Deviant Login Shop  Join deviantART for FREE Take the Tour


Submitted on
June 22, 2013
Image Size
939 KB


9,371 (24 today)
291 (who?)
Bioshock Finite (CONTAINS ENDING SPOILERS) by Goldsickle Bioshock Finite (CONTAINS ENDING SPOILERS) by Goldsickle
After all the stuff I was able to do back in the first two Bioshock games, it was a little disappointing that a lot was taken out of the gameplay in Bioshock Infinite.

Games nowadays seem to be given high scores and ratings based on it's story, art direction and narrative, which I think goes against the whole point of "video games".
Add a Comment:
Hahaha! honestly, even though I love the game, I agree with most of your points. I really miss carrying multiple weapons (Why is that so taboo now a days?). I will argue that I think most of the choices surrounding these mechanics (or lack thereof), were to help drive the story and create the characters and it didn't diminish too much from the experience.
It's better than rating a game solely on graphics or whizz-bang explody backstabby one-path-allowed set pieces.

Beyond that, I guess it's to add more challenge to the game. And hacking in both of the previous Bioshocks were flawed in different ways, so I don't really miss that.
d09smeehan Apr 5, 2014  New member
The stocking up of health is redundant with the implementation of infusions and shields. As the game goes on the difficulty ramps up, but assuming you play well so do your shields/health.
Result is stocking up on health kits would make an already easy game easier. 

The single ending was a little annoying, but it drummed the point that sometimes choices just don't matter. Remember all the choices in the early part of the game that had no real bearing on events, like choosing the bird or the cage in BS Bay. Also black and white moral endings would've been sh**.

Hacking = possession. It's quicker, easier and generally faster paced, which fits infinites style a lot more. Besides I never really saw the appeal of hacking bots and only did it out of necessity.

2 guns i;m neutral on as well. One hand it's a limiting factor, but on the other the only time I ever wish I could have more is when I find an RPG and don't take it due to ammo limit. Also with ammo being so much more common having more than two weapons would be overkill, whereas in the first 2 it was sometimes necessary to switch to guns you didn't like using because you'd emptied your shotgun.

Checkpoints are so common quick saving is redundant.
If they're gonna have Elizabeth toss health items and Salt at me randomly, might as well have me carrying them from the start, so I can decide when and where I use them.
It's fucked up that Booker carries lock picks for Elizabeth to use while Elizabeth carries health and Salts for Booker, who would be using them.
Nothing justifies this bizarre arrangement.

Possession is a poor replacement for hacking.
In the last two games, I was gradually turning the city and its vending machines against my enemies.
Especially in the first game, I can revisit certain areas, knowing that the bots and turrets have my back.
Here, what possession can do is very limited.
I remember back when I hacked health stations to kill anyone other than me trying to use them.
Having some vending machines spit out coins isn't a good replacement.
metalsonic612 Mar 28, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
well to be fair

when it comes to hacking.. that's what the possetion plasmid or vigor is for -_-

i will give you that it kinda sucks there's only one ending and you can only carry enough health to get you back up to full

but as far as only 2 guns that is sort of neutral, it has it's good points, and it's bad, but really i only use 2 guns in Bioshock anyway ^^;
The problem with Possession is that it's temporary for Automatons.

In the first two Bioshock games, it felt like you're slowly turning the city against your enemies with the hacking of the cameras, the turrets and even the health stations.

After all that, Possession feels like a cheap replacement.
metalsonic612 Mar 31, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
yeha and they're only temporary and you cna only do one at a time -_-
I found this game to be superior in every facet.

The player character, Booker Dewitt, is an actual character unlike Jack who never spoke or had any opinions about anything. Booker gets frustrated, he gets afraid, he thinks to himself, and it makes me (the player) actually care about what's going on. Jack on the other hand, says not a single word from the moment he enters the lighthouse, to the moment he defeats Atlas. He's in this fantastic, spooky environment, and he can't even be bothered to ask a question. I think the scene with Andrew Ryan would have been twice as dramatic if we had actually known what Jack was thinking (honestly, if you were in Jack's position, wouldn't you have something to say?)

The back story and origins of Columbia and its characters are actually made clear, unlike in the first game, where if you didn't collect every single audio recording you would be totally in the dark about what's going on. I get the gist of what Rapture was, but I didn't really see why I should care that it fell apart.

There was no needless backtracking and there were no boring errands that forced you to collect a bunch of shit. I absolutely hated having to go find cures for things and having to scrounge for clues, because every time you cleared out an area of its Splicers, you'd come back 5 minutes later and there would be more. Eventually, the Splicers that were meant to be scary, became annoying.  

The characters were actually, physically in the story, not talking to you over the radio the entire time. I understand that not having characters with you is supposed to create a feeling of isolation and vulnerability, but I actually found it boring. Also, the player's goal is much clearer. Stop Columbia from attacking the surface world, and rescue Elizabeth. In Bioshock 1, Jack (like I said) has no dialogue, so we never get a sense that he has a goal. With the exception of Little Sisters, every person alive in Rapture was a prick who deserved to suffer, so for me there was no real motive to save anything. I would have been totally happy to just leave everyone (little sisters included) underwater and call it a scratch.

Also, the ending of Bioshock Infinite was great because it kept the previous game's themes of choice, but presented them in a new fashion. Bioshock was about the power of choice. Infinite was about the illusion of choice.

All in all, I think Infinite delivered a better story, which in my mind resulted in a better game play experience. In the end, it doesn't matter how many guns you have, if you're not going to do anything of substance with them. That's not to say I don't think Bioshock had substance, just that Infinite had more.
While that was a very elaborate description, unfortunately, I put story & art direction on a much lower priority in video games.

In a video game, gameplay has to come first.
I couldn't care less about "human drama" or "bittersweet ending" when the gameplay is shallow.
All those would have been nice for a movie or novel but this is a different format altogether.

That is what my comic was focusing on: shallower gameplay that pales in comparison to what the series previously offered.

A good story is only a "bonus" in a video game.
It shouldn't be the core or the focus.
See, for me, engaging story goes hand in hand with engaging game play. The amount of effort put into the story really makes me feel immersed in the experience, and it affects my gameplay. True, this doesn't work for every game (no one cares about the story of Mario games) but for something like Bioshock, I think it works. So they took out health stock ups and hacking. We get a great companion character in Elizabeth instead, and I thin that's way better.
Add a Comment: