Bioshock Infinite vs 1 and 2

[GoaThief]

People, people.

It's one thing to comment on the gameplay as that is all the OP asked for, another to completely spoil the plot and turn the thread into an angry mess.

Is it not possible to focus on the gameplay alone? Seems the OP was fine with other aspects of Bioshock so there's no need to go there at all. If I made this thread only to have the game ruined for me with no spoiler tags even, I'd be fuming.

In short, can't we all just get along?

With that out of the way I'm amazed at the comparisons to MMS, they're nothing alike unless our military have taken to flying around with grappling hooks on roller coasters launching flocks of murderous crows at unsuspecting jihadists and I'm completely unaware of this.

the overall pacing and gameplay mechanics are the same.

I'd say the mechanics are similar;ie vigors /plasmids but everything is much more refined, fluid and correct. The pacing is way different however, the first was so fractured by annoying interruptions, no combat flow and not so great level design - all has been remedied in Infinite.

 

[TheRiddler]

If we're looking at gameplay alone, Infinite's a bit of a slog. Which, I mean, Bioshock 1 had some pretty lackluster shooting, but it was backed up with some interesting mechanics. Infinite doesn't.

BS1 had the potential for interplay between the various systems. You could hypnotize a Big Daddy to fight splicers and take down turrets. You could Enrage a splicer to fight other splicers, Big Daddies, etc. You could stand between a turret and an enemy, or hit them with a security bullseye, and delight as the enemy got fired at. You could hack machines to make them work for you. Bioshock Infinite lacks this. Hacking's gone, and there are no factions to play off against each other.

BS1 also had a lot more variety in plasmids. You had your basic elementals, your telekinesis, your faction control (Security Bullseye, Enrage, Hypnotize Big Daddy), and Cyclone Trap to set traps on unsuspecting enemies. Gone is this variety in Infinite. Plasmids are interchangeable here. All can be used to create traps. And they're not that different. Using Bucking Bronco as an immobilizer and damage amplifier is fairly similar to using Shock Jockey as, well, an immobilizer and damage amplifier. Sure, you get slightly more interesting plasmids towards the 2nd half (Undertow, Return to Sender) but it's too little, too late.

Also, if gore bothers you, Infinite's going to be trouble. Violence is visceral and bloody, compared to the relatively understated violence of BS1. It seemed unnecessary, almost pornographic, especially in the melee executions.

The skyhook system was fun, but imprecise. It unfortunately was used fairly little.

So, yeah. The gameplay felt inferior to Bioshock 1.

 

[J Tyran]

I liked 2 the most and Infinite was alright to start with then dies horribly once they start introducing Hypertime. Look, I don't like alternate dimension and time travel stuff in general so shoving the two together is already taking points off your score but for the love of god could you at least make it coherent and y'know, good? They try to make it look all deep and meaningful but if you take time to piece it all together it has a load of plotholes and is just plain nonsense sometimes.

I liked 2 the most and Infinite was alright

I liked 2 the most

Am I dreaming? Did I really find someone else that likes the second Bioshock the most? All my love~~ <3

I think two has more longevity than the others purely because the gameplay is more interesting, its good enough to pick up again once you know the story as its a lot more varied and entertaining. The story in the other two is better but once you have experienced it a few times there is little else left.

 

[Autumnflame]

I enjoyed all the each based on its own merits.

granted each has its own pros and cons but what game doesn't.

Enjoy the games for what they are not what others expect you to like or dislike about them

 

[Agayek]

Spoiler

There's literally no Comstocks or Columbias left at the end of the game. That's why Elizabeth asks Booker "are you sure?" BEFORE he opens the last door so that decision is made in Limbo and not in an actual universe so there is no new universe that forms from the opposite decision being made. Like I said, if you pay attention, everything makes sense. Also, your Elizabeth lived as she didn't go with you through the last door, even Booker notices it's not the same person. She stayed in Limbo and did not die.

You don't understand the way hypertime and the infinite-universe-theory is supposed to work, do you?

Spoiler

There's an infinite number of Comstocks, just as there are an infinite number of Bookers, and an infinite number of Elizabeths. That means it's not physically possible to eliminate any of them entirely. There is an infinite number of Bookers who were drowned by Elizabeth at the end, true, but there's also an infinite number of Bookers who changed their mind at the last minute and saved themselves. Thus, there's an infinite number of universes where Comstock still exists, ergo there's an infinite number of Comstocks.

