Bioshock: Infinite and other FPS's.. am i missing something?

[WWmelb]

Let me get to the main reasoning behind my questions: I (generally) don't enjoy first person shooters. Just not my cup of tea. Have nothing against games in first person perspective, i love my RPG's in first person, and survival horror in first person... but first person shooters generally just don't do it for me.

To me the combat in them seems to feel the same, you point gun and shoot things dead.

A lot of the reviews of Bioshock: Infinite I've read have criticized the gameplay and combat mechanics of this game saying they were dull and bland and repetitive.

That is a fair enough critique of a game, but completely opposite of what I experienced in the game.

I had an absolute blast with the combat in BS:I, with the rail swinging, face crunching, levitating and shooting fun. I found it fast paced (if a little sparse sometimes, with a few long stretches in between fights) but overall very satisfying indeed. I hadn't come across another game with similar combat style, and found it fresh and fun. I loved the use of the vigors and the way they complimented the gun play. I found the variety of weapons fun, and enjoyed all of them, even if i seemed to always drop what i had to get back my all-trusty machine gun. The vigors didn't fit the story really the way plasmids in the first game did, and was kind of just in there because it's bioshock, but they were fun. Which is what counted most to me.

Now, i am not saying the game is perfect, or saying other people can't think it was dull. They certainly can and my question is more about my experiences with the FPS genre.

Is there some subtle nuance to FPS games (only talking single player campaigns here) that I miss for the most part that makes them generally all feel the same to me?

What about BS:I was dull for most FPS fans with the combat?

Don't want to get into the story of BS:I here, but for the record i loved it. Certainly can see why others wouldn't though.

But if some FPS fans find this thread and can give me some insight that would be great.

 

[hazabaza1]

Honestly I don't get people who say it's bad either. It's probably one of my favourite modern shooter systems in a loooooooong time. No regenerating health, cool magic (well vigors but basically magic), the feel of the guns, the ammo scavenging, I really liked it.

There are some examples of shooting and the feedback from the shooting done better though. The new Wolfenstein (not the new one coming out the new one that isn't really new anymore) has some guns you get later on. I think it was a lightning gun and a plasma laser or something? Either way I have some good memories of them. Best thing in the damn game.

 

[Zhukov]

I loved it, and I've played a metric shitload of shooters.

The weapons were a bit unimaginative (little pistol, big pistol, SMG, MG, rifle, sniper, RPG etc etc) but they were sufficient and some of them were pleasingly satisfying to use.

Plus, crows.

 

[skywolfblue]

Is there some subtle nuance to FPS games (only talking single player campaigns here) that I miss for the most part that makes them generally all feel the same to me?

I'm confused. You said you liked Bioshock: Infinite because it played differently. Do you mean "They all feel the same except for Bioshock: Infinite"?

What about BS:I was dull for most FPS fans with the combat?

Compare it to Bioshock 2 combat.

The different ammo types really made for a lot of strategic choices. Especially Trap Ammo. I found setting up traps in preparation for a Little Sister gather or Big Daddy fight to be really fun. You could make consideration about where enemies would come from so as to put the traps in the right spot, how many and what type of traps to use, and so on. It made fights feel tactical and important.

I'm not sure why they didn't bring that to Bioshock: Infinite.

 

[Glongpre]

The vigors didn't fit the story really the way plasmids in the first game did, and was kind of just in there because it's bioshock, but they were fun.

But they did fit the story! It explains it in a voxophone.

People didn't like the combat because it isn't that good. I didn't mind the combat, it is pretty fun. However, it is very generic and vigors don't save it from being generic.

 

[WWmelb]

The vigors didn't fit the story really the way plasmids in the first game did, and was kind of just in there because it's bioshock, but they were fun.

But they did fit the story! It explains it in a voxophone.

People didn't like the combat because it isn't that good. I didn't mind the combat, it is pretty fun. However, it is very generic and vigors don't save it from being generic.

i may have missed that voxophone, there are 6 i missed in my play through.

And again, i get this it is *generic*. I don't mind you think so, but i want the reasons why so i can't start finding these subtle things that differ FPS games that i seem to be missing.

 

[WWmelb]

Is there some subtle nuance to FPS games (only talking single player campaigns here) that I miss for the most part that makes them generally all feel the same to me?

