This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

So how's the BioShock trilogy.

  • Topic Archived
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. PC
  3. So how's the BioShock trilogy.

User Info: DiviDude

3 years ago#31
pothocket posted...
Bioshock 1 - Best atmosphere/setting of the series

Bioshock 2 - Best gameplay of the series

Bioshock Infinite - Best narrative of the series

That about sums it up.

I agree with this guy.

And I'd say they're all pretty good, although none of them are really classics. Nor are any of them bad, unless you're swayed by a stupid person's idea of what a smart person's criticisms look like.

User Info: weAREtheB0RG

3 years ago#32
1 and Infinite are great, 2 sucks.

User Info: nonexistinghero

3 years ago#33
CatToy posted...
nonexistinghero posted...
Infinite: Horrible pacing,

What's horrible about the pacing?

Almost everything. Very long intro before the action actually starts. It sets the wrong mood for the game, makes it seem like exploration is a big factor as well. But nope, it's all pretty much just combat for the rest of the game (with the exception of just a few short sections). The few story moments there are, are often short and lacking. Character development is terrible. And almost every battle just feels the same one after another, it just drags on and on. Many gameplay sections just feel like they're dragged on for far too long before you get any relevant change. You can pretty much rid almost every room of enemies with the same kind of tactics throughout the entire game.

Lets not forget about the majority of the main game technically just being a few filler sidequest that have practically no relevance to the story in any way, along with an anticlimactic ending to it. Seriously, that supporting the rebels quest takes up roughly half of the game and it has no story relevance because at the end of it your characters just pretty much say "f*** it, let's just get out of here". Shortly afterwards the 'loose end' just gets finished off quickly and you have to move on to the next irrelevant filler sidequest that's actually the main game (the ghost one), which takes another hour or 2. It introduces a new character that could have some relevance, but doesn't actually do anything to it storywise that matters.

It's one of the most terrible paced games I've ever played and it fails on almost every level both gameplay and storywise when it comes to this.
Read the mania:
In SA2, it's Super Sonic and Hyper Shadow.

User Info: MaxCHEATER64

3 years ago#34
^^^Seems to me like you weren't paying attention at all.
i5-3570K @ 4.6 GHz | HD IceQ X 7850 | Z77-D3H | 700W | Intel 550 180GB | Seagate Barracuda 1T | Seagate XTD 2T + 16GB SSHD | 2x8 GB RAM

User Info: nonexistinghero

3 years ago#35
I've never seen anyone come up with a single argument for why the story of Bioshock Infinite is 'good' in any way. Meanwhile, a ton of people have come up with rather concrete arguments for why it isn't good. I'd say that speaks for itself.
Read the mania:
In SA2, it's Super Sonic and Hyper Shadow.

User Info: fiasco86

3 years ago#36
MaxCHEATER64 posted...
B:Ininite is one of the best recent FPSs I've played

Good story-driven game? Sure.

Good FPS? No way in hell.
Check out the Game Conquerors on YouTube and let me know what you think! Constructive criticism welcome.
  1. Boards
  2. PC
  3. So how's the BioShock trilogy.

Report Message

Terms of Use Violations:

Etiquette Issues:

Notes (optional; required for "Other"):
Add user to Ignore List after reporting

Topic Sticky

You are not allowed to request a sticky.

  • Topic Archived