http://www.metacritic.com/browse/games/score/metascore/all/pc?view=condensed&sort=desc

Right up there with Out of the Park Baseball 2007.

Im only a couple of hours in but so far Im not overly impressed with the game. The opening was pretty fantastic. Loved the temple area. After that Ive really been less impressed. They kinda toss tonics at you making them feel a little cheap. They have felt kinda useless for the most part as well. I really dont care for the enemies either. I miss the crazy deformed splicers. Troops with guns are boring. I assume there must be a big shift in the tone, and surroundings of the game, so hope it gets a lot darker.

Playing on PC and it's fantastic. I'm just loving everything about.

Lol Metacritic.

Haven't got a chance to play it so I will not vouch for the quality at all. :P

Considering Bioshock got about the same and is pretty overrated (still a fine game but nothing particularly staggering, one good twist) I don't really find this all that surprising. Aside from Quake and WoW almost the entire top half of that page is overrated at least a little.

Agreed. Infinite is at 96, and BioShock has a 96. And I wouldn't place BioShock in my top 25 of the last 7 years.

@brodehouse: Eh, hasn't been a great 7 years. Certainly not in the top 25 all time though. That said I am still very interested in playing or at least watching someone play Infinite just for the storyline. It's pretty early for reviews yet so chances are it drops to 94ish.

I wouldn't be surprised if Defiance turns out to be a better game than Bioshock Infinite yet winds up with a 70 average review score from the press due to the rough edges.

It hasn't even been a fucking day.

the combat sorta still annoys me , skylines are amazing fun but the shooting still feels like same crappy bishock shooting , no kick to the weapons , .. those vox repeaters and such are fucking useless, cant we get another game that does fps guns like bulletstorm did it ? .. anyway thats my only major qualm ... that and elizabeth should really hold onto all of those coins and just give them to me all at once , i wish i could throw it back to her liek ... nope dont need it

plus i guess its my fault for picking normal but shit is too easy and i feel im hitting a stride of gameplay that makes me burn thru those encounters even faster now :/ o well

If people need more evidence that scores are dubious then here you go.

Bioshock Infinite is the reason why I play video games. Then again, I was also an uncanny adorer of the first game.

keep playing.

As a massive fan of the first BioShock, I've got to say I'm fucking lovin' Infinite.

Yeah it looks BEAUTIFUL on PC. About 3-4 hours in. I walked so slow through the whole beginning and looked at everything (the pace has hardly picked up). The setting and atmosphere is just remarkable.

In fairness to Jeff he merely gave the original Bioshock a 90 and summarized it as follows: "If you're the kind of player who just wants yet another action-packed shooter, BioShock probably isn't for you. Its weak link is its unsatisfying no-skill-required combat, which might aim this one just over the head of the average Halo fan. But if you want to get a little fancy, there's a lot of fun to be had with some of the game's more indirect fighting methods. It builds an amazing atmosphere by using terrific graphics and sound to set a creepy mood. But BioShock's real strengths are as a compelling work of interactive fiction, and as a unique ride through a warped world with some great payoff built into its mysterious plot. If that description has you even the least bit interested, you won't be disappointed one bit."

Which is reasonably accurate; bad/mediocre combat, good atmosphere and storyline. From watching the QL I see it's not that much different; maybe feels a little better and you kill more people but as always the more people you kill the less possible it is to take a storyline seriously (not really that many enemies in the original Bioshock) unless they blend that into the plot somehow.

uhhh.... you kill plenty of people in Bioshock 1. This hasn't been much different and even if there is a bit more killing... who cares? It's a video game. I take the stories seriously and can get past this. It's only bad in a few games I can think of.

I'm about 4-5 hours into Infinite and the combat is just better. It's more dynamic, the shooting has a more powerful feel behind it, the environments are more open, the melee is actually good, the skyline stuff is interesting, and the powers have been better so far than anything in Bioshock.

Just finished the game. Everything I was hoping for and more. It's going to be difficult to top this for my personal game of the year.

@artisanbreads: Well 70-100 people is different from 500+ people; you're a mass murderer sure but not quite a genocidal superbeing of insanity; it is feasible that a crazy person could kill 100 people over the course of their day, but 500, that's a stretch. That's like 20 people an hour!

@sterbacblu: Well if you beat it in a day wouldn't "Game of the Day" be more appropriate?

I'm just loading it up now, but the shooting sure looked way better in the QL. It had a satisfying sound and the machine gun really seemed to have a 'kick' to it that I never had with the Tommy Gun in the original Bioshock. My fingers are crossed because I found the mediocre combat in the original Bioshock to be a hard weak link to over look. Not sure if I'm going to play with the numbers flying off the enemies Borderlands style, seems to take away some of the immersion... but man does that scratch a certain itch. Maybe for my '1999 Mode' play through...

The hype train is on overdrive with this game.

