I have only recently finished Bioshock infinite due to lack of time and being busy. Playing through the game I couldn't help comparing it to the original and it's hated younger brother.

I decided to make a new review because it seems like the perfect format to share my main queries about the game with a larger audience.

Bioshock 1 was a major innovation in the industry; being the spiritual successor to a brilliant series (system shock) just boosted it's popularity. The game was brilliantly thought out, with intricate level design, interesting stealth and hacking systems all boxed up in a beautifully designed hell like rapture. With this all said, the feel of the game was somewhat hindered by the lack of time put into the FPS mechanics, and therefore the combat felt slow and unrealistic: breaking some of the immersion. The game overall is one of my favourite games, and would hold a place in, not only my top ten, but my top 5 games as well. The game would have been number one if it wasn't for the combat being so flawed. I give it an overall 8/10

Bioshock 2 was long awaited by many people due to the success of it's older brother and the previous series that it derived from. The game had amazing ideas when it was first put into concept, the idea of becoming a Big Daddy was only joked in the last game but everyone wanted it to be real. The game itself had a major boost in FPS mechanics to BS:1 and showed that with enough thought it could work in the FPS industry. The flaws of the game were not in the gameplay, but in the main story being lackluster compared to the original. It was greatly punished in the reviewing scene for this. I give this game an overall 7/10

The next advancement on the series was Bioshock Infinite, which is seen as being one of the best games of the last 5 years. I feel this is because of the amazingly intricate story and the new ideas this more-open world brought with it. This being the case, and don't get me wrong the ending gave me goosebumps, I still find it wanting in many areas. Firstly, the combat is even worse than the original. I mean, couldn't they have just used the combat engine from the second game again? Or even better, make the combat even better than that? The story really pulled through with this game, showing that a good story can make all the difference, but I was constantly pulled away from the story of this game with little to no choice, and actually no choice that mattered. I get the whole idea of "the world is set, and cannot be changed", and I like that it actually makes sense with the game, but the combat is just always being destructive onto the story of the game. I give it a 7.5/10

I would suggest for you to buy the whole series, along with minerva's den for Bioshock 2, as it easily makes it the best game in the series when you play with that campaign, and then buy the two burial at sea DLC's when they come out, as they seem to be giving you a game that Bioshock infinite should have been, a non-combat game. If you do this then you will be blown away by the whole series.

Thank you for reading,

Tim Dawson

I guess this is a blog! Who would've known. So, games anyone? Well, I'll mostly be reviewing old games, and then comparing them to their modern equivalent, such as my first review, fable (the original) when compared to fable (the journey), free to roam is a thing that i have loved about fable games, and it seems to have been getting easier to 'roam', and that feature has turned into scripted movement- fable the journey, this is sad for me because fable was my first RPG that i really attached to, and all it seems to be doing better is the graphics; seriously lionhead, just give us a redo of fable (the original) with the newer engines, and graphics. That isn't really reviewing, so let us get onto that then. The original fable had the exact same plot line as they added into the second one, first you're a child, then your family gets killed and then, after training, you become an amazing hero, the game carries on much the same as the original, gain fame to get to the evil protagonist, jack of blades, and then take a major break in which you are trapped (fable 2= spire, fable the orig= jail), then you have to work to defeat the same protagonist that killed your family at the start. So as you can see the story wasn't exactly evolutionary, but lets move on to the 'questing', in the original fable the questing was very desirable at the time, and easy to use, for to activate a quest you must find the NPC who gives it out, then to hand it back in you tell him the deed is done, get experience and a reward. This formula has been used for years, and it definitely wasn't fable that created it, but it felt easy to use, realistic in a way; it felt good morally. That moves us on to the other major appeal to gamers for this game, the morality system, this game was unique when it came to this system and was used as a basis for many other games that tried the same type of system for years after, this of course is the main reason that I don't want to buy the latest fable, after we were asking them to refine it, and make it more reasonable, lionhead just removed it. Anyway, let us stray from that bad omen, and give a rating of the original fable, and then for all of the games to follow. Fable (original)= 6/10, was a good game for its time, but had an unfinished feel to it, Fable 2= 5/10, although it refined a lot of features, that was all it really did, Fable 3= 3/10, they gave us the opposite of what we asked for with 'sanctuary', Fable Heroes= 2/10, it left a sour taste in our mouths to see that fable had turned into an arcade game, Fable The Journey= 4/10, although it shouldn't be a fable game, it is really fun.

Thank you for reading

Tim Dawson