Why Bioshock 1 was the better game. spoilers

#1 Posted by kentriz (36 posts) -

I feel that the original was the better game. Here is why. I enjoyed infinite by the way... its just my opinion

First, most importantly, the city. Rapture had better atmosphere. You would be walking down a flooded dark corridor and look out the window to see a body drowned, floating in the sea. The lights would be flickering and suddenly a shadow would pass infront of you. Then you would hear a giggle in the vent above. Or enter a room and loot a desk and suddenly fog would fill the room and when you would turn around a splicer would be directly behind you just staring. Also each level was more like a mini sand box to explore unlike Columbia. Soldiers field and Emphoria where too small and didnt have as much detail. Think about Bioshock 1 and the level, the medical pavillion or Fort Frolic.

Second, the antagonists. In Bioshock 1 you fought splicers. Citizens of Rapture who have gone mad from overdose on adam. They are deformed have powers and are over all creepy. Infinite you just fight , founders who are practically cops or Vox who are rebels. Its just boring. They dont shout to themselves ad sing creepy songs like the splicers do while the roam the darkened halls. "Jesus loves me for the bible tells me so.." Comstock wasnt as interesting as Ryan but I cant really think of reasons why. Maybe because Adnrew Ryan was more relatable. I understood where he was coming from, Half the quotes he says I agree with. I am a atheist so Comstock wasnt anything to me like Ryan was. Ryan made quotes like, "God didnt plant the seeds to Arcadia, I did." "A man chooses, a slave obeys." "We all make choices but in the end our choices make us." "What is the diffrence between a man and a parasite? A man build creates, a parasite asks, wheres my share?" I just now tried looking up Comstock quotes but none were even intresting enough.

Third, the gameplay. They dumbed it down. Simple as that. Only two weapons at a time? No more u invent stations? I hate it when you upgrade a gun it doesnt change its appearance like Bioshock 1 did. Also the guns where better in Bioshock 1, they looked cooler as well. They took away my favortie weapon, the crossbow. Very Call of Duty/Halo to only carry two guns if you ask me. Skylines were cool but lack luster. Look back at the e3 2011 demo, the game looked better then.

Fourth, the story. Its story was good, dont get me wrong but it wasnt as intense. It had goofy funny moments and ackward moments, like the jam session in the bar? It felt really pushed to me. Also the ending was unoriginal. It wasnt bad but it just didnt impact me like the "Would you kindly" twist. To be fair Bioshock 1 had a pretty bad ending. I guess I am just talking about the plot twists. Multi universes? You are Comstock? I guess because I played through Ni No Kuni a few months back and it has the same plot twist I felt worn out. I can see why people think its ending is amazing but not for me. I read Stephen Kings Dark Tower novels so the ending was just stale to me. Songbird was lame. He was only in the game a few times, all scripted. I was expecting a epic boss fight so it was a cool twist when you actually use him in the final battle but that scene was also very dry. Really about vigors? Plasmids had such a better story. Adam found from sea slugs in the bottom of the ocean that cured the blind and healed the wounded and then it gets turned into weapons that drive people mad after prolonged use. In infinte, Fink just looked through tears to discover vigors... Okay? Cool I guess?

Even after everything I just said I still enjoyed the game, it was better than most fps shooters out there but now go back and play the original. It still has good graphics and still has fun gameplay. It takes skill and statedgy to play not run and gun shooting. Just because the main charecter is silent doesnt mean its bad. Hes just a conduit for you to expirence Rapture.

#2 Posted by poor_bastard (20 posts) -

Completely agree with you.  One more thing I'd add to the list about gameplay/vigors though, is I thought it was much more interesting and compelling in Bioshock 1 when you'd set a guy on fire and he'd run around looking for water to jump into, how you could fry everyone standing in water with electricity, etc.

In infinite the chains were pretty much worthless and uninspired, and felt really contrived and not "logical" or in some cases necessary like in the first one.  Infitinite felt much more like a run of the mill shooter then I'd have liked personally. 

#3 Posted by Luka89 (61 posts) -

Agree with the both of you, bioshock and bioshock 2 are better games all the way...

