs have been around forever, even those that follow you around for the majority of your journey.

And as far as Elizabeth goes, there are numerous instances of well written characters (take KoToR, for example) in the rpg genre, often multiple instances in a single game. What makes her so special?

[pewpewmerica]

I watched a lets play of it, and what makes it diffrent is the weird and diffrent setting and the themes in the story. (Any of course the mindfuck ending). Also, Elizabeth's AI is incredible. Oh yeah, and the combat system is pretty fun.

[Legend932]

Yeah exactly! Bioshock Infinite is a good game, that's about it. (Most hyped, overrated game of 2013 thus far?)

I've never seen people praise a game and fight the opinions of others like bioshock infinite, its no different than the blind following Valve seems to get, its sickening really, people don't form their own opinions anymore, they go on the internet and follow the latest trend. /sigh

 

For more Bioshock Infinite criticism (which seems to be rare on the internet and whoever criticizes the game seems to get a lot of shit for it)

I recommend you watch Errant Signal, by Campster, while I do not agree with everything he says, I still think those are valid points.

[Ineko]

It's a really good game story wise, the game-play was a bit meh. But yea, the story was pretty amazing. And the new DLC Buried at Sea looks pretty fucking awesome.

 

Oh Errant Signal, I hate that guy so much. I criticized the game myself and really thought the hype was over the top, but that guy just loves shitting on every new game that comes out, he's actually quite infuriating. Even the games I strongly dislike, some of the stuff he says makes me face-palm. 0/10 would not recommend, Errant Signal that is, not Bioshock.

[Hazy125]

I liked it for the 20 minutes I played. I might get around to finishing it, but I seem to buy games. Play them for around 20 minutes, then just move on to the next. As I understand though, Elizabeth gets you killed a fair bit

[Bluuz]

^Quite the opposite, actually. She throws you a health (or ammo) pack, and you perform an animation where you are invincible, whenever you get low. Convenient, but the game loses any sense of challenge. 

[KneesWeak]

i got it with never settle, played 6 hours and stopped. it was pretty unenjoyable, i didnt get it either.

[carolkarine]

Bioshock infinite is not meant to be played as a shooter. It is meant to be played as an experience, where you are part of the story. Bioshock infinite's crowning jewel is it's narrative, which alone stood out to me as the best I've seen in a game EVER. It was a more personal and raw emotional rollercoaster than I had ever seen before. Bioshock infinite had decent gameplay. I prefer other shooters when it comes to mechanics and the like, but it was decent. Bioshock infinite stands head and shoulders above even the most glorified games of all time - stuff such as Half-Life 2 and System Shock 2 - for it's story alone.

 

I believe you didn't like it because you went into it wanting for an amazing gameplay experience, when it is the story that you should be paying attention to. Story is all that mattered going into Bioshock Infinite, gameplay was just an exposition tool - which in single player games, is exactly what it should be. most new titles use gameplay as a way to segway between set-pieces, as opposed to integrate plot into the experience. 

 

I quote you below so you get a notification.

 

This is by no means a hate thread but I want to understand what the big deal around the game is.

 

[Hazy125]

^Quite the opposite, actually. She throws you a health (or ammo) pack, and you perform an animation where you are invincible, whenever you get low.Convenient, but the game loses any

sense of challenge.

No, I mean the time it takes her to throw the stuff, the animation, gets you killed... But like I said, I've only played 20 minutes and haven't even gotten up to rescuing Elizabeth

[Bluuz]

I believe you didn't like it because you went into it wanting for an amazing gameplay experience,

Actually yes, I was. Audiences expect a moving soundtrack and impressive visuals from a highly rated movie. Likewise, I expect great...you guessed it, gameplay, from a triple A title. 

 

 

the story that you should be paying attention to. Story is all that mattered going into Bioshock Infinite, gameplay was just an exposition tool - which in single player games, is exactly what it should be. 

Since when? If story was all that mattered, then nobody would still be playing shooters, or for that matter, strategy or puzzles - single player games with no story.

 

 most new titles use gameplay as a way to segway between set-pieces, as opposed to integrate plot into the experience. 

You seem confused. The gameplay is the experience, it's the whole reason why we choose to partake in it rather than just reading "Bioshock, the novel". But don't take my word for it, there's a great article by Thomas Grip of Frictional Games (the guys who made Amnesia) addressing this very topic. http://frictionalgames.blogspot.se/2013/07/thoughts-on-last-of-us.html

[carolkarine]

Actually yes, I was. Audiences expect a moving soundtrack and impressive visuals from a highly rated movie. Likewise, I expect great...you guessed it, gameplay, from a triple A title. 

 

 

Since when? If story was all that mattered, then nobody would still be playing shooters, or for that matter, strategy or puzzles - single player games with no story.

 

You seem confused. The gameplay is the experience, it's the whole reason why we choose to partake in it rather than just reading "Bioshock, the novel". But don't take my word for it, there's a great article by Thomas Grip of Frictional Games (the guys who made Amnesia) addressing this very topic. http://frictionalgames.blogspot.se/2013/07/thoughts-on-last-of-us.html

 

you play call of duty don't you?

 

single player games are supposed to be an immersive interactive narrative. open world single player games are supposed to be narratives you write to a large extent. I love BF3 for it's multiplayer (can't say the same for CoD) but the generic modern shooter (CoD, BF, MoH) all have shitty campaigns. (IMO)

[OozyGorilla]

There's really nothing to "get." It's a game a lot of people love that you don't. Nothing wrong with that. If you didn't like it, you didn't like it.