Bioshock infinite review changed, now has a 4 instead of 9.

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#101 Posted by Bigboi500 (28804 posts) -

Seems more accurate than the first time they reviewed it.

#102 Posted by the330and419 (223 posts) -

I agree. It was garbage.

#103 Posted by TheKingIAm (985 posts) -

Funny

#104 Posted by LordOfPoms (1086 posts) -

It's an overrated, corridor shooter with no soul. It deserves that score.

#105 Posted by princeofshapeir (13587 posts) -

Ellen Page simulator: 9.0

Bioshock Infinite: 4.0

"My name is Tom McShea and I'm here to write shitty reviews for page hits."

#106 Posted by toast_burner (21121 posts) -

@danten81 said:

@AmayaPapaya said:

I think Infinite is awesome. I don't understand the hate it gets sometimes.

It's a polarizing game. I hate it, but others seem to love it.

You may hate it, but if you are to be completely honest, there is no way you would give this game a 4/10. You may dislike it, but it is not a broken game, which is what a 4 would suggest. It atleast is a 6/10.

No a broken game would be a 1 or 2. 4 would be a functional game that isn't all that enjoyable.
I hate how people like you are dumbing down reviews to the point that anything below 9 isn't worth looking at.

#107 Posted by Razor_defiace (1618 posts) -

Even though I really disliked Bioshock Infinite. I think it doesn't deserve a 4 on a 10 scale.

#108 Posted by PurpleMan5000 (6560 posts) -

It's going to be amazing when some past flops like Skyward Sword and The Last of Us get re-reviewed by Carolyn Petite, and she not-so-fasts McShea with something like a 3.

#109 Posted by rjdofu (9167 posts) -

@toast_burner:

@II_Seraphim_II said:

@danten81 said:

@AmayaPapaya said:

I think Infinite is awesome. I don't understand the hate it gets sometimes.

It's a polarizing game. I hate it, but others seem to love it.

You may hate it, but if you are to be completely honest, there is no way you would give this game a 4/10. You may dislike it, but it is not a broken game, which is what a 4 would suggest. It atleast is a 6/10.

No a broken game would be a 1 or 2. 4 would be a functional game that isn't all that enjoyable.

I hate how people like you are dumbing down reviews to the point that anything below 9 isn't worth looking at.

So "a functional game that isn't all that enjoyable" is a poor game?

#110 Posted by toast_burner (21121 posts) -

@rjdofu said:

@toast_burner:

@toast_burner said:

@II_Seraphim_II said:

@danten81 said:

@AmayaPapaya said:

I think Infinite is awesome. I don't understand the hate it gets sometimes.

It's a polarizing game. I hate it, but others seem to love it.

You may hate it, but if you are to be completely honest, there is no way you would give this game a 4/10. You may dislike it, but it is not a broken game, which is what a 4 would suggest. It atleast is a 6/10.

No a broken game would be a 1 or 2. 4 would be a functional game that isn't all that enjoyable.

I hate how people like you are dumbing down reviews to the point that anything below 9 isn't worth looking at.

So "a functional game that isn't all that enjoyable" is a poor game?

Yes. Being enjoyable is a very important aspect for any game.

#111 Posted by rjdofu (9167 posts) -

@rjdofu said:

@toast_burner:

@toast_burner said:

@II_Seraphim_II said:

@danten81 said:

@AmayaPapaya said:

I think Infinite is awesome. I don't understand the hate it gets sometimes.

It's a polarizing game. I hate it, but others seem to love it.

You may hate it, but if you are to be completely honest, there is no way you would give this game a 4/10. You may dislike it, but it is not a broken game, which is what a 4 would suggest. It atleast is a 6/10.

No a broken game would be a 1 or 2. 4 would be a functional game that isn't all that enjoyable.

I hate how people like you are dumbing down reviews to the point that anything below 9 isn't worth looking at.

So "a functional game that isn't all that enjoyable" is a poor game?

