Friday, March 29, 2013

Bioshock Infinite Sucks

We've Been Had

I don't play many games anymore, but I was extremely excited about Bioshock Infinite, and now I'm really pissed off.
Irrational Games used supposed "game play" trailers to deceive us, delivering a product that is NOTHING like what was shown to us for the past two years since the game's announcement.  From a consumer point of view, I paid $60 and didn't get what was advertised.  Here's why I feel that way:

The game itself is good, it's not as good as the original Bioshock, but I'm not comparing the two; this isn't a critical review of the game.  This is an angry rant about what was SHOWN--not hinted, not promised, SHOWN--to me wasn't delivered.

First of all, about two years ago, a nearly 10 minute "game play demo" was released showing this game.
Here it is if you never saw it:
http://www.gametrailers.com/videos/fuusn2/bioshock-infinite-ten-minute-demo-gameplay

It was amazing, and everyone I knew was talking about it and we were rightfully excited.
In the trailer, it shows your companion, Elizabeth, doing all kinds of amazing stuff during the course of game play.  She summons a storm, and turns a bunch of junk into a big flaming ball.
This is a still from that trailer where she's clearly using some awesome power.
This is where she makes the metal ball out of junk that the player throws at an enemy.  

The best part is that the trailer shows the player interacting with these things that Elizabeth is able to summon, using the storm to take out a huge group of enemies, and using Telekinetic powers to throw the ball she makes at an enemy.  She is also shown "tearing" open space/time and entering and interacting with other realities.  There's a really cool moment where she finds a dead horse and tries to "tear" open a different reality where the horse is alive, in a flowery field.  It's really cool stuff, and I was excited to interact with the things she could manifest and reveal with her reality tearing powers.


The problem is NONE OF THIS STUFF IS IN THE GAME.  In the game, the most interaction Elizabeth has with the environment, is leaning up against a wall, which was actually praised in the IGN review.  Are you guys kidding me?  A character leaning against a wall impresses you?
The only time the player actually interacts with Elizabeth is when she randomly throws you a coin or some ammo in battle.  This is actually really annoying, because this sequence, which is the same animation every single time, brings the game to a complete stop while you turn and watch Elizabeth throw you a coin or ammo.  What's worse is the button to accept this animation is also the reload button.

So from this "game play demo" to actual game, we went from interacting with Elizabeth's amazing space/time manifestations to kill enemies, to pressing a single button to accept a coin she throws at you.  So am I supposed to believe that she had these amazing powers and the guys at Irrational Games just decided to 86 them in the 2 years since the trailer?  I don't believe that was real "game play" in the "game play demo" and I think that the actual released game is clearly evidence of this.  Also, this demo was never released to the public, we only ever saw videos of it.  I don't think it was actual game play.

But you know what?  Sometimes games change.  I can understand that, but you should tell somebody about it.  At some point, Ken Levine, creative director, had to have realized what they were going to release was not what they had been showing.  They should have said, "We really wanted Elizabeth to have these awesome powers, but we weren't able to fit it in the game.  We bit off more than we could chew making that amazing demo, which clearly wasn't part of the actual game, and we hope that people will still buy and enjoy the game we were able to make.  Sorry."

But they didn't, and they continued to hype the game, based on the footage from the demo and ACCEPTED AWARDS based on it.  Actually they didn't just accept awards, THEY'RE USING THIS HIGHLY AWARDED STATUS TO PROMOTE THE GAME.  UNBELIEVABLE.  Check this out:

This is the cover of the game I bought, which clearly says, "Winner of over 80 awards."  How has it won awards before it was released?  Well, it has been winning "Gonna be the best game ever" and "Most Anticipated" awards for 2 years now based on the bad-ass "game play demos" that were released.
But the thing is that the game inside this box art ISN'T THE GAME THAT WON THOSE AWARDS!
Those awards were given to the game that was showcased in those demos, which isn't THIS game.
This is flat out false advertising.  This would be a different story if they had released other trailers, but they never did.  For 2 years all we saw were the two hands-off demos.

What I have mentioned above is the biggest complaint I have, but it's not the only thing that didn't make it into the final game, that was showcased in the supposed "game play demo."  And, a year after, they released another, even longer, 15 minute "game play demo" that showed more stuff that isn't in the game.  I could probably list 30 things that were shown and aren't in the final game. And I'm not just talking about aesthetic choices, entire scenes were fabricated, in-game powers and abilities that aren't there.  But the main selling point for me and what I feel the original "game play demo" showcased was always Elizabeth and how the player was going to interact with her which turned out to be completely non-existent.

But just for fun, here's the list of things shown in the trailers, that aren't in the game, for which Irrational Games won 80 awards.

From the 10 minute "game play demo" posted in 2010.
1.  The player is shown to have telekinesis, like in Bioshock 1 & 2 and uses it to throw around all kinds of stuff.
2.  Huge cannons are firing all over the place and destroying the environment.  They aren't in the actual game at all.
3.  Enemies have glowing yellow eyes--seem possessed or out of control like the citizens of Rapture.  This is clearly not the case in the game; the citizens are motivated to kill Booker solely from political/religious ideology.
4.  Pieces of buildings come crashing down in front of the player, including a huge bell from a floating bell tower.
5.  Crows eating a dead horse.(Update 4/5/13:  This implies that Columbia is in a state of decay and that there are literally dead animals laying in the street.  This is an echo of Rapture when you first arrive there--remember the chaos and uncertainty?  They were trying to get us to think that Columbia would have the same terrifying atmosphere as Rapture.  And this one image, along with the slumped over man driving the cart, really implied that Columbia was out of control and a sort of post-apocalyptic environment, which is much more interesting than what we really got. Conflict is always interesting.  I refuse to believe that they didn't have the story figured out by that point, and I think they were using very effective imagery which reminded us about Rapture to misrepresent the game.)
6.  Skyline system more extensive in demo than in actual game.
7.  Cargo moves along the skyline system independently providing natural hazards to avoid.  In the game, other than the first area, the only time cargo moves alone the skyline is when Booker uses a lever a few times to move stationary boxes out of the way.
8.  A man named Charles uses Murder of Crows vigor against the player and crows surround the screen and obstruct the player's view.  In the game nothing this elaborate is used against the player.
9.  The player runs at Charles and rams him off the ledge of a floating platform.  In the game there is a Ram vigor, but it's not nearly as cool as sprinting at an enemy and elbowing them off a cliff.  If this is real game play, why is this suddenly not available in the game?
10.  The possessed enemy uses the skyline to escape from Booker.  In the game the Skylines are almost completely barren, the AI rarely uses them, and they certainly don't use them to try to escape a battle; they're not that smart.
11.  The player can zoom in, and look at things closely without using a sniper scope.
12.  Telekinesis is used to Pull things toward the player quickly.  In the game, there is a pulling vigor, but it requires charging and it can only be used to pull enemies toward you, not to pick up things.
13.  While riding the Skyline, Booker is vocally animated when jumping between lines.  He yells and has flailing arms.  In the actual game, none of this danger is present.  Again, if this is actual game play, Irrational just decided to axe this?
14.  Booker melees an enemy off the skyline.  In the game, you can only shoot while riding the skyline, because your melee weapon is the skyline thing.
15.  Booker uses telekinesis to take the gun out of an enemy's hand and makes the gun shoot the man while floating.  In the game, nothing like this occurs at all.  Same question: if this was actually in the game, why was it removed?
16.  Booker is able to stop a huge cannon shell in the air, reverse it, and shoot it back at the cannon, destroying it.  In the game, you can absorb some small enemy fire, and shoot out a ball of kinetic energy.  Not nearly as cool.
17.  Blood splatter on the screen from where the enemies shoot you(Update 4/5/13: I agree this is an aesthetic criticism, which I said I wasn't doing.  Ignore this, I don't want to renumber this thing.  But what's cooler, generic red arrows or blood splatter? I'll leave it up to you..........I think it's the blood.)
18.  Elizabeth creates a storm cloud by shooting some sort of beam from her hand.  She then tells Booker, "Hit it now" and Booker shoots electricity into the cloud, frying a huge group of enemies.  This is the completely omitted in the game; Elizabeth has no independent conjuration abilities whatsoever.  During some battles, there are stationary objects like cover or machine guns that you can tell her to reveal for you.  It is not even hinted in the game that she can create things--at the very end, there is 1 line of dialogue about how she used to be able to create "tears" in reality when she was young.
19.  More telekinesis is used to pick up an object and throw it at an enemy.
20.  Elizabeth, acts independently and creates a huge fireball out of pots and pans that Booker uses to "throw" at a group of enemies.  In the game, Elizabeth picks locks on doors and leans against walls.
21.  Elizabeth is physically drained from using her awesome powers and is coughing and gripping her midsection in pain saying, "I'm okay, I just need a moment."  Nothing like this ever happens, probably because Elizabeth just walks around and picks locks when you tell her to instead of acting independently like was promised us.
22.  During the handyman fight, he throws a galloping horse back at Booker and Elizabeth and also catches something that Booker throws at him.
23.  During the handyman fight, Elizabeth uses some kind of beam from her hand to help Booker bring down a bridge on top of the Handyman.  Again, in the game, Elizabeth has no such power at all.
24. A Handyman dies by slipping off a cliff.  In the game, they fall down and explode, nothing dramatic at all.  Again, if what we are looking at is real game play, why was it removed for something worse?  It's just a video, but awards were accepted and praise accepted because this was supposed to be the actual game.