#4 Posted by Zakhalf-life (210 posts) -

And I agree with the three of you. I fully enjoyed Infinite and it had a fairly engrossing story, but Bioshock's Rapture had a certain charm and level of cohesion. Infinite was on-rails and it's plot near the end was insanity, hoping you were paying enough attention to what was about to get contradicted just around the corner, though what engrossed me was its presentation that elegantly fit that insanity together. The ending was saddening though, being so magnificently executed yet it left me with a '**** You' feeling and when you start talking about multiple dimensions and doorways and all sorts of quantum mechanics, what is there to truly believe in.

#5 Posted by ShadowJax04 (3344 posts) -

I have to agree that I enjoyed the gunplay more in Bioshock 1, I get that they were trying to intensify gun battles and make every encounter play out different compared to the guns you currently have equipped but I enjoyed the U-invent and freeform weapons galore a lot. Also enjoyed weapon upgrades having actual visuals, the ADAM currency.. I could really go on but I'd rather play bioshock 1 again. BS:Infinite is a great game but from a pure gunplay perspective I enjoyed bs:1 more.

Also, from an athiest perspective it's not that I didn't like Comstock. "One man walks into the waters of baptism. A 'DIFFRENT' man walks OUT!". The southern elvis-esque accent he sometimes pulls off is quite funny. But I found Ryan a little bit more plausible considering there is no spoon (replace spoon).

#6 Posted by ShadowJax04 (3344 posts) -
And indeed the splicers were miles more interesting as enemies. From a perspective of in-game dialogue. The Vox and Founders simply were not as funny. Though I enjoy the soul less tin man automatons a lot. Though you can simply out run them, look away. There is no automaton. Look back. Automaton. Shoot automaton. Wouldn't mind one of those IRL.
#7 Posted by TitanZombie (23 posts) -

Please give my Bioshock Infinite Playthrough a View and a Like!! and dont forget to subscribe if you like what you see and you want to see more of the latest games in HD!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tY1Bh-l0CX4&list=PLWnx56tND3J5tcsowzOgKrhOAYamOSzbE

#8 Posted by BioAssassin (152 posts) -

Bioshock Infinite definitely departed from the horror genre. The atmosphere in Bioshock 1 and 2 was pretty good and it made you wonder how everyone must have been before all of the mutations and what the city must have been like. The only major difference between Columbia and Rapture is Rapture is basically a wreck upon arrival and Columbia is like heaven upon arrival. That could affect enemies as well. I also think they should have made multiple endings with corresponding choices. I loved seeing  how my actions affected the endings in Bioshock 1 and 2. There really weren't any choices to make in Infinite and it was just one general ending for the whole game. It's hard to picture what the choices might have been, but they still could have been incorporated. 

#9 Posted by ShadowJax04 (3344 posts) -

Bioshock Infinite definitely departed from the horror genre. The atmosphere in Bioshock 1 and 2 was pretty good and it made you wonder how everyone must have been before all of the mutations and what the city must have been like. The only major difference between Columbia and Rapture is Rapture is basically a wreck upon arrival and Columbia is like heaven upon arrival. That could affect enemies as well. I also think they should have made multiple endings with corresponding choices. I loved seeing  how my actions affected the endings in Bioshock 1 and 2. There really weren't any choices to make in Infinite and it was just one general ending for the whole game. It's hard to picture what the choices might have been, but they still could have been incorporated. 

BioAssassin
I knew something was missing in my post.. forgot to mention multiple endings! The game could of definately incorporated multiple endings in my not-irrational-games-developer eyes. How about letting Comstock live and seeing the destruction of New York firsthand like in that one cutscene we get in the game? Food for thought.
#10 Posted by BioAssassin (152 posts) -

That could have been one of them. Another could have been having two gravestones one with Bookers name and one with Anna "Elizabeth" Dewitt next to each other or simply having Elizabeth die. Latter would be the more sad one of the two. I'm not sure why they took out multiple endings. Not every ending was the same in Bioshock 1 + 2 and that was the beauty of it.