Boy, backlash starts earlier and earlier, doesn't it? I know everyone is really cynical about games now, and you aren't obligated to like the game, but can't you at least recognize that some people enjoy a game that is clearly well made?

No it isn't that I hate Bioshock Infinite but the idea anyone can compare it to Out of the Park Baseball 2007 just because both have scores pretty stupid.

@extomar: Oh, I guess I misunderstood.

I'm having a "pretty good"time so far. playing on 1999 as my first run, Handyman fight took me about 10 attempts with a shitty pistol/sniper rifle combo. Lesson learned: never drop the carbine.

Maybe I've spoiled myself reading quality fiction, but the story hasn't sunk its talons into me yet. However, I am rather curious as to the exact nature of Elizabeth's rifts, as they are playing a larger and larger role in the story.

So, I totally caved and got this even though I said I wouldn't because...well I'm an idiot. My take so far is that its pretty damn interesting. They sure take their time opening the game up which is neat. I haven't actually made much progress at all because well... I'm playing on 1999 mode and yeah....its sorta kinda ya know...tough.

Meh, its not really that great of a game to make highest rated of all time.

It doesn't deserve this because the PC port is plagued with stuttering issues.

I quite like the game itself, it's extremely well produced but the actual gameplay is pretty stale. Story isn't all that grand either.

I've played a few hours so far and don't get me wrong, its amazing, but there's crazy over hype with this game. It is by no means flawless. The game is so fucking linear, most of the time I feel like I'm being funneled one way or doing combat in a closed arena. Any side missions require literal backtracking. The combat is nothing special and the AI is piss poor. Half the time I'm charging into a room without them noticing only to have them dog pile on me a moment later. More than a few times NPCs are talking to walls as I stand on the other side of the room. I've also died only to be spawned in the middle of a dog fight or turret shooting at me. This certainly shouldn't be the highest rated of all time, but its absolutely worth playing.

@artisanbreads said:

See, now this is what I don't understand. Take the story seriously, but don't take the combat as seriously? That's the complete opposite of what I do. I've noticed that same mentality in the crew, games like Arma are not taken seriously at all. Don't get me wrong, I loved both quicklooks, but one of the most hardcore milsims out there can't hold the attention of the GB crew for more than a minute. And I'm willing to bet the upcoming Infinite Quicklook will be taken very, very seriously just like the Bioshock 2 one was. No Patrick dicking around trying to break every mechanic, no Ryan passing off snide remarks on every little grievance he has.

I can't take any video game story seriously. That's not what I play them for and the ones that really try so hard come off as laughable. Far Cry 2/3's story was just hilarious. Every character in either game had such flippant or exaggerated personalities I couldn't relate to any of them and couldn't bring myself into the World (Vaas here gets a pass for being an antagonist). For how much action there is in either game, how intense and engaging the combat is, I don't know how anyone could dwell on the story or its characters. The people that do are missing what makes both games great. If you want story, grab a book.

It's good, but not that good.

Where do I begin with this? How do you take ARMA so seriously? It's a sandbox made to be dicked around in. And the guys all liked it a lot. Vinny and Drew said they would be playing it. Because they aren't telling each other where "tangos" are on their "six" it isn't serious? What?

And you pull out two of the worst game stories to make your point when Far Cry. How about say Max Payne 2? Grim Fandango? or.... the WHOLE POINT OF THIS THREAD BIOSHOCK INFINITE. No more tired argument then "oh go pick up a book if you want a story!" So ignorant. Thank god creators don't agree and we get great video game stories. But you want them to take ARMA more seriously. You are one confusing cat.

Beyond all the other stuff you ignored, you're just not right about this. The combat might throw more people at you, but if it does it's not an amount that makes the end result any different. It's certainly not 70-100 to more than 500 in its difference.

In both games you fight a lot of people. In fact, in Infinite there are situations where you interact and walk amongst NPCs that aren't hostile, which allows for more story and a more real feeling to the setting than Bioshock 1 had, to me.

YOU'RE NOT THAT GOOD

It's not a more real feel, it's just a different setting. You didn't interact with many NPCs in the first game because Rapture was pretty much entirely devoid of people not trying to kill you.

and it certainly feels like there's more combat in Infinite to me. I haven't played BioShock in a long time though.

I guess more real wasn't the right choice... the setting is more absorbing to me and certainly more can be done with it (which is more interesting and complex). For example, you get racial and class relationships demonstrated right in front of you through scenes with NPC interactions. If you gave me the choice, I would have preferred some pockets of real people and semblance at least of sanity and order in Bioshock 1 as well.

And I think you should go back and play Bioshock 1. What else do you think you were doing? Again, I can say that maybe there is a higher body count in the end but the balance as far as time you spend doing things is the same, and Infinite so far has segments where you are just moving through NPC driven scenes which weren't really in Bioshock 1.

I played Bioshock 1 about a year ago and the pacing here is the same just about except in Infinite they have these sequences where you are in the society, which can be quite drawn out if you take everything in.

