Why does everyone love Bioshock?

[JochemDude]

I didn't incredibly repetitive and I have a deeply rooted hate for dungeons.

 

[honestdiscussioner]

I don't love Bioshock.

 

[Treblaine]

Sure the story was decent with a few cool plot twists but that didn't make up for the tedious gameplay which became boring and repetitive.

Sorry it isn't an incredibly linear game that leads you by the hand like Cowadooty, telling you all there is to do.

The combat has incredible depth, but if you don't seek it out (easy if you play on childlike easy setting) then you will not appreciate it.

(1) did you max out research for each enemy type (including turrets and bots)?
(2) did you specialise in any tonics?
(3) did you try new ways of hunting the big daddy?
(5) Did you customise controls in any way to fit your playstyle?
(6) did you bother reading any of the audio-logs or even think about mise-en-scene?
(7) Did you draw a plasmid upgrade plan?
(8) Did you ever select a new plasmid power on the fly? (such as select TK and grab grenade out of air to throw back!)
(9) Did you hack any machine to use as an ally?

and finally:

(10) do you love Michael Bay's 'Transformers' movies.

If that last answer is a yes, or no to even half of 1-9 I'll know where to file your crazy opinion: as utterly irrelevant.

 

[kane.malakos]

[

I played on the hardest difficulty on my second playthrough and was bored out of my mind. Fallout and Mass Effect have deep worlds with amazing characters with so much to do. Bioshock is a corridor shooter with slightly wider, retraceable corridors. Mass Effect and Fallout have moral decisions that completely change the story. You can focus in guns or speech and much more. In Bioshock the only moral dilemma is whether to kill Little Sisters or not which just amounts to a different ending (all of which were pretty stupid). Whether you kill or save them, your game will still play the same way.

However with Fallout it's a case of turn on vats to win and for ME it's just an average cover shooter with tacked on RPG elements,I will admit their are more options then just shoot person in face in fallout and mass effect SOME OF THE TIME. I think your kinda ignore ME and Fallouts faults but highlighting Bioshocks. I am not trying to say you opinion on the game is bad and you must enjoy it, I am just trying to show you why its enjoyed so much.

I'm not saying that I hate Bioshock, I still think it had its ups, it just wasn't a 10/10 game, well not even a 8/10 game in my opinion. I don't know how much Fallout or ME you've played, but they are incredibly deep and have 100's of ways to play it. Sure, in Bioshock you can choose between burning your foes or freezing them, but they will die no matter what. I expect RPGs do be a bit deeper than "kill him with wasps or kill him with poison."

That might be your problem. Bioshock is not an RPG. It is, above all else, a first-person shooter. That's all. It has some moral choice systems and some upgrades, but that doesn't make it an RPG. Compared to many RPGs it has less depth and complexity, but compared to first-person shooters? It stands head and shoulders above most of the genre. It's got a good story, a unique setting, fun gameplay elements, and a nice variety of weapons, especially when compared to the average FPS. So why is everyone comparing it to games that are in an entirely different genre?

 

[Justice4L]

Sure the story was decent with a few cool plot twists but that didn't make up for the tedious gameplay which became boring and repetitive.

Sorry it isn't an incredibly linear game that leads you by the hand like Cowadooty, telling you all there is to do.

The combat has incredible depth, but if you don't seek it out (easy if you play on childlike easy setting) then you will not appreciate it.

(1) did you max out research for each enemy type (including turrets and bots)?
(2) did you specialise in any tonics?
(3) did you try new ways of hunting the big daddy?
(5) Did you customise controls in any way to fit your playstyle?
(6) did you bother reading any of the audio-logs or even think about mise-en-scene?
(7) Did you draw a plasmid upgrade plan?
(8) Did you ever select a new plasmid power on the fly? (such as select TK and grab grenade out of air to throw back!)
(9) Did you hack any machine to use as an ally?

and finally:

(10) do you love Michael Bay's 'Transformers' movies.

If that last answer is a yes, or no to even half of 1-9 I'll know where to file your crazy opinion: as utterly irrelevant.

In my other posts you will see that I have said that

a) I was playing on hardest difficulty

b) It was actually quite linear (did the half-life 2 trick of seeming open but being extremely narrow).