When you introduce infinite somethings, you cannot then reduce it to 0. It's the nature of infinity.


OT: Infinite's a decent game. Not as good as either of the first two IMO, but still pretty damn good. It's got its fair share of problems, but the rest of the game is generally good enough to ignore it. My only real issue with it is that the underlying message of its ending is so mindnumbingly atrocious that I have to stop myself from breaking something every time I so much as think about it. It basically says that a man can and should be held accountable for the choices he could have made, instead of the choices he did make, and that's so far past bullshit that I can't express it in words.

Booker goes and accepts the responsibility for the existence of Comstock, despite the fact that the entire point of the kerfluffle is that he made the choice not to become Comstock. He killed himself because of what he decided he didn't want to be. And that pissed me right the fuck off.

 

[Evonisia]

Because even with the wrench you're still going to be two/three shotted by pretty much every enemy in the game, most of whom don't die in one hit and are present in groups. BioShock was an easy game, but it was still unforgiving.

Compared to Infinite where the tactic is hide behind cover MMS style and shoot at the sponges until they die. You can also soak up damage like a champ and as Elizabeth gives you perma-ammo, health and money buffs you will never ever be a position of vulnerability.

Why can't you hide in cover MMS style in Bioshock as well? I don't even know why anyone even compares Bioshock to MMSs, they are nothing alike. Plus, you can hide literally anywhere in Bioshock due to the Natural Camouflage tonic. The only kinda hard sections of Bioshock were the initial levels when you have to face a Big Daddy with just about nothing. Big Daddies become a joke after killing only a couple. The freezing plasmid in Bioshock makes all splicers so easy to kill. At the end, I was just running around with the wrench for fun, the game was that easy.

Elizabeth will only give you a medkit and more ammo once per fight. You'll get 2-3 shotted in Infinite as well.

Both games are about stacking a bunch of stuff together to make you really powerful. The 1st Bioshock was easier to stack stuff due to having all those tonic slots whereas Infinite only has 4 gear slots.

BioShock Infinite is compared to MMS' because it's blatantly just the same as them. Take BioShock's/System Shock's Plasmids and looting, take Halo's health system, the rest is all Modern Military Shooter action.

Linear levels? Check.
Two weapon limit? Check.
Regenerating health? Shields regenerate, Elizabeth provides free health kits.
Abundance of ammo? Check.
Lack of variety in enemies? Check.
Piss poor AI? Check.
All humans uncharacterised except the 'characters'? Check.
Gameplay elements ripped off from previous games without proper context? Check.
Useless RPG elements? Check.
Characters established and killed off 5 minutes later? Yes, about four of them are.

In fact, the only thing about BioShock: Infinite that isn't just a Modern Military Shooter is the fact that it's colourful and the world design is actually pretty good. Oh and the Halo health system/BioShock looting and Plasmids.

Now let's look at BioShock 1, which was more like a Half-Life 2 and Halo hybrid.

Linear levels? Yes, but they are large and exploration is encouraged.
Two weapon limit? No, 8 weapons.
Regenerating health? No, you must find health kits and EVE.
Abundance of ammo? Check but you have to search for it.
Lack of variety in enemies? No, not really. Models are reused but then tend to use different tactics depending on their 'type'.
Piss poor AI? Arguably yes.
All humans uncharacterised except the 'characters'? Nope, all of the enemies show tonnes of personality. They run away, shout out in pain, insult the player, try to get medical help from the same methods as you, talk to each over. The Big Daddies show compassion for their little sisters, and they are shown to be quite upset when alone, wishing to just not be disturbed.
Gameplay elements ripped off from previous game without proper context? No, not really. Most of the stuff ripped of from SS2 is given context in the story. In Infinite the Vigors are just there, no explanation other than "but tears".
Useless RPG elements? Arguably yes, but then again at least upgrading your gun has a purpose. In Infinite the money you spend is wasted should you pick up a different gun.
Characters established and killed off 5 minutes later? Some yes, some no. Some characters only die should you choose to kill them and are introduced early on.

Also, I have yet to say "BioShock is hard", I've said BioShock is unforgiving and it is. Stand still for three seconds and you'll die because all the enemies do ridiculous amounts of damage. In Infinite you can casually walk across the battlefield like you've got noclip on, only needing to hide when you've ran out of ammo or you've only just broke your shield.

