Bioshock Infinite: Top 5 Reasons It’s Overrated

4 min

Bioshock Infinite has been the most recent craze this past week in the gaming world. It does have it’s good points, and the ending is an especially hot topic to talk about. I do feel however that the ending is overshadowing a lot of other aspects of the game. Looking at the game as a whole, I can’t help but feel that people are neglecting major components of the game in favour of remembering (or working out) the ending. I’ll be fair though, and to accompany this article, I’ll create another one listing 5 reasons why the game is good. We’re dealing with the reasons it’s overrated here though.

5) Invincible Elizabeth

This may sound weird, but I’m glad Bioshock Infinite isn’t a game where you have to defend and watch out for Elizabeth constantly. I’m glad you don’t have to make sure her health bar doesn’t deplete. Having said that though, Bioshock Infinite’s way of addressing the issue is pretty lazy. Elizabeth becomes invincible during combat. Nothing can hurt her. She in turn, doesn’t attack anything either. It feels weird, especially when enemies run up to her and I believe they try to shoot her. Failing miserably of course. The fact that she can also scrounge around for ammo, health or salts (not forgetting her ability to open tears) makes her even deadlier. It’s immersion breaking.

4) Bad A.I.

I have to say, the A.I. in the game wasn’t that great. For most of your enemies, they just like to run up to you, even though you have overpowered abilities that can for instance launch them into the air for easy pickings. They still run at you. Very few enemy types offer a different challenge, but even then, in general you have a lot of possibilities from vigor to weapons to tears to use against them. The other point about the A.I. is how you can’t perform anything truly stealthy in the game. The was one section where I was alone in a room with one guard, with some cash and items just staring at me. I decided to get rid of the guard with a melee attack so as not to attract anyone, but the moment I did, all the guards in that complex stormed that room. It felt like freedom to play was being taken away from me. Elizabeth also suffers from mental lapses at times where she happily runs towards doors and opens them, inviting ambushes on you when you’re not ready.

3) Certain Story Elements

A lot has been said about the ending of Bioshock Infinite. For the most part, I’m fine with the ending even if I think it allowed the writers to pull anything they wanted to out of a hat. My problems with the story come from other moments. The political/religious/racist agenda all felt mediocre in the way they were handled. It was very black and white in terms of presentation and left no real room for in-depth thinking. No more is this more obvious than in the case of Daisy Fitzroy. It also doesn’t help that the beginning of the game is very heavy handed in pushing its propaganda in your face. It’s like the citizens of Columbia and Columbia itself have nothing else to do aside from sit and praise their leader. No glimpse into its economy. No glimpse into any real form of leisure. No glimpse into its education system. What felt like a great city to explore became a chore. It recycled through the propaganda at every turn. It doesn’t help that you don’t really get to sit down and talk with or properly meet a lot of the important people in the game. Most of your knowledge about them comes from audio files. It was also weird that Vigor had no real story element to it, especially since not many people wielded Vigor powers. Oh, and Songbird was very underwhelming.

2) Death Is Inconsequential

Enough about the story, back to the gameplay. A major negative against the gameplay is the point where death doesn’t really have consequences in the game. I understand that this is most likely due to story reasons (although the last battle doesn’t cater to that restriction), but it felt cheap. You needn’t really plan out attacks much or strategise much given that you’d be returned to battle with health and ammo about where you left off. It’s weird, since not many games utilise death like that (I know Bioshock had vita chambers, but even that had more restrictions), but at the same time it meant you could do whatever you wanted really. Oh, and falling from Columbia into the depths below was even worse. A very jarring transition occurs from when you fall to your doom to suddenly standing back on the ledge you were just on. Weird.

1) Tepid Gameplay

This is just an accumulation of some of the other points mentioned earlier, like bad A.I. and inconsequential death. Even touching back on the bad A.I. point again, some enemies would run repeatedly right into the path of a tesla coil, for the hell of it it seemed. Electrocuting themselves while you stood and watched. The gameplay really was the weakest part of the game. They just didn’t allow you much fun with what it had. The vigors were pretty powerful, negating a need to change your setup as any particular one was pretty good against a lot of foes. There was however the issue of not allowing you many uses of vigor at the beginning of the game, making you resort to using weapons 70% of the time in the early stages. Thankfully that got better as the game progressed, but that doesn’t make up for the earlier restriction that made combat as generic as any other FPS. Speaking of weapons, the fact that you can only carry 2 was disappointing too, as was the fact that you could carry ammo for other weapons you didn’t have while neglecting ammo for your own weapons because it was full. That was pointless. The weapons didn’t really feel that good either, as generic as most FPS games without the fluidity, impact and realism you get from games like Far Cry 3. It was kind of funny seeing you run with a heavy machine gun just as easily as you could with any other weapon. I will say that riding on sky-lines was good fun, although using it as a strategy in battles only happened a handful of times to be anything really exciting. The overall gameplay was merely serviceable. A game with this much rave should be doing better, or at least be called out for it.


There you have it. A long rant about Bioshock Infinite with room to spare for other points too. I’ll leave it there though. Look forward to another post featuring the positives from the game! I said I’d give the game a balanced look, and so I will.

