Half the people on this thread are putting "Bioshock Infinite" down? That astounds me. A freakin' Ken Levine game, the guy who was the genius behind some of my all-time favorite games. "System Shock", "System Shock 2", even the original "Bioshock"... I mean, "Infinite" would have to be the worst Levine game by a VERY wide margin to even come close to deserving the title of "Most disappointing game."
Anyway, back on topic...
My pick would be "Bioshock: Infinite". The worst Levine game by a VERY wide margin.
Yeah, the "vigors" didn't fit in the game at all (I think there was one, maybe two, enemies who actually used them, despite that some of them - including one that TURNS YOU MAD AND THEN MAKES YOU KILL YOURSELF - are on sale at the kids' fairground. WTF?!) And the two-weapon limit was just baffling when you consider that there's a full weapon upgrade system. WHY? There's not even close to enough ammo to keep the same guns equipped all the time. What's the point of having a weapon upgrade system when you never know which weapons you're going to have to use?
And I didn't like the combat, which was 80% of the game... I LOVED the world, by the way, which I thought was excellent... but I think there's a bigger point that people are missing.
I think back through all of Levine's games, and the early one especially are about making your OWN story. Yeah, "System Shock 2" and "Bioshock" had fixed paths and stories, but they never really made you feel like an observer in someone else's shoes. ("Bioshock" in particular used the idea of "control" very well to enhance the game and plot.) In "Infinite"... I never felt as though I was marching to the beat of my own drum. I never felt that my actions had consequences. I thought the hero was written perfectly as a character, and yet I was always WATCHING him, never BEING him... This is not what I want from a game.
Almost twenty years after first playing "System Shock" I still remember parts of it with clarity. I remember how the manual (anybody else remember when games had manuals? With quotes from the in-game characters and little facts about the world you were about to explore? I miss those...) had a quote from an engineer aboard Citadel Station describe how, when he was practically unarmed, a security bot had silently come over to him, started scanning him until he was convinced it was going to open fire, then just slid off. ("I hate those things.") And in the game THE EXACT SAME THING HAPPENED TO ME. One great thing about "System Shock" was that not all enemies would instantly attack you upon detecting you for the first time. It added a whole new element to the game in that you needed to conserve ammo as much as possible, and part of that was not wasting it on enemies that weren't hostile.
I was down on the engineering deck with a sparq beam, a pipe and a dartgun - all particularly useless weapons for taking on something as strong as a sec-1 bot - in a section that takes place in near-darkness. I just blundered in there before I was supposed to (yes, you used to be able to do things like that in games, go figure) when this THING appeared next to me. I'd already tried to take on a sec-1 bot before and was fully aware of how useless my current arsenal was against it... Trying to take on a security bot with a pipe or a sparq beam, let alone a dartgun, is a recipe for getting yourself horribly murderlized. If it had opened fire, I would've been killed very quickly indeed. Instead it just hovered there while I retreated as quietly as possible... then paused the game and went off to get a change of underwear.
This wasn't a scripted event. Almost NOTHING in "System Shock" was a scripted event. There were no cutscenes except at the very beginning and end (I don't think the technology even existed to have regular cutscenes at that point). And that's great because it means the developer has to make the game in such a way that the events within normal gameplay can, and will, have an impact on the player. The great thing about "System Shock" was that THEY DID. I had dozens of experiences like this in-game. No hand-holding required. The whole way through I felt as though I was the one in charge, it was MY story being told here. I was having experiences with the game that nobody else would ever have. And it was awesome.
That's the kind of game I want a developer of the calibre of Levine to be making. Not a linear generic two-weapon shooter with magical powers that feel like they're added as an afterthought. It depresses me that "Infinite" is getting as much praise as it is, because I feel it's entirely a step in the wrong direction for him.
Anyway, back on topic...
My pick would be "Bioshock: Infinite". The worst Levine game by a VERY wide margin.
Yeah, the "vigors" didn't fit in the game at all (I think there was one, maybe two, enemies who actually used them, despite that some of them - including one that TURNS YOU MAD AND THEN MAKES YOU KILL YOURSELF - are on sale at the kids' fairground. WTF?!) And the two-weapon limit was just baffling when you consider that there's a full weapon upgrade system. WHY? There's not even close to enough ammo to keep the same guns equipped all the time. What's the point of having a weapon upgrade system when you never know which weapons you're going to have to use?
And I didn't like the combat, which was 80% of the game... I LOVED the world, by the way, which I thought was excellent... but I think there's a bigger point that people are missing.
I think back through all of Levine's games, and the early one especially are about making your OWN story. Yeah, "System Shock 2" and "Bioshock" had fixed paths and stories, but they never really made you feel like an observer in someone else's shoes. ("Bioshock" in particular used the idea of "control" very well to enhance the game and plot.) In "Infinite"... I never felt as though I was marching to the beat of my own drum. I never felt that my actions had consequences. I thought the hero was written perfectly as a character, and yet I was always WATCHING him, never BEING him... This is not what I want from a game.
Almost twenty years after first playing "System Shock" I still remember parts of it with clarity. I remember how the manual (anybody else remember when games had manuals? With quotes from the in-game characters and little facts about the world you were about to explore? I miss those...) had a quote from an engineer aboard Citadel Station describe how, when he was practically unarmed, a security bot had silently come over to him, started scanning him until he was convinced it was going to open fire, then just slid off. ("I hate those things.") And in the game THE EXACT SAME THING HAPPENED TO ME. One great thing about "System Shock" was that not all enemies would instantly attack you upon detecting you for the first time. It added a whole new element to the game in that you needed to conserve ammo as much as possible, and part of that was not wasting it on enemies that weren't hostile.
I was down on the engineering deck with a sparq beam, a pipe and a dartgun - all particularly useless weapons for taking on something as strong as a sec-1 bot - in a section that takes place in near-darkness. I just blundered in there before I was supposed to (yes, you used to be able to do things like that in games, go figure) when this THING appeared next to me. I'd already tried to take on a sec-1 bot before and was fully aware of how useless my current arsenal was against it... Trying to take on a security bot with a pipe or a sparq beam, let alone a dartgun, is a recipe for getting yourself horribly murderlized. If it had opened fire, I would've been killed very quickly indeed. Instead it just hovered there while I retreated as quietly as possible... then paused the game and went off to get a change of underwear.
This wasn't a scripted event. Almost NOTHING in "System Shock" was a scripted event. There were no cutscenes except at the very beginning and end (I don't think the technology even existed to have regular cutscenes at that point). And that's great because it means the developer has to make the game in such a way that the events within normal gameplay can, and will, have an impact on the player. The great thing about "System Shock" was that THEY DID. I had dozens of experiences like this in-game. No hand-holding required. The whole way through I felt as though I was the one in charge, it was MY story being told here. I was having experiences with the game that nobody else would ever have. And it was awesome.
That's the kind of game I want a developer of the calibre of Levine to be making. Not a linear generic two-weapon shooter with magical powers that feel like they're added as an afterthought. It depresses me that "Infinite" is getting as much praise as it is, because I feel it's entirely a step in the wrong direction for him.
