• 170 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
#1 Posted by analog00 (14 posts) -

Is it just me who thinks Bioshock Infinite is a complete snooze? The art of the game is fantastic no doubt about that and the story isn't amazing in my opinion but some people may like it.

The actual gameplay is horrible though! The actual FPS aspect of Infinite is so dull, floaty and unsatisfying I have no clue how this game is so well rated. The weapons have no 'feedback' for lack of a better word and to me the combat just seems like a bit of a dull grind. You essentially walk through the world hitting F on everything while listening to the story and every now and then getting put into an 'arena' of enemies. Even worse is the that death is barely a hindrance and often it is helpful. On numerous occasions I died and when I was revived some enemies I was fighting are somehow dead or even worse once I died and was pushed further forward into the level than I was beforehand.

I'm having huge issues with AAA titles that seem to be forgetting gameplay and focusing on art and story. The story in Infinite isn't even particularly good. I did play through Tomb Raider which also had issues of a bad story but the gameplay was defiantly more satisfying than Infinite. Neither game I would ever want to play again.

Why are games focusing on story so much, trying to emulate a big budget film? HL2 does a good job of having a fairly deep story (compared to most FPS games) but keeping you 'in the game' and not putting story infront of gameplay.

At the moment I'm really loving smaller indie games such as Hotline Miami and The Binding of Isaac. Games that are games in the more traditional sense and rely on skill. There is no 'easy mode' and you just naturally get better the more you play.

Even the thought of being plopped into one of those 'arenas' with some Vox Populi is giving me a headache.

#2 Posted by Krullban (1036 posts) -

You made an account just to post this?

#3 Edited by Sooty (8082 posts) -

It's an amazingly designed game.

Except for the combat.

The production values, all the art, the audio, the voice acting (except Booker, that guy sounds identical in every fucking game), the colours, just everything else is off the charts good.

#4 Posted by OneKillWonder_ (1746 posts) -

It's not perfect, but it's certainly not 'poor'. It's worlds better than the combat in the original game at least.

#5 Edited by Funkydupe (3319 posts) -

It's not perfect, but it's certainly not 'poor'. It's worlds better than the combat in the original game at least.

Yep. Its not perfect at all, but I'm enjoying the ride so to speak.

#6 Posted by SlashDance (1815 posts) -

I think the combat is amazing when skylines are involved. I've had more fun with Infinite than with most shooters that came out in the last 5 years.

You can just play the game behind cover using only guns but why would you ?

#7 Posted by yoshimitz707 (2453 posts) -

I really like the combat. I'm having a lot more fun than the first bioshock.

#8 Edited by casper_ (903 posts) -

yeah from the quicklook everything about the tone art etc. looked fantastic but the combat/ways you could go about combat just seemed shallow as hell.you'd think in a game with such lofty ambitions they would allow you to resolve conflict in a way that wasn't walk into room, kill everything in room,wait for corpses to turn into boxes,walk into next room.

i dont know man, when i go to some weird fascinating place i dont want to just walk around killing everything in it and i kind of felt that this kind of mass murder-y gameplay made me feel less curious about the narrative and setting. but like i said i only saw the quick look so this is only a surface level judgement and it still seems like a quality game.

#9 Posted by Marcsman (3198 posts) -

Thank goodness GB has a posting cap for newbies.

#10 Edited by analog00 (14 posts) -

I'm just listening to the latest Bombcast and they are discussing a few of the issues with combat. There is no way this is a 5 star game. I honestly feel that this would have been better as some type of huge TellTale style game. The FPS aspect just doesn't work for me and seems a bit of an afterthought to wanting to tell a story. There is such little skill in the game that it's a grind.

#11 Edited by handlas (2682 posts) -

Videogamer.com review. Read it. That was their qualm with the game.