Leave your vote


Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. Finally it has been said. Wonderfully I might add. I felt like this playing it too and it is nice to see someone call the game out on these points instead of the overhyped praise. I enjoyed the game mind you but playing it I didn’t feel it was a perfect game as the scores it received would suggest. Good read, great points. Nice.

    1. i trust this man because his icon is from mass effect. i dont even own bioshock infinite, im just enjoying the comments.

  2. haters gonna hate. one of the best games I’ve ever played. Sure you two arn’t suffering from hipsteritis?

    1. Sure you’re not a hipster? This is the type of game they like, i’m hip early 1900’s artsy fartsy trash.

    2. It makes for a good and discussable article to point out the flaws in any game, no matter how good it is. Gaming does not have enough critical analysis.

      It’s not like he’s saying it’s a bad game. He probably thinks instead of 96%, it should have 92%. Seems like a lot of the commentors believe he thinks it should have 60% which I doubt is accurate.

    3. Yea I’m pretty sure you’re a hipster. One of the best games you’ve ever played. At this point I only have about 200 games after losing everything from the old 8 and 16 bit consoles but I’m pretty sure this doesn’t even rank on the list, not very high anyway.

      1. You must have reallly low standards, if you think thats one of the best games ever?

        I have seene games with better story, better gunplay, bettter ai, bettter level design, better gameplay variety, better campaign better graphics.

          1. Bioshock infinite is pretty much the same gunfight from start to finish, flollowed by money hoarding and vending machines to upgrade weapons. The shooting mechanics are subpar.

            So pretty much every good shooter outhere is better.

          2. No, I meant examples of other, better shooters. I always like finding a good shooter that I might not be familiar with.

          3. Well bioshock 1 and 2 were better for me on pc, i dont know if bioshock infinite controls were better on consoles than 1 and 2 and thus felt like better fps.

            Bioshock came from system shock 2, a game with nonlinear maps, hacking, multiple ammo types, etc etc, bioshock infinite is a really generic linear shooter and its pretty repettive, i was bored so much it took me months to finish, to me most fps are better than bioshock infinite.

          4. Yeah, I loved System Shock 2. I want to play it again. I just haven’t gotten to work on my PC yet.

          5. its a complicated progress, might as wel buy it from gog, or pirate it since you already own it.

            Seriously there are parts the game crashes and you have to mess up with the files and graphics bugs in the menu, just get the gog version legaly or not, you already own it.

    4. why is someone a hater if they dont like this game? Or if they just didnt like the ending? if you ask me your kind of being a hater, but then again, just because you disagree with someone does that make you a hater? or them? or is anyone a hater simply because they dislike or disagree with something that someone else likes or agrees with?

    5. One of the best games you’ve ever played!? Wow that makes me sad on so may levels. I can see praising the graphics or the story but the gameplay was as rudimentary and cliche as COD, which at least has multiplayer to make up for its lack of depth in its single player campaign. First time in a long time that I feel like I was robbed for my $60.

      1. @ Robert Prout Wow. Your really stupid. Did you even play the game? I’ve played halo, cod, skyrim, half life, Zelda and many other great games. Those games wish they had half the enjoyment bioshock had.

      2. You know? id rather play a 5 hour cod campaign with GOOD combat and DIFFIRENT situations, than 15 hours of shitty and repettive gunfights.

        1. Yeah, I suppose it’s better to spend 60$ on a half-assed, annually repetitive, over-hyped and overrated game than a game that does better on the story and the art style. I’m sorry but you sound like a twelve year old.

          1. A game that i am not playing becasue its borring as fuck and has no replay value nor multiplayer or coop to justify those 60 bucks.

            Who is the 12 year old now?

          2. All you’ve done across all these comments is post ignorant responses insulting everyone. Do us all a favor, go back to playing your CoD clones and stfu.

          3. why play cod clones when bioshock infnite is made for that audience?

            WAIT I KNOW becasue it freaking sucks.

            i like how my comment are ignoratns and yet you have yet to make a point, so do all of us a favor and go get fucked by a cactcus dumb troll

    6. you’re an idiot… just because you band-wagon onto a popular title does not make you correct…

  3. I was looking forward to this game more than anything else in my life. I had been anticipating it for over 4 years. I am also a super fan of System Shock 2, Theif, and Bioshock! This whole game felt like the ultra hacked down game we were being sold prior to iys release.
    This game was boring from start to finish and felt so Jr.High Low Rent. Not the type of game i would expect from Irrational at this point. Ken should have been growing as a writer and as a visionary instead of being hackneyed cliche regurgitation machine. Im so angry and dissapointed. They could have done WAY better! I want to play the game they were hyping NOT the one they are selling.

  4. Thank you. Inconsequential death and poor A.I. is why I couldn’t bring myself to finish the first one, yet alone try this latest one out. This game is very much overrated.

  5. Why are people so quick to throw “click bait” or “haters” out there. Is it wrong to look at a game objectively? Or even (heaven forbid) disagree with the highest reviews?

    In my eyes, no game is perfect and it’s commendable that folk have the decency to speak up against such a critically acclaimed game instead of nodding along and agreeing even though these issue exsist!

    1. Oh it’s obviously click bait. Some of the enumerated faults just aren’t there. This is coming from someone who _did_ in fact hate the mediocre combat mechanics, especially the contextual-as-fuck skyhooking command.