I'm confused. You said you liked Bioshock: Infinite because it played differently. Do you mean "They all feel the same except for Bioshock: Infinite"?

What about BS:I was dull for most FPS fans with the combat?

Compare it to Bioshock 2 combat.

The different ammo types really made for a lot of strategic choices. Especially Trap Ammo. I found setting up traps in preparation for a Little Sister gather or Big Daddy fight to be really fun. You could make consideration about where enemies would come from so as to put the traps in the right spot, how many and what type of traps to use, and so on. It made fights feel tactical and important.

I'm not sure why they didn't bring that to Bioshock: Infinite.

First point, that is pretty much what i mean yes. Most of them feel the same to me, but i thought BS:I felt very different to most.

Point two. I never played BS2 as the vast majority of reviews i read of the game said the story was utter bollocks and didn't fit well. So, i skipped it. the story being the best thing about the first bioshock, and finding the gameplay itself to be predominantly like all other FPS games, i didn't really want a "bioshock without story" that i got the impression that BS2 was.

If i'm wrong, i still may pick up a copy of BS2 and play it.

Wow my structure of responses today is bad. My brain is not doing the stuff correctly. Hope all that made sense.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

I (generally) don't enjoy first person shooters. Just not my cup of tea...

To me the combat in them seems to feel the same, you point gun and shoot things dead.

A lot of the reviews of Bioshock: Infinite I've read have criticized the gameplay and combat mechanics of this game saying they were dull and bland and repetitive.

I agree about how FPSs are feel very similar and also dull from a gameplay standpoint. Literally all you can do is usually move your character and shoot your gun (like say COD), it gets so repetitive and boring for me. Whereas in a 3rd-person shooter, you usually have some kind of moves to do like Ghost Recon Future Soldier has this dive roll where you can dive around say a corner and immediately shoot from a prone position (hell, you can shoot while airborne too), then it has these cover swap moves you can pull off. That kind of stuff increases the skill gap between players and gives you more tools at your disposal. The only online FPS that I've really like is MoH Warfighter (single player is shit though) because you can lean left/right/up/down as you're shooting and it makes gunfights more dynamic; it also has a slide and shoot mechanic where if you're sprinting and you hit the crouch button, you'll slide about 10 feet or so and you can turn the camera during the slide so you can use this to easy dispatch enemies camping in corners or just use it the open to help dodge gunfire.

I don't get the complaints about Infinite's gameplay, it's fun because of all the vigors and vigor combinations. Plus the skyline stuff is great fun too. The gunplay itself isn't quite where a normal FPS is at, it's hard to drag scope and such (the aiming feels just that little bit off). Maybe it's not quite as good as it could've been, but that doesn't stop it from being a blast to play.

You should probably check out Borderlands 2 because you have powers and skills that really make the game play much different than something like COD. Borderlands 1 is good too but it starts out so dull because your initial powers are so weak because the cooldowns are so long. Borderlands 2 is pretty much better in every way.

 

[Ninmecu]

Compare it to Bioshock 2 combat.

The different ammo types really made for a lot of strategic choices. Especially Trap Ammo. I found setting up traps in preparation for a Little Sister gather or Big Daddy fight to be really fun. You could make consideration about where enemies would come from so as to put the traps in the right spot, how many and what type of traps to use, and so on. It made fights feel tactical and important.

I'm not sure why they didn't bring that to Bioshock: Infinite.

My experience of Bioshock 2's Combat was basically this.

-Step One: Freeze Target.
-Step Two: Drill Target until explosion.
-Step Three: Repeat Step(s) 1-2 until enemies are defeated.

My experience of Bioshock Infinite's combat was thus.
Step One: levitation BS thing
Step Two: Repeated Shot Gun to the Face
Step Three: Lightning Rock Things if I'm feeling cheeky.
Step Four: Step Two and Three are interchangeable, feel free to repeat Step One and Two/Three as needed.

 

[Glongpre]

The vigors didn't fit the story really the way plasmids in the first game did, and was kind of just in there because it's bioshock, but they were fun.

But they did fit the story! It explains it in a voxophone.

People didn't like the combat because it isn't that good. I didn't mind the combat, it is pretty fun. However, it is very generic and vigors don't save it from being generic.

i may have missed that voxophone, there are 6 i missed in my play through.

