Why is this game so highly rated just for the story?

[Kurtino]

When I read comments about this game I see a lot of mixed opinions but one thing that always comes up is that the story is brilliant, the combat and gameplay isn't.

Why is this game so highly rated just for the story? It has such mixed reveiws but the ratings were sky high for whatever reason.

I personally can't stand playing it bores me to death...but there's only one thing that sort of kept me going which was Elizabeth, which I agree with others...she's a interesting character that makes you want to keep playing just to see she evolve and develops as a character.

The combat and gameplay though? It's just boring...repeatative, doesn't feel challenging, smart or interesting at all and it just puts me to sleep.

A huge fan of the first bioshock 1 and 2...don't really see what the powers are even about in this game...you drink them from elixirs that are scattered around and served to you for seemingly no reason and are free gain...but they're weaker than just headshotting them with pretty much any weapon...like, why evne use a fireball or crows or whatever then walk around eating cakes and smoking cigarretes to restore salts when I can just kill them way more effectively with my weapons? They feel bad.

So the powers, one of the main gameplay elements from the first 2 games feel redundant and there for the sake of it...the shooting feels as basic as any shooter and nothing else in the gameplay feels impressive or interesting...that hook stuff just feels silly.

So really, can story in a game alone drive such high scores? I personally need a balance of both or at least interesting gameplay...because as much as I love the story I can't keep myself awake inbetween scenes.

[S.H.O.D.A.N.L]

I do have to agree with you in the combat sense, the vigors didn't feel as needed as the plasmids were in Bioshock, and with such weapon variety you can breeze through the game at lower difficulty by just using weapons.

The reason why Bioshock is so highly rated is because the story is fresh and interesting in a genre in which first person shooters are dumb and bland. Look at Call of Duty, the stroy is boring and only rellies on explosions and Michael Bay set pieces. Battlefield single player tries too hard when battlefield is really just a multiplayer experience.

The setting is also cool. I mean its a fictional world even more interesting than the real world, it's awesome and you really want to find more voxophones to discover more about the city and its people.

2001 a space oddessy, is quiet and action is really limited to mere walking, but it's enthralling and as well as that it creates a sense of tension. Bioshock is like that, it doesn't need to create moments of shooting but moments of tension. Splicers in one and Handymen in the other create heart skipping moments.

To be honest with you i was disappointed with Infinite, look at this video; i can spot at least 10 things that weren't included in the game:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEBwKO4RFOU

Yes, it had alot of problems but it was still an experience, the setting, the characters, the story, it was brilliant, hopefully the dlc will patch things up and make it an even better game. and i found that by playing it again i enjoyed it more. Stroy alone can create amazing novels, films, and video games, but with Infinite that combat was not needed as much as they put in there was too much shooting for my taste.

[Strange Sentinel]

Here's the thing: every review or thoughts (including your own) on BS:I has been mostly subjective (in other words - 'It's, like, your opinion, man'), even critics such as IGN or even TotalBiscuit (including the opinions about THOSE reviews).
It is understandable that some people are confused that the story was one of the more hyped parts of the game, and felt let down by the gameplay. Personally, I didn't have a problem with combat - I personally loved vigours for groups, and even though some people bagged out the shooting side (Halo-esque shielding and 2 weapon limit, etc.)., I didn't mind as I was having fun with it (I think this is something that's up to the player themselves though, because I just went nuts on everything rather than take a conservative approach, even on 1991 mode).
Of course, a rather plausible reason would be that the story is rather different for a FPS, even if there are flaws that can be apparent, and the fact that it is more noted by reviewers means that even if the gameplay is not entertaining, there's something that can still immerse you into the game.

[Kurtino]

Originally posted by LonelyRobot:

Here's the thing: every review or thoughts (including your own) on BS:I has been mostly subjective (in other words - 'It's, like, your opinion, man'), even critics such as IGN or even TotalBiscuit (including the opinions about THOSE reviews).
It is understandable that some people are confused that the story was one of the more hyped parts of the game, and felt let down by the gameplay. Personally, I didn't have a problem with combat - I personally loved vigours for groups, and even though some people bagged out the shooting side (Halo-esque shielding and 2 weapon limit, etc.)., I didn't mind as I was having fun with it (I think this is something that's up to the player themselves though, because I just went nuts on everything rather than take a conservative approach, even on 1991 mode).
Of course, a rather plausible reason would be that the story is rather different for a FPS, even if there are flaws that can be apparent, and the fact that it is more noted by reviewers means that even if the gameplay is not entertaining, there's something that can still immerse you into the game.

I don't know, that sounds like opening a book, reading 5 pages then between every 5 pages having to do the dishes or some chore until you're allowed to read the next part of the book.

