351 réponses à ce sujet

[txgoldrush]

AresKeith wrote...

BS2 wasn't really a bad game but out of the three

BS:I > BS1 >BS2 IMO

Minerva's Den > BS2 > BS1 >>>>>> Infinite

[AresKeith]

so txgoldrush what I'm getting from this is:

Your right and we're wrong, am I right?

[OdanUrr]

txgoldrush wrote...

No, its a plot hole ridden mess of a game with a conclusion so forced and arbitary. Easily the worst Bioshock game.

This article discusses how much BI fails.

http://inanage.com/2...-infinite-plot/

Oh, my god, I'm reading this article and I'm beginning to agree with it.

What have you done to me, txgoldrush?!

[o Ventus]

txgoldrush wrote...

Wrong...absolutely and utterly wrong.

The PAIRBOND had a TON of depth.

So BioShock 2 has a ton of depth, but Infinite has none, despite them (in your own words) being fundamental clones of each other?

[TheChris92]

Kais Endac wrote...

TheChris92 wrote...
No, that it is not. Fair enough, you don't like the ending, it's not for everyone. I'd say there are many people who interprets the story & its ending in different ways. Linking to an article written by 1 guy doesn't exactly set it in stone as there are many other articles says the opposite to the one you linked. Anyway, I completely disagree with your statement, as I personally found BioShock 2 to be the worst simply because it didn't really say or deliver much.

I personally like Bioshock Infinite's story and ending. I would say there is no problem with the plot or
the themes, but it is the science of the different dimensions that causes the problems. There are infinite ways the plot/ending/science can be interpreted all equally valid, the way that the game has an infinite amount of universes
all differing in subtle (or sometimes not) ways is quite mind boggling and to try to wrap your mind around it would probably cause a meltdown. 

Things like time travel/dimensions always cause problems because of the different ways each can be interpreted. Does traveling back in time actually change the future or create a divergence in the timeline.
Can the past actually be changed, or would it simply create a paradox, or maybe what you changed was meant to happen in which case you changed nothing.

I agree with the bolded part here -- I always tend to find time travel to be a rather risky hit or miss plot device, which usually does more harm to the story than good. I'm usually not a big fan of it in general. Some anime or games have interpreted time travel as something that does not alter the past, but creates a different timeline altogether. It is still confusing but it can be clever if done right. It can serve to tell how time travel in that respect is impossible as it doesn't change the past but merely creates paradoxes or "what-ifs". Futurama has done this, though what happens in that show shouldn't always be taken seriously, Dragon Ball did it, Final Fantasy has done it. Lots of franchises have done it, and I'd agree with you at most time travel doesn't do the story justice. I felt that with Infinite, Irrational brought an interesting new perspective to the trope in the entertainment medium. Anyway, I'll stop talking about this now -- Arguing about this does nothing but dertail the thread further. Thanks for your post, I liked it!

Modifié par TheChris92, 25 avril 2013 - 11:27 .

[txgoldrush]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

I wouldn't say it had no depth, they obviously tried to inject some sort of life into it with Lamb being the opposite of Ryan, but overall it felt a lot more hollow than both the others.

Wrong again.....you missed it.

Bioshock 2 is about parenthood, thats its central theme. And the reason why Sofia is the way she is, is because she was raised that way. Its the same thing she was trying to do to Eleanor.

[Mr.House]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

I wouldn't say it had no depth, they obviously tried to inject some sort of life into it with Lamb being the opposite of Ryan, but overall it felt a lot more hollow than both the others.

Yup. What the devs wanted to do and how it turned out are two diffrent things. For me, Ken succeeded with what he wanted in BS and BS:I. The devs of BS2 did not. They had good ideas but it sadly did not work it out well.

[txgoldrush]

o Ventus wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Wrong...absolutely and utterly wrong.

The PAIRBOND had a TON of depth.

So BioShock 2 has a ton of depth, but Infinite has none, despite them (in your own words) being fundamental clones of each other?

Yep...its execution.

Here is what happened.

The plot was in the service of the twist, instead of the twist being in service of the plot. This can cause many aspects of the narrative to lose depth.

[FlamingBoy]

txgoldrush wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

Sauruz wrote...

What message did BS:I have?

Very simple. How far are you willing to go to undo your sins.

Which was really underdeveloped.

Unlike the first two games, Infinite lacks depth in key areas.

BS2 had no depth at all. It was a cash cow.

Wrong...absolutely and utterly wrong.

The PAIRBOND had a TON of depth.

I would disagree, anyone who truly loved the orginal bioshock (I did not like it ) would know that it did not need a sequel. Everything that was need to be said was said.
Bioshock 2 is not a bad game, but it exsitence is to cash in on the success of the previous entry , instead of being a game the market wanted to play. Hence the term "cash cow" is appropriate

Also if you call out someone for being "wrong" you should argue your point than just repeating the words ("wrong") over and over.