Yes. Being enjoyable is a very important aspect for any game.

As long as there're aspects of the game that are enjoyable; in this case: Gorgeous visual design, Amazing soundtrack, IN ADDITION to being a functional game, the game is not a 4/10.

#112 Posted by toast_burner (21121 posts) -

@rjdofu said:

@toast_burner said:

@rjdofu said:

@toast_burner:

So "a functional game that isn't all that enjoyable" is a poor game?

Yes. Being enjoyable is a very important aspect for any game.

As long as there're aspects of the game that are enjoyable; in this case: Gorgeous visual design, Amazing soundtrack, IN ADDITION to being a functional game, the game is not a 4/10.

You are aware reviews are just opinions? To some people art and sound simply isn't enough.

Not sure why this very simple concept is hard to grasp for some people.

#113 Posted by princeofshapeir (13587 posts) -

@rjdofu said:

@toast_burner:

@toast_burner said:

@II_Seraphim_II said:

@danten81 said:

@AmayaPapaya said:

I think Infinite is awesome. I don't understand the hate it gets sometimes.

It's a polarizing game. I hate it, but others seem to love it.

You may hate it, but if you are to be completely honest, there is no way you would give this game a 4/10. You may dislike it, but it is not a broken game, which is what a 4 would suggest. It atleast is a 6/10.

No a broken game would be a 1 or 2. 4 would be a functional game that isn't all that enjoyable.

I hate how people like you are dumbing down reviews to the point that anything below 9 isn't worth looking at.

So "a functional game that isn't all that enjoyable" is a poor game?

Yes. Being enjoyable is a very important aspect for any game.

I don't know about you but Bioshock Infinite was the first game in the series that I played from start to finish without really putting it down. Overall, it was enjoyable game the whole way through, with certain glaring problems in design (f*ck the final boss fight and the three-part ghost bullshit). Today, I'd give the game an 8.0 for combining a really engaging narrative and setting with "okay" gameplay, though the mechanical shallowness becomes more apparent the more you play. At the very least I see this game getting a 7.0.

I agree that enjoyment is fundamental to any game, but to say that Bioshock Infinite was not enjoyable at all is pretty unbelievable. There are games that were not enjoyable at all who rightfully deserved below-5 scores: Final Fantasy XIV 1.0, Resident Evil 6. To equate Bioshock Infinite to such broken, unplayable, and un-fun games is disingenuous. To me it reeks of a personal vendetta against the game spurred by the high acclaim it received following its release rather than an honest, fair assessment of how Infinite holds up today.

#114 Edited by rjdofu (9167 posts) -

@rjdofu said:

@toast_burner said:

@rjdofu said:

@toast_burner:

So "a functional game that isn't all that enjoyable" is a poor game?

Yes. Being enjoyable is a very important aspect for any game.

As long as there're aspects of the game that are enjoyable; in this case: Gorgeous visual design, Amazing soundtrack, IN ADDITION to being a functional game, the game is not a 4/10.

You are aware reviews are just opinions? To some people art and sound simply isn't enough.

Not sure why this very simple concept is hard to grasp for some people.

If you're free, read my post from last page where I pointed out how contradictory his opinion is. You can't just jump around and say "lalala it's my opinion" while you can't even be consistent with it.

#115 Edited by toast_burner (21121 posts) -

@princeofshapeir said:

@toast_burner said:

Yes. Being enjoyable is a very important aspect for any game.

I don't know about you but Bioshock Infinite was the first game in the series that I played from start to finish without really putting it down. Overall, it was enjoyable game the whole way through, with certain glaring problems in design (f*ck the final boss fight and the three-part ghost bullshit). Today, I'd give the game an 8.0 for combining a really engaging narrative and setting with "okay" gameplay, though the mechanical shallowness becomes more apparent the more you play. At the very least I see this game getting a 7.0.

