The Bioshock thread

[Luvly KM]

BioShock 2 is the better overall game. Better combat, better morality system, better choices that impact story and continually great level design and atmosphere.

Also, Sofia Lamb is a really well defined 'enemy', neither black nor white to Fontaine's cackling corruption. I even found myself agreeing with her sentiments on an intelligent level!!! BioShock 1 just has all the spectacle and a forth wall twist that really makes people think it is the better game.

Both are great but it is funny, i am noticing a lot more nods to B2 in Infinite. The fairground propaganda theme is directly copied from 2!

[mue 26]

I've actually heard a lot of people say they prefer the 2nd game to the first, but I'm definitely in the "Bioshock 1 was the better experience" camp. I guess from a technical perspective Bioshock 2 did improve the combat a bit, but the game also felt too combat heavy for me, and I did start to tire of it. It's also not helped by the fact that it totally lacks that sense of awe and excitement the first game gave me, I felt like I'd already seen it all before. There were some welcome improvements and expansions of the setting, it definitely made better use of the underwater aspect for example. But was still too similar, and lacked that impact. Likewise I also felt the the story lacked impact too. I mean, it certainly had it's moments, but it was also quite messy, and I wasn't quite so enamoured with Sofia, she was too obvious a counterpoint to Ryan. Yes, religious communism isn't all it's cracked up to be, I get it.

I also had additional issues with the pacing and that my Big Daddy didn't feel as powerful as I would have expected. With all that said though, I still absolutely agree that it was a great game regardless. Could have been an expansion pack though

[Riku Rose]

Wasn't asking if it's better just if I have to play it to understand everything in Infinite. I liked the first one but not sure if I can be bothered with another 15 hour game set in Rapture as Infinite just looks so much more appealing to myself. Even if it's just little nods I'll play through Bioshock 2 as I have it because of PS+ but I wanted to know if it's necessary or related at all other than the name.

[mue 26]

No, not really. Infinite isn't connected like 1 and 2 were, I'd say just go straight for infinite if you can't be bothered for another game set in Rapture.

[Who Really Cares?]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0reqx2tV34[/youtube]

[Luvly KM]

yes i'd relay to just jump straight into Infinite.

Responding to Mue 26 regarding BioShock 2's narrative: i just really like the sense behind attempting to create the "Utopian".. As Rapture had shown, it was Humanity itself which had failed and no particular individual. The rationale behind supporting a Utopian before a Utopia can arrive is sound, empatheic logic. But then of course the game asks if the sordid, behavioral conditioning means can justify such ends! and for this instance it actually might!! which for myself is a shocking revelation in a medium where baddies are drawn with very crude motives.

Such was the philosophical questions it pondered however, i found myself very much disliking its gamey conclusion. A la Deus Ex HR, it needed a grand sit down conversation battle where ones tongue and mind became the most powerful plasmid!

[mue 26]

Right, just finished Infinite, I loved it. I thought the narrative was great, and that everything was handled fairly well, the end sequence in particular I found to be quite impactful. Though I can also understand that its not to some's taste. It basically comes down to the fact that some will just think

parallel universe gibberish, meh

while others like myself will appreciate such twists and turns. I can't say it's all incredibly original, but I do genuinely think it was handled very well, and I was kind of gob smacked at the ending (in a good way). It's a unusually ambitious narrative for a AAA title for sure. Though, if you miss out on many of the audio recordings tucked away in all the nooks and crannys of the game, it can really detract from one's understanding of the game's world and events that transpire. So exploring and finding as many of them as possible is pretty essential, in my opinion.

I really enjoyed the combat, I know some like to bash it, but I've had as much fun with the combat in this game than I have had with any FPS. The combination of options at your disposal can make things pretty interesting, and some of the best set pieces let you zip around the skylines like a nutter.

