First Review for Bioshock Infinite is Up!! (Official Review Thread)

[Dr.HannibalLecter]

there were moments where you walk around armed in front of both civilians and cops. this is part of the reason why i wish it played more like deus ex. future detroit behaved like a real place, if you go around armed, people will acknowledge your weapons, and you can actually talk and get things done with words, unlike this game. the first bioshock didnt need talking and interaction with people because they were all insane plasmid addicts. this game needs middleground between action and role playing.

True

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEBwKO4RFOU]BioShock Infinite: 15 Minutes of Gameplay Footage [HD] - YouTube[/ame]​

^ What happened to the game above?

The Bioshock Infinite we got is a Potemkin village, inhabited by lifeless NPCs

 

[Ice Cold]

Spoiler

After the current Booker assists the Vox in taking over Fink Manufacturing, Fitzroy kills Jeremiah Fink, ending his ruthless exploitation of the poor. Paranoid, bloodthirsty and mad with power, she orders the death of Booker and Elizabeth, though the latter kills her when she tries to execute a child. It is suggested that Preston E. Downs takes over leadership and the Vox Populi rampage across Columbia, burning entire Founders districts to the ground and executing innocent citizens. When Booker and Elizabeth head out to destroy the Siphon, the whole of Columbia is shown to be in flames as the Vox take over the city.

Did I miss this part, I don't remember innocent civilians being executed.
Well except in old town (or whatever the shanty town was called) but nothing too crazy not like they were marching out women and children and killing them in the streets a la King Washington in the Tyranny

 

[winb83]

i also dont like how they make the vox equal to a bunch of fascists. it's cowardly storytelling, in my opinion.

to me it was good story telling. everything wasn't cut and dry good and evil both sides were kinda foul. its kinda like how when a person is a child and their parents spank them and they vow to never spank their kids when they grow up but once they get grown and the kids cut up the kids get that ass beat.

i mean there were the black people and then there were the Vox. the Vox would be the equivalent of black leaders who rise up because the blacks are oppressed but just cause they rise up and are oppressed doesn't make them good. many a black leader could be just as corrupt as the oppressors.

 

[NZA]

True

BioShock Infinite: 15 Minutes of Gameplay Footage [HD] - YouTube​

^ What happened to the game above?

The Bioshock Infinite we got is a Potemkin village, inhabited by lifeless NPCs

yeah, that was just some scripted marketing video put out to show what they were aiming for at some point. then high level people started quitting the company and whole elements of the game were getting scrapped and replaced. i assume the game we got was a compromise to be able to get the game out in a somewhat timely manner. people drank enough of the kool aid to make this game rank better than what it is. i give it 8.5/10, and much of that is based on art direction, animation, and voice acting.

 

[NZA]

to me it was good story telling. everything wasn't cut and dry good and evil both sides were kinda foul. its kinda like how when a person is a child and their parents spank them and they vow to never spank their kids when they grow up but once they get grown and the kids cut up the kids get that ass beat.

i mean there were the black people and then there were the Vox. the Vox would be the equivalent of black leaders who rise up because the blacks are oppressed but just cause they rise up and are oppressed doesn't make them good. many a black leader could be just as corrupt as the oppressors.

to me it was cut and dry, but in a different way. the morals of acceptable violence are cut and dry in the sense that because a revolution may have harmed some innocents or marginally guilty people, it is somehow equivalent to a borderline nazi regime. that to me is arbitrarily rigid to the point of absurdity. it essentially says that if a revolution cant be perfect, then you might as well stay on your knees, which again, is arbitrary due to the final solution to elizabeth's problem being

Spoiler

the death of booker even though he clearly is somewhere between innocent and marginally guilty due to him only understanding his actions in his own timeline and not the complicated multiverse

you cant make an omelete without breaking a few eggs. elizabeth is able to do this and she is a heroine, but daisy kills a few noncombatants and she's now a monster like comstock. it's clearly a ridiculous attempt to not pick sides.

 

[King Sun]

to me it was cut and dry, but in a different way. the morals of acceptable violence are cut and dry in the sense that because a revolution may have harmed some innocents or marginally guilty people, it is somehow equivalent to a borderline nazi regime. that to me is arbitrarily rigid to the point of absurdity. it essentially says that if a revolution cant be perfect, then you might as well stay on your knees, which again, is arbitrary due to the final solution to elizabeth's problem being

Spoiler

the death of booker even though he clearly is somewhere between innocent and marginally guilty due to him only understanding his actions in his own timeline and not the complicated multiverse

you cant make an omelete without breaking a few eggs. elizabeth is able to do this and she is a heroine, but daisy kills a few noncombatants and she's now a monster like comstock. it's clearly a ridiculous attempt to not pick sides.

the game is a lackluster and ass.

