The Order 1886 vs Bioshock Infinite

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

I didn't play The Order 1886. But I'm pretty sure you can't compare the two like that.

Bioshock Infinite is a bit flawed masterpiece. Sure, gunplay in Bioshock Infinite isn't perfect. Only 2 guns and no visual upgrades is kind of a letdown, especially when you compare to the original. The ability to use guns and vigors at the same time is an upgrade though. And vigors are a lot of fun.
I think that most of the hate comes from the people who just can't cope with the idea that something IS that good and that a lot of people like it. When the majority likes something it must be bad, so people start seeing flaws EVERYWHERE to "uplift" themselves from the majority opinion. You can do that to any game. To anything actually. Which is just as stupid as liking something because everybody else likes it. If you look at Bioshock Infinite as just another shooter then you're either really shallow or you're lying to yourself. Games are sometimes about more than just shooting things until they die.

 

[SmallHatLogan]

Am I honestly the only one who really enjoyed Bioshock Infinite's gameplay?

I hear people describe the gunplay and it's like we played completely different games. I was grabbing groups of people and tying them up with magic water tentacles so I could air dash into them and explode them with my skyhook. I used the handcannon and shotgun combo throughout the game and picked up a bunch of gear which made me a close range powerhouse who could siphon health and ammo with melee executions, recharge shields with skyhook dashes, and stack a damage multiplier which made my weapons glow redder with every enemy I killed in succession. I had a blast and appreciated the large combat arenas which encouraged verticality and many different approaches. And while I didn't particularly like the two weapon system at least there was a decent variety and you could always count on a favorite weapon being just around the corner because they did a good job of mixing up what weapons enemies carried.

I feel like a ton of people stuck with the machine gun and played it like they would any other shooter, which is kind of a disservice to themselves in my opinion. I felt like it was an incredibly enjoyable game with some really solid gameplay to back it up, it felt better than bioshock 2 and while that game caught some flak for it's relatively trivial story, no one impugned it's gameplay.

Well I can't speak for anyone else, but my issue wasn't with the gunplay itself but the areas. As someone who loves games like Doom and Duke Nukem 3D (and, you know, Bioshock) which actually have interesting level design and enemy placement, Bioshock Infinite's constant arenas were just so boring. It felt like I was playing Unreal Tournament single player with only two weapons.

 

[Kajin]

Wait, people didn't like Bioshock: Infinite? I thought it was an awesome game. The story tried too hard but was otherwise pretty good and the gameplay was nonstop fun.

 

[Bad Jim]

Not everyone enjoyed Bioshock Infinite, but at least you could see that they tried to make something interesting and fun. The Order 1886 comes off as cynical greed, a polished but mechanically unremarkable half game being sold as a full game.

 

[MysticSlayer]

Cutscene QTE's just make people want to tear their eyes out? (I think Infinite did have a few though).

BioShock Infinite barely had any cutscenes, let alone QTEs.

And as far as I can tell, that's probably one of the biggest differences between the two. From what I've heard of The Order (I haven't actually played it), it tries to hard to be a movie. There are too many cutscenes, and much of the interactivity comes in the form of QTEs. BioShock Infinite was absolutely dedicated to being a game. You could probably count on one hand the number of cutscenes it had, even including optional ones, and most of these were probably over in less than a minute.

Infinite also tried to show what games were capable of as a storytelling medium. Heck, the whole story was basically a commentary on what games are and what they can do. It may not have been particularly unique in what it did, but it executed everything with a passion for the medium as a place to tell unique stories through interactivity. Most of what I've heard of The Order seems to indicate that it doesn't have anywhere near that same level of passion for games or interactive storytelling. If anything, many reviewers seem to think that it wants to be a movie but had to find some way to justify being called a game.

that being said, as as much as i like B:I, the game did have its issues in the story department

Yeah, I know. I spent most of the first few months after its release tearing it apart for those very flaws. The thing is, having gone back to play BioShock, I realized that a lot of Inifnite's storytelling flaws were also present in BioShock: few, if any, strong character; a disjointed overarching story; over reliance on plot twists and shock value to grab people; and a few other issues. What I think both of them did great, though, was present players a lot of ideas for them to talk about, both in the more overt ideas (e.g. Randian Objectivism) and subtle ideas (e.g. player agency in video games).