Visually, this game is a class all of it's own. I honestly think this is the most visually impressive game I've ever played. It's just so consistently impressive. Coming from a game like MGS Revengence that's chock full of wholly uninspired gray/brown charmless environments (that are admittedly choppable) to Bioshock infinite, is like a slap in the face. They have some very talented artists working at Irrational that's for sure. The amount of detail and incidental touches is ridiculous.

But that last line can said about the game as a whole, the amount of subtle detail packed into this game is quite breathtaking.

[Who Really Cares?]

This will probably be the next game i buy.



[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIfQUIZhabQ[/youtube]

[Luvly KM]

Just completed Infinite myself and my overall feeling after swilling it around my head for a few nights is that it is much of a muchness.

Initially I was incredibly impressed with the intricacy of the story with all the hints that it gives early on. The way you instantly revive when falling off buildings, the number of marks on the chalkboard, the:

"he doesn't ROW? "

"no, he DOESN'T row"

It all hints at the infinite set of universes the game is taking place within each with its own set of constants and variables. It feels clever and well thought out but after a while it just feels silly if you think about it too much.


I mean, I was very happy to see a complex indie-esque storyline find its way into a mainstream game but i found the actual plotting to be VERY poor - just an info dump at the end of the game with nothing much happening throughout. Chen Lin? Daisy Fitzroy? Slate? non of these variables matter in the grand scheme of things and were more so a hollow vehicle to emphasise certain aspects of the main story and not important in and of themselves. As players we don't care whether Fink lives or dies etc.

Also, they should have had more audio-files/info on how vigors were created, how the ballons were quantumly placed, the day-to-day toil of Columbia etc etc.... BioShock 1 and 2 did this superbly: We had audio files from the head engineer of Rapture talking about the difficulties of building underewater, how plasmids were created and controlled, why big daddies were needed, overall a lot more colour to the ecosyetm of the city.

As for the gameplay, i found the mainstream element of shooting to be rather mundane, offset by a lopsided economy of ammo, coins, pick-ups and shield regeneration. the people you kill, not splicers of Zombies, don't feel like real people and i don't think the game cleverly rectifies the disconnect of an FPS trying to tell a story of personal redemption.

In another Universe it is the best game ever made.

[mue 26]

Finally, someone to talk to about this game! Why have more people around here not played it?!

I mean, I was very happy to see a complex indie-esque storyline find its way into a mainstream game but i found the actual plotting to be VERY poor - just an info dump at the end of the game with nothing much happening throughout. Chen Lin? Daisy Fitzroy? Slate? non of these variables matter in the grand scheme of things and were more so a hollow vehicle to emphasise certain aspects of the main story and not important in and of themselves. As players we don't care whether Fink lives or dies etc.

I can understand this criticism. This seems to be one of the main things some people take issue with, that the way the story unfolds ultimately renders everything that happened within the game as inconsequential. It doesn't really bother me so much though. I don't necessarily agree it was just an info dump at the end; part of the fun is piecing together as much as you can throughout the game, and I think we're meant to work out most of what is going on before the end, perhaps aside from the

Dewitt=Comstock reveal, that is obviously intended to be a shock revelation, not that it isn't completely figurable well before hand too, mind.

Also, they should have had more audio-files/info on how vigors were created, how the ballons were quantumly placed, the day-to-day toil of Columbia etc etc.... BioShock 1 and 2 did this superbly: We had audio files from the head engineer of Rapture talking about the difficulties of building underewater, how plasmids were created and controlled, why big daddies were needed, overall a lot more colour to the ecosyetm of the city.

I do agree with this. Rapture did feel like a more consistent and fully realised city in this regard. But I think it's because Infinite isn't really about Columbia in the same way that Bioshock 1 and 2 are about Rapture. Infinite widens the scope and is more about the bigger picture, as well as being a much more personal journey. I think the EDGE review got it spot on when it said "Columbia’s fascinating, but it’s not what Infinite is about. Infinite is about Elizabeth, some key players, and its own sci-fi mythology". This is true, but with that said, I'd be lying if I said that I didn't prefer Columbia as an overall setting. Columbia may be less consistent and coherent (things like Vigors never quite mesh with it's world in quite the same way Plasmids do in Rapture, for example), but I just found it a richer location, larger in scope and more alive. The game also eases the pace in places and allows you to simply wander around these stunning locations (like Battleship Bay), soaking up the atmosphere. In comparison, Rapture was just a derelict and dead underwater city to me.