From the 15 minutes of supposed game play footage from July 2011.

25.  Booker and Elizabeth enter a sundries store which is abandoned and has evidence of a squatter that Booker even comments on, "Looks like some poor fellow called this place home."  This insinuates that Columbia has descended into chaos, like Rapture, and that the city has become derelict.  This store doesn't exist and Columbia is not in a derelict state, rather the people there seem extremely happy and nothing is run down at all.
26. In this store, Elizabeth interacts with several things like a gold statue and wears an Abe Lincoln head.  Other than the beach scene, Elizabeth interacts with the environment by leaning against walls sometimes or sitting on a bench.
25.  Booker searches a barrel and discovers several things that aren't in the game, like a melee weapon called the executioner which looks like a sword.  Also something which affects movement called spring-heeled.  In the actual game, you cannot switch melee weapons, nor can you upgrade your movement at all.  The buttons on the prompt are also clearly Xbox buttons.  You're telling me that the console version had different melee weapons and you decided to cut all that?
26.  The dead horse scene.  It's cool, and it's not in the game.  Let's not beat it any more.  It's not as though I
need to see that exact scene again, but Booker argues with Elizabeth about whether she is able to bring the horse back, showing a deeper relationship between Booker and Elizabeth and teases that her powers are much more than what is actually in the game.  But anyway, if this is truly game play, why were the voices recorded and animations done and everything and then cut?  Because it's not real game play.
27.  Elizabeth and Booker walk amongst the Vox Populai undisturbed, until someone actually recognizes Booker and attacks.  There are some areas of the game where you can walk amongst the enemy without them attacking you first.  However, it is not nearly as cinematic as what is shown and in my playthrough, tiny things you didn't mean to do will destroy this.  For instance, while exploring, I crossed an invisible line that triggered my attack.  I restarted the checkpoint and went another way over the line and the attack was triggered again eventhough no enemy saw me.  So this notion that you can sort of sneak through places until you're discovered is an illusion.
28.  An enemy taunts Elizabeth somewhat sexually, which scares her and causes Booker to draw his weapon on the man, chasing him away without gunplay.  Nothing like this ever occurs   Enemies don't even acknowledge Elizabeth nor do people on the street.  You certainly can't interact with the environment by drawing your weapon and threatening, which is what this scene implies.
29.  The Vox rebellion is shown as the Vox are rounding up Columbia's citizens and harassing them.  In the game, the rebellion takes place completely off screen, and there is 1 small scene where a Vox kills a well to do citizen.
30.  A citizen is thrown through a window on the street by the Vox and they are holding an informal trial type of execution for one of Comstock's men for his crimes.  Booker is given the choice to intervene or not through Xbox button prompt.  Something similar does occur, but it's not nearly this elaborate.
31.  An enemy starts to sound a huge alarm and Booker has to kill him before he does.
32.  Booker uses a vigor to levitate enemies and then instructs Elizabeth to materialize a moving box on the rail system which smashes into the levitating enemies.  This isn't in the game.  Why would this have been removed if we're actually watching real game play?
33.  Booker wants Elizabeth to materialize a turret to use, but she says, "I can't.  It's too soon.  I won't be able to control it" making it sound like she's tired from using her powers too much, adding a cool-down factor to using her in combat, adding more drama and excitement to the experience.  In the actual game, this is not an issue and she can pop in whatever thing you want as many times as you want, but there are really only four of five things that she can ever actually materialize: weapon cache, health, turret, cover, sky hook.
34.  Rail system is shown that is huge and sprawling with tons of enemies shooting at the player and bullets and rockets whizzing by.  In the game, the rails aren't nearly as extensive, usually consisting of two different rails per screen, not an extensive network of intertwining rails.  Riding around on them isn't nearly this exciting, as most of the rails cover a small area and are just a loop, not a sprawling system throughout the city.  Many scenes don't have any rails at all, and in ones that do, IMO they don't provide much of a tactical advantage.
35.  An enemy pursues Booker on the extensive rail system.  This never happened in my game.  A few enemies entered on the rails and got off.
36.  Booker and Elizabeth come upon Comstock House and Elizabeth says, "Is that really Comstock House? What if he won't help me?"  Booker replies, "I can be persuasive."  This dialogue is never in the game, nor is what it implies.  The implication here is that the game is a sort of Off to see the Wizard theme, and Booker and Elizabeth are traveling to see Comstock for his help with a mystery assignment with which Elizabeth needs help.  It's another layer of intrigue and mystery.  In reality, Comstock is the villain from the start, he's constantly taunting Booker and sending guys to kill him.  Elizabeth never needs anything from him except to kill him and ask him where she comes from.


These things were shown to be in the game, but aren't on the disc I bought.  I'm really disappointed with this game, and I'm puzzled as to how Ken Levine could have put so much effort into these game play demos and not include any of it in the game.
I don't think I'm alone in assuming that since these were called game play demos, that what we were seeing was actually from the game. That's a natural assumption.  It seems that we were wrong and that these demos were not action from the game but action using the game's engine and setting.  That's a really fine line, and as I said before the game shown in these demos is not what is in the box.

When the critics gave this 80 Most anticipated awards every year it was in development, is this final product what you were anticipating?  From the massive ommisions that were shown to be game play, I think the only award this game us up for now is biggest let down of the century.

What the fuck happened here?















80 comments:

  1. Haha, you are so right! And don't forget to mention the words at the end of the Bioshock Infinite VGA 2011 Trailer: "This trailer was made entirely from in-game footage". Liars! As a bioshock fan I am very disappointed. This game was way to much overhyped!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh man, Thanks for reminding me about that. As if I wasn't pissed off enough.
      I kept waiting for Elizabeth to 'Unleash' her powers or whatever, and when the game ended and I realized all she'd done was flip me some fucking coins for 10 hours, I was infuriated.

      Dear Ken Levine, Where is the other half of the game you promised me?

      Do you think if those trailers showed Elizabeth flipping you coins and materializing stationary objects, the back of my box would say "Winner of over 80 awards?"
      No fucking way.

      Peace brother, Thanks for your support.

      Delete
  2. I agree with you 100%! I am also a huge BioShock fan (or at least was) and was completely disappointed! What a fuckin letdown this game was to me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You have an absolute right to be more than disappointed; What you got on that disc isn't what you were told for 2 years that you were getting.
      Last month people were pissed about a very similar situation with Aliens: Colonial Marines, because the graphical differences between demos and the final product. In our case, there are severe game play omissions, and not one major outlet has even mentioned it.
      Thanks for reading my long rant and thanks for your support.

      Delete
  3. Thanks for this post Billy, for what it's worth you have my agreement 100%. As soon as I arrived in Columbia I noticed the graphics looked three years old and everybody had the same face, and I realized this was another off the shelf Unreal 3 project with zero innovation. In terms of the much lauded "Elizabeth AI", Alyx Vance is getting close to 10 years old and is still in no danger of being superseded as the best game companion character. I just finished Tomb Raider shortly before I played through Bioshock, and the difference is striking. The beautifully rendered graphics (on PC), carefully nuanced combat mechanics, and fascinating gorgeous level designs put Infinite to shame. Now I know to be more careful before jumping on the pre-release hype bandwagon for games.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well put.
      Funny you should mention Tomb Raider. I swore up and down there was no way that game was going to turn out well and that Bioshock was a sure thing. Oops.