I agree that enjoyment is fundamental to any game, but to say that Bioshock Infinite was not enjoyable at all is pretty unbelievable. There are games that were not enjoyable at all who rightfully deserved below-5 scores: Final Fantasy XIV 1.0, Resident Evil 6. To equate Bioshock Infinite to such broken, unplayable, and un-fun games is disingenuous. To me it reeks of a personal vendetta against the game spurred by the high acclaim it received following its release rather than an honest, fair assessment of how Infinite holds up today.

Lets return to that very simple concept I discussed earlier, OPINIONS

Nothing is objectively enjoyable or boring. He could say it's the most boring game ever made and it's as valid as you saying it's enjoyable.

#116 Edited by XBOunity (2981 posts) -

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-10-10-sources-grand-theft-auto-5-out-on-pc-early-2014

lightleggy: new site is hard to sign in yo. Btw pc gta6 is coming out yo

#117 Posted by rjdofu (9167 posts) -

Lets return to that very simple concept I discussed earlier, OPINIONS

Nothing is objectively enjoyable or boring. He could say it's the most boring game ever made and it's as valid as you saying it's enjoyable.

I normally call an opinion without sufficient or reasonable back up bullshit.

#118 Posted by killjoi (9986 posts) -
@Blake135 said:

I think the Score is alittle Low but I agree with the written review 100%. I was saying these certain points months ago but people were still stuck in the honey moon period, it was a overhyped game that didn't live up to its prequel.

McShea enlightened me on a lot of things that I had sensed but not realized. I kind of wish I hadn't read the review because of it. I do agree that the score is a little sensational and if nothing else, lends to the argument that we shouldn't use scores

#119 Edited by toast_burner (21121 posts) -

@rjdofu said:

@toast_burner said:

Lets return to that very simple concept I discussed earlier, OPINIONS

Nothing is objectively enjoyable or boring. He could say it's the most boring game ever made and it's as valid as you saying it's enjoyable.

I normally call an opinion without sufficient or reasonable back up bullshit.

So claiming it's an enjoyable game without backing it up (like that guy did) is bullshit.

It's not bullshit to not back up your opinion with reasoning. It's just entirely useless information.

#120 Posted by R4gn4r0k (16027 posts) -

It's actually a neat idea to have multiple reviews from multiple people for a game. I wonder how it'll fit in the SW meta game.

I totally disagree with McShea though, like most of his reviews. Bioshock is waaaaay beter than a 4

#121 Posted by SaltyMeatballs (25139 posts) -

It's not amazing, but a 4/10 seems a bit harsh.

#122 Edited by PhazonBlazer (11372 posts) -

I seem to be one of the only ones here who thinks it deserves a 9.0

lel

#123 Posted by ubergusterfan (64 posts) -

It seems like people have either forgotten or didn't read, but gamespot is now offering differing reviews. They are not changing the review score. As you can see, the 9.0 original review is still there. They are trying to offer differing viewpoints now, and so this is just an example of that.

#124 Edited by anab0lic (271 posts) -

Reviewing this game myself i probably wouldnt give it more than a 5...easily the purchase i regret the most from the games i bought this year....pretty to look at but a complete chore to play....it's beauty is only skin deep. The annoying thing is i actually trusted the GS initial review enough to buy it... if only we'd had a review which highlights the GAMEPLAY flaws like this one did back then i could have saved myself some money.... that was pretty much the last time i trusted a GS review to give me good advice about what games are and arnt worth my time and money.

#125 Edited by aroxx_ab (9118 posts) -

Lol, no wonder i have not bothered finish it, loved the 1st game tho :P

#126 Posted by glez13 (8498 posts) -

This will could change system wars dramatically...

#127 Edited by jg4xchamp (46596 posts) -

@rjdofu said:

@jg4xchamp said:

@rjdofu said:

A 4, are you fvcking serious? That's a score for games that fundamentally bad, something like nonfunctional gunplay or full of glitches.

That's stupid as f*ck. You can make a game not broken, be poorly designed as hell. A tedious game is a bad game. It doesn't need to be loaded with glitches and bugs to be considered poor/bad/not worth spitting on.