And yes, you can hide wherever you want in BioShock, but taking cover is not very useful seeing as how half the enemies are faster than you, and their tactic is obviously charge at you seeing as most of them are melee based. Infinite's enemies mostly have guns and as such they take cover.

It's a boring shooting gallery with enemies that just soak up damage.

The bullet sponge enemies are your fault for using shitty weapons.

That's a cop out argument and you know it. That's like saying "Halo isn't hard, you're just using pistols". Especially because Infinite's variety of weapons is incredibly small considering it's two weapon limit system.

 

[Nouw]

snip

snip

snip

Spoiler: Feels good to see some praise for the harshly criticized black sheep of the three, feels good man

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

You don't understand the way hypertime and the infinite-universe-theory is supposed to work, do you?

Spoiler

There's an infinite number of Comstocks, just as there are an infinite number of Bookers, and an infinite number of Elizabeths. That means it's not physically possible to eliminate any of them entirely. There is an infinite number of Bookers who were drowned by Elizabeth at the end, true, but there's also an infinite number of Bookers who changed their mind at the last minute and saved themselves. Thus, there's an infinite number of universes where Comstock still exists, ergo there's an infinite number of Comstocks.

When you introduce infinite somethings, you cannot then reduce it to 0. It's the nature of infinity.

Spoiler

Technically, Bioshock Infinite doesn't have an infinite amount of Comstocks, Bookers, Columbias, etc. There are just a shit-ton of them, but not quite an infinite amount. Calling Bioshock Infinite, Bioshock Million[sup]Million[/sup] isn't quite as punchy. Secondly, you can eliminate an infinite amount of things if you remove the one thing that led to the infinity. If you remove all numbers between 1 and 2, you just eliminated an infinite amount of numbers. Lastly, this is something almost everyone doesn't catch on to; Elizabeth very purposefully asked Booker "are you sure?" BEFORE going through the last door so that decision was made in Limbo and his opposite decision would not cause a new universe to spring up, which would indeed make the ending meaningless. Unless the infinite universe theory (which is just a theory to begin with) tackles making decisions outside of an actual universe, then why are you even bringing it up? Plus, everything works out by the rules the game has set forth as well. You don't criticize Dr. Who for failing to work with regards to a theory (or theories), you criticize for it not working within the rules it setup itself.

---

BioShock Infinite is compared to MMS' because it's blatantly just the same as them. Take BioShock's/System Shock's Plasmids and looting, take Halo's health system, the rest is all Modern Military Shooter action.

Linear levels? Check.
Two weapon limit? Check.
Regenerating health? Shields regenerate, Elizabeth provides free health kits.
Abundance of ammo? Check.
Lack of variety in enemies? Check.
Piss poor AI? Check.
All humans uncharacterised except the 'characters'? Check.
Gameplay elements ripped off from previous games without proper context? Check.
Useless RPG elements? Check.
Characters established and killed off 5 minutes later? Yes, about four of them are.

In fact, the only thing about BioShock: Infinite that isn't just a Modern Military Shooter is the fact that it's colourful and the world design is actually pretty good. Oh and the Halo health system/BioShock looting and Plasmids.

The bullet sponge enemies are your fault for using shitty weapons.

That's a cop out argument and you know it. That's like saying "Halo isn't hard, you're just using pistols". Especially because Infinite's variety of weapons is incredibly small considering it's two weapon limit system.

You can check off pretty much all that stuff with regards to Borderlands as well, and Borderlands is nothing like a MMS because it doesn't play like a MMS regardless of how many similarities there are. An MMS has you dropping enemies with a 3-shot burst from an assault rifle, you have grenades, and that's literally all you got. Borderlands and Bioshock play so much different regardless if they have share many similarities. Even a game like Uncharted plays differently than a MMS and it's a lot closer to one than a Bioshock. You can get through a lot of sections (maybe even all of them once you get a decent amount of vigors and the right gear) just using vigors without even shooting, what MMS allows for that? Saying Bioshock Infinite plays the same as say COD is as ridiculous as saying Mass Effect 2 & 3 plays the same as Spec Ops: The Line.