      Case in point: complaining about the racism in a game set in 1912. Of course it’s gonna be racist; people _were_ racist at the time without knowing. Have you tried reading anything from the time, like say, HP Lovecraft? It’s a product of its time, which is to say, highly racist. This game, in attempting to appear as a product of said time, tried to emulate that feel. It’s just like how Django Unchained is peppered with the N-word.

      Then there’s a rag on the resurrection. The author claimed dying was cheap, when it in fact could become very expensive quickly if you didn’t pay attention. Dying often meant you wouldn’t have enough money to upgrade your weapons or vigors, or buy a health kit. In the hardest difficulty setting, the game ends when you run out of money.

      Again, I agree that this game is not perfect; it just seems like the author is reaching far beyond the already highly visible flaws of the game.

      1. try to remember, not everybody in 1912 was racist, or 1860 or 1776 or all the way back to when the jews controlled israel before the 1940s, if someone called a black person the “n” word back in say 1912 and had no malice or hate behind the use of the word, would that mean they are racist? the very word negro means black, but anyways im just saying not everyone was racist even in slave days. you can only be a racist if you have hate and malice behind the words you use or the actions you take. i used to call arabs, a rabs, people thought i was racist yet i couldnt have been further from it. And btw in django unchained by no means represents everyone who lived in that time period, but it was interesting to see how many people thought everyone who was a slave owner was evil but they didnt think it was evil to murder everyone who came on the silver screen, at the end of the movie django was just as guilty as the main villian. there were no winners.

        1. Slavery is worse than murder. If you kill a man, you rob him of everything he is, but you only do it once. If you enslave him, you rob him of everything he is every day that he remains a slave.

          1. a man chooses…. a slave obeys….. a MAN chooses…. a SLAVE obeys…. A MAN CHOOSES A SLAVE OBEYS!!!!!!!!!!

            for all the people who for some reason don’t get the joke, go play Bioshock numero uno

      2. Oh trust me, people knew full well they were racist back then, they just didnt care. Their racism was socially and financially rewarded and encouraged.

          1. Yeah, except for that part where white people arent and were never slaves in America, and white people run the country and own a majority of its land and wealth.

    2. Yes it’s not allowed to have a legitimate opinion. Just do what gamespot/ign/gi tells you and obey. Games aren’t for free thinkers anymore, remember. Press X to win.

  6. 5) …It’s a good thing that Elizabeth is invincible. If she died every few minutes because you couldn’t protect her, you’re gonna ragequit and possibly spurn the game. BioShock Infinite gets around this by having her always in cover. That, and I’m pretty sure the citizens of Columbia will want to avoid harm to Elizabeth…so, no. It’s not ‘lazy’ as you claim.

    4) I don’t have a problem with the AI. I never had Elizabeth open a door on me to bring in another hoard of enemies. And yes, the enemies may be a touch dumb, they’re just following their one leader Comstock in fighting to die.

    3) Ok, firstly, why do you care about its educational system? It’s not SimCity…and second–in fact, I’m not even gonna bother explaining all the reasons this bit is invalid, because BioShock was exactly the same and it was praised for it.

    2) 1999 Mode. NOW is death all that inconsequential?

    1) A LOT of faults in your article about this. Firstly, a Vigor is the first thing you use in the game…even if it is against machines. Plus, the fact you can carry two weapons only allows you to think on your feet and pick which weapon is right for the job? What’s more, carrying the ammo for weapons you don’t have can be advantageous, because what if you come across that one weapon you have full ammo for? Problem solved.

    As far as I’m concerned this article is very very faulty.
    By no means do I think BioShock Infinite is the greatest game ever made, but I think it is very very much deserving of the praise it gets.

    1. The story wasn’t interesting (Not one time did I pick up a Voxaphone and was interested by what it told me) and the combat/controls were a nightmare. The only thing this game had going for it were the visuals. And I also agree with the article above that the Songbird segments were very very underwhelming, as were Comstock’s. Very underwhelming main Villain. The story was just weird for the sake of being weird. It felt like it was trying to hard to be the “Inception” of video games. Although, I feel like if this game would have came out in 2009 in Bioshock 2’s place, I would have enjoyed it more back then. This didn’t feel like a 2013 AAA title to me. This is just my opinion though. You don’t have to agree.

      1. Which I don’t, but, to avoid ranting, I’m just gonna say that I accept your opinion all the same.

      2. I agree with you. They game felt a little out of date, especially when it came to the animation. I also, agree with the story being flat. I didn’t enjoy the story to much, I feel like people are hyping up over the ending. Overall this game was okay, but not nearly as good as the hype allowed. I love bioshock and own them all, but I preferred the other one’s over this one.

    2. I’m confused, what do you need to buy in this game, that death has much of a consequence? You loose money for dying but it is superfluous any way. I beat the game on 1999 buying 2 weapon upgrades and 4 vigor upgrades, I literally had over 8,000 silver eagles by the end. A trophy for beating the game without using Dollr Bill? Why would I buy anything when the game is so full of crap that i could run past half the bodies and still be fully stocked on at least a couple ammo types at all times. The ammo is so plentiful I don’t see why it isn’t “infinite”. All the guns are efficient without upgrades and the perks give you life and salt with each kill, never mind the regenerating shield. I guess if you want to max a lot of stuff the money is useful but to beat the game you don’t need to. As for the AI most battles ended up being piles of bodies in the same spot because the AI was too stupid to not run directly to where their friend just died, giving me one perfect headshot after another. I can’t imagine how easy it would be if I didn’t turn off auto aim.