#11 Posted by ShadowJax04 (3344 posts) -

That could have been one of them. Another could have been having two gravestones one with Bookers name and one with Anna "Elizabeth" Dewitt next to each other or simply having Elizabeth die. Latter would be the more sad one of the two. I'm not sure why they took out multiple endings. Not every ending was the same and that was the beauty of it.

BioAssassin
It is definately a replay value incentive IMO. The way I see it, the more inclinced people are to replay your games the more solid your fanbasis would go, as biased as that is because I obviously would have like to see multiple endings ;) I like your idea as well. I reckon that Bioshock 2 had 3 different endings and that upped the replay value for me. I imagine my mentioned ending would be something akin to rejecting one's apparent suicide but therefore allowing Elizabeth to stay with Comstock, which will first allow you to see Booker do whatever. Perhaps arrest a criminal as a Pinkerton agent but anti-hero style, roughing him up. Later on you see the destruction of NY.
#12 Posted by Paoksis (479 posts) -

in the end,i think what makes this game look worse than previous Bioshocks,is that it aimed too damn high and failed to reach these expectations.They had so many ideas thrown into this game,that couldnt be that well polished  in the amount of time they had....So many elements of this game were underused that gives you a bit of bitterness ,thinking on what this game could have been.....Still,that doesnt make this a bad game,in fact it makes it easily a contestor of one of the best games of 2013

#13 Posted by emiroas (178 posts) -

I said this in another post. Ken levine was more interested in telling HIS story (no matter how good is..) than in letting us players do what we have most fun with...

We always like to SAVE all amo & eve as possible, so every encounter makes you think in the best possible way to tactically approach the situation, using the enviroment and everything at hand, or maybe just going back to a different location to upgrade this or that,...and at the end you have a game that is challenging enough to make you spend some time figuring out how to go through to the next level in a most efficient manner. That is something I havent found yet in this BS Infinite as I did in the past with the previos games, WHY,WHY???...The lady supplies you with whatever you need, there´s no weapon customization nor health/eve/vigors accumulation.

At the end is not fun just to walk around looking for everything because that is not as essential as it was before.It all comes down to run & gun, and be more fast and precise during combat time.Pufff

#14 Posted by BioAssassin (152 posts) -

Did anyone else think that there would be a major choice in choosing wether to be friends with Founders or Vox. After playing Industrial Revolution and choosing to send gifts to one faction, I thought that would also be in the game too. I thought Booker would get exclusives from choosing Vox or Founder. After beating the game though that would be hard to pull off since both factions are after Booker, but they could have made the side you chose a little less hostile. 

#15 Posted by Frag_Maniac (2059 posts) -

First, Bio 1 had more survival horror type atmosphere, but in a one sided, scripted way that lost it's effect on subsequent play throughs. Odd you comment on some maps being too small, because one of the key differences are the many spacious and varied maps of Infinite. Finally a Bio where you can actually use a sniper rifle.

Second, yeah, you mostly foguht nothing BUT Splicers, another one of the worst things about Bio 1. You were stuck in a mad house with psycho Splicer after psycho Splicer. I also found their repeat psychotic ramblings to be boring. Infinite's enemy banter is far more varied and intersting. There are also more than just quotes from Comstock, Fink and others had some key things to say to give the story depth.

Third, I hear the "dumbed down" cliche a lot, and it's inaccurate. The two weapon limit is more of a balanced approach than dumbing down. It keeps you from spamming a camp spot with a doomsday arsenal on your back as per typical arcade shooters do. Weapons are personal preference, but clearly you get WAY more choices in this one. Skylines are as cool as you make them, there's tons you can do from them, esp with Syline oriented gears. You didn't say what you thought was better in the E3 demo, but it looked to me to have too much hand holding in some ways, like having Liz summons crows for you, or melt metal for you to hurl. I was one of the ones that was skeptical largely due to what I saw in the demo. Infinite has more varied gameplay and more epic set pieces and battles., and the Zeppelin fight is quite a good climax.