And I have seemed to have done everything on your list (including hating the Transformers movies) and guess what? Still find the game a 6/10 at best

 

[TelHybrid]

It makes a nice change from all of the generic brown/grey military shooters that saturate the games industry these days. Nice to see risks being taken rather than pandering to the more easily amused demographic.

 

[Justice4L]

[

I played on the hardest difficulty on my second playthrough and was bored out of my mind. Fallout and Mass Effect have deep worlds with amazing characters with so much to do. Bioshock is a corridor shooter with slightly wider, retraceable corridors. Mass Effect and Fallout have moral decisions that completely change the story. You can focus in guns or speech and much more. In Bioshock the only moral dilemma is whether to kill Little Sisters or not which just amounts to a different ending (all of which were pretty stupid). Whether you kill or save them, your game will still play the same way.

However with Fallout it's a case of turn on vats to win and for ME it's just an average cover shooter with tacked on RPG elements,I will admit their are more options then just shoot person in face in fallout and mass effect SOME OF THE TIME. I think your kinda ignore ME and Fallouts faults but highlighting Bioshocks. I am not trying to say you opinion on the game is bad and you must enjoy it, I am just trying to show you why its enjoyed so much.

I'm not saying that I hate Bioshock, I still think it had its ups, it just wasn't a 10/10 game, well not even a 8/10 game in my opinion. I don't know how much Fallout or ME you've played, but they are incredibly deep and have 100's of ways to play it. Sure, in Bioshock you can choose between burning your foes or freezing them, but they will die no matter what. I expect RPGs do be a bit deeper than "kill him with wasps or kill him with poison."

That might be your problem. Bioshock is not an RPG. It is, above all else, a first-person shooter. That's all. It has some moral choice systems and some upgrades, but that doesn't make it an RPG. Compared to many RPGs it has less depth and complexity, but compared to first-person shooters? It stands head and shoulders above most of the genre. It's got a good story, a unique setting, fun gameplay elements, and a nice variety of weapons, especially when compared to the average FPS. So why is everyone comparing it to games that are in an entirely different genre?

I don't know where to classify it then. As an FPS, it is below average. As and RPG, it is below average. But as a hybrid of the two I think it is just simply average.

 

[kane.malakos]

[

I played on the hardest difficulty on my second playthrough and was bored out of my mind. Fallout and Mass Effect have deep worlds with amazing characters with so much to do. Bioshock is a corridor shooter with slightly wider, retraceable corridors. Mass Effect and Fallout have moral decisions that completely change the story. You can focus in guns or speech and much more. In Bioshock the only moral dilemma is whether to kill Little Sisters or not which just amounts to a different ending (all of which were pretty stupid). Whether you kill or save them, your game will still play the same way.

However with Fallout it's a case of turn on vats to win and for ME it's just an average cover shooter with tacked on RPG elements,I will admit their are more options then just shoot person in face in fallout and mass effect SOME OF THE TIME. I think your kinda ignore ME and Fallouts faults but highlighting Bioshocks. I am not trying to say you opinion on the game is bad and you must enjoy it, I am just trying to show you why its enjoyed so much.

I'm not saying that I hate Bioshock, I still think it had its ups, it just wasn't a 10/10 game, well not even a 8/10 game in my opinion. I don't know how much Fallout or ME you've played, but they are incredibly deep and have 100's of ways to play it. Sure, in Bioshock you can choose between burning your foes or freezing them, but they will die no matter what. I expect RPGs do be a bit deeper than "kill him with wasps or kill him with poison."

That might be your problem. Bioshock is not an RPG. It is, above all else, a first-person shooter. That's all. It has some moral choice systems and some upgrades, but that doesn't make it an RPG. Compared to many RPGs it has less depth and complexity, but compared to first-person shooters? It stands head and shoulders above most of the genre. It's got a good story, a unique setting, fun gameplay elements, and a nice variety of weapons, especially when compared to the average FPS. So why is everyone comparing it to games that are in an entirely different genre?

I don't know where to classify it then. As an FPS, it is below average. As and RPG, it is below average. But as a hybrid of the two I think it is just simply average.