As a result, I've mostly backed off from criticizing Infinite's storytelling. I'll still talk about the story and even point out flaws at the proper time, but I think it has deserved a little too much hate for some of the minor issues like "ludonarrative dissonance". To me, BioShock stands up for being a great thought piece on video games, and there just aren't many games that are that good about exploring what games are as a storytelling medium, and a lot of the others that do are harshly critical and dismissive of other people's experiences. Infinite sort of falls into that same place: It offers a great commentary on what games are as a storytelling medium, and it does it all without feeling like it needs to take some "I am so profound!" position of harsh, biting criticism over other games.

 

[Azure23]

Am I honestly the only one who really enjoyed Bioshock Infinite's gameplay?

I hear people describe the gunplay and it's like we played completely different games. I was grabbing groups of people and tying them up with magic water tentacles so I could air dash into them and explode them with my skyhook. I used the handcannon and shotgun combo throughout the game and picked up a bunch of gear which made me a close range powerhouse who could siphon health and ammo with melee executions, recharge shields with skyhook dashes, and stack a damage multiplier which made my weapons glow redder with every enemy I killed in succession. I had a blast and appreciated the large combat arenas which encouraged verticality and many different approaches. And while I didn't particularly like the two weapon system at least there was a decent variety and you could always count on a favorite weapon being just around the corner because they did a good job of mixing up what weapons enemies carried.

I feel like a ton of people stuck with the machine gun and played it like they would any other shooter, which is kind of a disservice to themselves in my opinion. I felt like it was an incredibly enjoyable game with some really solid gameplay to back it up, it felt better than bioshock 2 and while that game caught some flak for it's relatively trivial story, no one impugned it's gameplay.

Well I can't speak for anyone else, but my issue wasn't with the gunplay itself but the areas. As someone who loves games like Doom and Duke Nukem 3D (and, you know, Bioshock) which actually have interesting level design and enemy placement, Bioshock Infinite's constant arenas were just so boring. It felt like I was playing Unreal Tournament single player with only two weapons.

I can certainly understand that, and I agree to some extent. By and large the areas did not have the same level of complexity as areas in 1 and 2, which were chock full of secrets and small stories occurring in nooks and crannies. Like the numerous little splicer dens you found, usually with an audio log or at the very least bits of carefully placed environmental story telling. And then you have the very well thought out encounters, such as one in fort frolic which I will always treasure as one of my greatest gaming memories. Infinite did suffer from arena syndrome, and it was in large part due to the team trying to diversify the encounters. As they said themselves, in bioshock one the electro bolt and shotgun were rather overpowerd in the tight quarters of rapture, and many players found themselves using one or two effective strategies against enemies that usually came in groups smaller than five. They wanted to have more long distance firefights on a grander scale with more enemies. In this respect I think they succeeded, but as you pointed out the level design suffered for it. I still quite enjoyed the spectacle of flying around on skylines shooting at enemies with my handcannon and leaping off to smack em Errol Flynn style, and I think they did a decent job of crafting interesting areas to explore when combat wasn't happening. But like I said, I can definitely see where you're coming from.

 

[JagermanXcell]

As much as I grew to slowly dislike Bioshock Infinite for being a shallow version of it's predecessors... it at least had color, more than 4 generic weapons, was honest with it's absurd inconstancies while being a full-ish package with closure, and had the intention of being a video game FIRST than a certain The Order 1886.

Oh, and it had gameplay too. /thread

 

[Iwata]

I enjoyed both immensely.

At the end of the day, I really don't care what media outlets have to say.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Am I honestly the only one who really enjoyed Bioshock Infinite's gameplay?