And again, i get this it is *generic*. I don't mind you think so, but i want the reasons why so i can't start finding these subtle things that differ FPS games that i seem to be missing.

FPS in general aren't very different. You got your Halo's(which seem to be becoming more generic...sigh), your cod, and your class based. There are also twitch shooters like Unreal and Counter Strike. Because the majority copy cod, that style has become generic; looking down iron sights, sprinting, perks, kill streaks, refilling health. Bioshock uses most of those and didn't add anything new.

 

[skywolfblue]

Is there some subtle nuance to FPS games (only talking single player campaigns here) that I miss for the most part that makes them generally all feel the same to me?

I'm confused. You said you liked Bioshock: Infinite because it played differently. Do you mean "They all feel the same except for Bioshock: Infinite"?

What about BS:I was dull for most FPS fans with the combat?

Compare it to Bioshock 2 combat.

The different ammo types really made for a lot of strategic choices. Especially Trap Ammo. I found setting up traps in preparation for a Little Sister gather or Big Daddy fight to be really fun. You could make consideration about where enemies would come from so as to put the traps in the right spot, how many and what type of traps to use, and so on. It made fights feel tactical and important.

I'm not sure why they didn't bring that to Bioshock: Infinite.

First point, that is pretty much what i mean yes. Most of them feel the same to me, but i thought BS:I felt very different to most.

Point two. I never played BS2 as the vast majority of reviews i read of the game said the story was utter bollocks and didn't fit well. So, i skipped it. the story being the best thing about the first bioshock, and finding the gameplay itself to be predominantly like all other FPS games, i didn't really want a "bioshock without story" that i got the impression that BS2 was.

If i'm wrong, i still may pick up a copy of BS2 and play it.

Wow my structure of responses today is bad. My brain is not doing the stuff correctly. Hope all that made sense.

Well, I'm one of the minority who thinks Bioshock 2's story is actually pretty good. I like it better then Bioshock 1's. Bioshock 1 kinda stopped being interesting once Ryan died, Fontaine was a rather lame villain. Sophia Lamb on the other hand I think is the perfect rival to Ryan, an equal yet opposite mind.

Since you can probably just find it really cheap in a bargain bin somewhere, I'd say it's worth trying for it's gameplay alone. If you do buy it, consider buying the Minerva's Den DLC as well. It's one of the best DLCs ever IMO, and has an excellent story about a steampunk computer.

 

[WWmelb]

Is there some subtle nuance to FPS games (only talking single player campaigns here) that I miss for the most part that makes them generally all feel the same to me?

I'm confused. You said you liked Bioshock: Infinite because it played differently. Do you mean "They all feel the same except for Bioshock: Infinite"?

What about BS:I was dull for most FPS fans with the combat?

Compare it to Bioshock 2 combat.

The different ammo types really made for a lot of strategic choices. Especially Trap Ammo. I found setting up traps in preparation for a Little Sister gather or Big Daddy fight to be really fun. You could make consideration about where enemies would come from so as to put the traps in the right spot, how many and what type of traps to use, and so on. It made fights feel tactical and important.

I'm not sure why they didn't bring that to Bioshock: Infinite.

First point, that is pretty much what i mean yes. Most of them feel the same to me, but i thought BS:I felt very different to most.

Point two. I never played BS2 as the vast majority of reviews i read of the game said the story was utter bollocks and didn't fit well. So, i skipped it. the story being the best thing about the first bioshock, and finding the gameplay itself to be predominantly like all other FPS games, i didn't really want a "bioshock without story" that i got the impression that BS2 was.

If i'm wrong, i still may pick up a copy of BS2 and play it.

Wow my structure of responses today is bad. My brain is not doing the stuff correctly. Hope all that made sense.

Well, I'm one of the minority who thinks Bioshock 2's story is actually pretty good. I like it better then Bioshock 1's. Bioshock 1 kinda stopped being interesting once Ryan died, Fontaine was a rather lame villain. Sophia Lamb on the other hand I think is the perfect rival to Ryan, an equal yet opposite mind.

Since you can probably just find it really cheap in a bargain bin somewhere, I'd say it's worth trying for it's gameplay alone. If you do buy it, consider buying the Minerva's Den DLC as well. It's one of the best DLCs ever IMO, and has an excellent story about a steampunk computer.

I may just do that then, i remember seeing it new for $10 at eb games, so i might just pick it up next time i'm in town.