Below average for an FPS? That certainly wasn't my experience.

 

[Titan Buttons]

Am I the only the only person who thought that Bioshock was deeply average?

Sure the story was decent with a few cool plot twists but that didn't make up for the tedious gameplay which became boring and repetitive. People kept on praising the story when games like Fallout and Mass Effect's story is 10x better. They also have better gameplay. I don't hate the game, I'm just pretty underwhelmed.

Does anyone else think it was average or do you think it was great?

Mass effects story is fairly good but fallout 3 NOPE

Spoiler: fallout 3 story is not very good

Mostly due to the massive plot hole of going in at the end when you have a Super mutant standing next to you, who is immune to radiation

Spoiler: bioshock explaining

Bioshock is well regarded due to the political and philosophical elements about rapture, I would by no way call the gameplay tedious, and I would like your opinion on mass effects gameplay as from my point of view, it is vastly more repetitive.

Actually you can get the Super mutant to do it for you.

OP: I understand what you mean about the gameplay but I believe it has more to do with your personal taste the the game itself.

 

[kane.malakos]

Am I the only the only person who thought that Bioshock was deeply average?

Sure the story was decent with a few cool plot twists but that didn't make up for the tedious gameplay which became boring and repetitive. People kept on praising the story when games like Fallout and Mass Effect's story is 10x better. They also have better gameplay. I don't hate the game, I'm just pretty underwhelmed.

Does anyone else think it was average or do you think it was great?

Mass effects story is fairly good but fallout 3 NOPE

Spoiler: fallout 3 story is not very good

Mostly due to the massive plot hole of going in at the end when you have a Super mutant standing next to you, who is immune to radiation

Spoiler: bioshock explaining

Bioshock is well regarded due to the political and philosophical elements about rapture, I would by no way call the gameplay tedious, and I would like your opinion on mass effects gameplay as from my point of view, it is vastly more repetitive.

Actually you can get the Super mutant to do it for you.

OP: I understand what you mean about the gameplay but I believe it has more to do with your personal taste the the game itself.

Only if you have the Brotherhood of Steel expansion. If you have the vanilla game Fawkes refuses, saying that it's your "destiny" or some shit like that.

 

[GigaHz]

It's appropriate that you bring Mass Effect into this.

I thought Mass Effects gameplay was terrible, with the story being it's only redeeming quality.

I've got a similar opinion about Bioshock. The game plays fairly clunky, even on PC. I liked what they tried to do with Plasmids and the objects in the environment, but only a few are dependable in all situations while most are largely situational. The random AI wandering around the environment was a nice idea, but it never really came off as more of a 'respawning' monster type that you might run into now and then. Eventually, you get bored of the repetition.

In short, it was an experiment with elements of System Shock thrown in. What made the experience bearable despite the tedium was the brilliant art direction, atmosphere, sound design, and plot. It was nice to play an FPS game that wasn't drenched in sepia tone, as was the style (and still is, sadly) when the game first released. Again, I must stress the art direction. Every single room you explored was unique and highly detailed. From the furniture to the architecture. A tremendous amount of effort was put into achieving this and it should be praised.

When I first played the game, I really wanted to get inside Andrew Ryan's head and understand what he was about. From the moment you see the banner 'No God's or Kings, Only Men' you can tell that the man is some kind of criminal/political misfit and that is interesting to me. As you learn more about Ryan, Fontain, and the other cast of characters, Rapture almost seems like a believable place. It could even serve as a cautionary tale for Artists and Scientists alike. It's a story that you can digest at face value, or read into.

But as with everything, it might not be your thing. It wanders into the 'games as art' camp... sorta. With anything remotely considered art, its a largely love or hate it affair.

 

[Treblaine]

The gameplay was really great for the first few hours but it did get a bit repetitive during the middle sections. I basically did the freeze/shoot combo for most of the game. I wish the game would've had situations that forced you into changing up your tactics. Later in the game, I choose to start using the wrench and with all the right tonics stacked, the wrench was so overpowered.

This is what I am talking about, gamers over dependence on "hand-holding".