      Delete
  4. Hi every one , well i was a fan of Bioschok till i got this final release. I saw my self pushed to get back this title because of just thing verry notoriuos and that you haven´t mentioned here... this game has a HIGH SATANIC CONTENTO in it... i mean since i saw some of the release version out there i noticed the amount of caracters related to te DEVIL... i bought the game anyway because i thought it was an isolated issue... but when started to play it.. it has DEVILS everywhere... i mean and main menu of tonic o vigor... i hs DEVILS on it as main art over ther... to seee the effecto of those tonic like POSSESION that casuie the gay you posses commit siucde in the end... i mean the message is realy EVIL... and yes o totaly agree the graphics for a game for PS3 of 2013 SUCKS a lot... i better got DEAD SPACE and the game and grafics jus AMAZING..great article BTW

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Do you look at what you're typing as you're typing it or do you just flail away and then click Publish?

      How about taking like 3 seconds to read over the diahrreah you just typed before pressing the button?

      Delete
    2. In short...This game is SATANIC it has DEVILS everywhere... did you undertand that?o.O or are you retarded?:O... i see you man...

      Delete
    3. Well, I hadn't heard that one yet; a lot of people in the US are upset because of the racism, which is hilarious, because we have a various obvious history of racism in America.

      Me personally, I don't practice Santeria, I ain't got no crystal ball.

      I'm curious, do you see the Racists in the game as the devils?

      Delete
    4. I am talking about the real devil that appear in the game... like the vigor called "devil kiss" and the main menu where you get the upgrades...with devils in the upper corners... that's what i am talking about.. they taunt the Christian values ... and they make look the first founders of US as crazy people that had to be killed... i am Cristian ... i don´t care a lot about racist issues... after all every country has the right to protect what with a lot of effort they have builded...

      Delete
    5. im sorry too tell you this, but just because dead space 3 is sci-fi and not occult, doesn't mean its any more right to play it than bioshock infinite. love for violence is contemned as much as occult.

      Delete
    6. Juan,
      One thing this game does well is highlight the relationship between Christianity and racism in America. Example: we almost had a president who was taught by his church until 1978 that Cain was the first black man and had been marked by God. And that all black people were children of Cain (That's what Mitt Romney was taught until age 30) In present day, Arizona passes a law saying anyone can be pulled over under suspicion of illegal status(basically, anyone who looks Hispanic can be legally harassed). This is what the game is addressing.

      Yes, the word "devil" is in the game, but it's mere existence doesn't undermine Christian principles anymore than does a devil's food cake.

      Delete
    7. Mitt Romney is a Mormon. That's about as Christian as... well as this game is compared to the "other" game in the trailers. Just sayin'.

      Delete
  5. Im wondering what can we do to discredit this game and make people realize how terrible this game is, all the "official" reviews are giving it ridiculous praise. I thought i was only half way through when the credits rolled. i kept waiting for it to get good.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies

    1. Usually when something doesn't live up to expectations, the internet gets together and bombs it on Metacritic, which doesn't seem to be happening; the opposite is happening actually.
      I think we have a sort of Episode 1 situation here, where the original IP is so beloved that nobody wants to admit that the game is nowhere near what was promised, choosing to remain in a state of blissful ignorance and adamant support.
      I think it'll be a few years until the masses are going to be able to look back and say, "Ok, I can admit now it sucked."
      In the mean time I have been trying to contact Irrational for a comment on the differences between what was shown to be game play and what we got and how they can still write, "Winner of over 80 awards" on the box. If I actually get a response, I'll post it here.

      Delete
  6. They'll probably just say "games change during the development process blablabla". I'm not really that angry, I just want to voice my opinion and inspire more creative thinking in games.

    One thing I'd like to note (read: rant about) is the story and the way the devs chose to tell it. The demos imply rpg-type elements would play a big role in the game, like the scene where Booker makes a choice about whether to support a postman (triggering a big fight) or avoid the fight by staying silent. Also big moral decisions, like the interracial couple scene, have no impact because every choice results in the same sequence. Also, Lutece tells Booker not to pick 77, but he picks it anyway! What is he, an idiot? He just got the telegram five minutes before. Overall, the progression of the story feels like a Disney ride, where puppets just pop up and say their lines around every corner. This cheapens the "social commentary" that Ken Levine kept boasting about.

    And now for the ending(spoilers follow):
    I understand that people have different tastes and that edgy, Battlestar Galactica-type endings seem to be in style, but what is it with all the gloom-and-doom nihilistic transdimensional time-traveling Memento-style plot twists these days? I certainly enjoy dark, dramatic material as much as anybody but I think game producers are trying too hard these days to impress with the endings and it always falls flat. It's not that I'm "not smart enough to appreciate the ending" or whatever - I do understand the concept of multiple universes and Booker Dewitt being Zachary Comstock in another reality. But if you try to summarize the plot ending, you'll realize how ridiculous it is with the circular logic. Here's my attempt:

    Booker Dewitt survives the massacre of Wounded Knee and feels guilty about the atrocities he committed. In one universe, he finds religion and becomes a preacher named Comstock, setting in motion a chain of events that causes his daughter, who he later kidnaps from another dimension from his alternate self who DIDN'T become a preacher, to travel back in time to pose as the Angel of Columbia and inspire him to build a floating city. He later meets a quantum physicist (?) who he teams up with to make the floating city a reality. He also uses the physicist's technology to predict the future, but overusage causes him to become sterile. Desperate for a successor, he kidnaps Liz as described above. However, Booker tries to get her back at the last minute, resulting in her finger being chopped off by a portal, leaving her body in two dimensions at once, imbuing her with strange spacetime-bending powers. The plot is set in motion when the physicist feels guilty about helping Comstock and brings Booker "back to the future" to try and get his real daughter back, destroying his memories of selling his daughter in the process. The plot is resolved when Booker discovers he is actually Comstock and allows his "daughters" from multiple realities to drown him, preventing Columbia from ever coming into existence in all realities.

    It sounds like something I would have written when I was eight. Anyway, my point is that the creators are bending themselves into a knot trying to make a weird edgy plot but it's really just a pseudointellectual pile of crap. What ever happened to good old swashbuckling adventures with colorful, memorable characters? Take Mass Effect for example: other than the weird ending of ME3 (yet again, overcomplicated) most of the series is about a cool band of heroes each with their own strengths and flaws exploring and blowing up their way across an awesome galaxy, meeting awesome characters along the way. There are dark parts, sad parts, funny parts, uplifting parts, and even social commentary parts. So I don't see why a game like Bioshock can't do the same. Just make a world that I don't want to leave with characters that (however briefly) make me feel like they're my buddies. Escapism.

    If you read this, bravo XD

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your explanation is as good as any I've read. I certainly wouldn't call the ending "Brilliant" as did Forbes.
      Any story that requires a suddenly omniscient character to basically turn to the camera and blatantly explain everything in the last 20 seconds of the game could have been rethought a little. But I guess when you're too busy dismantling trailers for game scraps you can't dwell on that.

      Delete
    2. "Gloom-and-doom nihilistic transdimensional time-traveling Memento-style plot twists"
      - well put.

      "Just make a world that I don't want to leave with characters that (however briefly) make me feel like they're my buddies"
      - Amen!

      Delete
  7. I agree the game while fun to an extent is not the game we were told we would get.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Also some of the animation on Elizabeth is off at times, while on the gameplay video of old you hardly could see problems with the animation, there's more than one time where Elizabeths animation looks off, and lifeless... odd since they spent so much time doing captures from top tier actors and all... something strange happened here.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Everyone used to complain when amazing CG trailers were used to trick people in buying mediocre games. And in England they have to put "Not actual game play footage" somewhere in the trailer if they do that.
      Now we're being tricked by trailers of actual game play, it's just that, it's from a game that doesn't exist and that they have no intention of releasing. That's so much worse!

      Delete
  9. Hi Billy,

    Your post is well constructed and really in-depth. I do agree with a lot of the points you made, and believe the game would have been better if the developers decided to incorporate all the different gaming aspects featured in the demo.