I hear people describe the gunplay and it's like we played completely different games. I was grabbing groups of people and tying them up with magic water tentacles so I could air dash into them and explode them with my skyhook. I used the handcannon and shotgun combo throughout the game and picked up a bunch of gear which made me a close range powerhouse who could siphon health and ammo with melee executions, recharge shields with skyhook dashes, and stack a damage multiplier which made my weapons glow redder with every enemy I killed in succession. I had a blast and appreciated the large combat arenas which encouraged verticality and many different approaches. And while I didn't particularly like the two weapon system at least there was a decent variety and you could always count on a favorite weapon being just around the corner because they did a good job of mixing up what weapons enemies carried.

I feel like a ton of people stuck with the machine gun and played it like they would any other shooter, which is kind of a disservice to themselves in my opinion. I felt like it was an incredibly enjoyable game with some really solid gameplay to back it up, it felt better than bioshock 2 and while that game caught some flak for it's relatively trivial story, no one impugned it's gameplay.

I feel the same way, I loved the burning crows + fire + crow trap combo. I used mainly the shotgun + sniper rifle combo. I had the overkill or overload gear, which was awesome because I'd overkill pretty much ever enemy. I had so many things proccing at once, I'd get some pretty good framerate drops. I hear so many complaints about Infinite having bullet sponge enemies, it's kinda their fault for not using power weapons though.

Yeah, there were less combat options in Infinite due to the level design but one combat option was a whole lotta fun.

Yeah, I know. I spent most of the first few months after its release tearing it apart for those very flaws. The thing is, having gone back to play BioShock, I realized that a lot of Inifnite's storytelling flaws were also present in BioShock: few, if any, strong character; a disjointed overarching story; over reliance on plot twists and shock value to grab people; and a few other issues. What I think both of them did great, though, was present players a lot of ideas for them to talk about, both in the more overt ideas (e.g. Randian Objectivism) and subtle ideas (e.g. player agency in video games).

As a result, I've mostly backed off from criticizing Infinite's storytelling. I'll still talk about the story and even point out flaws at the proper time, but I think it has deserved a little too much hate for some of the minor issues like "ludonarrative dissonance". To me, BioShock stands up for being a great thought piece on video games, and there just aren't many games that are that good about exploring what games are as a storytelling medium, and a lot of the others that do are harshly critical and dismissive of other people's experiences. Infinite sort of falls into that same place: It offers a great commentary on what games are as a storytelling medium, and it does it all without feeling like it needs to take some "I am so profound!" position of harsh, biting criticism over other games.

I think Infinite's plot is more sensical than the 1st Bioshock, not that Infinite doesn't have its own issues.

 

[Lightspeaker]

Am I honestly the only one who really enjoyed Bioshock Infinite's gameplay?

I hear people describe the gunplay and it's like we played completely different games. I was grabbing groups of people and tying them up with magic water tentacles so I could air dash into them and explode them with my skyhook. I used the handcannon and shotgun combo throughout the game and picked up a bunch of gear which made me a close range powerhouse who could siphon health and ammo with melee executions, recharge shields with skyhook dashes, and stack a damage multiplier which made my weapons glow redder with every enemy I killed in succession. I had a blast and appreciated the large combat arenas which encouraged verticality and many different approaches. And while I didn't particularly like the two weapon system at least there was a decent variety and you could always count on a favorite weapon being just around the corner because they did a good job of mixing up what weapons enemies carried.

I feel like a ton of people stuck with the machine gun and played it like they would any other shooter, which is kind of a disservice to themselves in my opinion. I felt like it was an incredibly enjoyable game with some really solid gameplay to back it up, it felt better than bioshock 2 and while that game caught some flak for it's relatively trivial story, no one impugned it's gameplay.

Nope. Not the only person.

I tried playing the original Bioshock on numerous occasions and every single time I found it shallow, lifeless and the gameplay extremely clunky and boring. I couldn't finish it, had to watch a playthrough on youtube and just wasn't impressed at all. So I went into Infinite with low expectations but since everything I'd read said "this is really quite different to the previous ones" I was willing to give it a go a little while after release when the price had dropped. And it was one of the most entertaining gaming experiences of the year in a colourful, vibrant setting with entertaining characters and a wonderful aesthetic on top of nice, tight gameplay mechanics and well-paced combat.

Frankly I was kinda disappointed that Burial at Sea was set back in the original games' setting. It almost feels like a lot of people hate on it because its "cool" to do so or to come across as intellectual in some weird way. Either way, many people complain about it but for me it was a gigantic step up from the first (never played the second).


So yeah. On topic: haven't played The Order yet but it'll have to be pretty damn amazing to beat Bioshock Infinite in my view.

 

[MysticSlayer]

Am I honestly the only one who really enjoyed Bioshock Infinite's gameplay?

I hear people describe the gunplay and it's like we played completely different games. I was grabbing groups of people and tying them up with magic water tentacles so I could air dash into them and explode them with my skyhook. I used the handcannon and shotgun combo throughout the game and picked up a bunch of gear which made me a close range powerhouse who could siphon health and ammo with melee executions, recharge shields with skyhook dashes, and stack a damage multiplier which made my weapons glow redder with every enemy I killed in succession.

Eh, I enjoyed it enough on the PC. Didn't particularly like it on consoles, but I found the PC's controls to allow me to maneuver around faster, taking more advantage of the sky hook. Much of my strategy was based around semi-automatic weapons and using vigors like Bucking Bronco and Murder of Crows for crowd control, so I often was forced to the skyline when things were getting a little too heated and I didn't want to waste my Salts. It made for quite a few enjoyable encounters, particularly in the late game. Still hate the Siren with a passion, though.

Still, it is hard not to realize that the gameplay underwent some drastic changes between BioShock 1/2 and Infinite, most of which dealt with removing features. Infinite added some stuff, but for the most part, it is hard to go to Infinite if you were expecting to have the same level of depth that BioShock offered.

I think Infinite's plot is more sensical than the 1st Bioshock, not that Infinite doesn't have its own issues.

I actually thought the first game was far easier to follow. Once Infinite started fully exploring the Tear idea, it started becoming really hard to follow. Then again, I was more interested in what they were trying to say--because it was clear they were trying to say something--rather than what was going on. It took a couple times through for me to really wrap my head around Infinite, both as a story and as a commentary. Granted, it also took seeing the second half to fully realize that the racism/American nationalism angle wasn't really what they wanted to talk about, and if I had realized that sooner, it may have been more enjoyable the first time through.

Conversely, I found BioShock relatively easy to pick up on the first time through. Yeah, some of the underlying elements

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

I think Infinite's plot is more sensical than the 1st Bioshock, not that Infinite doesn't have its own issues.

I actually thought the first game was far easier to follow. Once Infinite started fully exploring the Tear idea, it started becoming really hard to follow. Then again, I was more interested in what they were trying to say--because it was clear they were trying to say something--rather than what was going on. It took a couple times through for me to really wrap my head around Infinite, both as a story and as a commentary. Granted, it also took seeing the second half to fully realize that the racism/American nationalism angle wasn't really what they wanted to talk about, and if I had realized that sooner, it may have been more enjoyable the first time through.

Conversely, I found BioShock relatively easy to pick up on the first time through. Yeah, some of the underlying elements

I was talking about the 1st Bioshock having more holes in it when you start thinking about it than Infinite does yet Infinite is considered like 'plot-hole city' by many. Both games have rather large sections of side-questing that feel like distractions. It took me literally 3 years to finish Bioshock because I got so bored with the middle section of the game. Same thing with Infinite and getting the guns for Fitzroy; once you go through the 1st tear, the quest literally becomes pointless because your deal with your Fitzroy (to get the airship) is now void because it's a different Fitzroy now who you have no deal with.

 

[SmallHatLogan]

I was talking about the 1st Bioshock having more holes in it when you start thinking about it than Infinite does yet Infinite is considered like 'plot-hole city' by many.

I think it's because there's so much more happening in Infinite that the plot holes matter more. The only things that are important in Bioshock are Atlas, Jack and Ryan. Pretty much everything else is just world building.

 

[Fox12]

I think that most of the hate comes from the people who just can't cope with the idea that something IS that good and that a lot of people like it.

B:I is probably the best looking game I've ever played, period. FF13 comes close, but I try to forget about that one. The art direction is inventive and beatiful, like a painting, at almost every turn. That said, I think it's (sometimes rather harsh) criticisms are valid, especially when it comes to the story. There were a lot of plot holes, and decisions that didn't make any sense. I was honestly extremely disapointed. It was ambitious, though, and that's something we just don't see much these days.