I haven't played a Bioshock game so this is coming from maybe a less than informed perspective but the game reminds me a lot of Dishonored (which I assume was influenced by Bioshock 1) which no one other than Patrick seemed to like on GB. Except Dishonored had really great gameplay with the blink mechanic while this seems to have great everything minus the cool things Dishonored did from a gameplay standpoint. In other words... I'm basically saying everytime I see Bioshock Infinite it makes me want to go play Dishonored. I guess there's something wrong with me.

#12 Posted by The_Laughing_Man (13629 posts) -

@sooty said:

It's an amazingly designed game.

Except for the combat.

The production values, all the art, the audio, the voice acting (except Booker, that guy sounds identical in every fucking game), the colours, just everything else is off the charts good.

Its not changed much since the first game. I agree the fighting can be kinda crappy at times but way to into the world and all that to care.

#13 Edited by LackingSaint (1815 posts) -

I thought the combat was great; the stacking of weapons, vigors, skylines and elizabeth's tears I thought added a good amount of depth and variety to how the game plays. I guess if you just wanted to machine gun and fire vigor your way through the whole game you'd find issue with it, but I tried not to get to comfortable with any one combination and had a ton of fun with it. The only exception to that would be the Sirens, which I think are just really annoying enemies with no inherent value.

I certainly don't get why you'd pick this of all games to raise your platforms on "games devalueing gameplay", when the vast majority of promotional material for the game was talking about Elizabeth's role in combat, the various enemies, the Skyline game mechanic and the different ways of approaching situations. Seems like this weird trend of people acting like games don't care about their gameplay whenever there is any value in their story; there is objectively so much more depth to this game in combat than there is in something like Call Of Duty, but those games are never questioned as "not caring about gameplay" because that's the case majority of what's there to enjoy.

#14 Edited by ArtisanBreads (3835 posts) -

If you say the gameplay is horrible, you are just full of hyperbole. You must not play many games.

@analog00 said:

I'm just listening to the latest Bombcast and they are discussing a few of the issues with combat. There is no way this is a 5 star game. I honestly feel that this would have been better as some type of huge TellTale style game. The FPS aspect just doesn't work for me and seems a bit of an afterthought to wanting to tell a story. There is such little skill in the game that it's a grind.

There's no way Jeff Gerstmann thinks it's a five star game? lol uhh.. okay. Here's a tip dude: go write a user review and give it four stars or whatever you want. When you say something "doesn't work for me".... well you're you. Don't tell Jeff how he feels about the game.

#15 Edited by gike987 (1755 posts) -

I think the combat is great and I normally hate FPS games. Although, like with most games, it's only as fun as you makes it. If you just sit back in a corner and snipe all the enemies you will have a bad time, make use of all your vigors and use the skylines.

Play on hard (or use the konami code to unlock 1999 mode) if you find it too easy.

#16 Edited by project343 (2825 posts) -

This has been the most fun I've had with a first person shooter in years. Probably since Half-Life 2 in 2004. I also happen to really enjoy the story.

I want more Bioshock, less Call of Duty in the future devs... kthx.

#17 Posted by SirPsychoSexy (1329 posts) -

I don't know, I find the combat incredibly satisfying. The gunplay is great, all the vigors are awesome, and the areas with the skylines really shine. Maybe people are playing on too low a difficulty? I could see people just running in spraying bullets until everyone is dead on the lower difficulties. I feel like anyone who has experience with FPS games should play on hard, it makes you use the environment and vigors in more significant ways to be successful and I find it really fun.

#18 Posted by ShaggE (6454 posts) -

@analog00 said:

There is no way this is a 5 star game.

Is there really no way? What are the requirements for a five star review from Giant Bomb? I haven't seen any myself, but I can't imagine "some people don't like the combat" is what Jeff considers while writing a personal opinion. Would you rather he go back and try to enjoy the game less so that it reflects your opinion?

#19 Posted by jacksmedulla (279 posts) -

@sirpsychosexy: I'm also really enjoying the gameplay. What's your combo right now? Hand Cannon, Shotgun, Bucking Bronco, and Charge are making me feel like an incredible bad-ass.