 

[WWmelb]

Compare it to Bioshock 2 combat.

The different ammo types really made for a lot of strategic choices. Especially Trap Ammo. I found setting up traps in preparation for a Little Sister gather or Big Daddy fight to be really fun. You could make consideration about where enemies would come from so as to put the traps in the right spot, how many and what type of traps to use, and so on. It made fights feel tactical and important.

I'm not sure why they didn't bring that to Bioshock: Infinite.

My experience of Bioshock 2's Combat was basically this.

-Step One: Freeze Target.
-Step Two: Drill Target until explosion.
-Step Three: Repeat Step(s) 1-2 until enemies are defeated.

My experience of Bioshock Infinite's combat was thus.
Step One: levitation BS thing
Step Two: Repeated Shot Gun to the Face
Step Three: Lightning Rock Things if I'm feeling cheeky.
Step Four: Step Two and Three are interchangeable, feel free to repeat Step One and Two/Three as needed.

I guess in that sense it is as fun as you make it. I had a blast using the sky-lines to my advantage, and messing around with different vigor combinations.

Would have liked some more melee combat to make more use of the charge, however, i changed up my play a lot depending on enemy type.

 

[Ninmecu]

Compare it to Bioshock 2 combat.

The different ammo types really made for a lot of strategic choices. Especially Trap Ammo. I found setting up traps in preparation for a Little Sister gather or Big Daddy fight to be really fun. You could make consideration about where enemies would come from so as to put the traps in the right spot, how many and what type of traps to use, and so on. It made fights feel tactical and important.

I'm not sure why they didn't bring that to Bioshock: Infinite.

My experience of Bioshock 2's Combat was basically this.

-Step One: Freeze Target.
-Step Two: Drill Target until explosion.
-Step Three: Repeat Step(s) 1-2 until enemies are defeated.

My experience of Bioshock Infinite's combat was thus.
Step One: levitation BS thing
Step Two: Repeated Shot Gun to the Face
Step Three: Lightning Rock Things if I'm feeling cheeky.
Step Four: Step Two and Three are interchangeable, feel free to repeat Step One and Two/Three as needed.

I guess in that sense it is as fun as you make it. I had a blast using the sky-lines to my advantage, and messing around with different vigor combinations.

Would have liked some more melee combat to make more use of the charge, however, i changed up my play a lot depending on enemy type.

Well, early on I got some article of clothing that gave me a 50/50 shot of setting people on fire by punching them with the Wheel of Pain. It felt more like 99% chance of setting them ablaze and it made the combat piss easy. Which I was OK with. I just wanted to see the story, the sights, the music. The combat was what I had to dredge through, so I found w/e worked for me and stuck with it.

 

[WWmelb]

Compare it to Bioshock 2 combat.

The different ammo types really made for a lot of strategic choices. Especially Trap Ammo. I found setting up traps in preparation for a Little Sister gather or Big Daddy fight to be really fun. You could make consideration about where enemies would come from so as to put the traps in the right spot, how many and what type of traps to use, and so on. It made fights feel tactical and important.

I'm not sure why they didn't bring that to Bioshock: Infinite.

My experience of Bioshock 2's Combat was basically this.

-Step One: Freeze Target.
-Step Two: Drill Target until explosion.
-Step Three: Repeat Step(s) 1-2 until enemies are defeated.

My experience of Bioshock Infinite's combat was thus.
Step One: levitation BS thing
Step Two: Repeated Shot Gun to the Face
Step Three: Lightning Rock Things if I'm feeling cheeky.
Step Four: Step Two and Three are interchangeable, feel free to repeat Step One and Two/Three as needed.

I guess in that sense it is as fun as you make it. I had a blast using the sky-lines to my advantage, and messing around with different vigor combinations.

Would have liked some more melee combat to make more use of the charge, however, i changed up my play a lot depending on enemy type.

Well, early on I got some article of clothing that gave me a 50/50 shot of setting people on fire by punching them with the Wheel of Pain. It felt more like 99% chance of setting them ablaze and it made the combat piss easy. Which I was OK with. I just wanted to see the story, the sights, the music. The combat was what I had to dredge through, so I found w/e worked for me and stuck with it.

I used that piece for a long time until i realised how little i meleed anything, then i got undertow and started having fun using that in conjunction with said piece of clothing. And had a blast, just would have liked a variety of melee weapons to choose from.

