Just released today. About 3 hours into the game and let me just say I thought Dishonored was the best single player fps that has come out recently but this game beats. On the PC it is glorious. The art direction in this game is spectacular. It is also receiving amazing reviews. This is a story driven fps with no multiplayer aspect so if you don't stray from the Call of Duty/Battlefield games much it might not be for you.
I've seen it's been getting some rave reviews, which was expected because Bioshock 1 and 2 were both acclaimed as well. For me, personally, I gotta pass it up though. If a game doesn't have good multiplayer, I just can't get interested in it, unless it's a massive RPG like Skyrim was.
I love my fix of Battlefield 3 but once in a while when a single player campaign with the level of plot that is in Infinite passes by I have to try it.
I used to be all about finishing the single player story mode or the campaign before even playing the multiplayer, but now I just want to get the game and play with my friends. It's actually gotten to the point where most of, if not all the game I get are strictly for the multiplayer (Halo, CoD, NBA 2K, etc.) Having said that...I do mess around with Co-Op campaigns on occasion if they're available.
My mindset is different when playing games like Bioshock. When playing mutliplayer games its about competition. When playing story driven single player games I think of them more as interactive movies. Honestly I wouldn't pass up on a game like Infinite just because of how unique and spectacular the art direction in the game world is. Even if you are not a fan of the genre it's still worth delving into.
That is very true and a very good point. Pretty much that's how I felt with Skyrim. Obviously no multiplayer, but it was just such an epic game with so much to do, it was easy to get lost in.
The main problem with games like Uncharted, Bioshock, or the new Tomb Raider is the price vs. value. All of them are spectacular games, they deliver everything you could want, but you can beat them in a good weekend, a few days tops. It's really hard to justify paying 65 dollars after taxes for that. And the depreciation is worse than a car, once you buy it the trade value plummets. Games like Madden, Fallout, GTA, Call of Duty, Skyrim, they can all offer hundreds of hours worth of enertainment. Even the Batman games offer those addictive combat challenges. But i just bought and beat Tomb Raider. It was spectacular, now it's collecting dust.
I had it pre-loaded, but was too tired to stay up and play it. I'll play when I get home from work this afternoon.
Depends on the gamer, but I'd rather have 5 great hours than 50 OK hours (I'll remember the 5 great hours for years, but likely forget all of the 50 OK hours in a few weeks). Plus I could probably get 50 OK hours from some other form of entertainment, possibly with a lower cost. Ideally, you have both though (tons of gameplay + great storyline/single-player), which some of the older RPGs used to do. BioShock 1 had a pretty lengthy campaign (20+ hours IIRC), and I'm guessing Infinite does as well. The games with ~10hr campaigns have problems though. They have to be extremely good at providing an experience not really found in other games to really justify having no multiplayer/replayability/etc. and a $60 price tag (e.g., Heavy Rain/Beyond, or adventure games in general actually).
I am currently playing BioShock 1 and while it lacks a multiplayer element, the story and setting is extremely intriguing. Not only that, the BioShock series provided a refreshing twist that the FPS genre desperately needed. Pass if you so desire, but you are missing out.
Bioshock series and Dishonored really are rare gems in the massive pile of generic current gen fps games. One thing I love about Bioshock are how the plot twists truly come from left field and surprise the crap out of you. Apparently Infinite has one massive twist at the end also. Will have to wait and see.
I have a question, and this is not specifically directed at fchowd0311, because I read it on reviews of the game as well, but doesn't simply saying the game has a big plot twist at the end count as a spoiler, even though no specifics are divulged? Just a thought, but that question came to me yesterday when I was reading a review of Bioshock Infinite, so it is loosely related, and wanted to here other's opinion on matter.
Tip for PC gamers playing Infinite. Disable vertical sync. Its wonky in the game and causes random fps dips.
I think its a given with the Bioshock series with its history. Ya it could be considered a spoiler but it's so well known(pretty much in every review and article about the game) that I typed it without second guessing.
This times 10. I think so fondly of the old school adventures games (Monkey Island, Day of the Tentacle, etc) that I enjoyed growing up. They weren't long games and the replay value is debatable... but 25 years I have great memories.
Fair enough. I can see that point; it would like saying an M. Night Shyamalan movie will have a twist at the end.
Just curious, my friend let me borrow Bioshock 1, If i played this first and went back to play 1 and 2, would that goof up the story or is this a standalone game? Would I be able to understand all the references made from the other 2 games?
Bioshock Infinite is a compete stand alone game story wise from the first two unless something drastically chances in the game since I haven't beaten it yet. I recommend you pick it up. It trumps the first one imo.
I've taken some in game photos just to show how magnificent this game looks. Its not technically superior to a game like Crysis 3 but its art direction is a sight to behold. Sorry for the massive pictures.