#20 Edited by believer258 (11911 posts) -

I like the combat in this game a lot. Then again, I also liked the combat in the first game. Sue me, it was fun and challenging then and it still is.

Also, you should play this game on hard. Same way you should play the first game on hard with Vita chambers off.

#21 Edited by gaminghooligan (1447 posts) -

I can't tell how the combat really is, I'm to busy getting lost like some kind of amnesiac looking at every sign that has legible text. It seems like Bioshock, which I loved, so what if it's not the best shooting in gaming. I think there's enough incredible gameplay here to balance some average shooter mechanics.

#22 Posted by SirPsychoSexy (1329 posts) -

@jacksmedulla: Right now I am loving undertow and charge, with a shotgun. I upgraded undertow so I can pull in 3 dudes at once and then blow them to bits, it's pretty awesome.

#23 Edited by lexpar (31 posts) -

I dunno, I think on PC once you figure out which plasmid is assigned to each 1-8 key you can have a lot of fun in a very dynamic combat field. Add that to sky hooks and tears, and you can really create interesting (if not mechanically wonderful) combat situations. I like the combat a lot.

#24 Posted by DarkShaper (1334 posts) -

I started on hard and the combat is great that way. What I have seen of normal looks super boring.

#25 Edited by kishinfoulux (2308 posts) -

The combat is super fun and satisfying.

#26 Edited by Sooty (8082 posts) -

@kishinfoulux said:

The combat is super fun and satisfying.

I'm just seeing bullet sponging and too many annoying turrets.

The sky hook sections are the best, otherwise I think it's pretty standard fps combat. I wish the plasmids cost less to cast, being able to spam them more would make it way more fun.

Although my opinion means fuck all because I'm talking about the PC version which randomly grinds to a halt making the combat extremely annoying at times.

#27 Posted by Glic2000 (14 posts) -

@handlas said:

Videogamer.com review. Read it. That was their qualm with the game.

I haven't played a Bioshock game so this is coming from maybe a less than informed perspective but the game reminds me a lot of Dishonored (which I assume was influenced by Bioshock 1) which no one other than Patrick seemed to like on GB. Except Dishonored had really great gameplay with the blink mechanic while this seems to have great everything minus the cool things Dishonored did from a gameplay standpoint. In other words... I'm basically saying everytime I see Bioshock Infinite it makes me want to go play Dishonored. I guess there's something wrong with me.

Yeah, that's kind of how I've been feeling: "Oh, this is sort of like Dishonored except without the interesting gameplay."

The game is pretty fun, and generally very well-made. I just feel like maybe I'm getting too old for FPS games. I need something a little more engaging than that at this point in my gaming life. It's especially disheartening because I'm coming from the perspective of a System Shock 2 fan, and that game was actually quite complex. BioShock took that style of game and simplified it, now I feel like BioShock Infinite has simplified it even further.

The varied vigors and weapons and such don't really amount to much for me, because they all basically do the same thing: kill dudes. Albeit, some more directly than others. I'm in love with the Skyrails though. That's the only game mechanic that really felt fresh to me.

#28 Edited by Nekroskop (2786 posts) -

I have two MAJOR problems with this game:

1.Can only hold two weapons at the time.

2.Cannot save normally, only through checkpoints.

I understand if it's a limitation on consoles, but on PC there's no fucking excuse. Not after using $100 million USD on game development.

#29 Posted by CrazyBagMan (842 posts) -

@analog00 said:

I'm just listening to the latest Bombcast and they are discussing a few of the issues with combat. There is no way this is a 5 star game. I honestly feel that this would have been better as some type of huge TellTale style game. The FPS aspect just doesn't work for me and seems a bit of an afterthought to wanting to tell a story. There is such little skill in the game that it's a grind.

Seems like someone is missing the point of opinions and subjective reviews. You're allowed to not like the combat, but there's no way you can suggest that someone else's review is wrong.

#30 Edited by LackingSaint (1815 posts) -

I have two MAJOR problems with this game:

1.Can only hold two weapons at the time.