 

[Hiphoplives4eva]

Im only 1/3 of the way through, but i definitely enjoyed Tomb Raider and Far Cry more than this game. There was alot of unwarranted hype surrounding this title imho

 

[winb83]

to me it was cut and dry, but in a different way. the morals of acceptable violence are cut and dry in the sense that because a revolution may have harmed some innocents or marginally guilty people, it is somehow equivalent to a borderline nazi regime. that to me is arbitrarily rigid to the point of absurdity. it essentially says that if a revolution cant be perfect, then you might as well stay on your knees, which again, is arbitrary due to the final solution to elizabeth's problem being

Spoiler

the death of booker even though he clearly is somewhere between innocent and marginally guilty due to him only understanding his actions in his own timeline and not the complicated multiverse

you cant make an omelete without breaking a few eggs. elizabeth is able to do this and she is a heroine, but daisy kills a few noncombatants and she's now a monster like comstock. it's clearly a ridiculous attempt to not pick sides.

Elizabeth didn't have an angry mob following her having her and become drunk with power. Daisy is the monster Comstock created. she lost sight of the original purpose at some point and it became about her maintaining her new found power with her new found freedom. if somebody like Booker

Spoiler

who died in that universe and she used his death to propel herself to power shows up he has to be eliminated because he's existence threatens her power Daisy wasn't a monster like Comstock. She was just someone who was powerless and suddenly became very powerful and went mad.

 

[NZA]

Elizabeth didn't have an angry mob following her having her and become drunk with power. Daisy is the monster Comstock created. she lost sight of the original purpose at some point and it became about her maintaining her new found power with her new found freedom. if somebody like Booker

Spoiler

who died in that universe and she used his death to propel herself to power shows up he has to be eliminated because he's existence threatens her power Daisy wasn't a monster like Comstock. She was just someone who was powerless and suddenly became very powerful and went mad.

the writing is not nuanced enough to accommodate a flawed revolutionary leader of an otherwise good revolution. it merely treats a struggle between two somehow equally horrible groups as a backdrop to elizabeth and booker's story, which rang very hollow with me. this "everybody's crazy" route just seems like a way to not have to write a work that has an opinion on something.

the writers even go out of their way to make sure that

Spoiler

you see daisy about to kill a kid, just so you could call her a monster and feel good about killing a woman who was downtrodden and had the gall to fight back

perhaps if they found a more creative way to depict her "monsterousness" i might be moved. it was so abrupt.

her management of her image only struck me as the kind of calculation that all successful leaders need to an extent. it made her a more flawed and realistic leader, but even that didnt strike me as an evil equivalent that the narrative seems to want me to believe.

 

[Chris Mauro]

 

[Legal]

I know I'm late, but I just beat this the other day. This shyt is status to the fullest.

That ending.......... especially since they definitely laid small clues throughout the game about what would happen.

It's even crazier when you consider the implications/connections to the original Bioshock.

Part of me is excited to see what this DLC is about, and another part doesn't want anyone to mess with the story since the ending was so great.

 

[Black Hans]

there were moments where you walk around armed in front of both civilians and cops. this is part of the reason why i wish it played more like deus ex. future detroit behaved like a real place, if you go around armed, people will acknowledge your weapons, and you can actually talk and get things done with words, unlike this game. the first bioshock didnt need talking and interaction with people because they were all insane plasmid addicts. this game needs middleground between action and role playing.

i also dont like how they make the vox equal to a bunch of fascists. it's cowardly storytelling, in my opinion.

I thought the point was that Daisy was full of shyt and was the exact same as Comstock. The only reason why she wasn't doing the same thing as Comstock was because she wasn't in the position of Comstock. When she got there in the alternate universe, she turned out to be every bit the tyrant of Comstock. I thought the whole "Lions walk with lions" line pointed that out?

 

[Legal]

I thought the point was that Daisy was full of shyt and was the exact same as Comstock. The only reason why she wasn't doing the same thing as Comstock was because she wasn't in the position of Comstock. When she got there in the alternate universe, she turned out to be every bit the tyrant of Comstock. I thought the whole "Lions walk with lions" line pointed that out?

Cosign this. Also, all the voxophones with her backstory make a strong argument that her whole motivation was the murder that she was accused of, not some strong sense of anger due to class/racism.

 

[Marci-Senpai]

 

[NZA]

I thought the point was that Daisy was full of shyt and was the exact same as Comstock. The only reason why she wasn't doing the same thing as Comstock was because she wasn't in the position of Comstock. When she got there in the alternate universe, she turned out to be every bit the tyrant of Comstock. I thought the whole "Lions walk with lions" line pointed that out?

i understand that she is a "horrible" person in the story, i just dont like it. i think it is a cop out. i would prefer a story with a point of view other than apathy and cynicism. i think making daisy out to be literally as equally evil as comstock is weak.

and she was not really shown to be a tyrant since she is only depicted in the revolutionary stage, not the governing stage yet. she is shown to be a merciless warlord. we dont really get a good look at what columbia will be like when run by daisy after the damage from the battle is over. we can assume that the writers would make it like some kind of repressive maoist regime, but that would just be an assumption. what we do know is that her columbia would have racial and class equality superior to the rest of early 20th century america...