I think it's getting to people because few AAA games treat story as anything other than an excuse to hang mechanics on, and gamers are clearly starved for something meatier.

I don't think it's 'the greatest story in all of fiction' as some have claimed, but it's not dumb, it doesn't treat you like a horned-up moron who can't handle a quiet moment, a difficult idea, or an uneasy answer. Maybe the overwhelming positive reaction has just as much to do with what it's not as what it is.

So you're saying "it's not" means it's not a bad story but a good one? So it has a good story? Yes I think that is something to be overwhelmingly positive about. Not sure where the mystery comes in. Game tells a good story and people like a good story.

I swear in the first game there's far less move into a room and have 10 enemies swarming at you, and more melee enemies too which makes traps more viable (something that kind of sucks in Infinite so far)

One thing I wish they did reduce were turrets, they are so fucking annoying.

Whoa there defensie. I'm just commenting on how it sets itself apart. If all games treated narrative as integral as Bioshock does, would Bioshock still stand out? I don't know, I'm only a few hours in. Just suggesting that what people perceive as disproportionate praise isn't necessarily about Infinite's merits as it is the dire state of storytelling everywhere else.

I think it's more that people are delighted to get a story which is executed in a more competent fashion. The story is okay, the ending feels like a bit of a fumble but telling the majority of the story through the actual events of the game instead of a buttload of exposition and having the characters show their traits through their behavior rather than having to explicitly state their nature through hamfisted dialog is a nice improvement.

Still, there seem to be plenty of problems with Comstock's character and the way that the ending is handled is not ideal. Overall, it's competent and enjoyable genre fiction which is more than most games can come close to claiming.

I think that they drop the ball on the "game" side of things though, the combat isn't much fun and the scavenging for ammo and upgrades is a bit of a chore. Granted, no-one is coming to Bioshock for the combat or the character progression mechanics but those are the meat of the gameplay.

Not being defensie (why would I be defensive?), just saying, as you continue to do here, the story is great for the medium. You seem to be slighting it by saying "maybe it's just by comparison.. well what is that? I prefer to compare story telling within a medium and from that lens, Infinite is just great story telling in video games. Period. Not dire straights, just how it is. Nothing disproportionate about it... how would it be disproportionate? Even you say the story telling is better than almost all games, well that makes the praise proportionate.

I think you would be surprised. I think there were more melee enemies overall in Bioshock 1 but I like the balance in Infinite of having both as it allows the combat to be quite dynamic.

And I do agree a bit about the turrets, just makes you use that vigor though. They've done a decent job of giving you alternate routes though in most cases.

@artisanbreads: Sorry, I think I just misread you. I do think there's an important difference between "great for the medium" and "great for any medium", but maybe that's neither here nor there.

edit: yeah, what rebgav says.

Oh god this.I swear in every room there's like 5 desks, 3 drawers, 7 lunch boxes, 10 trashcans, not to mention the dead bodies, I mean it's completely overkill. And it's not like you don't need it, either. I'm close to the end and despite having looted every container in the game I'm nowhere near having maxed out all my powers and weapons.

I haven't finished the game, only about 4 hours in, so I won't make any judgements overall. So far it's been excellent though and I don't say "just for a game". The plot itself is good, but more than anything the world, setting, etc are really top notch.

In @rebgav 's comments though I would just like to say, to the defense of game story tellers, it's not easy to do these things in games. Having a game where there isn't just "a buttload of exposition" and it managing to be a good story is an accomplishment in itself. Think on other compelling game stories, stuff like Metal Gear, and it's just tons of exposition. So I think that's something to applaud on its own. Interactivity and narrative are not an easy balance. Developers are talented, and there is a reason that this has been rarely accomplished. The medium is still maturing.

The only other game I can really think of that is accomplishing this kind of setting, character, plot development with so little exposition is the first 15 minutes of Half Life 2, and yeah that was 15 minutes. Just four hours in, there have been a few: the opening, the Raven club (albeit brief), and the beach/arcade that have been on that level. No small feat there.

Is this the thread where I can act cool and say Bioshock Infinite is just ok?

That ain't what yo mama said. (Oooohhh)

oh my god I hope they patch this version soon, dat stuttering, soooooooooo infuriating.

game running perfect on ultra, i walk into a room, smooth smooth smooth, then i turn around and look at a desk BOOM 10 FPS/stutter stutter stutter

god damn it

So, does this game bang you over the head with, "... religion is bad, mkay?" stuff repeatedly? I just saw a 'Let's Play' on Youtube of the first 30 mins and it seems like this is a big part of the story.

No, it's the thread where you act cool and hop on the 'best game eva' train by making fun of those who think otherwise

Well, in that case I'm outta here!

@tangoup said:

While religion is certainly an aspect of what this game is about, it's about a whole lot more than that, and I'm not sure it's even fair to say that the game is entirely opposed to religion. There are a few moments where I felt that certain aspects of religion were actually cast in a pretty favorable light.