It is call of duty style shooting. It's got aim assist, sluggish movement, a bog standard set of Pistol, shotgun, rifle, machine gun, rocket launcher, lets you carry two weapons at a time and has a fucking recharging shield. Actually, no, you're right, it's not call of duty, it's a reskinned Halo.Alarien said:Is that what you thought or actually regurgitated from so many other people complaining about the game, because I'm fairly certain I've seen almost this exact commentary before.Piecewise said:But...bioshock infinite is a terrible half finished mess of generic shooting, shit characters and more plot holes then a novel made of Swiss Cheese. It eschews all the good parts of the first game for bland call of duty shooting, copy pasted plasmids and even less challenge. Not to mention every single e3 preview they had was full of lies and broken promises. Seriously, go look at those previews and then think back to the game you played. It is a profound disappointment.
It's ok to dislike or hate Bioshock Infinite, but the comments you make are mostly ill-informed.
Call or Duty shooting and "Generic" shooting are not the same thing. Bioshock Infinite follows an older "generic" FPS style that complete ignores cover based mechanics. It allows free movement around the existing arena/corridor. It would have been called a corridor FPS back in the day. Call of Duty is the exact opposite. It is a cover based rails shooter of a style that it and Medal of Honor have pushed since 1999. Bioshock Infinite may have generic shooting, but it is most certainly not "call of duty shooting."
"Copy pasted plasmids." Yes, it's part of the story. It is the same multiverse. It's like complaining that Bioshock 2, a far worse game, was worse because it specifically re-used the plasmids of Rapture while still in Rapture. Personally, I found the vigors/plasmids to be useful enough and this is still, I believe, a Bioshock game. Why would you expect there to be a different game play element?
Plot holes. The words that we often throw around just to throw them around. Specifically, those plot holes are... which, exactly? I'm not saying that the game doesn't have any, just that it was not "swiss cheese." In fact, most of its story lines were tied up and most of its mechanics at least attempted an explanation. Without pointing specifically to plot holes that were, in fact, plot holes and not just a lack of attention to the presented dialogue, then it's not a fair comment.
I agree on the E3 comment. The game from the E3 trailers was a much different game, in many respect. Are the changes and final product bad? Well, I'm not particularly unhappy that I didn't get to walk into a bar and shotgun someone in the face, fight with Saltonstall, or have Elizabeth be more of a sorceress (without explanation) than a child effected by her own physical existence simultaneously in two different realities. I think the final product worked fine. I failed to miss the E3 stuff.
The hyperbole in your post just makes your comments suspect. It sounds like regurgitation, sour grapes or some combination of both.
Also, thats a pretty freaking weak justification for a lack of imagination. Plus it doesn't even make sense. I don't remember fucking crows or ram in Bioshock. So they didn't even stay constant in order to make it fit within that "It's in the same multi-verse!" justification of yours. Which is right up there with the delusional crap of "Indoctrination theory", another desperate attempt to stave off buyers remorse. Face it, they didn't give us new stuff because they couldn't think of anything or didn't want to.
As per plot holes
http://imgur.com/Z2ajG3L
Lists a few. Beyond that, there are a few, but a lot of it comes down more to plot inconsistencies and...well, stupidity. Characters that act nonsensically or inconsistently or story choices that are stupid or meaningless or just plain clearly not as fleshed out as they were originally intended. Remember ghost mom and how liz's powers can now suddenly produce ghosts because...why not? Or why this utopia of uptight white people would be totally on board with injecting drugs that gave them the power to summon deadly birds? Actually thats a double weirdness, because they present it as though it was common, but there's all of like 2 enemies that actually use them, so I guess they weren't common? Blah.
And yeah, I guess it's sour grapes to be ticked off that a company showed me videos and said "This is what you're gonna get" and then gave me something that only shallowly resembles the product they promised. It's not to say it's a horrible game or anything, but it's completely average. The characters aren't anywhere near as good as the ones in other games, the gameplay isn't as good as other shooters that came out the same year, the graphics are pretty meh (especially some of them. I mean, fruit in baskets thats a 2d jpg in 2013? Really?) and the soundtrack didn't have anything stand out about it. It's just not that great of a game.