    Clearly it would have been better if Elizabeth had a greater sense of purpose during combat other than simply providing you with supplies or aiding you with cover. Her debut from the first demo really gave us the impression that she was fully capable of delivering devastating attacks to enemies during combat. In addition, I would have liked to see a complex yet tactical skyline system in place, and like ou mentioned one that is continuously in operation regardless of the combat taking place.

    With that said, I still feel that I am enjoying the game a lot. I think the developers had delivered a great story that immerses the gamer into the world of Columbia. I still feel that I enjoyed the first Bioshock game a lot more, but this is mainly due to the fact that the whole concept was unique (I don't really want to say new, in case it was already done before). At the same time, I still feel more amazed by the concept of an underwater city like Rapture, rather than one floating in the sky.

    I think your post does provide a lot of food for thought. I also think it highlights the issue on hype, and whether or not this factors into people's opinions regarding whether something is good or not. Personally I believe that hype plays a significant role in eluding people, but with that said I still believe this game deserves a high rating. The story along with the gaming environment are what make this game great.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for that, and thanks for reading.
      I also agree that the game itself is not bad. I enjoyed playing and I actually liked Columbia and the bobbing buildings, and I'm a huge sucker for the religious fanatic theme. Judging the game on its own merits, it's not my GOTY, but I definitely had fun--which is really the only standard I have.
      But, when I buy my Lucky Charms, I expect the marshmallows to be inside as well as the healthy, forgettable shapes. I mean, I'll eat the brown things too, but I was told there were rainbows and pots of gold and stuff inside the box.
      We wouldn't even be having this conversation if somebody had come out and set the record straight on the changes, but all I ever saw were articles about some stylistic choices and how her boobs were going to be covered up.
      I think the whole cleavage calamity might have been a genius misdirection from Irrational Games.

      Delete
  10. IMHO, the game is a 3 out of 5. The graphics just plain suck. Most over hyped game since Red Dead Redemption and L.A. Noire

    ReplyDelete
  11. I LOVE YOU. I am already creating a discussion on the Bioshock facebook page trying to open people's eyes to how much they are being fooled by this piece of shit game. I posted your article as proof. Thank you for being the only person I can find that hates this game as much as I do.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ellie,
      You're always welcome to vent here. You're braver than I attacking the enemy directly like that; I'm sure that'll be a tough crowd to convert.
      I was thinking about creating a time/space tear and going back and stopping myself from watching those "game play" demos from two years ago so I could be also be one of the blissful ignorant flooding Metacritic with 100's and claiming the Jesus Christ of gaming has returned. If you'd like to join me, you're more than welcome but you have to bring your own weapons. Safety not guaranteed.

      Delete
  12. I used to do this mistake myself. I was getting overhyped about a game and when it game out it was not what I was expecting. I got disappointed on seemingly great games.


    numero uno problem with this is that it is a mistake to judge a game from 2 to 3 year old trailers.

    A lot can change in that time frame. concepts will be scrapped plot will change and segments might get removed.
    the segments, mechanics and plot elements presented, might have had a negative impact on the final game if they were included. Its not as easy as it seem to say "BOOOOOO they didn't give what they promised, filthy liars!!". its difficult to develop a triple A title and deciding what to keep and what to throw out. release trailers so early, but if you keep your expectations down to earth you will be way less angry.

    There are a lot worse cases like aliens colonial marines

    numero duo problem, I see no problem with the graphics. I see no problem with the quality nor the art style which as far I can see is the same as the previous games, its only brighter and the inhabitants of Columbia are not some malformed mutant psychopaths but normal people.



    With that said, bioshock goes for a GOTY nomination at the least whether we like it or not.

    ReplyDelete
  13. There is a difference between "advertising" and "showing what you have so far". I don't think you seem to grasp the concept that there weren't "advertisements" for what you saw, rather than showing what they were working on.

    I find it humorous that you compare this to "Episode 1". It seems quite frankly that you didn't play this game to have fun, you created the experience you wanted based on very old information and footage when the game was still in the design phase, and because it wasn't exactly what you anticipated, you crap on it.

    This has to be one of the most nonobjective, biased, and more importantly "entitled" reviews that I have ever seen.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Thanks for stopping by and reading. I'm glad this has encouraged as much discussion as it has. I understand what you're saying, but I feel the consumer was purposefully mislead. This is the VGA 2011 trailer:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BIfFeen9q8
    At the end of this video it says, "This trailer was made entirely from in-game footage."
    And all these scenes are ripped straight from the videos I'm talking about.
    This is reinforcement that the previous trailers were indeed the game, not concept demo, not test demo, but the game.

    And at the same time, we were told they'd been working on this since 2007, when the original Bioshock came out. It's not unreasonable to have thought we were seeing the real game that had been in production for 4 years at that point.
    I was told this was the game.
    I'm not complaining about concept art here or test footage or things that were mentioned in magazine interviews.
    This was called "in game footage" and it's completely non-existent.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In-game footage isn't what is being disputed. I'm sure there are other games that show "in-game footage" during production that doesn't make it to the final product. That's what production is, it is still being produced, refined, perfected, et cetera. To say that they were purposefully misleading people is definitely an overreaction.

      In 2011 they said they were working on it since 2007, it is definitely ignorant of you to assume that the final product released in 2013 would be identical to what was shown in 2011 (which was worked on since 2007).

      Delete
  15. Ken Levine did interviews in late 2012, where he ensured Adam Sessler and others that the game in the demos was in fact coming.
    Here's one example:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3u_ZcGZykE

    Sessler gives him several opportunities to come clean, and he never does. He even insists those demos were real game play.

    But the most damning evidence is starts at 7:24.
    Levine:
    "We would have been misrepresenting what we were shipping from what we showed at E3."
    "Once we were that ambitious, we knew we had to deliver on that, because it got people excited, it got us excited. I wanted that game, I wanted to play that game."--in reference to the E3 2011 demo.
    He said this in December 2012. He did't deliver, but the back of the box still ensures us that the contents inside are the things that won "Over 80 Awards": the demos.
    It's not my ignorance, we were intentionally mislead.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Nice one Billy, I saw that interview too. I started a thread on Steam discussing my disappointment:
    http://steamcommunity.com/app/8870/discussions/0/828934913329951457/

    after being literally demolished on every point by dozens of people I just gave up trying to defend myself. It seems like everybody is telling us "well, why'd you set your expectations so high then?" My response would be why the hell can't I have high expectations? Why do I have to be cynical and jaded and accept all the slings and arrows of lazy game production? I want to set a higher standard.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bruce
      That takes some bravery to go into the lions den like that.
      You're totally right and its hilarious you have to argue with people who are telling you to accept the hopelessness of constant betrayal and deceit as just a part of the normal experience. Just keep your mouth shut and give them your money and be glad the disc is readable, like the rest of us.
      As I was typing, the BI commercial came on that showed Booker save Liz from being lynched. Maybe its metaphorical. What is up with this game?

      Delete
  17. Hey Billy. Let me say that I for one agree with you. I seem to be alone with this on my end but it's good to know I'm not the only one that didn't drink the Kool-Aid.

    As to the people saying "the game was in development since 2007 so of course things are going to get cut" they need to take a step back and really think about what they're saying. Here we have a game that was supposedly worked on for many years yet, somehow, we end up with a generic on the rails shooter with nothing to set it apart from everything else.

    I think that its INSANE that they supposedly worked on the game as long as they did and DIDN'T end up having half the shit that was in the game play videos. It's like half way through production they said "hey everyone, awesome work so far! Lets now scrap it all and go with a generic shooter instead of the epic shit we've made so far!". The environments were boring and lacked any kind of detail (oh look more trash cans and desks with cake in them), the enemies had no suspense to them AT ALL, the graphics were pretty bad up close, the characters didn't make me care for them at all, half the guns did the same thing...man...

    Bioshock Infinite is nothing but an over-hyped by the books shooter and nothing more. Far Cry 3 was easily more involving, Tomb Raider had far more dynamic maps and game play, etc.

    I also love how they seemed to take out EVERYTHING in this game OTHER than KILL! KILL! KILL! Where are the puzzles? Where are the dynamic environments? Where are ANY of the things that made the first Bioshock what it was?

    Man, I could go on and on. This game, at its core, is nothing special what so ever. All the 9's and 10's on metacritic either means that A) I've lost my mind and have zero appreciation for outstanding games B) I'm playing a totally different game than everyone else, or C) Peoples views on game quality has dramatically fallen.