Why would you use anything but power weapons in Infinite? You just said above Infinite has an abundance of ammo so you can use a sniper rifle and shotgun all game but you are going to instead use the shitty machine gun or carbine just because? If a game allows you to primarily use power weapons, fucking use them, have FUN!!! I mainly used power weapons in Uncharted 2, Vanquish, Bioshock Infinite, I mainly used the Widow in Mass Effect. If a game is allowing you to use power weapons so much (and powers), then it's not much like a MMS at all.

With that out of the way I'm amazed at the comparisons to MMS, they're nothing alike unless our military have taken to flying around with grappling hooks on roller coasters launching flocks of murderous crows at unsuspecting jihadists and I'm completely unaware of this.

Thank you. I don't know why MMSs were even brought up except that the aiming feels on par with a MMS now. In the 1st Bioshock, the aiming just didn't feel right and I used the aim-assist whereas in Infinite, I never had to turn it on as I was quickscoping with ease. Infinite is nothing like a MMS; yeah, you can play it like one, but why would you? It's like playing Vanquish like a cover shooter and then complaining Vanquish is boring and devolves into whack-a-mole like other cover shooters. That's really your own fault for playing a game in the most boring manner possible.

 

[MysticSlayer]

I couldn't play Bioshock, the controls were abysmal. I have a free copy of Bioshock 2 I got from PS+ and I can't play it because it's just not fun.

Infinite is on sale for $14 on PSN.

This is a digital copy I can't return if I don't like.

Is it worth the risk? Don't just say yes because you liked it and you like the first 2. Does it stand on its own, is the gameplay solid? I hear the story is exceptional but so was the story from the first one and I couldn't get over the gameplay.

The gunplay is arguably better, but it is still far behind most shooters on the market. Unfortunately, enemies are more numerous and fighting is given more priority, and the gunplay hasn't been improved enough to handle this influx of action. Furthermore, the gameplay has been stripped down to the point where this gunplay is essentially the only thing left in the game. Hacking is gone, replaced with a vigor. The diversity of the plasmids/vigors is gone, and the customization from gene tonics is mostly gone (what they have left is so pathetic it might as well have not been in the game at all). It also has a ridiculous health system that tries to be like Halo: Combat Evolved's but does a horrible job, offering a near pointless regenerating shield and requiring the player to fumble around annoyingly for the health packs scatted around because you don't just pick them up. They also remove all random encounters, have nothing close to the Big Daddy encounters (they add the Handyman, but he is a poor excuse for the Big Daddy fights), and exploration has been all but completely removed. They did add Elizabeth's powers, but I find it more of an annoyance than an enjoyable addition. The only good thing about the gameplay is the skyhook battles, and even those felt like wasted potential in the more linear levels. Oh yeah, and the game also uses the two weapon slot but doesn't do anything remotely compelling with it to justify forcing that limit. I've heard it said that it was used for greater realism, but that's an absolutely ridiculous claim to make when you consider some of the stuff Booker does in the game.

Ultimately, the game's gameplay is hardly better than the first two, and I actually found it to be much worse because it is essentially little more than a shell of the first two. The game has its moments in the human interaction, but the vast majority of the game is fighting, and all I could do while fighting is hope for more human interaction, but pretty much all that interaction is shoved into the first half of the game and is all but completely absent from the second half. Even then, the first half of the game is still about 60% or more of fighting, so you rarely get the truly good parts.

 

[babinro]

I couldn't play Bioshock, the controls were abysmal. I have a free copy of Bioshock 2 I got from PS+ and I can't play it because it's just not fun.

Infinite is on sale for $14 on PSN.

This is a digital copy I can't return if I don't like.

Is it worth the risk? Don't just say yes because you liked it and you like the first 2. Does it stand on its own, is the gameplay solid? I hear the story is exceptional but so was the story from the first one and I couldn't get over the gameplay.

No.

Bioshock Infinite is a great game for Bioshock fans but it does nothing to bring in someone who disliked the previous installments. It's more of the same in terms of game play which you'll hate. The story is on par with the first which was excellent in my opinion but clearly didn't draw you in. I think you'd feel as though you wasted your money.

 

[Multi-Hobbyist]

If you don't like the first two there is little to change your mind in the second, the environment is different but functions the same and gameplay wise its the weakest in the series. The plot is cool but it doesn't really blow your socks IMO, its pretty good but I don't see the "OMG leik the best story evar OMG 10/10 GOTY!!11!" that other people saw at the time.