    3. Speaking of that first Vigor, it was stupid. Its called “Possession”, its supposed to use pheromones to bend people to your will and make them do what you want, the little cutscene when you first activate it even has their weird glittery heart-shaped effect with the girl who gives it to you. But then….it doesnt work on people, it only works on machines! You have to buy an UPGRADE to make a power that exists for the sole purpose of influencing people, actually affect people. It should have been the other way around, affecting people first, and needing an upgrade to work on machines, not that pheromones affecting machines makes any damn sense anyway.

      And it wasnt even permanent when used on machines like it was in Bioshock 1 & 2, so it doesnt even work as a way of bypassing turrets or security bots, which are a huge pain in the ass and break up the flow of combat compared to the other enemies.

    4. 5. How about the Vox Populi who hate everyone in Columbia and want kill Comstock, Elizabeth, and Booker? They want to kill Elizabeth but they don’t, they can’t even hurt her, if one of the Devil’s Kisses guys lobs a Devil’s Kiss at her, she’s fine.

      4… Yeah.

      3. It’s a living city with happy inhabitants and all they seem to do is… Nothing, well there was a fair going on so I guess they were enjoying themselves. Rapture was a broken city with broken inhabitants, that’s why it got away with it. Columbia is a messed up city with people with messed up views, it works but it’s not as interesting.

      2. People are telling me to play 1999 mode, haven’t gotten around to it yet so I can’t say anything.

      1.The gameplay just got really bland for me, I can’t bother playing it again, really regret being coerced in by the hype around the game. The 2 guns thing didn’t really bother me but most of the guns were useless. What really bothered me was how easy the game was on Hard mode (need to try 1999 mode). Just Shock Jockey and shoot, I’d change it up because that winning formula gets really stale really quick.

      I feel the game deserves praise for some of the things it does, Elizabeth wasn’t all that great as an AI. The fact that she can’t die removes one aspect of having a companion. I want to be able to save her from trouble, but it can’t get annoying and I don’t want to constantly babysit her so she should be able to hide or take cover, but she can’t die so it’s so less compelling. The game didn’t live up to the hype at all. I’ll admit some parts were fun (need a break from FPS’s and maybe the game will be even better).

  7. When I saw the first demo I love this game and I hoped it would be cool . I played it and I love the beginning but the ending ruined everything . Very overrated, bad storytelling, too many plot holes and poor developed characters. Elizabeth and Comstock ruined the whole story for me.

  8. Played through the whole thing, and while I got quite attached to Elizabeth, I didn’t find the story any big woop really. Very similar in setup to Looper, so though they’ve both been in development roughly the same time, unfortunately I’ve seen it done before.

    Gameplay wise, I agree with the author – Tomb Raider and Deep Space 3 as games were more fun; I played through all three games in about 2 or 3 sittings each. While the AI and combat on them all are pretty average, Tomb Raider had more set pieces, and Dead Space 3 weapon modification was a mini-game by itself.

    I felt like I was fighting the same guys over and over again, and the story dragged without much progression from one locale to another – ok first act (find Elizabeth), super long 2nd act (get to Paris), and very short 3rd act (confront Comstock).

    Graphically it’s a very pretty game, but it didn’t feel like a Bioshock title, it could easily have been any other IP – Bioshock 1 and 2 had far more enjoyable combat because even the grunts were somewhat dangerous; the Big Daddys were far more intimidating than whatever those gorilla goons were.

    1. The game honestly feels like somebody was making a no-stealth sequel to Dishonored, and at the last minute decided to make it a Bioshock game and had to tack on all the Vigor stuff with no time to make it make any sense or integrate it into the story, just so they could call it Bioshock.

      And i ended up having just as much fun playing this as i did Dishonored: not very.

  9. Didn’t find the enemies underwhelming or predictable or the same throughout. My experience so far is the enemy A.I. doesn’t just run up to me and attack so not sure where the article writer is going with that. So for me the A.I. is just fine. As for the story it is a lot like reading a book or watching a movie. If you don’t like those stories you’re not going to want to read the book or watch the movie. Video games being interactive negates that because it gives you something to do, but if you don’t like the story you’re not going to feel compelled to finish it. This can be a huge factor in whether you like the game or not.

      1. You must be new to bioshock games, or something. Because i had the easiest time with the controls. The controls were the same as both the first and second. Everything felt so fluent.

    1. 1999 was just as easy. The AI does not change. The only difference is damage amount and cost of death. If you can beat the game on hard without dying you can beat 1999. You have to be a piss poor gamer to think this game is challenging, probably had to wait for the GoW:A patch too. Play the first one on survivor without vita chambers then come back and comment. This is the type of comment that makes me afraid to buy most games outside of the multiplayer variety, devs actually think they are making challenging games because of unskilled gamers like you.

    1. whoa, i would hate to have a disagreement with you and be in the same room, would you set the person on fire? i mean literally, you want this guy to be fired from his job because you disagree with his article?