Cut the bullshit, it's fvcking clear that Tom was trying to nitpick and shit on the game to prove how damn different he is from others. Tom's lack of an understanding about the twist just reflex his knowledge about the game in general. Nitpicking the gameplay, complaining about how the main character got ressurected once he falls in battle (WTF), while giving shit like Beyond 2 Souls a free pass. And you calling me stupid, you're full of it dude.

Yeah sure, he can criticize however the fvck he wants, but giving the game a 4/10? Give me a fvcking break, how many games that on this caliber, with excellent art direction, great atmosphere, decent gunplay, excellent sound direction, got a 4/10 aka. a POOR game? How the hell can he come to that conclusion when he can't even support his arguments without contradicting himself or showing how ignorance he is about the game? And how many broken ass games, filled with terrible mechanics & story etc, got the same score. You can argue that different reviewer different score, but fvck, if you're gonna post it on a gaming review site, the scale has to be the same. If that's not hits fishing, I don't know what is.

You mistake my point. I'm not defending Tom's review, the fact that this is the first second review they did speaks volumes for what its real purpose is.

I'm saying that your statement is complete and utter bullshit. You can make a game with great production value, and have it be a fundamentally bad/poor videogame. The scale below 5/10 should not be reserved for games that are simply broken only. "It works" should not be enough to mean badly designed games are automatically mediocre/fair on the premise that "hey it might suck, but at least works". And tedium above all else is definitely a sign of bad game.

And no I didn't call you stupid, but your logic? Completely flawed. You're too focused on the person's background, and his taste in reflection to your own. I'm arguing that from a scale standpoint there is nothing wrong with giving a game like Bioshock Infinite a 4/10 assuming you could argue it correctly.

#128 Edited by Jacanuk (3610 posts) -
#129 Posted by ahmed_2014 (261 posts) -

love this game and Lizzy as well

#130 Posted by Inconsistancy (8091 posts) -

You didn't agree our original review? Here, a new feature! Look at this cynical, contrarian, contrived, inane, entitled, and pretentious review. Just to appease the haters, and possibly to stir controversy.

AppeasementSpot™.

#131 Edited by rjdofu (9167 posts) -

@jg4xchamp said:

@rjdofu said:

@jg4xchamp said:

@rjdofu said:

A 4, are you fvcking serious? That's a score for games that fundamentally bad, something like nonfunctional gunplay or full of glitches.

That's stupid as f*ck. You can make a game not broken, be poorly designed as hell. A tedious game is a bad game. It doesn't need to be loaded with glitches and bugs to be considered poor/bad/not worth spitting on.

Cut the bullshit, it's fvcking clear that Tom was trying to nitpick and shit on the game to prove how damn different he is from others. Tom's lack of an understanding about the twist just reflex his knowledge about the game in general. Nitpicking the gameplay, complaining about how the main character got ressurected once he falls in battle (WTF), while giving shit like Beyond 2 Souls a free pass. And you calling me stupid, you're full of it dude.

Yeah sure, he can criticize however the fvck he wants, but giving the game a 4/10? Give me a fvcking break, how many games that on this caliber, with excellent art direction, great atmosphere, decent gunplay, excellent sound direction, got a 4/10 aka. a POOR game? How the hell can he come to that conclusion when he can't even support his arguments without contradicting himself or showing how ignorance he is about the game? And how many broken ass games, filled with terrible mechanics & story etc, got the same score. You can argue that different reviewer different score, but fvck, if you're gonna post it on a gaming review site, the scale has to be the same. If that's not hits fishing, I don't know what is.

You mistake my point. I'm not defending Tom's review, the fact that this is the first second review they did speaks volumes for what its real purpose is.