There are many games that have been very unsuccessful in many aspects but have reviews that say, the game was bad but the story was good. Although it is opinion, it makes no sense that this game took a aspect from half-life 2 which was openly admitted and that alone was strong enough to rise it to the top charts.

I find the combat to be much more enjoyable in the other 2 bioshocks, that's the worst part of it...I felt like I wasn't jumping into a unknown game or new branded title until I actually played and thought to myself why does this feel worse than the other 2 games?

[Strange Sentinel]

Originally posted by Kurtino:

Originally posted by LonelyRobot:

Here's the thing: every review or thoughts (including your own) on BS:I has been mostly subjective (in other words - 'It's, like, your opinion, man'), even critics such as IGN or even TotalBiscuit (including the opinions about THOSE reviews).
It is understandable that some people are confused that the story was one of the more hyped parts of the game, and felt let down by the gameplay. Personally, I didn't have a problem with combat - I personally loved vigours for groups, and even though some people bagged out the shooting side (Halo-esque shielding and 2 weapon limit, etc.)., I didn't mind as I was having fun with it (I think this is something that's up to the player themselves though, because I just went nuts on everything rather than take a conservative approach, even on 1991 mode).
Of course, a rather plausible reason would be that the story is rather different for a FPS, even if there are flaws that can be apparent, and the fact that it is more noted by reviewers means that even if the gameplay is not entertaining, there's something that can still immerse you into the game.

I don't know, that sounds like opening a book, reading 5 pages then between every 5 pages having to do the dishes or some chore until you're allowed to read the next part of the book.

There are many games that have been very unsuccessful in many aspects but have reviews that say, the game was bad but the story was good. Although it is opinion, it makes no sense that this game took a aspect from half-life 2 which was openly admitted and that alone was strong enough to rise it to the top charts.

I find the combat to be much more enjoyable in the other 2 bioshocks, that's the worst part of it...I felt like I wasn't jumping into a unknown game or new branded title until I actually played and thought to myself why does this feel worse than the other 2 games?

Well, BS:I was attempted to be a 'standalone' game from the other Bioshocks (apart from the glaring similarities and ending ) where the developers tried different things with it's elements, and maybe you are missing something, or it's lacking it, that they didn't include in this game's combat that they had in the first and second.

[Kurtino]

Originally posted by LonelyRobot:

Well, BS:I was attempted to be a 'standalone' game from the other Bioshocks (apart from the glaring similarities and ending ) where the developers tried different things with it's elements, and maybe you are missing something, or it's lacking it, that they didn't include in this game's combat that they had in the first and second.

Well in the other bioshocks the powers were core gameplay mechanics..like the slicers were byproducts of the plasmids and those gave you powers but were also very unstable...stuff like that. The whole game and environment was what happened to the world and the people there because of this technology that corrupted and twisted people's minds and bodies.

I can understand Infinite tried to be a seperate game and I don't think its a sequel? I can't say because I haven't completed it but I don't see any relation from the others so to me when I see the powers and it doesn't make any sense to why they're incorperated into the world it just feels lack luster, confusing and silly. Like that woman who serves you a tonic at the start of the game that allows you to possess machines...like why would she serve you that and why would it be allowed? The powers seem to be the only things that are related to Bioshock in this game and yet they don't seem to make sense. They're heavily advertised and openly accepted by the community if you look at bilboards, advertisements and videos played in the world and yet no one uses them to fight the guy that's drinking them all?

Maybe the game later on reveals more about the powers but from the start and quite a bit into the game with elizabeth I'm seeing no relation to the old games...the horrors gone, the powers aren't linked to anything, the enemies all seem to be just policemen or militia with the odd "power" enemy and the combat just feels like I should be gunning down hordes of them and headshotting instead of even exploring ways to use these supposively new powers because the guns are more effective. Gun is instant death but crows/fire etc seem to be 2 hits to kill.

[LagMan_PT]

Theres a connection, you just gotta find out as you play the game

[Whale Slippers]

The game really seems to be optimised for the higher two difficulty settings. They require you to utilise the vigours and different gear combinations if you don't want to be dying all of the time. I honestly don't see why the combat would be boring. When I'm playing, it's practically required to be moving at all times, jumping to a sky-line when available to move around so I'm not getting cornered all the time.

That being said, I did try playing on Easy and Normal, and I found I could sit in place at the first Fireman fight and easily kill him without even moving. Thus, I reiterate that it seems meant for higher levels of difficulty.

[Kurtino]

Originally posted by Caress of Steel:

The game really seems to be optimised for the higher two difficulty settings. They require you to utilise the vigours and different gear combinations if you don't want to be dying all of the time. I honestly don't see why the combat would be boring. When I'm playing, it's practically required to be moving at all times, jumping to a sky-line when available to move around so I'm not getting cornered all the time.