2.Cannot save normally, only through checkpoints.

I understand if it's a limitation on consoles, but on PC there's no fucking excuse. Not after using $100 million USD on game development.

The first one is a design decision more than anything else. Not having every weapon always at my disposal made me change up what I was using far more than I did in the first two games. That said, I agree no manual saves is really dumb.

#31 Posted by Mr_Skeleton (5144 posts) -

The controls feel about off in the start but you get used to them and it becomes really fun.

After 30 min a friends of mine also asked me if the controls felt weird.

#32 Posted by Turambar (6784 posts) -

@analog00: Because a FPS with well made combat but shit for setting and tone will still bore me to tears as I could not give less of a fuck about first person shooters as a gameplay style. An interesting world and setting however can cause me to raise my eyebrow and find something to latch onto in a game that I would otherwise discard based on gameplay genre alone.

#33 Posted by expensiveham (291 posts) -

The combat is not the best there is. I found that playing on Hard made it more satisfying as you are unable to just roll everything over. I still think the game is great and deserves the 5/5.

#34 Edited by Irishdoom (333 posts) -

Whenever a game is this roundly lauded, there will always be people who want to reject it as being "not that great." I guess this shows how different you are, or how you are more discerning or something. Since when are story-based FPS games about cutting edge combat? Since never. The fact that there is ANY interesting combat element is a huge boon. My only hope for this type of game is that the combat is serviceable and fun, and this goes beyond that.

#35 Edited by Humanity (9259 posts) -

The combat is the same as it was in the original Bioshock which is unfortunate as I was really hoping they would refine it. I'd agree that the art direction and storytelling is top notch - but the gunplay and the way the story moves forward seems like something from 2008. The whole notion of "were here, oh this door is locked, we now have to go to this side area, fight a ton of doods, and then backtrack once we have that item we needed" is really the opposite of revolutionary.

I'm probably slightly more than halfway through it and at this point no matter how good the ending is I don't think I could honestly rate it as a perfect score. At the end of the day these are games and not books, and when the main aspect of a game is just servicable-to-lacking then you can't just overlook that in favor of story. There have literally been parts in the game where the gunplay just wasn't fun, I was running out of ammo constantly and it felt like a slog just to see the really exciting next storypoint - that's not 5/5 for me but hey we all have our opinions.

#36 Edited by LordXavierBritish (6320 posts) -

It's really sad that Bioshock 2 pretty much improved on the actual gameplay of Bioshock in every way and they couldn't even copy that and put it into the fucking new one.

#37 Edited by ioftd (5 posts) -

The base mechanics and weapons were a bit bland but I thought all vigors, skylines, tears, and some fairly interesting gear layered on top gave me more than enough to keep it interesting over the course of the game. I was constantly picking up and dropping weapons (the fact you could never just pick the one you want from a list probably benefits the game), and I even found some magic pants that made every weapon I dropped turn into a floating mini turret (AWESOME).

My personal favorite thing about the combat is that the ram vigor and upgrades + shotgun/heater = first person Vanguard from mass effect, where charging an enemy does a ton of damage and recharges shields. It was kickin rad in mass effect and with the much more multi-dimensional design level design in Infinite its even better.

#38 Edited by Tidel (360 posts) -

Whenever a game is this roundly lauded, there will always be people who want to reject it as being "not that great." I guess this shows how different you are, or how you are more discerning or something. Since when are story-based FPS games about cutting edge combat? Since never. The fact that there is ANY interesting combat element is a huge boon. My only hope for this type of game is that the combat is serviceable and fun, and this goes beyond that.

This is a really petty way to try and delegitimize any complaints.

You may want to sit down for this: it's actually possible that some people don't like the game on its own merits, and it hasn't nothing to do with their quality of character or how they want to be perceived.