Fourth, I agree the ending was a bit lackluster and too weird for me. I don't care if a story's ending is complex, but this one leaves too many questions unanswered. I'm a clear resolve kinda guy. I felt Songbird was an intersting and fairly original guardian/boss type creature, and after all the scriopted escape encounters, I think most of us probably expected an actual fight at some point. The Zeppelin battle however was epic, and it showed that Songbird is so powerful it would have taken a fairly scripted battle against him with Godlike weapons were we to fight him.

Summary, totally disagree again. Yes this one is more fast paced, but you still have to use a lot of strategy, it's just that now you have to make decisions quickly, vs at your leisure while setting up trap wires and prox mines before triggering a battle. That's part of what made Bio 1 boring IMO. You have the tension of knowing you can't just sit in one spot with traps protecting choke points that lead to your position, while you have an arsenal on your back. It's not just the silent protagonist either, but the repeat small dark maps, the lumbering, moaning Big Daddys, the constant psychotic banter, etc, that make Bio 1 atmospheric in a depressing way. There's no sense of what they were trying to achive in building Rapture, just madness. Basically Bio 1&2 were too one sideed toward horror, without being full on survival horror games. The first two, esp Bio 1, also had much clumsier aiming and movement. I like all the refinements of Infinite. It's renewed my faith in the Biochock universe, and I look forward to their next installment.

#16 Posted by Joh01648 (5 posts) -
Excellent post. I agree with your summary. For me the awe of first entering Rapture and and the shadow in the doctors office are things that can't be forgotten, but the splicers and the w after mazes left the game boring in combat and bloated in a awe-inspiring atmosphere. The golf clubbing of Ryan was amazing, but a letdown followed in the matchup w/ Fontaine. Overall story and ending go to Infinite, overall gameplay to BS2, and the originality and very amazing spots goes to 1. All 3 games are great
#17 Posted by Vambran (1920 posts) -

No backing tracking for missing items.

No upgraded weapon looks.

No Ammo types.

No boss fight , Can't fight songbird. ( Songbird was just for show mostly )

No mini games. ( Hacking , lock picking or otherwise )

No good or bad ending. ( Only bad thing you can do is throw a ball which does nothing , and steal , which just spawns a few cops )

No closure on ending ( pulls an alan wake , they prob going to pad it with DLC )

No multiplayer ( Bioshock 2 had one )

 

#18 Posted by Frag_Maniac (2059 posts) -

No backing tracking for missing items.

No upgraded weapon looks.

No Ammo types.

No boss fight , Can't fight songbird. ( Songbird was just for show mostly )

No mini games. ( Hacking , lock picking or otherwise )

No good or bad ending. ( Only bad thing you can do is throw a ball which does nothing , and steal , which just spawns a few cops )

No closure on ending ( pulls an alan wake , they prob going to pad it with DLC )

No multiplayer ( Bioshock 2 had one )Vambran

Some points there are valid, but you can in fact backtrack a ways to get to boxes you've found keys for or ciphers or code books.

#19 Posted by Vambran (1920 posts) -

You can backtrack a little bit in the hub your in. But It does not let you back track between hubs.

#20 Posted by Frag_Maniac (2059 posts) -

You can backtrack a little bit in the hub your in. But It does not let you back track between hubs.Vambran

But you said it in the context of "missing items", and you can in fact backtrack for items associated with those you find. If you "miss" items beyond that point, well, then you didn't look very thoroughly did you?

#21 Posted by kidbu3 (291 posts) -

as more like temporary teleport-copy-thing from other dimension ;)

#22 Posted by Karatekid360 (25 posts) -
I totally agree with Rapture being a hell of a lot more atmospheric, but Columbia's environments are still pretty damn stunning. This is how I look at it: BioShock 1 > Infinite > BioShock 2.
#23 Posted by gutsallover (412 posts) -

Thanks for spoiling Ni no Kuni, asshole.