    2. Crybaby fanboy alert! Can somebody please call this kids parents and get them to bring him a clean pair of pants?

    1. Oh yes because the 1999 mode automanticly makes the game like system shock 2, nope not evne like the first bioshock. What are you people morons?

  10. Completely agree with this article, generic FPS that does little to….wait..wait, does ‘NOTHING’ to brake new ground, and yer you can all say “Troll”, “Hater” and “Fan-boy” all you want but name something that this game does that is even worth an 80% on metacritic

    1. But not every game has to break new ground….every game CAN’T break new ground….and no story is truly original anymore. It’s the telling of the story that can be unique. Little differences in style and tone make all the difference. I play “generic” FPS games just to shoot things. I play Bioshock games for the story, the interesting look at different philosophies, and the amazing worlds that I get to play in.

      Look at Mass Effect. That series has received so much praise and has so many fans….yet, what is so original about that? Mass Effect is what I consider an example of a generic game…but that is just my opinion and there are thousands of people that disagree with me. I played the first 2 and I just couldn’t get into them. It felt like a re-hashed Star Trek episode.

  11. propaganda about how white people are the problem. awful game. awful story. ruined bioshock for alot of people.

    1. “Racist white people would NEVER secede from the United States, form their own nation, and then attack the remaining Union! Thats so unrealistic!” –a literal retard

  12. Yeah. I WANT games to live up to their hype. But, In the end, BI is just a rails shooter with a nasty habit of making you go through the same friggin place multiple times over. Sheesh. BUT in spite of that, the graphics made my head spin at certain points. That’s impressive. It was fun. But, why did it take so long to release?

  13. “The gameplay really was the weakest part of the game.” Really? What was the strongest? The ending that you’re OK with? I loved the gameplay. The ending is almost Mass Effect 3 ending-bad.

    1. nothing in either heaven or hell or all the realms of consiouness could ever disappoint me as badly as the ending to mass effect 3. i f@!#ing spent a tedious amount of time in all 3 games making sure i did everything the best i could to have that freaking dropped on me made me wish i had never played the games in first place. all the work i put in to it for nothing. nope nothing will ever be as bad as mass effect 3s ending. nothing.

      1. Same case really, i spend 15 hours of repetitive gunfights and looking for coins in every corner only to get a “you dead and this starts back from the begining ending”

  14. Respect your opinion and view but a lot seems nitpicky and just trying to find something to say for the article. I mean the AI did not bother me but for point sake name me a game that has fantastic AI? Games have not came that far yet. I agree with the Elizabeth invincible view. I did wish a few times during playing that I wish she did need some protection I just thought it would add to the game, bond with her and be fun. However I just thought it would be more fun and didn’t believe it harmed the game in anyway because her character was great. Can’t even be bothered getting into the rest of your article but I understand its just your view and this is mine. For me that world was amazing and stunning to look at. This game felt like art. I mean I stopped to look at shops bobbing up and down floating in the sky. It took me 3 times as long to finish my first run because I explored, viewed, heard and looted everything. Once I gathered what happened in the end I noticed how much depth is in the game. Story and more understanding from playing again. Things you never noticed or things that related to the story. Little things like flipping a coin. So to me the game itself is not overrated it just has limitations like every other game however the world they created and was fantastic.

    1. I hear you on the art thing but that is more of a passive experience, I play games for the mental and physical dexterity of solving challenges.Great AI: Ninja Gaiden games except for 3 though the demo for the Bloody edition or whatever seems up to snuff, Mass Effect 3 on hardest, F.E.A.R., HALO on Legendary, Mr Gimmick if you wanna go really old school, Chess games, Tekken Tag 2 and a few other fighters.

    2. “I mean the AI did not bother me but for point sake name me a game that has fantastic AI?”


  15. I am very confused by point 3. Columbia and it’s citizens were fleshed out as they needed to be as far as I care. All of these points brought up, economy, leisure, and education not only were explained, but had entire levels designed to show it. The game went very in depth to show that there was a great divide between the rich and the poor in order to keep the rich rich (The poor are paid tokens that can only be used in Fink stores, the rich are allowed an honor system in some stores. The poor keep them leisure activities mostly include drinking and laying music, while the rich attended festivals and visited amusement parks. The poor were given an education in industry, while the rich were encouraged from a young age to attend military school.) The argument that the citizens do nothing but sit around and praise their leader is technically true. These were brainwashed people who gave utter and complete devotion in exchange for a luxurious lifestyle. That’s why the only people who had rebelled were the ones who DIDN’T live the luxurious lifestyle. That’s why the propaganda was so heavy handed in the beginning. The first level was genius in storytelling because it set up what looked like this beautiful, perfect city, but as you looked closer, it was all just an illusion created by words from a snake oil salesman. On another note, the political/religious/racist agenda WAS black and white because that was the point. On Columbia, you’re either a rich white “American” or a poor worker from of any other race. Saying that this game left no room for in-depth thinking isn’t true at all. The game held a huge mirror up for humanity to truly look at itself in, and did nothing but provide points for us to go in depth on. Is a life of luxury worth losing free thinking over? What marks the line between patriotism and corruption? At what point does the military go too far? At what point does letting your voice be heard against a corrupt government go too far? This is one of the best games out there to date, and I myself believe that it is earning just as much recognition as it should.