That being said, I did try playing on Easy and Normal, and I found I could sit in place at the first Fireman fight and easily kill him without even moving. Thus, I reiterate that it seems meant for higher levels of difficulty.

That is probably true. As a rule of thumb for any game I just don't change the settings, I presume that normal is the way the game should be played and in the past normal was the standard sort of difficult level for gaming that was still challenging. Guess those times have passed and I'll be forced to play hard to experience normal.

Just played Dead Space 3 from origin and had to start the game on hard because on normal I was swimming with ammo and health packs...and even hard was too easy. Feels like they've really toned down games for some reason.

[Pixel]

Это на редкость хорошая игра на самом деле!

[timeformime]

I also just got Dead Space 3 from Origin and I started it on Impossible - which is a stiff challenge and fits the setting much better than normal - when I got to a room literally full of necromorphs I actually screamed. I played Infinite on hard as well because normal made me feel like I was fighting teddy bears!

I'm not that hardcore of a gamer - but I also don't like a game to give me everything so easily. Hard mode just makes them both much, much better games.

Also, it's interesting to note that Infinite was reviewed by several sites on PC. That almost never happens with a multi-platform title, but Irrational probably was aware that's where the best experience was.

[Bite]

Originally posted by Kurtino:

I can understand Infinite tried to be a seperate game and I don't think its a sequel? I can't say because I haven't completed it but I don't see any relation from the others so to me when I see the powers and it doesn't make any sense to why they're incorperated into the world it just feels lack luster, confusing and silly. Like that woman who serves you a tonic at the start of the game that allows you to possess machines...like why would she serve you that and why would it be allowed? The powers seem to be the only things that are related to Bioshock in this game and yet they don't seem to make sense. They're heavily advertised and openly accepted by the community if you look at bilboards, advertisements and videos played in the world and yet no one uses them to fight the guy that's drinking them all?

You're questioning alot of things you assume are not in the story, I'm gonna say this and hope not to spoil anything, but there's a reason for all of these things to play out like that, I hope you're able to piece everything together by the end.

[LeftPaw]

Originally posted by Kurtino:

The combat and gameplay though? It's just boring...repeatative, doesn't feel challenging, smart or interesting at all and it just puts me to sleep.

Was really looking forward to this after reading some reviews, but after a hour or two's play I have come to the same conclusion. It's how to stay awake.

[Kurtino]

Originally posted by Bite:

Originally posted by Kurtino:

I can understand Infinite tried to be a seperate game and I don't think its a sequel? I can't say because I haven't completed it but I don't see any relation from the others so to me when I see the powers and it doesn't make any sense to why they're incorperated into the world it just feels lack luster, confusing and silly. Like that woman who serves you a tonic at the start of the game that allows you to possess machines...like why would she serve you that and why would it be allowed? The powers seem to be the only things that are related to Bioshock in this game and yet they don't seem to make sense. They're heavily advertised and openly accepted by the community if you look at bilboards, advertisements and videos played in the world and yet no one uses them to fight the guy that's drinking them all?

You're questioning alot of things you assume are not in the story, I'm gonna say this and hope not to spoil anything, but there's a reason for all of these things to play out like that, I hope you're able to piece everything together by the end.

Well the issue isn't really the story...that's the only thing that seems to keep me wanting to play...it's the horrible gameplay before the story..

[Ivlichnov]

I agree with you somewhat about the combat system. But to a certain extent the combat is what you make it. Holding down 'Q' brings up the vigors menu, which brings a whole load of possibilitys. I could rush in and fire my weapon until some is dead, or I could consider my options and work out a way of efficiently taking down my opponents in interesting ways.

As for the origin of Vigors, well that's explained in a Voxaphone recording.

Yeup and for me in the end, the story outweighed any issues I had with the combat system. And then I saw the trailer for the upcoming 2 part DLC. Now that's going to be interesting.

[Tusken GA]

I couldn't muster the same passion for Elizabeth as the rest of you seem to have. She was decent enough for an FPS game, but Mass Effect 2 by far had more interesting and complex characters and Tomb Raider 2013 had by far a better individual character story arc.

In comparison Elizabeth felt a bit hollow to me. Like her entire arc was just phoned in by the writers. It was pretty predictable and her dialog wasn't particularly original so I just ended up feeling apathetic to the character.

Then the whole multiverse thing just left me irritated. It took so many liberties with the theory that any profound impact it could have had was squandered, leaving not much more than gibberish.

Then, as discussed elsewhere, the combat wasn't anything spectacular either. In the end it's a decent enough FPS, certainly better than most other FPSs on the market right now, but it's a far, far cry from flawless.