#24 Posted by w2play2 (49 posts) -

<They dont shout to themselves ad sing creepy songs like the splicers do while the roam the darkened halls.>


oh man... who could ever forget those haunted wails ... "I want to be a staaaaaaar"

de nitro splicer gunning for you and howling "why are u making this so difficult for yourself"

splicer against splicer  "open up the goddamn door"...crazed frenzy!


you are so right, in infinite I was killing uniformed and (so called)trained guards ....after playing B1 this is so plain boooooring. if I need to run and shoot guards why cant I buy and play black opps or soem war game 


Actually Levine wanted to surpass B1 , but he cant, Bi is the juwel in the crown and can never be surpassed. it's at the top , others will follow but shall not perch. Ken should make ANOTHER game like B1 . u cant beat them (B1) , so join them !

#25 Posted by scorptatious (142 posts) -

The problem I seem to see when it comes to comparing Bioshock 1 and Infinite is that in several ways, while they are the same, they are also both quite different.

Personally, as someone who loves Bioshock 1, I didn't mind that the enemies in B1 weren't like the splicers. I liked how Columbia wasn't dark and atmospheric like Rapture, I liked how the game had a different feel to it gameplay wise compared to the first game. It has it's own identity.

To me, it's sort of like comparing Chrono Trigger and Chrono Cross. Yes, they share the same title, yes, they do connect in some way story wise, but they're fundamentally different in a lot of ways as well.

Out of the two, I definitely prefer Bioshock 1, but it is nice to see 2K taking their series in a different direction instead of making yet another game set in Rapture.

#26 Posted by CrackerMcGee (714 posts) -

System Shock 2 is the better game.

#27 Posted by darksoulja7 (12 posts) -
(Invading another world as a black phantom).. dark souls II shield design contest! take a second to click link then click vote! https://apps.facebook.com/darksoulsii/?gallery&action=view&id=2413
#28 Posted by yearssomuch (54 posts) -

Infinite had a fantastic environment, are you kidding? If you like Rapture more, then more power to you, but Columbia was a fantastic concept. While I would've liked to have been able to explore more, this games setting was just as engrossing as any other BioShock, it was just different.

#29 Posted by bonafidetk (3820 posts) -
BS1 was better but infinite was also one of the best FPS's out in the last few years. It just speaks volumes of how good BS1 is tbh.
#30 Posted by JasonDarksavior (9325 posts) -
I preferred Rapture much much more than Columbia. When compared to Rapture Columbia was almost a bit boring.
#31 Posted by dominer (3316 posts) -

I Like they handled guns and plasmids in Bioshock 1, but that's about it. Infinite has more character and heart that inspires to play through it again, something I don't do for many games these days.

Plus, Infinite didn't have a stupid mute protagonist (a trope that needs to die) or a lame ending(s) like the previous Bioshocks, I'd rather have one amazing ending than multiple "meh" ones.

#32 Posted by Gankstar_VX84 (39 posts) -
you just have to look at any part of the first game, and compare it to infinite, and it hands down beats infinite. I can't even play infinite anymore. I spent 39.99 on the collectors, buying into the hype that levine could do no wrong. what I end up getting, is a drab dull snorefest, utterly un-inspired, stupid enemies, no explaination to anything, tonics, plasmid type things, enemies, civil war, it's all just there, and just happens, the ai isn't particularly special, the combat, animations etc I felt was the weaker part of the bioshock games, they don't feel tight and realistic like a tactical shooter, cod, bf3 or medal of honor etc, but it didn't retain anything that made bioshock 1& 2 cool, so in essence, it's just a shit shooter on a shit game engine, set in a shity enviroment. I love elizabeth, but you're supposed to, twas the point, the rest of the game was shit, overhyped shit.
#33 Posted by nunyerbiz (102 posts) -

I just finished the game for the first time... I will say that I liked the atmosphere and general vibe better in the first game. There really wasn't any sense of dread or uneasiness in Columbia. Enter room, clear room, listen to audio logs for plot snippets, rinse, repeat. I was never worried about what was waiting behind the next door like the first game. The lack of any suspense factor, at least for me, really took away a lot of what made the first Bioshock such a great game.

That's not to say that Infinite was a bad game... far from it... I thought it was really quite good. But once the game slapped down the 'multiple universe' card... Well, I knew I was in for at least a goofy paradox or two when it was all said and done... so the big 'twist' ending just didn't hit home for me.