I'm saying that your statement is complete and utter bullshit. You can make a game with great production value, and have it be a fundamentally bad/poor videogame. The scale below 5/10 should not be reserved for games that are simply broken only. "It works" should not be enough to mean badly designed games are automatically mediocre/fair on the premise that "hey it might suck, but at least works". And tedium above all else is definitely a sign of bad game.

And no I didn't call you stupid, but your logic? Completely flawed. You're too focused on the person's background, and his taste in reflection to your own. I'm arguing that from a scale standpoint there is nothing wrong with giving a game like Bioshock Infinite a 4/10 assuming you could argue it correctly.

So you went completely out of the context of the topic and chose to argue with half of my point (or in fact, ONLY the very last part of my statement). I don't wanna go into a semantic argument here, but it seems you were too quick to jump into conclusion and so overly argumentative that you've missed what I meant, "something like" =/= only, i was simply give examples of what a fundamentally bad game would be, those 2 are what on top of my head at that time. If you don't accept that argument, then fine, just consider my original statement stupid, I'd agree as well.

But, I have comeback to this case again, because arguing without context is stupid, pointless and is a waste of time. As many have pointed out, you cannot simply give this game a 4/10 without cherry picking and/or using hyperbole. Sure there's nothing wrong with someone giving the game that score, but there's nothing wrong to argue against that score either. Opinions CAN be refuted, if it's based on logical fallacy. That is exactly what happens in this particular case, focusing on Tom background and his previous review is essential for my argument, so that I can expose his bullshit, and his inconsistency for citing a game mechanic to criticize one game while using the similar mechanic to praise the other.

#132 Edited by GiantAssPanda (1590 posts) -

@Inconsistancy said:

You didn't agree our original review? Here, a new feature! Look at this cynical, contrarian, contrived, inane, entitled, and pretentious review. Just to appease the haters, and possibly to stir controversy.

AppeasementSpot™.

Pretty much.

For a game to receive 4, it would need to be seriously broken and (close to) unplayable, which Infinite is not. The review is laughable.

#133 Posted by moistsandwich (0 posts) -

Alot of you may not have liked the game. But a 4/10 this game is not.

This ^

McShea is an ***hole. I'm pretty sure he gets his jollies from trolling GS users.

He is certainly allowed to have issues with a game... but there is nothing in Bioshock Infinite that warrants a 4/10 score.

If you think BIoshock Infinite is a 4/10... take a look at games in the past that have scored a 3, 4 or 5 here at GS.... and tell me honestly you think the games are on the same level quality wise.

#134 Posted by Fizzman (9869 posts) -

It's his opinion and he is entitled to it. I don't really disagree with most of his criticisms, but i do feel that he over stated them. I loved the game and have beaten it multiple times and have enjoyed it every time.

#136 Posted by dzaric (1056 posts) -

Ahh I get it now. Tom McShea is the Quarter to Three guy of GS.

#137 Edited by Giancar (19030 posts) -
#138 Edited by Slashkice (12978 posts) -

As much as I think the only purpose of the review was to generate hits (I mean, putting up a 4/10 Bioshock Infinite review alongside the new site's launch? gamespot plz), I do think it's cool we're getting a second opinion on games now. Hopefully the ones we get moving forward are more genuine though.

#139 Posted by Nintendo_Ownes7 (30917 posts) -

How is this new review ordeal going to work with flops? First review counts? What if they both release at the same time? Oh my!

Maybe they can either do an average but than Bioshock Infinite will only have a 6.5 out of 10 if they did the average. Or it could be like Game Informer and other magazines that had a second opinion where only the main review counted.

#140 Posted by Guppy507 (17395 posts) -

Some who's mad about this, I have a question for you plz answer as honestly as possible.

Q: Why are you mad?

#141 Edited by Vaasman (11123 posts) -

As I said in the comments for the review, I'm all for a second opinion piece, but if doing such a blatant troll review of a game that is almost 7 months old is what we can expect from them, then don't bother. Why aren't we seeing second opinions for games that are almost out, like Pokemon X/Y or Beyond? Tragically, it seems like this feature is just a poor excuse for the reviewers here to vent about the games they liked or didn't like.