OP, if ya got's any brains at all, you takes this guy's advices.
Seriously though, I liked the original's story far better. Bioshock 2 is the red headed step child in this franchise. But if you didn't like the first 2, chances are you wont like Infinite. It's the same FPS with magic powers thrown in, the only difference being that the developers couldn't think of anything more creative and original beyond asking themselves "What's the complete opposite of miles underwater?" But it's story was pretty decent.

 

[Evonisia]

BioShock Infinite is compared to MMS' because it's blatantly just the same as them. Take BioShock's/System Shock's Plasmids and looting, take Halo's health system, the rest is all Modern Military Shooter action.

Linear levels? Check.
Two weapon limit? Check.
Regenerating health? Shields regenerate, Elizabeth provides free health kits.
Abundance of ammo? Check.
Lack of variety in enemies? Check.
Piss poor AI? Check.
All humans uncharacterised except the 'characters'? Check.
Gameplay elements ripped off from previous games without proper context? Check.
Useless RPG elements? Check.
Characters established and killed off 5 minutes later? Yes, about four of them are.

In fact, the only thing about BioShock: Infinite that isn't just a Modern Military Shooter is the fact that it's colourful and the world design is actually pretty good. Oh and the Halo health system/BioShock looting and Plasmids.

The bullet sponge enemies are your fault for using shitty weapons.

That's a cop out argument and you know it. That's like saying "Halo isn't hard, you're just using pistols". Especially because Infinite's variety of weapons is incredibly small considering it's two weapon limit system.

You can check off pretty much all that stuff with regards to Borderlands as well, and Borderlands is nothing like a MMS because it doesn't play like a MMS regardless of how many similarities there are. An MMS has you dropping enemies with a 3-shot burst from an assault rifle, you have grenades, and that's literally all you got. Borderlands and Bioshock play so much different regardless if they have share many similarities. Even a game like Uncharted plays differently than a MMS and it's a lot closer to one than a Bioshock. You can get through a lot of sections (maybe even all of them once you get a decent amount of vigors and the right gear) just using vigors without even shooting, what MMS allows for that? Saying Bioshock Infinite plays the same as say COD is as ridiculous as saying Mass Effect 2 & 3 plays the same as Spec Ops: The Line.

Why would you use anything but power weapons in Infinite? You just said above Infinite has an abundance of ammo so you can use a sniper rifle and shotgun all game but you are going to instead use the shitty machine gun or carbine just because? If a game allows you to primarily use power weapons, fucking use them, have FUN!!! I mainly used power weapons in Uncharted 2, Vanquish, Bioshock Infinite, I mainly used the Widow in Mass Effect. If a game is allowing you to use power weapons so much (and powers), then it's not much like a MMS at all.

Ok, let's break down Infinite further. What is it's gameplay? Shooting dudes. Anything else? Nope, not even collecting things or optional baddies for further benefit, or any mini games.

But! I hear you say, MMSs are just shooting dudes and using grenades. Well, then, guess what the Tonics are?

In BioShock 1 there were many Plasmids which did all different things like freezing, opening doors and disabling cameras as well as the usual killing people. By contrast Infinite's Tonics are all killing dudes, hypnotising robots which explode and they are usually AoE effects. You know what else is mostly AoE effects? Grenades. If you look me in the (internet) eye and say that Modern Military Shooters don't have power weapons then you're clearly deluded.

In Borderlands you loot things, and from what I can tell it's largely numbers based. Mass Effect has the romance and characterisation aspects of the gameplay, as well as planet scanning, driving and preparing for the goal at the end of the game.

 

[Edl01]

I don't understand why, but people really seem to hate Bioshock Infinite for some very odd reason. I mean it is very similar to the origional Bioshock other than the 2 weapon system(which made no difference to the gameplay) and the Skyrails, which are bloody awesome.
Personally I love Bioshock 1 and I love Bioschock Infinite, I think both are absolutely fantastic games with brilliant stories, beautiful graphics and incredible worlds, and both would definitly make it onto my list of top 10 games of this generation.

Ok, let's break down Infinite further. What is it's gameplay? Shooting dudes. Anything else? Nope, not even collecting things or optional baddies for further benefit, or any mini games.

But! I hear you say, MMSs are just shooting dudes and using grenades. Well, then, guess what the Tonics are?