All things said, the game certainly isn't perfect, and some aspects I definitely do think were done a bit cackhandedly

Fitzroy's rather extreme transformation into a murderous psychopath, for example

or left a bit vague for some people's taste. But on the whole, the overall narrative did really succeed for me. Sure, it's not hard for sci fi nerds on forums to pick holes in it's logic, due to the nature of the story, but that doesn't matter to me when the game did such a good job of actually hooking you in and gripping you. In my opinion it's a superior experience to Bioshock 1.

[Luvly KM]

I'm happy you enjoyed it so much. Battleship Bay was an ultimate highlight, when Elizabeth began skipping stones i actually got a real life deja vu which i found to be incredibly strange. it was an enigmatic moment. Girls just wanna have fun echoing in the background...

All i can say is that despite my misgivings I still greatly appreciate what it is doing. rarely do i want to replay a game so earnestly and i'm thinking that 1999 mode shall alleviate some of my gameplay concerns. But yes major plaudits have to be given to the Levine for the

Songbird death crawl in Bioshock 1

internet finding. A beautiful bow to the series whilst duly underlining the multiverse thematics.

Also i am positively certain that the Songbird design was stolen from a big Daddy via a tear into Rapture, no other way can we explain its strong mutual link to Elizabeth. Our very own 'little sister'.

Further small details like that really make the game appreciable.

[the police drawing of Booker looking a bit like Comstock too!!]

[mue 26]

OMG I just searched about that

songbird death cry in Bioshock 1

MIND BLOWN That is such a great little touch.

And yeah

Songbird's design did come from Fink observing the Big Daddys through a tear. There's a recording that hints at it

[Perfect_Chaos]

"he doesn't ROW? "

"no, he DOESN'T row"

i didnt get that part. whats it mean?

[mue 26]

Have you finished the game? Only carry on if you have

It's because the Dewitt your playing as is only the current Dewitt in a long line of Dewitt's that the Lutece's have sent back on a mission to rescue Elizabeth. They've seen all the other Dewitt's do exactly the same thing time after time, and know that Dewitt never rows. Same thing with the coin toss and their score board, Dewitt gets heads every time.

I really want to go back and replay this to discover all the little nods like this, and see how everything was planned out from the beginning. And I practically NEVER replay games. But this game would be great for a reply once your enlightened to everything. Though, as much as I liked the combat the first time around, I kind of feel like I've had enough of it for now, especially the later parts that get a tad more combat heavy.

[Luvly KM]

"he doesn't ROW? "

"no, he DOESN'T row"

i didnt get that part. whats it mean?

Indirect spoilers abound

It is rather ambiguous but for me it is just a wry hint towards the multiverse shenanigans early on.

to analyse it more deeply I surmise that as the player we are the 'critical-path' Booker. We are the Booker who successfully manages to close the cycle of Comstock->Elizabeth->NewYork in flames. And this Critical-path successful Booker DOESN'T Row. There will be Bookers which did row, Bookers which also threw Tails and picked number 59 at the raffle, only these Bookers did not go on to 'complete the game' or close the Comstock cycle.

I haven't read this theory anywhere so it is not ratified but I personally believe that the Lutece's, just as they saw New York in flames via a tear, they also saw a Universe where they never met each other and Columbia was never built. And it is my belief that their 'little thought experiment' is simply their attempt to recreate and record the latter outcome... And it is down this branch of multiverse which Booker always throws heads, Doesn't row and picks 77 at the raffle.


My head[s] hurt[s].