    1. there were poor white people as well, or are irish men colored folk? i Just cant seem to remember. you cant call white people racist if they throw people of thier race in the same boat as blacks and asians. the irish are white people too.

      1. Believe it or not, back in the day in America, Irish immigrants were NOT seen as “white”, they were considered an ethnic minority, and to have inferior, criminally-destined genetic stock. They were treated very similarly to black people, which is exactly why the game portrays it that way.

        In fact, the common slang for the Irish in the 1800s and early 1900s was literally “white n****r”. They were even portrayed in illustrations and political cartoons with ape-like features, same as racists did (and still do) to black people.

  16. I agree with most . Since I paid 60 ‘overpriced’ there is no way I can stop playing until I peek 60:hours of game play, or my entertainment investment will feel cheated 🙂 Combat fun 50% of the time but then becomes mind numbing , I just cut off the game , open up Cubase to drop a few tracks .

    Storytelling , felt washed over by clinches , and pointless dialogue . I actually turned off the voices , for my second play through . They are trying to be shocking but the end result came off comedic .

    1999 mode too easy .

    1. Dumbest thing I’ve ever heard. So when you buy a one dollar pack of gum you have to chew it in one hour. Pathetic. I know none of you have played 1999.

  17. BLABBER MOUTHED REVIEWER… Probably too Negative to get social maybe sitting home playing Alot of games searching for the BAD

    1. Uh yeah, thats why theyre called CRITICS bro. Wouldnt be much point to them if they always said everything was perfect.

  18. The only thing I agree with the writer on is that teleporting when you fall off the city is just stupid. Everything else, I strongly disagree with. I loved the fact that it was now a 2-weapon system, because it meant that you had to think about what you were going to do and how to do it. In general situations, I’d carry two opposites – a shotgun and a sniper. But in horde situations, I used the minigun and the smg. I also found that different tactics required lots of different vigors (with the exception of ‘return to sender’…. that sucks in my opinion). Like in the case with the shotgun, I’d used bucking bronco. In the case of hordes, I’d use possession. In the case of a clump of enemies, I used devil’s kiss. Vigors were great, I think. Also, I found the AI frustratingly good – they constantly ran to cover when I tried to snipe them and I’d have to run into them with a shotgun… damn their tactics. I also found that dying was an awful thing to do; you would lose a ton of cash (which is much needed for upgrading vigors / weapons) and enemies would gain health – especially deadly in cases like the Handy-Man. I admit that there wasn’t much skyline fighting near the beginning, but tons of opportunities came around nearer to the end. I also loved the story line. Instead of suggestion perfection and a good heart in the protagonist, it portrayed him as a somewhat terrorist; he killed the citizens, tore down monuments and killed many figureheads. I also loved what voxophones added to the story – one of my favourites was one where *SPOILER ALERT* a biographer of Comstock can’t find any information about him because it was all ‘left by the river side’ – a reference to the end of the game. *END OF SPOILER* What I’m trying to say is that you haven’t fully appreciated the game – you’ve just run through it like a mad-man most likely, shooting everything you see, not looting all the chests (like I did).

    But I don’t know – it might have been different for me. After all, I did play it on Hard Mode and was a somewhat completionist.

  19. I agree with the article. I enjoyed the game but there are definitely some flaws and occasionally big missteps throughout. The amount of praise is a little ridiculous.

  20. What I really don’t like with this game is actually its story. *Spoiler warning btw*
    The things I have the most problems with are the following:
    * What is Vigors?
    * Why do you need to die?
    * Why punish the victim?

    Just what is Vigors? They are unlike Adam and Plasmids ingested orally instead of injected with a needle, but what else are they? What does salt have to do with its magical powers? at least Adam, Plasmids and EVE are explained how and what give them their ability, but with Vigors and Salts it is ohohohohohohoo.. MAGIC! What makes Vigors not Plasmids?

    Why do you need to die?
    Just hear me out for a sec. What caused the plot is the following.

    1. After the war Brooker is filled with guilt and try to get reborn but ran away because he wasn’t able to handle it. He began to drink and gamble to forget his problems and got a big debt he wasn’t able to handle.
    2. He somehow was able to get in contact with someone that was willing to pay off it debt in exchange of his daughter. Brooker initially agreed to this but when his agent was able to leave he changed his mind and was trying to get his daughter back and failed, this resulted in that Elizabeth lost a part of her finger when the tear machine was shutdown.
    3. The guy that paid of Brookers debt was a different Brooker from a different dimension. He was not able to get his own child and in his desperation to get his “miracle child” he was able to get the help from the physicist “twins” Robert and Rosalind Lutece. Rosalind had been able to create a machine that allowed you to open a window into a different reality.
    4. When Robert and Rosalind was “assassinated” they wanted to fix the problems they made so they brought you into Comstocks dimension to fix things.

    So why did you need to die? To stop all possible Comstocks ofc….. Wait a sec here. The only reason the player Brooker got dragged into the Comstocks dimension problems in the first place was because of the tear machine Rosalind created. As Robert and Rosalind can move throw all different dimensions and times they can just go back in time and stop Rosalind from ever creating the tear machine in the first place. Also why do you have to be drowned back in time to stop all different Comstocks? Doesn’t that only stop that Brooker from becoming Comstock and not all of them? Are the player Brooker the one and only true Brooker in all dimensions? This story makes no sense whatsoever.