    I think I'm going to have to go with C.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yo Android,
      I felt the same way when this game was over, I thought maybe I had gone insane because I couldn't find a single critical review. So I wrote my rant thinking nobody would ever read it, certainly not 2000 in four days, and id just be the only person on the planet who was even the slightest disappointed.
      Thanks for the support and welcome to the worlds smallest minority.

      Delete
  18. Here's a story worth a look. Some people have pointed out a similar situation between what I am alleging about Bioshock Infinite and Aliens Colonial Marines.
    It seems those complaining about misleading trailers got some resolution here.
    http://www.joystiq.com/2013/04/03/sega-europe-asa-aliens-colonial-marines/

    Aliens trailers now will now be accompanied by a disclaimer acknowledging they don't reflect the final product.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I Hated This Game But SOO Loved The First One.

    ReplyDelete
  20. My god, thank you for this review, I am sick of 10's this game is receiving from the very reviewers that no doubt saw and praised pre-release "actual gameplay" videos, realised the actual game is nothing like that, and then shamelessly proceeded to give it a rave review anyway, the dirty liars that they are. Infinite's textures and detail level is worse than in original Bioshock. Gameplay is dumbed down beyond belief. Did most of Infinite's budget go towards bribing the critics ? We've been so had. :(((

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you'll remember all the critics also called RAge the best of show one year, but actually set the record straight on what wasn't delivered before I dropped my $60.
      So why not this time? I don't think anyone was actually brave enough to blow the whistle. I watched the IGN review; they actually said the Skylines completely delivered and were amazing. Come on, they were small loops.

      (I got RAge the other day at Toys R US in a $7.99 dump bin; it's still a rip off.)

      Delete
    2. I just don't understand how not a single critic said what you did. OK, all the media is sucking politicians' dicks for access to politicians, but is same happening in the gaming world? Is IGN literally afraid to speak up against Irrational Games? Now that games make more money than movies objective truth is shoved aside. Btw, Rage indeed was a pile of lifeless shit (I wish it was at least steaming), had to stop playing. Still, only Infinite managed to trully insult my hopes like no other game before that.

      Delete
  21. I remember they did something similar with the original bioshock, a video was launched that looked fantastic when you fought a big daddy, but at least they didn't call it gameplay demo. I must confess i enjoyed the game a lot, and at parts was overwhelmed, loved the art, sound, arquitecture. What could have gone wrong, maybe they had to restrict the whole sandbox thing in order to release a game for the less powerful consoles, i don't know. Perhaps the game would have taken much longer to make. many things were far from perfect but i thought i was probably just nitpicking, maybe i was, if it had been the game that was promised to us. It actually feels to me like they had to either delay the production for a couple more years to do what they had intended to do, or deliver about half or less of the game when they did, and probably 2k had final say in the matter. You see, the whole lady comstock goose chase and fights felt very uninspired and cheap to me, rushed even. so was the final fight in the airship, if a bit less bad. Too much was left out of the game, and i'm certainly not talking about multiplayer. No hacking, no special ammo like in bioshock 1 which made the game play so much better, liz's powers left out. Most of what we had was great, but the game could have been so much more. of course i'm guessing, but i'd wager 2k came in when they did and saw how far the game was, and said, fuck this, deliver in 6 months we'll give you 2 extra month funding in the form of a delay, but that's as far as we'll go.
    Games like bioshock, half life 2 came to an end very nicely, you felt rewarded when you finally got there, but in this case when the screen faded to black i felt so cheated. The game ended half way there. we couldn't even fight songbird! I'm hoping we do get some of that content in some shape or form in dlc form, but i'm doubtful. i wouldn't go as far as comparing ken levine to peter molineux, because ken does a much better job and delivers on quite a lot more and better on what he promises. It's a beautiful tragedy, half the game it should have been.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh yeah, I'm sure you're up on the EPL. Our HERO Kei Kamara is over there now in Norwich. I'd give anything to have him back. Look at his April Fool's prank.

      http://www.pitch.com/plog/archives/2013/04/02/kei-kamara-pulls-best-kansas-city-april-fools-prank

      That literally made me cry.

      Delete
  22. I suspect you're absolutely right about 2K coming in and rushing things, and I don't want to come down so hard on Ken Levine, or Irrational, but they're the only names I know.
    I actually have few squabbles with the game that was delivered, I just have a problem with the game that wasn't.
    As to the fight with songbird that never happened, despite him being in every trailer and game magazine, and terrorizing you through the entire game, that has to be the biggest missed opportunity in game history.
    I'm immediately reminded of Anton Chekov's gun: If you show a loaded gun in Act 1, you better fire it by Act 4.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Agreed! Save mechanics ruined, Trash that gives goodies Oh Common this is not Rapture to scavenge food, Collectibles Lockpicks and health, shield and salt tonic curses!!!!, First aid kit useless (no animation like in previous franchise and like Far cry 2 and 3 animation), tears in the demo is not in the real gameplay, Elizabeth is not quite active like in the demo but in first and mid lvl you could see Elizabeth Ai interact some object, opening safes is not quite rewarding and playing as protagonist has no involvement of the story at all except in the first and mid lvl.

    The game feels so rush!!!!! 1st and mid lvl of the game you felt you are involve in the story but after that its freaking linear and one ending.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agreed! I love your passion, man. I can feel your frustration.
      Thanks for contributing. Stick around, I need your help for when the fan boys attack.

      Delete
  24. Bioshock: Infinite doesn't suck, it just wasn't what you thought it would be. There's a difference.

    As soon as I saw this trailer when it premiered, it was quite obvious that it wasn't gameplay, despite it being marketed to the contrary. It was probably in-engine, but it's all scripted action sequences made specifically for the video. This is especially telling since the video was released YEARS before the completion of the game. It's obvious the game would change dramatically during that time. And, again, the sequences in the "gameplay video" are obviously scripted for the video itself. It's a marketing technique as old as gaming, just so publishers can slap "real in-game footage" on it. The video was probably just a tech demo to show off the engine, and some early gameplay concepts.

    That said, the publisher is at fault for marketing this "gameplay" the way they did. It is very dishonest, in my opinion, but such is the state of any modern advertisement. I always take any pre-launch trailer or gameplay video with a grain of salt.

    I really feel strongly that both the negative backlash and the divine praise the game has gotten are both simply wrong. The game does not suck, nor is it as brilliant as the critics say. It has many flaws, most notably the unoriginal gameplay and average AI. To the game's credit, the focus was never to deliver amazing, cutting edge gameplay. It was, however, to deliver an immersive story, which I think the game gets across quite well.

    I get that you're frustrated by this. The gameplay video in question was very successful at getting you hyped for the game, but that shouldn't spoil yours or anyone's experience of the game. The video was a blatant advertisement, and nitpicking tiny details that didn't show in the final product like crows nibbling a dead horse or blood spattering the screen is a petty move on the level of any biased fan boy. Judge the game based on what it presents, not on what the publisher presented to get you to buy it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I love how all you are doing is just making assumptions. Your entire first paragraph is nothing but you saying stuff with no actual facts supporting you. "It's obvious the game would change dramatically during that time." Oh really? It's OBVIOUS? Says who? You?

      This game DID suck. It was linear as hell, lacked any sort of depth, game play was average AT BEST, the story was a broken mess where 50% of the details and vital plot points lied in Voxophones where a lot of them were even hidden in obscure places. That's dumb. Only GOOD thing about this game that I found was the first hour of the game (before it became just a linear on the rails shoot'em up) and maybe like the last 30 minutes of the game. Other than that everything in between was shite.

      I think what happened is that the game play footage WAS the actual game. If they had been working on it since 2007 it would make sense they would have some bad ass stuff like in the video (as well as the more detailed environment, more interactive NPC's, etc). The problem is that it was taking too long, it was too hard, and was using too much money (Irrational was known to have multiple issues through out development). So in the end the effectively scrapped everything, started over, and due to time and money constraints they ended up pumping out this mediocre shooter we ended up having.