In BioShock 1 there were many Plasmids which did all different things like freezing, opening doors and disabling cameras as well as the usual killing people. By contrast Infinite's Tonics are all killing dudes, hypnotising robots which explode and they are usually AoE effects. You know what else is mostly AoE effects? Grenades. If you look me in the (internet) eye and say that Modern Military Shooters don't have power weapons then you're clearly deluded.

In Borderlands you loot things, and from what I can tell it's largely numbers based. Mass Effect has the romance and characterisation aspects of the gameplay, as well as planet scanning, driving and preparing for the goal at the end of the game.

I feel to point out that Bioshock Infinite isn't modern, it isn't military and most of the battles happen in fairly open areas with a lot of space to jump about, which is pretty much the opposite of the modern military shooter genre which keeps you confined on a straight narrow path.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

I feel to point out that Bioshock Infinite isn't modern, it isn't military and most of the battles happen in fairly open areas with a lot of space to jump about, which is pretty much the opposite of the modern military shooter genre which keeps you confined on a straight narrow path.

Yeah but modern military shooters are short hand for "disappointing and lame!", so it's a perfect comparison brah! Just like that video people love to throw up that said Infinite was "Space Invaders with better graphics".

If you want riveting and intellectual games criticism, this is probably not the best place to look.

 

[Agayek]

Spoiler

Technically, Bioshock Infinite doesn't have an infinite amount of Comstocks, Bookers, Columbias, etc. There are just a shit-ton of them, but not quite an infinite amount. Calling Bioshock Infinite, Bioshock Million[sup]Million[/sup] isn't quite as punchy. Secondly, you can eliminate an infinite amount of things if you remove the one thing that led to the infinity. If you remove all numbers between 1 and 2, you just eliminated an infinite amount of numbers. Lastly, this is something almost everyone doesn't catch on to; Elizabeth very purposefully asked Booker "are you sure?" BEFORE going through the last door so that decision was made in Limbo and his opposite decision would not cause a new universe to spring up, which would indeed make the ending meaningless. Unless the infinite universe theory (which is just a theory to begin with) tackles making decisions outside of an actual universe, then why are you even bringing it up? Plus, everything works out by the rules the game has set forth as well. You don't criticize Dr. Who for failing to work with regards to a theory (or theories), you criticize for it not working within the rules it setup itself.

That's not the way this kind of things works, not without breaking its own internal consistency at least.

Spoiler

And there's a difference between Booker answering Elizabeth's question and Booker allowing himself to be drowned. That's two distinct actions. Even if the limbo shenanigans are applicable (which they aren't in pretty much every version of the theory I've ever heard), Booker still makes a conscious choice when Elizabeth drowns him. He has the choice of whether or not to change his mind at any point in that process. That means that when she goes to drown him, there's an infinite number of alternate universes where he chose to fight back at any given point in time during that process. In some of those (possibly even most), he died, but in others, he lived, and therefore in some of those universes, Comstock continued to exist.

That's what I mean by not being able to reduce infinity to zero. It takes a choice to eliminate something, and by making the choice, you create a universe where you didn't make the choice. By Infinite's own explanations and internal cosmology, the final solution to the conflict they provide doesn't work.

It does work, rather spectacularly at that, from a thematic perspective (which is why I'm generally willing to let the issues with the topic slide), but from a more literal perspective, it doesn't remain consistent to its own logic.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Ok, let's break down Infinite further. What is it's gameplay? Shooting dudes. Anything else? Nope, not even collecting things or optional baddies for further benefit, or any mini games.

But! I hear you say, MMSs are just shooting dudes and using grenades. Well, then, guess what the Tonics are?

In BioShock 1 there were many Plasmids which did all different things like freezing, opening doors and disabling cameras as well as the usual killing people. By contrast Infinite's Tonics are all killing dudes, hypnotising robots which explode and they are usually AoE effects. You know what else is mostly AoE effects? Grenades. If you look me in the (internet) eye and say that Modern Military Shooters don't have power weapons then you're clearly deluded.

In Borderlands you loot things, and from what I can tell it's largely numbers based. Mass Effect has the romance and characterisation aspects of the gameplay, as well as planet scanning, driving and preparing for the goal at the end of the game.

Oh come on, so I guess AoE damaging spells in DnD are merely just grenades then. Most of Infinite's vigors aren't about damaging unless you combine the vigors like the crows and devil's kiss (which does lots of damage). I didn't say MMSs don't have power weapons, I said you can't use them as your primary weapon like you can in Infinite. Something like a shotgun in a MMS isn't even considered a power weapon because it's only good up close so you'll still be mainly using an assault rifle whereas in Infinite you can use nothing but a shotgun if you want by using vigors to get close to enemies or use them to pull enemies to you.