    So what do we know now? The tear machine is the root of all problems in this game, and the player Brooker just happened to be dragged into this problem. This make Brooker the victim in this story as well, not the root of the problem. By killing Brooker in the end it punished the victim that was literally dragged into the problem by death.
    If this should have been done in Bioshock 1 its like saying: The fault Rapture became what it became was because you (the protagonist) was born (got the feeling this is how small kids feel when any adult get angry about anything). Never mind that Frank Fontaine put Adam and Plasmids on the market, that he smuggled and corrupted the system, nvm that the workers was treated like dirt and it was the best option to join Fontaine even if he was a criminal.

    1. I agree. It was the twins fault, period. And yes if you want to pull out the multiverse in a game than one could say that at the point when Booker is killed, other dimentions would appear in which Booker was not killed. Therefore, it would end nothing.

      1. However maybe that’s the whole point of the game. To relive the events over and over and over infinitely. That would make more sense. But the story would still not be original.

  21. I think the thing about the story is that many elements
    suffer because so much effort has been put into making the twist ending. Some
    of the audio logs are deliberately cryptic. At the half way point the game goes
    on a wild journey that I no longer cared about.

    Invincible Liz is obviously a conscious gameplay choice so
    players aren’t annoyed. But I think there are other ways they could have done
    it without resorting to removing Elizabeth from the world. See Alyx in HL2: Ep1

  22. Massively overrated. I LOVED Bioshock, really enjoyed the sequel, couldn’t wait for BI but it turned out to be a huge disappointment! Bioshock Infinite is boring, like playing on autopilot. No wonder they delayed it so much. Dishonored was forty times more fun.
    BI was just lame cash grab, capitalizing on the awesome original title.

    Derivative, unoriginal, boring, overrated game.

    1. Dishonored was so overrated. The only way you could get the “good ending” was by using stealth (which, I admit, is not my favorite genera). The mission levels were sooooooo long. Plus, even though the game was designed for a more aggressive approach (you had, like 15 different weapons and attacks), you were punished with the “bad ending” if you used them. So, I spent that whole game with 2 attacks: choking from behind and sleep darts. Talk about repetitive game play! And the rules for playing in that world didn’t even make any sense whatsoever. People are poor, starving, and/or dying of the plague…and yet I am finding food, money, and health all over the streets?!?!

      The game says that you shouldn’t kill people because it increases chaos (because you are leaving dead bodies around), attracts more rats, and spreads the plague further (hence, the “bad ending”), but how is me throwing a guard into an electrified barrier breaking those rules? He is turned into ash. Therefore, no body, no rats, no chaos. Also, killing weepers won’t spread the plague…it will actually slow it down. The game even tells you that’s rats will not eat the infected, so again, why can’t I kill them. I was so disappointed in Dishonored. I liked the story, but the game play made no sense and it was sooooo boring.

  23. The combat gameplay is terrible. The plasmids, sorry, VIGORS were mostly underwhelming compared to their Bioshock 1 & 2 counterparts, you werent given much opportunity to experiment with them, or play around with and get a feel for them before getting railroaded into limited upgrade paths. The guns all felt like crap.

    But the worst, absolute worst decision they made in this entire game, is getting rid of health/mana stims. In Bioshock 1 & 2 you could have them in reserve for when you needed them. In Infinite, you can only replenish them with instant-use food items, which means you end up getting a ton of them when you dont need them, and then when youre actually in combat, you use up all your salts and then are left with no way to refill them, without tediously backtracking through the level. And to make up for not being able to replenish health on the fly, they give you a stupid rechargeable shield. Rechargeable shield + projectile attackers = pop in and out of cover gameplay. And Bioshock Infinite’s combat is NOT designed to be a cover shooter. Every single thing about this game except for the story and visuals feels like a step backwards. Even the gameworld itself, while gorgeous, feels sterile. I dont understand how they managed to make an active, vibrant city full of people feel LESS alive than an abandoned, sunken ruin on the bottom of the ocean.

  24. 5) Who cares, really, this is a detail for such a rich game. Honestly, in combat I was too busy to stare at her, shouting “WHY ARE YOU INVINCIBLE” while 5 enemies were rushing at me.

    4) I have to say the enemy was very bad at finding cover, but they moved quite well together, and coupled with the the level design they had me making good use of the vigor traps sometimes (Comstock gate oO). Kinda nice to see them use the skylines too.

    Also I was not frustrated by the fact you can’t stealth, because it’s an action game really. Stealth just ain’t the point of the gameplay that’s all. Would you complain ’cause you can’t do any combat in a stealth game ? There are some games that allow you to choose how you want to play like Dishonored (very good one), and it’s the choice of the dev’s. Why all the dev’s should do the same ? The gaming community is overrating the choosing as a gameplay mechanic. If the dev wants you to take a specific path, just accept it and see what he wants with you, it’s just that simple.

    3) As some others said, this isn’t true. At all. Really, this game had me thinking a lot. About revolution and how real social progress is often paired with bloobath and civil war. About industry and our modern vision of what a worker is supposed to be (click…clock, welcome to Fink industries). About how well science and art fit together (no spoilers but WAW). And so on…Playing an individualist was a great part of my experience too.