      Delete
    2. drewcifer,
      Yes, my title "Bioshock Infinite Sucks" is purposefully provocative, as this is how the internet searches for things, if something is disagreeable in the least, you Google, "Blah blah blah sucks" and you come up with results. Had I titled it, "Bioshock Infinite didn't live up to my expectations" we probably wouldn't be here right now.
      I've had some comments here and on others sites where this post has been re-posted, which has lead me to update what I said, which I never wanted to do, as I wrote this literally seconds after I finished the game; this post was very "here and now."
      Regarding the blood splatter, I'll give you that one, that's aesthetic, which I claimed I wasn't criticizing(I just don't want to renumber everything). Birds eating the dead horse, I should have explained, I thought people would get it.
      Birds eating the dead horse implies that Columbia is a completely different place compared to what we got. This implies that Columbia is like Rapture when we fist arrive; everything is in chaos, and we're in the middle of it. In Columbia, there's nothing dead and decaying in the street; everyone is happy and they go to the beach. I didn't literally need a horse being eaten in the street, but this image is definitely echoes of Rapture, which I believe they included to add dimension and intrigue to the trailer by hinting that Columbia is a much more exciting place than what we got. This "post-apocalyptic" Columbia is much more interesting than the happy go lucky one in which we arrive--conflict is always exciting. I refuse to believe that they hadn't yet nailed down the story by 2010, and I think that they misrepresented the game here.

      You're just another in a long list of guys with this jaded, cynical POV that "the game industry always misleads us, and it's just stupid to even talk about it." At what point can we talk about it? How much worse does it need to get? Calling something "game play" and then completely omitting every single thing that made that "game play" interesting is beyond forgivable for me. Elizabeth does nothing, all they kept were the guns. You're basically saying, "Yeah, they lie to us all the time, that's the nature of the business" and you're criticizing people that comment on it. YOU ARE A CONSUMER TOO.
      They released TWO trailers for this game, and both of them were total bull shit. That's all we saw until the day before release. And Levine did interview in late 2012, where he defended the trailers and ensured they were legit. At what point is it finally enough for you? Stand up for yourself!

      Delete
    3. Jaded...I like that.

      You know, I actually got an infraction on a forum I frequent for "trolling" because I was stating my opinion on the game...these people just don't get it man. That or you and I are the crazies.

      One thing you brought up though was how Columbia was a boring place. The lack of action and stuff going on is one of my main gripes with the game.

      Take the beach scene as a perfect example (one of many in the game). Here it is, this rather small beach. You arrive at the beach by falling hundreds of feet nearly being crushed by tons of debris and junk from the bridge that just got tore to shit...yet when you are awaken by Elizabeth you get up and look around and there are people all over the beach that don't give a FUCK about what just happened! Kids playing, people sun bathing, group of people dancing...WHAT THE FUCK! Why is no one FREAKING THE FUCK OUT OVER A MASSIVE BRIDGE THAT JUST GOT DESTROYED AND NEARLY KILLED EVERYONE ON THE BEACH?!?!

      That to me was a MASSIVE problem in the game. NOTHING you did game play wise, decision wise, etc made fuck all difference to anything or anyone in the game. I could just unload on 20 enemies, blow shit up, cause massive chaos then walk through a door and everyone is acting like NOTHING happened.

      I don't care what people say (as they don't care what I say) but this game was complete and utter crap. Forget the shit they showed in the trailers, forget about Levine talking this game up like it was some masterpiece of interactive visual media...this game is NOTHING but a on the rails shooter with uninteresting game play, boring and repetitive environments with little to no detail (besides the same desks, crates, and trashbins in EVERY level), boring uninteresting enemies, absolutely HORRIBLE NPC's, etc...

      I don't get it...I simply don't get it...I'm replaying Bioshock 1 right now and it is better in literally every single way possible. The level design, detail, and art direction are MUCH better, then enemies are totally awesome, the NPC's actually seem to matter, the game play is easily superior, and the game never seems to lose focus on its story and environment. Infinite is the complete opposite of the 1st...and in no way was it ever in a good way.

      Either way, forget all these people giving this game 10's and 9's on Metacritic and what not. They can continue living in their alternate universe where this game is actually a awesome game. I'm opening my own tear and going to a world where people actually have some level of critical thinking skills.

      Delete
    4. Oh I also wanted to bring up something about the time they spent on this game vs. what we actually got.

      The first game play trailer we got was in 2010. That was 3 years ago. So even going on a very conservative guesstimation lets ASSUME that they had been working and developing the game for a year prior to the 2010 demo. So 4 years total spent on developing this game.

      Can someone explain to me how in FOUR YEARS from a massive gaming studio with a massively talented and paid staff that we ended up with a single player only game that can be beaten in a 6-8 hour run through?

      I mean, the levels were bland, the NPC's were over used (there was what, like 3 different ones for men and women?), we got Unreal Engine 3 typical graphics with shitty textures, we got pretty typical gun play shits that any one that's worked with the UE3 engine could create...and this took them 4 years? FOUR YEARS?!

      All this talk and shit about Elizabeth being MAD AWESOME and SUPER intelligent and all this but in the end, like you said, all she does is lean on shit and do scripted events. Nothing she did was done on her own. Nothing she did was in anyway amazing. Well, the ONLY thing I can say that made me think "that's interesting" was the fact that she could run in front of you. However once you realized that she would always run in front of you AFTER you started heading towards the next objective did it lose its cool factor as, again, it was just scripted.

      So four years for blands levels, bland aged graphics, bland NPC's that do nothing, rehashed powers and weapons from the first (cept the first somehow did it better), 6-8 hour campaign, and nothing else.

      Makes ZERO sense. None.

      ONLY thing I can think what happened is that the game we got was rushed. I think they had to scrap what they had, the GOOD parts, and had to start over but didn't want to take another few years. I think Levine himself said something to the point about how they ended up cutting like 5 games worth of content. I think they were working on making this game awesome like the trailers but it was simply too much. Either too complicating and technical or too out there for current console technology so last minute they had to scrap it all and quick put a game together. That quickly put together game was Bioshock Infinite.

      The proof is in the pudding. Just look at the shop that Booker and Liz are inside of from the 2011 game play video. Just LOOK at that detail! Shit all over the place! Actually feels like a real store. Show me ONE level from the actual game that has even a quarter of the amount of detail. You can't...it simply doesn't exist.

      Note: Sorry for the rants...I tend to go a little overboard sometime...it's just nice to have a place where I can express myself and call out the bullshit when I see it without fear of getting called a troll or banned or some shit. :-p

      Delete
    5. You can rant here all you want as long as you're telling the truth, which you are. I'll even thank you for it.

      Thanks.

      Delete
  25. At last the truth. From the glowing reviews and stratospheric scores I was led to expect something outstanding. IT ISN'T. Sure, the story and characters are deep and engaging, unfortunately the gameplay is neither. The player is just run on rails through one chaotic gunfight after another, and not in a way that is fun. I completed the game more out of stoicism than anything else. I kept waiting for it to get good. IT DIDN'T. Whether finishing a great book or a great game, you do so with a sigh that something wonderful has ended. I just finished Infinite with relief that I wouldn't have to play it anymore, and then immediately deleted it.
    My score would be 6/10 at best. All infinite hype in my view.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Wow - I just finished the game and thought the ending was worthy of "Prometheus", really muddled, tough to figure out, and full of hole - but I REALLY enjoyed playing the game. I hadn't seen the E3 trailer since, well E3 2011. Wow is all I can say again. That is NOT the game I just played. And, based on the ending, I don't see how they can make any more sequels or prequels based on this particular story. The ending even negates Rapture! That being said, I did have a good time with it - just overly short, and darnit, I miss the Splicers! LOL

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This Rapture retcon also the time I realized, "Ok, I'm definitely not fighting Songbird now."

      Delete
  27. found a really fair review of the game here:
    http://www.newgamenetwork.com/article/809/bioshock-infinite-review/

    ReplyDelete
  28. I'm surprised no one's mentioned the boys of silence or the banshees from the series of heavy hitter trailers they released Or how they went from enemies we would meet with some frequency (there are screens and videos of them in various places throughout Columbia somewhere accompanied by an interview with Ken Levine explaining them in great detail) to one level gimmicks.

    I remember about a third through the game my growing concern that it was almost over when the game hadn't seemed to really start yet, only to remember that i hadn't even seen the boys or the banshees, so it meant the game was just getting started...imagine my chagrin when i finally encountered them... I mean...one could be forgiven for thinking they would play a larger role in the game given that they had, y'know, trailers centered around them.