As for a 4/10... lol. I get that some parts of reviews are subjective, but this is just ridiculous. Games that are playable with little to no bugs or function flaws, and including the same features as their peers, should at the very least be considered 5/10. 4/10 puts this right around Lair territory, a game with solid presentation and utterly broken controls. Hell, Sonic 2006 got a 4.4. Reviews have been harsher since then, sure, but for gods sake why would you destroy any credibility you have by nearly equating this with Sonic 06?!

#142 Edited by Cherokee_Jack (32198 posts) -

Haha, I just noticed it wasn't a glitch.

I'm all for it. They should let him re-review every major game of the past 5 years in this fashion, and the entire game industry can witness his glorious self-destructive meltdown

#143 Edited by tonitorsi (8112 posts) -

GS so thirsty for hits.

#DaThirst

#144 Posted by Gaming-Planet (13699 posts) -

Hahahahahaha this is great!

#145 Posted by Big_Pecks (5192 posts) -

GameSpot is getting pathetic. If this isn't a clickbait review I don't know what is.

Totally. They need to drag more helpless victims into this mess of a redesign.

This site really needed more trash to spruce it up.

#146 Posted by Armoured_Mage (766 posts) -

at least this site has an accurate review now.

#147 Edited by Stringerboy (6887 posts) -

@toast_burner said:

@rjdofu said:

@toast_burner:

@toast_burner said:

@II_Seraphim_II said:

@danten81 said:

@AmayaPapaya said:

I think Infinite is awesome. I don't understand the hate it gets sometimes.

It's a polarizing game. I hate it, but others seem to love it.

You may hate it, but if you are to be completely honest, there is no way you would give this game a 4/10. You may dislike it, but it is not a broken game, which is what a 4 would suggest. It atleast is a 6/10.

No a broken game would be a 1 or 2. 4 would be a functional game that isn't all that enjoyable.

I hate how people like you are dumbing down reviews to the point that anything below 9 isn't worth looking at.

So "a functional game that isn't all that enjoyable" is a poor game?

Yes. Being enjoyable is a very important aspect for any game.

I don't know about you but Bioshock Infinite was the first game in the series that I played from start to finish without really putting it down. Overall, it was enjoyable game the whole way through, with certain glaring problems in design (f*ck the final boss fight and the three-part ghost bullshit). Today, I'd give the game an 8.0 for combining a really engaging narrative and setting with "okay" gameplay, though the mechanical shallowness becomes more apparent the more you play. At the very least I see this game getting a 7.0.

I agree that enjoyment is fundamental to any game, but to say that Bioshock Infinite was not enjoyable at all is pretty unbelievable. There are games that were not enjoyable at all who rightfully deserved below-5 scores: Final Fantasy XIV 1.0, Resident Evil 6. To equate Bioshock Infinite to such broken, unplayable, and un-fun games is disingenuous. To me it reeks of a personal vendetta against the game spurred by the high acclaim it received following its release rather than an honest, fair assessment of how Infinite holds up today.

I found re6 enjoyable.

#148 Edited by Zensword (3885 posts) -

Tom seems to write controversial reviews to get attention. He might as well give it a 1

#149 Posted by MlauTheDaft (2992 posts) -

I guess it's fair to ask for a new SMG2 and GTA IV review then.

Pretty much this....

Strikes me as more tabloid than game reviewing.

#150 Edited by Lulu_Lulu (8498 posts) -

Actually Playing this game on 99 mode does make it deeply flawed and unfinnishable. If you don't die then you can complete it pretty easy but dying just 3 to 5 times will put a serious dent in your wallet which will prevent you from buying the upgrades you need to boost your own stats to keep up with the Mega Damage sponges and high damage dealing capabilities of the baddies. This is even worse than the difficulty concepts used in Dark Souls. Also F#ck numbers ! They're a waste of time, and a crappy criteria to used when buying a game.