Sly Reflex Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 I've had this idea floating in my head for a while but never really knew where to start. I was going to go with another game, but seeing as Bioshock Infinite is out I think it'd be good to reflect on the game that kicked it all off, if we are disregarding System Shock. So when Bioshock came out it released to a chorus of good reviews and the critical reception was great. But was Bioshock really deserving of this? What separated it from being a good game to exemplary game? What did it do that made it stand apart. Was its success and acclaim really deserved? Discuss. Advance Wars Bastion Batman: Arkham City Bayonetta Bioshock Bioshock Infinite Bomberman Braid Bubble Bobble Burnout 2: Point of Impact Burnout 3: Takedown Burnout Paradise Call of Duty 4 Castlevania: Symphony of the Night Catherine Cave Story Civilization 4 Dark Souls Dead Space 2 Deadly Premonition Demon's Souls Donkey Kong Country Elite Fallout 3 Fez Fire Emblem Awakening Final Fantasy VI Final Fantasy VII Final Fantasy VIII Final Fantasy IX Flower Forza 3 FTL: Faster Than Light Galaga Gears of War Geometry Wars Retro Evolved 2 Gitaroo Man Global Defence Force God Hand God of War II God of War III Golden Axe Goldenh Sun Goldeneye Gran Turismo Grand Theft Auto III Grand Theft Auto IV Grand Theft Auto: Chinatown Wars Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas Grand Theft Auto: Vice City Gravity Rush Grim Fandango Guitar Hero 2 Gunstar Heroes Halo: Combat Evolved Halo 3 Half Life 2 (and Episodes) Hotline Miami Ico Journey Limbo Littlebigplanet Lumines Mass Effect 2 Mario 64 Mark of the Ninja Metal Gear Solid 2 Metroid Prime Minecraft Ni No Kuni Okami Outrun (1986) Outrun 2 Pacman CE Panzer Dragoon Orta Panzer Dragoon Saga Persona 3 Persona 4 Plants vs Zombies Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time Pokemon Gold/Silver Pokemon Red/Blue Portal Portal 2 Rachet and Clank: Tools of Destruction Red Dead Redemption Resident Evil 2 Resident Evil 4 Resident Evil Remake Rez Rock Band 3 Sam and Max: Hit the Road. SEGA Rally Sensible World of Soccer Shadow Complex Shadow of the Colossus Shenmue II Silent Hill 2 Skies of Arcadia Sonic and Knuckles Sonic the Hedgehog Sonic the Hedgehog 2 Sonic the Hedgehog 3 Soul Calibur II Soul Reaver Space Invaders Spec Ops: The Line Spelunky Super Mario Bros. 3 Super Mario Galaxy Super Mario Galaxy 2 Super Mario Kart Super Mario World Super Meat Boy Super Metroid Super Street Fighter IV SSX Tricky System Shock 2 Team Fortress 2 The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim The Legend of Zelda: Link to the Past The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword The Sims The Walking Dead The World Ends With You TimeSplitters 2 Tomb Raider (1996) Tony Hawks Pro Skater 3 TrialsHD Uncharted 2: Among Thieves Vanquish Viewtiful Joe Virtua Fighter 4 Wipeout 2097 World of Goo World of Warcraft WWF No Mercy Xenoblade Chronicles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HandsomeDead Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 The reception Bioshock infinite has been getting has to me skeptical of it. Of course the original Bioshock got similar reviews but it is a game with its issues. I like Bioshock a whole bunch but it does have some glaring flaws, mostly in the moment to moment gameplay. Yeah, you could play with a lot of different mechanics but not many of them felt that satisfying. I hated fighting Big Daddies for the most part. Even in Bioshock 2 I think I stopped after the second fight with a Big Sister as it was like pulling teeth. But I've gone on about my problem with game criticism before - http://www.mfgamers.com/index.php?showtopic=39373&hl=criticism Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sly Reflex Posted March 26, 2013 Author Share Posted March 26, 2013 Bioshock was received really well by players too, not just critics. Was all the fawning over it just? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HandsomeDead Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 There are components in it to be fawned over, yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sly Reflex Posted March 26, 2013 Author Share Posted March 26, 2013 That's what I'm saying. Did Bioshock really warrant all the love it got, or was it a case of the Emperors New Clothes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HandsomeDead Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 Well no, because calling it "the emperors new cloths" suggests narrative in games is unimportant and just window dressing. It made some cool strides in that department and it deserves to be applauded for it. It deserves respect for some of the things it did, no doubt. But I'm talking about criticism here, 'cos of the thread title, and it's here that I think is where we have a problem. But that's reviews for you. They are of a time and current excitement does rub off on a review. It's why I find retrospectives to be a much better look at games these days, and most retrospectives of Bioshock do point out its short comings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radiofloyd Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 I loved Bioshock. I loved the atmosphere, and the music. The crackling of the jukeboxes and the vending machines. The level names - "Arcadia", "Hephaestus". I guess I was just really immersed in it. The final boss battle was terrible though, and the ending (or lack thereof). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sly Reflex Posted March 27, 2013 Author Share Posted March 27, 2013 For me Bioshock was a very presentation heavy title with very little in the way of fun gaming. It did something that no other medium could even dream of doing story wise, and I think that's why it's held in such high regard. Strip that story away and you're left with a very pretty but vacuous looking shell. As a game I found it average at best, there's no amount of dressing up could hide that from me. One thing I did love about Bioshock was the audio diary pick ups. The fact that it eliminated having to watch cutscenes or took gameplay out of your hands so you could be fed a bit of story was a stroke of genius. Allowing you to consume these mini stories in bitesized fragments as you rooted around the playing areas is something that every game of its type could learn from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hendo Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 By contrast, I had loads of fun with the combat of Bioshock and I fully immersed myself in the world. The story in the end did elevate it to where I think the fawning was just. Now, in the opposite end of the spectrum, I really don't get the love that Internet forums have for EDF. I just found it boring repetitive nonesense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sly Reflex Posted March 27, 2013 Author Share Posted March 27, 2013 One game at a time H. I've got a list of games to go through and I'll be picking them at random. EDF isn't on the list, it isn't what I'd consider what most critics and players would consider landmark software. I'm surprised anyone could get fun out of the shooting myself, it just wasn't a fun exercise for me. I'm not saying lots of people didn't find it entertaining, because clearly a lot of them put up with it or enjoyed it to see out the games credits. Was it the shooting that kept them playing or the multitude of other things that kept players engaged? That's what I want to know. That's what I'm looking at, do the component parts of the game constitute to the reputation the game has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hendo Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 Well it certainly doesn't have the fluid combat that CoD or Halo has, but then those games don't have its story nor is it going down that path, it's more RPG that happens to be in first person is how I played it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DANGERMAN Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 I've said this way too much over the years so apologies to anyone that's heard it before. I like a lot of stuff about Bioshock, Rapture is probably the best game world I've ever experienced, it looked and sounded great, felt fairly full, and it was also brilliantly tense. The slight distortions on normality like the splicers singing religious songs, setting a kind of Chicago 1900s under water, it all helped make it a bit unsettling. I even really liked the plasmids, I liked being able to get a Big Daddy to follow you around, although I think the best use of the plasmids was in Minerva's Den where you needed to use the environment because you didn't have much else. Which kind of brings me to the problems with it, I saw the other day that it had got loads and loads of 10s at release, I didn't realise that it had been reviewed quite that well. For all the well done narrative (like the audio files) the game itself isn't all that special imo, take it out of that setting and it's pretty run of the mill. It's very predictable at points, you know when you're about to be attacked, the controls weren't great, changing weapons/plasmids wasn't very good, particularly when you wanted to switch ammo types too. And while the commentary on linearity in games is commendable, like a certain recent modern shooter (that I'm trying not to spoil) it does it by making an incredibly linear game. Saying that you always had a choice and could have stopped at any time is idiotic when I'm supposed to play the game to discover that. It also got very fetch questy in the back half, in fact everything past the reveal is pretty poor imo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HandsomeDead Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 To be honest if you look at 95% of AAA games that get Bioshocks level of critical acclaim they pretty much always have massive things wrong with them. I mean Mass Effect is certainly a worse game than Bioshock when all elements are taken into account and it got a similar acclaim, but both are strong in an 'area' and it's what people mostly remember about them, or what people care about when they are playing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sambob Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 I think the gist of the big reviews at Bioshock's release were that the things it did well it did on a totally different scale to games that would have been seen as it peers, and so effectively the reviews were high because reviewers were reviewing it as the kind of game that it wants to be. I think its a bit unfair because you could do that with many games and say, I apologise to Sly for talking about games that are not Bioshock, but if you look at Assassins creed when it came out, people went mental for it but then soon after release people began to pick it apart. It was very much a case that playing it as the games creators wanted you to play it would yield great rewards but then if you just ran through sword fighting for example, it was something lesser. So really the question is should you review a game based on how well it does the stuff that it does well or not, if thats something that we are fine with allowing then Bioshock is definitely deserving of its high scores. Its a linear, atmospheric, high end visual shooter that delivers an exemplary one off story payload that only a handful of games has been able to match. It doesnt hold up well against some other games that offer lots on repeated play through, it doesnt have a strong multiplayer element that some games have, it doesnt have very good RPG elements that you might perhaps expect with a game where you are improving yourself and your powers etc. Its just a case of how you review it I think, praise for the things it does well, and scorn for the things that it doesnt have? or maybe you look at what it was trying to achieve and whether it does that. I cant really put my finger on why, but i think giving it a 7 or 8 that it could maybe have received if you looked at the things it was lacking would have been wrong, because even now moments from the game stick in my mind and in others that have described them here, for example: the opening sequence where your plane crashes and you are stranded in the water (with the stunning visuals) and you see this lighthouse and make your way to it and are submerged in the bathysphere and you begin to see the scale of rapture as you are guided remotely by this mysterious character on the end of a walky talky. Its a real stand out moment in gaming, its fucking hella stylish, it was narrative in gaming with a real flourish, and was the sort of thing that almost