That freezing plasmid in Bioshock was so overpowered.

I'm not talking about the other aspects of Borderlands or Mass Effect, just the shooting gameplay. And the shooting gameplay of both Borderlands and Mass Effect are way different from a MMS. You can be a vanguard in Infinite basically almost exactly like Mass Effect, can you be a vanguard in COD, BF, Spec Ops, etc.? Hell fucking no. Why not talk about Vanquish as that game has no other element but fucking shooting and it plays so much different than a COD or a Gears? Just shooting stuff can vary greatly from game to game, that's the point.

That's not the way this kind of things works, not without breaking its own internal consistency at least.

Spoiler

And there's a difference between Booker answering Elizabeth's question and Booker allowing himself to be drowned. That's two distinct actions. Even if the limbo shenanigans are applicable (which they aren't in pretty much every version of the theory I've ever heard), Booker still makes a conscious choice when Elizabeth drowns him. He has the choice of whether or not to change his mind at any point in that process. That means that when she goes to drown him, there's an infinite number of alternate universes where he chose to fight back at any given point in time during that process. In some of those (possibly even most), he died, but in others, he lived, and therefore in some of those universes, Comstock continued to exist.

That's what I mean by not being able to reduce infinity to zero. It takes a choice to eliminate something, and by making the choice, you create a universe where you didn't make the choice. By Infinite's own explanations and internal cosmology, the final solution to the conflict they provide doesn't work.

It does work, rather spectacularly at that, from a thematic perspective (which is why I'm generally willing to let the issues with the topic slide), but from a more literal perspective, it doesn't remain consistent to its own logic.

Spoiler

I realize that's 2 different actions but it was done in that manner for dramatic purposes so everything wasn't quite revealed to the player at that point. That last scene would have a lot less impact if Elizabeth explained that you are going to be drowned after you open the door. The point was obviously for Booker to decide before he goes through the door while holding back on the final reveal.

Also, there wouldn't be an infinite amount of Bookers deciding not to be drowned, that's not how the game sets up the rules for its multiverse theory. When Booker is baptized to become Comstock at the beginning, there's only ONE Comstock at that point. Then as that one Comstock goes on to make his first decision, then more Comstocks and universes spring up due to the other possible choices from that decision. For example, Comstock decides what to eat for dinner, other universes spring up from his other possible decisions. There isn't an infinite amount of universes where he choose steak and potatoes, just one universe. There's just so much branching going on that it might as well be an infinite amount but it's never an infinite amount of Bookers or Comstocks because there's only so many decisions you make in a lifetime (yes, it's a huge number and the branching it causes is exponentially much much larger, but not an infinite amount).

 

[Agayek]

Spoiler

I realize that's 2 different actions but it was done in that manner for dramatic purposes so everything wasn't quite revealed to the player at that point. That last scene would have a lot less impact if Elizabeth explained that you are going to be drowned after you open the door. The point was obviously for Booker to decide before he goes through the door while holding back on the final reveal.

Also, there wouldn't be an infinite amount of Bookers deciding not to be drowned, that's not how the game sets up the rules for its multiverse theory. When Booker is baptized to become Comstock at the beginning, there's only ONE Comstock at that point. Then as that one Comstock goes on to make his first decision, then more Comstocks and universes spring up due to the other possible choices from that decision. For example, Comstock decides what to eat for dinner, other universes spring up from his other possible decisions. There isn't an infinite amount of universes where he choose steak and potatoes, just one universe. There's just so much branching going on that it might as well be an infinite amount but it's never an infinite amount of Bookers or Comstocks because there's only so many decisions you make in a lifetime (yes, it's a huge number and the branching it causes is exponentially much much larger, but not an infinite amount).

I get the feeling you don't understand the nature of choice and infinity.

Spoiler

Booker goes to be baptized. The preacher approaches him to dunk him in the water. There are then an infinite number of opportunities for Booker to reject the baptism. He could do it immediately, he could do it at 1 second, he could do it at 0.5 seconds, he could do it at 0.25 seconds, he could do it at 0.125 seconds, etc, etc. There are an infinite number of opportunities to reject the baptism, because there are an infinite number of moments between one second and the next. Each and every one of those moments spawns two universes. One where he rejects the baptism, and one where he does not.