[AresKeith]

The smugness is strong in this one (txgoldrush)

[o Ventus]

txgoldrush wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

I wouldn't say it had no depth, they obviously tried to inject some sort of life into it with Lamb being the opposite of Ryan, but overall it felt a lot more hollow than both the others.

Wrong again.....you missed it.

Bioshock 2 is about parenthood, thats its central theme. And the reason why Sofia is the way she is, is because she was raised that way. Its the same thing she was trying to do to Eleanor.

Replace Sofia with Comstock, and Eleanor with Elizabeth, and you have Infinite.

What exactly was it that made 2 so great but Infinite so garbage?

[The Night Mammoth]

txgoldrush wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

I wouldn't say it had no depth, they obviously tried to inject some sort of life into it with Lamb being the opposite of Ryan, but overall it felt a lot more hollow than both the others.

Wrong again.....you missed it.

Bioshock 2 is about parenthood, thats its central theme. And the reason why Sofia is the way she is, is because she was raised that way. Its the same thing she was trying to do to Eleanor.

How can I be wrong if nothing I said conflicts with your post? I didn't state what the central theme was, or that 'parenthood' wasn't important to the game. You spend far too much time trying much too hard to be right about everything that you lack even basic reading comprehension.

[txgoldrush]

FlamingBoy wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

Sauruz wrote...

What message did BS:I have?

Very simple. How far are you willing to go to undo your sins.

Which was really underdeveloped.

Unlike the first two games, Infinite lacks depth in key areas.

BS2 had no depth at all. It was a cash cow.

Wrong...absolutely and utterly wrong.

The PAIRBOND had a TON of depth.

I would disagree, anyone who truly loved the orginal bioshock (I did not like it ) would know that it did not need a sequel. Everything that was need to be said was said.
Bioshock 2 is not a bad game, but it exsitence is to cash in on the success of the previous entry , instead of being a game the market wanted to play. Hence the term "cash cow" is appropriate

Also if you call out someone for being "wrong" you should argue your point than just repeating the words ("wrong") over and over.

No, its existance is because the designers wanted to use Rapture to tell a more personal story.

Godfather didn't "need" a sequel either.

[txgoldrush]

o Ventus wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

I wouldn't say it had no depth, they obviously tried to inject some sort of life into it with Lamb being the opposite of Ryan, but overall it felt a lot more hollow than both the others.

Wrong again.....you missed it.

Bioshock 2 is about parenthood, thats its central theme. And the reason why Sofia is the way she is, is because she was raised that way. Its the same thing she was trying to do to Eleanor.

Replace Sofia with Comstock, and Eleanor with Elizabeth, and you have Infinite.

What exactly was it that made 2 so great but Infinite so garbage?

execution of the plot.

[spirosz]

Let's get back on topic, shall we?

Come on people, use the correct instrument when playing those notes.

[Mr.House]

2K wanted to make money off the IP while Ken and his team worked on the next Bioshock. Thus Bioshock 2 was created by a new team. It's a cash cow. You can like BS2 all you want, it does not change the fact it is a cash cow because of the reason it was made.

[AresKeith]

Injustice: Gods Among Us story mode had a better plot than BS2

[spirosz]

AresKeith wrote...

Injustice: Gods Among Us story mode had a better plot than BS2

Okay, no.

Ahahaha.

[txgoldrush]

Mr.House wrote...

2K wanted to make money off the IP while Ken and his team worked on the next Bioshock. Thus Bioshock 2 was created by a new team. It's a cash cow. You can like BS2 all you want, it does not change the fact it is a cash cow because of the reason it was made.

Or it simply put is another great game.

All games are attempts to be cash cows with your logic.

http://www.eurogamer...2-retrospective

[M Hedonist]

While everyone is throwing around controversial and poorly thought out ideas, allow me the opportunity to write the following:
Hotline Miami had better storytelling than Bioshock:Infinite.

[o Ventus]

txgoldrush wrote...

execution of the plot.

Infinite's execution was infinitely better. There was ample detail and foreshadowing that led to Booker/Elizabeth's relationship.

Booker/Elizabeth has a clear advantage in that Booker is clearly shown to actually be related to Elizabeth. 

[OdanUrr]

Hey, guys, as much as I enjoy the discussion, this is not ME3 related. There are a couple of threads in the Off-topic section to discuss BioShock Infinite and its ending.

[OdanUrr]

Sauruz wrote...

While everyone is throwing around controversial and poorly thought out ideas, allow me the opportunity to write the following:
Hotline Miami had better storytelling than Bioshock:Infinite.

Now run for your life.

[txgoldrush]

o Ventus wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

execution of the plot.

Infinite's execution was infinitely better. There was ample detail and foreshadowing that led to Booker/Elizabeth's relationship.

Booker/Elizabeth has a clear advantage in that Booker is clearly shown to actually be related to Elizabeth. 

But BS2 explains how Delta and Eleanor were bonded, and the story centers around this bond.

And BS2's characters (or the supporting cast) are far more deep and multidimensional than BSI's.

[dreamgazer]

Minerva's Den is better than all of BS2, I definitely agree with that.