every reviewer wanted to see more of in gaming, and giving it a 10 was probably their best way of doing that. The 10s that Bioshock received should probably be seen more as 'this is good, everyone look at this, parts of it are exemplary' rather than what a 10 would historically be which is more like 'this is gaming perfection'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HandsomeDead Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 I think Sam nailed it in terms of its critical acclaim. But to be devil's advocate for a bit, don't the rubbish scenarios in the game taint it a bit? Like when you find yourself in a fight with a Big Daddy which is much stronger and faster than you, and it's early on so you haven't unlocked many skills and traps. All you find yourself doing is chipping away at it a little then dying sent back to the Vita-Chamber then chipping at it a little more then back to the Vita-Chamber, and continue to do so to the point it's just comical. Is this emergent and atmospheric? I wouldn't say so. And of course as well as the nice touches such as audio logs you also have the stupidity of picking up food, drink and cigarettes from buckets and dead bodies and consuming them were you stand. Again, you realise what you're doing sometimes and it's just comical, but not in a knowing way. When I think about it I've always lumped Bioshock in with the likes of No More Heroes and other games I like that have glaring flaws but are still cool in a lot of ways, and overall, things I enjoy spending time on... well, most of the time spent... some of the time spent... more than half the time. Anyway, I think I've said my part so I'll end on this: Is Bioshock the best game ever made? No, it's no where near good enough (Though it may be someones personal favourite, and that's fine). Does Bioshock have influential elements to it that deserves it a place in gaming history? Yes, and then some. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hendo Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 @Ben, that's not fair about though about "could've turned off at any time". The other game has that but Bioshock is the opposite that you never had a choice and never really do. The points are a little different. Also I think that the other game failed on this because of it for me - you can't make me feel guilty for having done something in a game when it was all I could do bar turn it off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dante76 Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 I think Sam nailed it in terms of its critical acclaim. But to be devil's advocate for a bit, don't the rubbish scenarios in the game taint it a bit? Like when you find yourself in a fight with a Big Daddy which is much stronger and faster than you, and it's early on so you haven't unlocked many skills and traps. All you find yourself doing is chipping away at it a little then dying sent back to the Vita-Chamber then chipping at it a little more then back to the Vita-Chamber, and continue to do so to the point it's just comical. Is this emergent and atmospheric? I wouldn't say so. Real men don't use Vita-Chambers. It adds to the tension and the satisfaction of taking down a big daddy at that time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sambob Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 I was going to say that actually Dante, when I was in that situation I just chipped away at it and made use of cover etc, part of the challenge was that at that point you werent necessarily meant to be able to beat them easily, and the reward for beating them was the little sisters, which were largely optional. Again the idea was there, but it wasnt quite perfect for all people, and I guess the problem with a review of '10' is that it is seen to mean the game is all things to all people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craymen Edge Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 I really like Bioshock, the setting atmosphere and art direction are some of the best out there in my opinion. Still, despite the opening really grabbing me, I did have to start it 3 times before I finally knuckled down and finished it. I don't know if it was anything in the game in particular or just a weird apathy I get towards first-person shooters from time to time. I owned Bad Company 1 and Far Cry 2 at one point and sold both unopened, and couldn't even be bothered to try Crysis' free demo. The least interesting parts of Bioshock were the most regular "game-y" bits: (go collect 3 parts of this. Go here, but in order to do that first go somewhere else and do x, etc.) But to be devil's advocate for a bit, don't the rubbish scenarios in the game taint it a bit? Like when you find yourself in a fight with a Big Daddy which is much stronger and faster than you, and it's early on so you haven't unlocked many skills and traps. All you find yourself doing is chipping away at it a little then dying sent back to the Vita-Chamber then chipping at it a little more then back to the Vita-Chamber, and continue to do so to the point it's just comical. Is this emergent and atmospheric? I wouldn't say so.I didn't realize until starting it for the second time, that I didn't need to face the Big Daddies as soon as I encountered them, you can come back for many of them once you're a bit more powerful. Admittedly, you can't get too powerful without the Adam from the Little Sisters, but most of the important Plasmids are given to you as you progress through the game. But before I knew that, the early fights against Big Daddies weren't great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DANGERMAN Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 @Ben, that's not fair about though about "could've turned off at any time". The other game has that but Bioshock is the opposite that you never had a choice and never really do. The points are a little different. Also I think that the other game failed on this because of it for me - you can't make me feel guilty for having done something in a game when it was all I could do bar turn it off. I see your point but I think they amount to the same thing. Bioshock tells you you don't have a choice the other game that you do, ultimately it doesn't work in a format that needs to be played Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now