    I can't call Ken Levine Molyneux considering they are still in the game. But damn if i don't feel like i've been Molyneuxed again.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I had actually forgotten about the Boys of Silence, that's how memorable that was.
      When I watched that heavy hitters trailer, I remember being afraid that those guys were going to be stalking me and popping up in the most inconvenient times.....glad I didn't have to worry about that.

      Delete
  29. Lets MOD the game into what it should have been... Ill bet with recycling voice clips and animations the Mod teams could come close. I would love to have better sky rails and fight Stallonstall and Charles the crow guy! Ill bet the mod teams could add a ram/push command to knock enemies off the city too.

    ReplyDelete
  30. So, I took my copy of Bioshock Infinite Rip-off back to Gamestop, gave them a short version of everything discussed here and got full refund without them putting up any fight at all. I encourage everyone to do the same.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Haters... haters everywhere... it's kinda sad actually. This game has left a lasting impression on a lot of people that none of you are gonna enjoy cause you're too busy whining about what it "could have been." What the developers delivered was an emotional, touching and fun-to-play game deserving of all the hype and I sincerely feel bad for the people who weren't able to experience it like the rest of us did. Ah well, enjoy your... whatever you play... AC3 or CoD or whatever... BAHAHA

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry, but BAHAHA is on you. You didn't notice that instead of a Ferrari you got a Toyota, or maybe you're not really into driving. There's one other possibility though: if you say the game is "deserving all the hype" then you must be that one lucky guy who got the only copy with all the stuff Irrational Games promised us. Hide it in a safe deposit box, it's worth millions. Btw, how did you defeat Songbird ? Did you use telekinesis ?

      Delete
    2. I caught a cannon ball in the air, spun it around and shot it back at Songbird, right after Elizabeth stunned him with her lighting storm.

      Deserving of the hype? You can't be serious about that. Literally nothing that was hyped about this game is in there.

      Delete
  32. I Feel exactly the same! I do not understand why this game gets perfect scores across the board. It's god damn INSULTING. This game is mediocre at best. And because I'm not American, it was even less enjoyable because I did not understand all the references and quips the game threw out at me. What a fucking disappointment.

    ReplyDelete
  33. I've heard it said the reason that so much of this game was changed to "make Elizabeth a more believable character" and they dumped loads of effort on the beach scene so they could have her running around and actually interacting with the enviroment and being "alive" and shit.

    Maybe they suceeded with making the beach scene convincing but hello Irational? This is a first person shooter and most gamers would rather be in the midst of a high intensity rail chase scene or flinging Comstock's men into the air and blowing them to pieces with an RPG. Most gamers are going to breeze right past that beach until they're up to their nose in battles. I might be generalizing, however, how many of you bought this game based on the praise you heard about "the beach scene."

    Now, I'm not saying I always prefer those elements over compelling characters but after being promised what was in that trailer which had everything from a much broader storyline to Elizabeth doing some crazy awesome shit that she never does once in the game. (I love how they changed Elizabeth's character into a pacifist so they didn't have to give her those elemental powers. Clever.) Like you said, it really does feel like a monumental rip-off when you look at it.

    I have a question for those of you more tuned in than me. What is up with the gaming industry these days? And why does everyone always think that every big blockbuster title will be "the best game in the world."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I stuck around the beach forever looking for loot and watching to see what she did. She really didn't do all that much interacting, a little more than what she does the rest of the game maybe, which set the bar low for her, and they kept missing the bar throughout the game from then on.

      As to the games industry these days, who can say? Reviewers are either aging gamers who are wowed by simple things, people who aren't necessarily the biggest gamers to begin with, or are too afraid to give honest previews, sometimes honest reviews either if it's a big name company, because game developers and publishers have a tendency to cut off anyone who says anything remotely bad about their upcoming titles. When previews and exclusives are your bread and butter, you don't want to insult the people who give them to you.

      So everything gets ridiculously hyped up, sometimes bordering on outright lies, to promote a mediocre game a group of people somehow spent millions of dollars and four years of their lives to make. Of course the devs and publishers aren't going to be honest, they either believe their title really will be amazing, or they just pray they'll make enough to be profitable.

      In this case it was part Ken Levine being full of himself and refusing to admit he hadn't pushed the boundaries as much as he said they would. Part reviewers writing their reviews right after they finished the game, still hyped up on a seemingly cool ending that starts to wear off after a little while and some thinking...or they were pretentious and called the game important because it glanced at some interesting subject matter for all of a minute before getting wrapped up in some deus ex machina and forgetting the interesting social commentary stuff altogether.

      Delete
    2. Thanks for the insight on how people react when it comes to these "important" games. I miss when I was younger and videos games, movies, heck, everything wasn't just endless waves of overhype and backlash but people have gotten too cynical, I guess. I think this problem started around 2005-07 when most game designers stop experimenting because they thought they had found some formula to make a perfect game that would sell boatloads.

      A lot of games today seem to be a heterogeneous mixture of elements that all seem cool at face value but yet, refuse to synthesize together and the final product is disjointed as a result. People still praise the games because they contain everything they wanted and they don't even notice how poorly their favorite elements interact with one another.

      And again, about the beach part, I've seen many interviews have people talking about how it's a pivotal of the game and how they spent so much time on it. I really don't get why they were so focused on having Elizabeth performing all those random animations that only happen in one part of the game. It's a lost cause since she completely changes her tune once you get ambushed shortly after and she becomes dead serious for the rest of the game. It makes her seem off and hardly the wall leaning AI of everyone's dreams.

      I don't know why but I think this game exemplifies what's wrong with the industry. I'm not up in arms about it but I'd much rather have video games go back to being imaginative, creative and experimental at the risk of a game company losing money. Heck, games like Ocarina of Time and Mario 64 were successful financially and they were both chances taken by a game developer.

      Delete
    3. My thoughts on Bioshock Infinite have been MORE than expressed above. Nothing special at all...moving on...

      As far as the industry goes...I have no idea. Reviewers are becoming more and more baffling. Have you watched Adam Sesslers review on YouTube for Bioshock Infinite? His review is nothing but him gargling on Infinites balls throughout the entire thing. He calls it one of the best games he's ever played. Uhhh...what? I've been watching Adam doing reviews for a decade now. Since he was on TechTV YEARS ago. The man has probably been playing games for much longer than I have and has probably played 10x the amount of games I have...yet this is one of the best game's he's ever played? I mean, I can name 10 games right off the top of my head without even thinking about it that are better than this shit in EVERY way.

      Yet, this seems to be the view of nearly every review I've seen. I simply don't get it. These reviewers used to be critical, used to give honest reviews. Now it seems like A LOT of games now a days are getting 9's and 10's.

      Let's see, just from the past TWO years we have:

      2011:

      Batman Arkham City
      Skyrim
      Mass Effect 2
      Uncharted 3
      Deus Ex: Human Revolution
      LA Noire
      Dead Space 2
      Killzone 3
      Fable 3
      The Witcher 2
      inFamous 2
      Limbo
      Hard Reset
      Battlefield 3
      Saints Row: The Third
      Trine 2

      2012:

      Uncharted: Golden Abyss
      Alan Wake (PC)
      I Am Alive
      Blacklight: Retribution
      Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon: Future Soldier
      Max Payne 3
      Spec Ops: The Line
      Sleeping Dogs
      Mark of the Ninja
      Borderlands 2
      Dishonored
      Assassin's Creed III
      Hitman: Absolution
      Far Cry 3

      Just to name a few!

      I have to say that looking at the list I've made, I can say that every single one of these games has better game play than Infinite...a lot had better characters and their development, and more than a few had better story lines. Not trying to start anything here...but to people saying this is game of the decade...just look at this list! Infinite better than Arkham City, Deus Ex, Uncharted 3...did these reviewers not play any games from the last two years? Did they not play any games that BLOW Infinite out of the water? I'm guessing not...

      On the topic of games "sameness" I'm hoping next-gen will change this. I think one of the MAJOR problems with games are their low level of interactivity. I know that I have put WEEKS of play time in games like Red Faction Guerrilla and GTA 4. Not because of the story and what not, but because of the PHYSICS and interaction with the levels and characters. Playing Red Faction Guerrilla and being able to bring down an ENTIRE multi-story building and watch it collapse in on itself and blow up semi-realistically using actual physics just never gets old. Same with GTA 4 in it's car damage and character physics. Running people over, shooting people in the knees as they're running towards you and watching them fall flat on their face and tumble a couple times is just amazing. Maybe a little sick minded of me...but it all boils down to just that realism. That feeling of "holy shit I just fucked some shit up".