I haven't played The Order, but I think it's somewhat unfair to place it against Bioshock, as it does a disservice to both games. I can say I don't mind cutscenes, so long as there aren't too many. B:I didn't use many, and the ones that were there often came across as cringeworthy in execution. Other parts felt like I was just walking down the hall of a museum, as events weren't triggered until the exact moment I passed by, which made the world feel artificil to me, and robbed it of the organic livelihood that games like Skyrim created. I those instances I think a well done cut scene may have helped the world feel more grounded, or would have improved the pacing. The Order may have taken things too far in the other direction, since you need to tell a story through gameplay, and not just scripted cut scenes. That said, the game was just the developer trying to prove the cut of their gib, so I feel like it does receive an undue level of hate for a game that doesn't really look all that bad. I've seen far worse games get far less hate.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

I was talking about the 1st Bioshock having more holes in it when you start thinking about it than Infinite does yet Infinite is considered like 'plot-hole city' by many.

I think it's because there's so much more happening in Infinite that the plot holes matter more. The only things that are important in Bioshock are Atlas, Jack and Ryan. Pretty much everything else is just world building.

When you actually think about the assassination plan in Bioshock, you realize how it's like the worst assassination plan ever. The main reason why Jack was chosen is because the vita-chambers, which also applies to Ryan. Whereas in Infinite, if you look at what Elizabeth is doing from a different perspective, pretty much all the plot holes no longer exist and the core story never has a major hole it in either.

 

[SmallHatLogan]

I was talking about the 1st Bioshock having more holes in it when you start thinking about it than Infinite does yet Infinite is considered like 'plot-hole city' by many.

I think it's because there's so much more happening in Infinite that the plot holes matter more. The only things that are important in Bioshock are Atlas, Jack and Ryan. Pretty much everything else is just world building.

When you actually think about the assassination plan in Bioshock, you realize how it's like the worst assassination plan ever. The main reason why Jack was chosen is because the vita-chambers, which also applies to Ryan. Whereas in Infinite, if you look at what Elizabeth is doing from a different perspective, pretty much all the plot holes no longer exist and the core story never has a major hole it in either.

I have to be honest, I don't actually remember hearing the in game explanation for the vita chambers (while I was playing the game that is, I read about it afterwards). I guess I just wasn't paying attention. In fact I don't remember ever thinking about why Jack was chosen. My problem with stories in games is that I never notice the plot holes/inconsistencies/bad writing until I've finished the game and am thinking about them later, But with Bioshock I never thought about the story after dealing with the tedium of the ending. And by "the ending" I mean everything that happened after the plot twist.

But the more I think about it the more I agree with you.

 

[Somekindofgold]

The Order and Bioshock Infinite really feel similar. That is, they both have shallow gameplay, little replayability and endings that made me want to hit something.

I never got the praise for B:I, it was a terrible game at least in my view. It was around the point they made me repeat the same ghost boss for the third time that I realized I couldnt make excuses for the game anymore, which is a shame because I liked the first two Bioshocks. They were just much better gameplay wise, there was more variety in the weapons, the upgrades (in 2) and the plasmids. I'm not even going to begin to talk about how many plotholes were in Infinite.

 

[rbstewart7263]

See guys I loved the gameplay! It was tough and challenging till you learned how to move and be mobile and how to multitask and kick ass like some skypunk buckaneer or something! But yeah ill check out hte super edition whatever of 1886 but not before that comes out.

 

[hybridial]

The Order and Bioshock Infinite really feel similar. That is, they both have shallow gameplay, little replayability and endings that made me want to hit something.

Heh. I have no desire to play The Order because it represents to me everything wrong with modern games. Much like Bioshock Infinite did. It wasn't just the completely abhorrent mess of a plot, it was the fact the game portion of it was shallow and tedious. It looked good. Yay. Okay. it was garbage in every other sense.


I'd say to anyone considering these two games, pass on them, play Dishonoured. That is a game, and not a schlocky movie masquerading as one.