At least there were quite a few finishing animations with the claw of fun.

 

[KoudelkaMorgan]

I used to be a fan of FPS. Doom, Final Doom, Doom64, Heretic, Hexen, Turok 1 and 2, Turok: Rage Wars, Quake, and so on.

Then came 2 generations of Xboxery, from which very little came out that I enjoyed.

Pretty much just Borderlands 1, Resistance 1, Half Life 2 and Killzone 2. In that order from best to meh.

These days, after the disappointing sequels to Borderlands/Resistance and never ending reiterations of CoD and CoD clones I just don't even bother with them anymore.

Bioshock in particular just never held anything of interest for me. I've played them some, and moved on.

 

[LetalisK]

I actually wanted to quit half way through because I stopped giving a shit about the combat. Don't know why. The combat wasn't engaging enough to me to keep me going by itself, but I stuck it out to see the rest of the story.

 

[PhoenixWright]

I think my problem was that it didn't feel like it had the same weight as in the original Bioshock. Perhaps because of the action packed nature of the game, when compared to the subdued nature of the first, the shooting just didn't feel as significant. When you shoot a guy in the first Bioshock, it means something. You have limited ammo, and you're only fighting 1-3 enemies at a time. This made the combat a more personal experience. A lot of the time, it was smart to use the crowbar to save ammo, perhaps use a more stealthy approach, but in Infinite, it's not so. You're given tons of ammo to allow you to mow down the waves of enemies, and they all feel slightly more boring. Melee isn't even an option, which is made clear by the omission of the option to wield the sky-hook by itself. The whole game feels a little more large scale, like you're fighting in the army, not like you're a lone man fighting for his life in a crazy situation which makes everything feel less powerful somehow.

 

[Miss G.]

The vigors didn't fit the story really the way plasmids in the first game did, and was kind of just in there because it's bioshock, but they were fun.

The vigors actually do fit the story more than most people believe. The city of Columbia is based on the 'White City' built for the World's Columbian Exposition (aka World's Fair) in Chicago circa 1893 (the same year Columbia is built and the same fair it is presented at in the game's timeline). At these fairs many new inventions are shown off to people so they could see how these things can change their lives for the better e.g CocaCola was just as weird a concept at the time as vigors are in BI. They had advertisements and demos in much the same way and let people try out the new products in hope of catching the interest of future buyers/investors. After success at these fairs a lot of these innovations/inventions become more and more commonplace over time. The vigors don't really seem as integral story-wise because they are just 'one of these newfangled things' to the people of Columbia so they haven't had the chance to really use them and get screwed up like the people of Rapture had as of Booker's arrival.

 

[MHR]

There's really no variety in the gameplay you do in Infinite. The entirety of the gameplay can be summed up in 2 activities. Clear the setpiece room of samey baddies, and dumpster dive for silver dollars. There are really only 2 types of bad guys. Regular dudes with guns that hang back politely waiting for your shields to regenerate so you can pick them off, and some bigger guys that will actually charge you. Those include the raven warriors, the firemen, and the machinegun patriots. You only see 4 handymen in the whole game and they are really your only "boss" events that all you have to do is outrun while you shoot em.

And then of course you have all the other classic generic elements. Regenerating shields, plentiful health and ammo thanks to the vending machines being so cheap, super generic guns (each having two versions of the same damn weapon), 2 weapon carry limit, and many of the vigors are the same. There's no reason to use all the different vigors. Fire, crows, shock, and bronco are all just different flavors of a Stun+bonus damage move. You pick the one you use and forget about the others. Undertow and charge are fun ways to close a gap between you and the enemy so you can feel like a beast while clobbering them, but they're really more like toys than actual useful abilities. Then there's possession which is just a rage spell that costs you a lot of mana and works on only 1 guy at a time for a short while. Return to sender is the only one that seems both unique AND useful.

Yeah it's a shooter and it would be a bad shooter if it didn't make the shooting fun, and it does, but other shooters offer the same things except better.

Sounds like the OP just hasn't played a lot of shooters to realize this. If all he tried was counter-strike and fourth of a playthrough of Half-Life, of course shooters are going to look like nothing but Point-click shooties. Suddenly if he were to see one with SPELLS wowza! That's a new innovation for him and a gimmick for people who've seen better.