#39 Posted by Fredchuckdave (5484 posts) -

Reviewers like easy games; no unforeseen delays, little frustration. An easy game with a good story is guaranteed to get great reviews. See Zelda: Every 3D Zelda Ever

#40 Edited by EuanDewar (4927 posts) -

I personally really love the combat, I was excited for every enemy encounter especially the ones with the skyrails

#41 Edited by Hawkerace (280 posts) -

It's good to have some sort of context to what you would call a 'good game' instead. Many people like Skyrim, and I loathed it. All the bioshock games feel, on the surface hit or miss depending on what goes on in your head. But you cannot slander it for the game itself just because it isn't your cup of tea. Well, I guess you could I mean cool opinion bros and all. But you can really feel some passion put into the game, and appreciation. The combat is there to keep you engaged and somewhat desperate in some cases, and personally I somewhat give the generic combat the excuse of you're not supposed to feel sympathetic to these people and their causes, they're all crazy and out to get you for whatever motives. You're there for the girl etc - focus on that. The shooting feels pretty satisfying this time around, fighting splicers in Rapture where they were bullet sponges far more than in this game kinda puts me off from replaying it again, but that is just personal opinions.

Don't appreciate the game? Cool - tell us a game you like instead, and you'll probably get somebody else telling you that game is butts. So besides me rants, and shitty defence forcing of this game, you're merely asking why all the love because of poor gameplay - cause well gameplay believe it or not, isn't all that matters in every single video game.

#42 Posted by DrDarkStryfe (1117 posts) -

A great game makes you forget the title's shortcomings.

#43 Edited by Ares42 (2666 posts) -

@irishdoom said:

Whenever a game is this roundly lauded, there will always be people who want to reject it as being "not that great." I guess this shows how different you are, or how you are more discerning or something. Since when are story-based FPS games about cutting edge combat? Since never. The fact that there is ANY interesting combat element is a huge boon. My only hope for this type of game is that the combat is serviceable and fun, and this goes beyond that.

This sorta hooks up to something I was thinking while playing the game, Bioshock Infinite is in many ways exactly like Castlevania: Lords of Shadow. It's a game where I don't expect something revolutionary from the gameplay but the fact that it does something different is nice. It has great atmosphere and some amazing moments, but it's a slow burner. Considering that I have the exactly same opinions about the games as the GB guys have, but just switch the games.

The problem is that judging games like that is just all about taste. Neither of the games are actually especially good but that's irrelevant, it's just a matter of "I like this setting". So it's not that people wanna be cool or different, it's just that the games aren't about something qualitative.

#44 Posted by DelroyLindo (387 posts) -

Setting and story are great, but im gonna have to agree that the actual gameplay is pretty bland and unsatisfying

#45 Posted by TooWalrus (13202 posts) -

holy christ the jumping onto skyrails, shooting, flipping around, landing on dudes, I'm having a hell of a time with it

#46 Posted by Bawlsz (84 posts) -

I felt Bioshock 2 did the combat allot better than Infinite, the weapons and plasmids where allot more creative and flexible. However the story in Infinite was incredible, but I liked the world of Rapture more than Columbia, it just had that discovery sort of feel to it, a mystery that made Rapture just more exciting to explore.

#47 Posted by George_Hukas (1317 posts) -

Skyrail combat is the most fun I've had with any game in the past 3 years.

Hands down.

Also, the control is snappier than most FPS shooters, what are you talking about? For the love of christ, use a mouse.

#48 Edited by JerichoBlyth (1044 posts) -

It's literally on rails.

#49 Posted by 49th (2758 posts) -

I just got to the first combat area with skylines and it blew my mind. It's one of the most fun battles I've had in a game for a long time.

Zooming around the skyline, jumping onto a police airship and taking everyone out, jumping from there to the next airship, going back on the skyline, making a turret appear and picking off people as they use the skyline to get to me, quickly changing position, then finally getting a rocket launcher and blasting the shit out of a robot guy as I fly past him. It was incredible, I hope there is a ton of this throughout the rest of the game.

#50 Edited by Milkman (16798 posts) -

I'm finding the combat a ton of fun and am generally just absolutely loving the game.