EVEN IF BORED you won't try anything new until it is SO LONG into the game! You say you have to be forced by game design to try something you want to try anyway. How about you actually use the freedom that is given to you than demand that other freedoms are taken away for you to try them.

Why weren't you trying all the weapons at a steadier pace?

 

[Motakikurushi]

Incredibly well designed levels, hugely atmospheric and involving, well written, interesting take on a genre stagnating with repetitive mechanics and ideas. It doesn't patronise the player, it's frequently terrifying, had great music, used it well and was graphically sublime for the time of its release. Then again, it's my favourite game of all time, so I'm biased, and Bioshock 2 was awful. Yes, the ending is crap, yes the gameplay is a watered down System Shock 2, but it is not 'average'. It won those awards for a reason. But how the hell does the gameplay suck? It's not great, sure, but by that logic every other FPS sucks. I'll take Bioshock over the next regenerating health bar, cover system, 3 weapons only shooter any day. Frankly, we NEED more games with the integrity and creativity of Bioshock. I myself cannot stand the boredom and monotonous drudgery that is Battlefield or COD. I frequently revisit Bioshock to remind myself of when FPS games used to have colour.

 

[Titan Buttons]

Am I the only the only person who thought that Bioshock was deeply average?

Sure the story was decent with a few cool plot twists but that didn't make up for the tedious gameplay which became boring and repetitive. People kept on praising the story when games like Fallout and Mass Effect's story is 10x better. They also have better gameplay. I don't hate the game, I'm just pretty underwhelmed.

Does anyone else think it was average or do you think it was great?

Mass effects story is fairly good but fallout 3 NOPE

Spoiler: fallout 3 story is not very good

Mostly due to the massive plot hole of going in at the end when you have a Super mutant standing next to you, who is immune to radiation

Spoiler: bioshock explaining

Bioshock is well regarded due to the political and philosophical elements about rapture, I would by no way call the gameplay tedious, and I would like your opinion on mass effects gameplay as from my point of view, it is vastly more repetitive.

Actually you can get the Super mutant to do it for you.

OP: I understand what you mean about the gameplay but I believe it has more to do with your personal taste the the game itself.

Only if you have the Brotherhood of Steel expansion. If you have the vanilla game Fawkes refuses, saying that it's your "destiny" or some shit like that.

Oh I did not know that.

 

[Nomanslander]

Yeah, why do you people like it? Stop this nonsense now!

Wait? I like Bioshock! Ahhh, I don't understand what's wrong with me!

:O

 

[scar_47]

Good story with an actual surprise twist unlike 90% of the time where I clearly see the twist coming, game play was fun and surprisingly deep with the all of the different weapons, ammo types, plasmids, and tonics you could do some pretty neat combinations, the settings was also a nice touch the 50's and 60's atmosphere was done amazingly well. In the end its all a matter of opinion there are certain popular things that I've never really gotten like star wars its ok but really not nearly as good as you'd think given how people talk about it but again its a subjective thing. What works for some doesn't work for others.

 

[Kathinka]

what i don't like is what consoles have done and do to the developement of pc gaming. sucky p2p-networking in mw, no prone in bc2 due to limited controls on console pads, elimination of inventory and xp elements in bioshock, stuff like that...

They are a more viable business model thats all. If PC users played and paid more for content they would be catered for more. MMOs seem to have destroyed your market and consoles have taken it's place. I hate lots of the things the MMOs popularity has caused but i also like some of the stuff coming from consoles. I never have compatability issues with software or hardware. My games always work without fail. I don't have to upgrade every few months to play the next best thing.

I've done both types of gaming and both have advantages and disadvantages. You moan about dumbing down stuff for the console market but what you really mean is the mass market. It's what the masses want from games now that you don't like, not consoles.

'tis true i suppose. it's futile anyway, nothing much we lowly gaming peasants can do about it, exept enjoying the ride.

i must object to the upgrade every few months thing though. if you are content with the graphical level that an xbox360 offers for example, you can get a dirt cheap and year old pc and never upgrade it. now if you mean "play every next best thing on the highest settings", that would be true. but consoles are nothing else but small computers, so yeah...a pc as old as an xbox with the same power costs next to nothing, and you dont have to upgrade if thats good enough for you.