There is no one place in time or space you can point at and say "Booker dies there" and therefore eliminate Comstock, because whenever he dies, there's another universe where he doesn't. That's why you can't reduce the infinite number of Comstocks to nothing. Literally every attempt to stop him eliminates the existing Comstocks, but simultaneously creates an equal number with the exact same experiences/mentality/history/etc. That's the most basic aspect of the many-worlds theory and how quantum uncertainty is supposed to create alternate universes.

Now, as I said, from a narrative/thematic point of view, it works quite well for what it wants to do. The story isn't about quantum mechanics, it's about redemption and a man finally accepting the crimes he has committed. Thematically, Infinite's ending is damn brilliant (even if I hate the theme it's trying to sell).

It doesn't hold up under logical scrutiny however. That was sacrificed for a more effective thematic ending. I'm reasonably certain it was a matter of artistic choice, and I don't begrudge Levine or whoever for it, but that doesn't make it any less nonsensical.

 

[Evonisia]

Ok, let's break down Infinite further. What is it's gameplay? Shooting dudes. Anything else? Nope, not even collecting things or optional baddies for further benefit, or any mini games.

But! I hear you say, MMSs are just shooting dudes and using grenades. Well, then, guess what the Tonics are?

In BioShock 1 there were many Plasmids which did all different things like freezing, opening doors and disabling cameras as well as the usual killing people. By contrast Infinite's Tonics are all killing dudes, hypnotising robots which explode and they are usually AoE effects. You know what else is mostly AoE effects? Grenades. If you look me in the (internet) eye and say that Modern Military Shooters don't have power weapons then you're clearly deluded.

In Borderlands you loot things, and from what I can tell it's largely numbers based. Mass Effect has the romance and characterisation aspects of the gameplay, as well as planet scanning, driving and preparing for the goal at the end of the game.

Oh come on, so I guess AoE damaging spells in DnD are merely just grenades then. Most of Infinite's vigors aren't about damaging unless you combine the vigors like the crows and devil's kiss (which does lots of damage). I didn't say MMSs don't have power weapons, I said you can't use them as your primary weapon like you can in Infinite. Something like a shotgun in a MMS isn't even considered a power weapon because it's only good up close so you'll still be mainly using an assault rifle whereas in Infinite you can use nothing but a shotgun if you want by using vigors to get close to enemies or use them to pull enemies to you.

That freezing plasmid in Bioshock was so overpowered.

I'm not talking about the other aspects of Borderlands or Mass Effect, just the shooting gameplay. And the shooting gameplay of both Borderlands and Mass Effect are way different from a MMS. You can be a vanguard in Infinite basically almost exactly like Mass Effect, can you be a vanguard in COD, BF, Spec Ops, etc.? Hell fucking no. Why not talk about Vanquish as that game has no other element but fucking shooting and it plays so much different than a COD or a Gears? Just shooting stuff can vary greatly from game to game, that's the point.

I am calling any AoE damaging spell/ability/weapon a 'grenade', because it fits the same purpose. Casting Living Bomb on something in WoW is essentially the same as tagging somebody with a grenade in Gears of War.

And yes you can (by two definitions) be a vanguard in a MMS. Power weapons can be used mainly, I've had no issues using a Shotgun as the primary weapon in Battlefield 3's or Call of Duty: Black Ops II's campaigns.

I agree, shooting stuff can be different, Halo, MMS, System Shock 2, Half-Life and Duke Nukem all have different methods of play. Infinite's gameplay is not that different from a standard MMS on the market. You can play Infinite the exact same way you'd play Battlefield, Medal of Honour etc. and vice versa, and the consequences would be identical. It's almost the exact same health regen, infinite ammo, run about firing against vastly inferior enemies game. Go onto Half-Life 2 and run about firing and enjoy dying fifty million times because your health bar doesn't come back, and your gun needs restocking.

It's why I keep bringing up BioShock 1 because it doesn't play like an MMS, it's gameplay is not exactly original (I'd call it a Halo, System Shock 2 and Half-Life 'inspired' game) but it has a different style of play to the typical MMS.

 

[JazzJack2]

System Shock 1 and 2 are better than all the Bioshock games by miles. I din't really like the first Bioshock but I will admit it was a well crafted game, 2 and Infinite are dogshit.