      So I say next-gen because with the new processing power and what not I see stuff like this becoming more common place. I mean, imagine GTA 6 on the next consoles...look at what they did with GTA 4 and what they're doing with GTA V on CURRENT console technology that's 6-7 years old!

      Anyways...Infinite sucks, reviewers have lost their fucking minds (only rational conclusion I can come to), and games need more shit going on else it all feels the same at some point.

      That is all...sorry for the long ass post. I have a tendency to do that! :-p

      Delete
    4. There was a Jan 2013 Forbes article that said game/hardware sales were down 20% in 2012. Review sites are dependent upon the industry succeeding.
      I'm not going to insist a game reviewer conspiracy theory, but I think that it may have been in the collective unconscious that Bioshock Infinite COULDN'T fail. It wasn't going to be allowed to fail. They didn't get together in a secret room and decide this, I just think that given the adoration for the IP, the supposed development time, the hype, and the respect for Ken Levine, there wasn't anyone that was going to slam it, and I think that nobody wanted to be "those guys" that gave it a 9 instead of a 10, just in case it actually was the Ocarina of Time reborn, in the eyes of the consumer.
      I'm not going to look back, but I'd be interested to see if there were any sites that gave the original Bioshock a 7 or 8, I bet there were some, and I bet they didn't do it again.
      The court of public opinion is very strong, and nobody wanted to be the review that didn't give universal praise to something that the public might really rally behind, because just as there are those who will say, "Why so much praise" there are also those who will say "Why not more praise" just as loudly.

      Delete
  34. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Some very interesting points from you guys about the sycophantic reviewing/ball gargling that's been going on. I've also been wondering if the video game marketing/critique system is badly broken. I suggest three reasons this might be happening:

    (1)Low standards of criticism
    (2)Stagnation/decadence of geek culture (what I like to call "The Late Age of Geekdom")
    (3)Corporate Patronage/Conflicts of Interest

    In the last 10-15 years the internet has transformed global culture, with geekdom becoming increasingly mainstream. Like Ancient Rome, geekdom has surpassed its golden age of splendor and creativity and collapsed into an orgy of self-love, exchanging and collecting of obscure references, and endless nerd back-slapping. It is now hip to call yourself a geek and strive to be a geek, and "geek" trends rise and fall with the tide. The source of the problem is the types of people whom geeks, either through complacency or jaded enthusiasm, have voluntary chosen to be their spokespeople: other geeks. You see, most game reviewers are ordinary geeks/basement dwellers who managed to raise their profile through incessant shit-spamming of their opinions on the blogosphere (present company excepted). Their opinions are no different from those of your average nerd, they are just more vocal about it. However, unlike film or literary critics (such as Roger Ebert), you don't need special credentials to be a game reviewer or spokesperson for anything related to geek culture - you only need people clicking on your links. Because of this, the standard of criticism has been irreparably lowered over time.

    The final nail in the coffin has been mass commercialization: corporations (in this case, game developers) have learned to monetize geekdom, and the representatives whom they communicate with to find out what geeks want are the crappy, sub-standard Kotaku writers that are supposedly the spokespeople for geekdom. These geek sellouts get kickbacks, promotional items, and minor internet fame and glory in return for sucking the devs' balls. In journalism, such a conflict of interest would destroy a career or even be illegal in some cases. In the wild west of internet culture, this kind of crap still flies.

    I'd like to conclude by saying I don't think commercialization is a bad thing, but we geeks should take back what's ours and recognize sellouts for what they are. True geekdom is about true passion and mutual respect for the material. I'm not sure how to fix the problem. Going back to the Rome analogy, I guess history will repeat itself and the decadent hype-empire will collapse, returning to the middle ages where a few educated monks lovingly preserve and safeguard the old texts in preparation for a new generation to build upon it (the Renaissance). Sorry guys, I like history :).

    ReplyDelete
  36. Quick question.

    I just beat the game again thinking I maybe missed something (I didn't) but it got me thinking...why did black people come to Columbia and if they came by choice (which they had to as slavery is abolished by 1912) then why don't they just leave? If there is an answer in the game I didn't catch it the first time around or on my second play through.

    I don't know...maybe it's just one of the big plot holes.

    ReplyDelete
  37. guys
    for download this full games just click here
    BioShock Infinite PC Game

    ReplyDelete
  38. Hot-pluggable USB devices can be connected to without turning the computer off, enabling removable devices to be plugged and unplugged as required. This feature, combined with simple-to-reach ports on the front of the computer case, gave rise to the USB drive, that is employed for storage and numerous applications.

    With USB-compliant PCs and peripherals, you only plug them in and turn them on! USB makes the full process automatic. It's like adding instant new capabilities to your LAPTOP. You never want to open your LAPTOP, and you do not need to fret concerning add-in cards, DIP switch settings or IRQs.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Hi there,

    Just stopped in to say that the game is quite good, and just because a load of people like a thing doesn't mean that they are wrong for liking it. Also, the original blog post feels very unfocused and keeps returning to the same points over and over again for countless paragraphs, rendering it somewhat unreadable.

    Good day.

    ReplyDelete
  40. This game was the FPS version of Final Fantasy 13. That's all that needs to be said really.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Just completed this game earlier today, and honestly I was disappointed. The game was frustrating and difficult for me as it was, struggling to hear the villain's mad rambling over the top of gun-fire I expected to hear loudly every time someone started talking. Could have turned the sound effects down and turned on subtitles, but even then important dialogue would be replaced with "There he is!" or something equally as pointless.

    The story itself was a buzz-kill and had the potential to be way more uplifting. Bioshock was depressing as fuck, but redeemed itself by purposely being creepy and having such a pretty and heart-warming ending where he finally escapes and has a family with the Little Sisters he rescued. The second one was a bit of a downer, but if you really think about it, the result was the best for Subject Delta as his consciousness was put inside his daughter because his body was fucked up enough was it was. This game however, I had to Google the ending to find out what the fuck that was all about, because I didn't think at the time that I needed to replay it twice or three times just to clarify it for myself. For that my intelligence feels insulted and once again I feel stupid for not understanding one bit, I didn't even understand how he was Comstock as-well as Booker. The only thing I knew was that Elizabeth was Booker's daughter.

    Frank Fontaine is still my favourite villain, be tricking Jack the entire time into thinking he was helping him but really pulling the strings all along with a different name and voice/accent. The bit where he goes "Cheers.. Boyyo..." and then laughs manically, and then continues to taunt you through the final corridors.

    The game-play annoyed me a lot too, the navigator got stuck all the time and I was pretty much looping round the sky-liner because the arrow kept disappearing. I kept running out of ammo and my salt kept running the fuck out. At-least in the first two games I could check the map for the nearest vending machine to buy more ammo, EVE and health packs, we didn't even have a map in this, or even stock up on health kits!

    One of the only things I liked about the story was the relationship between Booker and Elizabeth, they seemed to work together well and were just getting close by the end of it. An extension of the story where an older Booker and Elizabeth team up for something else not knowing anything of the story that happened with multiple realities would be awesome but I doubt that would happen. I mean, I think I can be safe in assuming I'm not the only one who thought it would be cool to see Booker and Elizabeth at-least have a conversation about something that's nothing to do with the story or anything.

    I only played through these three games to remove my curiosity, and the peer pressure of most gamers nowadays making you feel like you're not worthy because you haven't played a certain mainstream title.

    ReplyDelete
  42. I agree with 100 percent I was gonna get this but I had a feeling this game was gonna let me down like aliens CM so I bought tomb raider instead and my friend got it and i borrowed it I started in June the game was such a letdown I hated the story the enemies the over irritating gameplay at times I only really played just to see if it had any connection with bioshock 1 and 2 and honestly I never beat the game I got stuck at the final fight aginst all the barge ships I never got angry at a game but this game pushed me over the edge I had to give it back this game was a failure I hope they don't make a sequel and make something enjoyable again

    ReplyDelete
  43. i completely agree with you especially about the part on sky lines in the original demo you seemed to have vast parts of Columbia to fight in and the skyline seemed was large and seemed believable. In the actual game the skyline just goes in a loop and iss very small. Does anyone have like a link to download the demos and try them. Irrational should at least include them as DLC so i could play the game i thought i was buying.

    ReplyDelete