    And Songbird… I think its design it awsome, it looks so human in the way it moves. It embodies the human/machine, emotions/fonctionnality thing in such a godd way, I mean come on…Ok he wasn’t scary (except for its first apparition) and I was quite disappointed with this scene with the code for the lift, they showed the bird too much.

    2) It’s the biggest issue I had with this game. I found death was inconsequential but also the most frustrating I’ve ever seen in a game oO. And so I was reloading checkpoints just like any other game. OMG those checkpoints were soooooo retarded, like, I had to loot the same objets and hear the same dialogues without any combat other than the one which had send me to the grave (MEMORIAL GARDENS ><). Actually, death was full of consequences for me…

    1) I could not disagree more. We were given the tactical gameplay of the first game (assuming you used a lot your vigors like I did) + SPEED + SKYRAILS. They succeeded in keeping the feeling of a Bioshock game while actually changing the gameplay a lot, for the better.I'd say the gameplay is one of the best assets this game has, I've had a lot of fun (My playstyle was : close range weapons + vigorsvigorsvigors in 1999 mode) and I discovered a lot of tricks on my second and third playthrough (I did a lot of traps, also the water thing made me laugh at my screen like a retard ^^).

    Btw I don't think you can blame the early game to be some sort of tutorial, or do you ?

    In the end, I find the bad aspects of the game were clearly blown away by the good ones.

  25. #5. If you were a baddie and you saw a derelict with a combo of weapons and array of vigors tossing your allies around and a dainty woman in a blue dress, would you logically attack the girl or Booker? Besides, there are tons of references when the “enemy” has been told by Comstock that no harm is to befall the Lamb.

    #4. Yeah; a common issue with many games nowadays. I think it’ll be some time before we get challenges akin to fighting an actual human from computer AI.

    #3. I think this was what was expected. You see how cult-like the citizens of Columbia are. And their openly racist behavior (usually) segregates the player from any form of community (the whole ‘Mark of the False Prophet’ thing doesn’t help either) At least this game didn’t pull any stops when it came to racism and religious fervor.

    #2. Yeah, but if you return the user back to the game with less ammo and health, especially in an overwhelming battle, then the player is doomed to fail more often and much more quickly. Try playing 1999 mode and watch your Silver Eagles plink down as you die if you want an incentive to not be so brazen in your battles.

    #1. Couldn’t disagree more. Combat on skylines was jaw-droppingly fun and gave great dynamics to the battlefield. The ability to jump onto nearby airships, throw enemies into the air or to sabotage warships and run out as it fell out of the skies gave great satisfaction. On top of that, Handymen were very real threats. Much of this is lost if you play on difficulty levels that allow you to easily overcome those odds.

  26. damn deserves an 80/100
    Unoriginal gameplay, overhyped AI, and a story that is just plain mediocre that handles all its themes badly.
    People are acting like this is gamings Citizen Kane, which is obviously isn’t, the story might be better than most video games, but nearly all video games have plots made by a total twat.

    1. ” that handles all its themes badly.”

      How come no one sees that? i am replaying the original bioshock now, its amazign how overrated this game is.

  27. The fact that someone needs to look into a deep dark cave to find this article tells how low the hipsters have gone. Luckily this article is so hard to find that no one will notice. Next time you make a top 5 reasons bioshock is overrated article, don’t make a top 5 reasons bioshock is awesome article.

  28. I loved the game but I felt in the end like it wasn’t “the game changer” it promised to be! Still great game, but brings nothing new in the world of FPS and VG in general!

  29. The game has a 96 on metacritic. By 2013 standards, this is very overrated. If this was 2005, maybe the high scores could be justified. It’s a shooter that belongs in the mid 2000’s. And even in that time period, I would say it deserves maybe an 85-90.

    1. The first game beats this one in every way apart from the ending. That alone is proof enough.

      Compare it with system shock 2 and you see what is wrong with industry today, paid reviews.

  30. I have to agree with all of this, but particularly #3–the game’s narrative had some interesting elements, but most of it was so damned heavy handed and silly that I had a hard time taking it seriously. Of course, the original Bioshock has exactly the same problem. The story is badly written and conceived. It’s better than many games out there, but that doesn’t make it objectively good. Reviewers ignored the glaring narrative problems, and I’m still not exactly sure why. It’s the part that gets praised the most, and so I can only conclude that when it comes to story, gamers refuse to even think a bit about what they’re being fed.

  31. Bioshock Infinite was a COLOSSAL disappointment. One of the most disappointing games ever.

    The weapon/ammo system was far less engaging than in the
    previous Bioshock, and I was very disappointed with Infinite’s extremely boring combat.

    Sadly, there was none of the cool gadget-type stuff that helped make the previous game so much fun: no hacking, no trap ammo, etc. I wanted to be using all kinds of different ammo, setting traps with my weapons (trap rivets, spear traps, etc.), hacking lots of machines to fly around and help me out…. but none of that was in this game. I couldn’t believe it.

    The powers/perks system was pretty boring this time around
    too. No ice power so you could freeze enemies? WTF?

    The enemies themselves were also boring as hell. There was
    nowhere near the variety of interesting splicers and whatnot from the previous game. Most of the time you just fought regular-type dudes, and every once in a while you’d fight a robot patriot guy. YAAAAAAWN. The enemy selection for Infinite was downright AWFUL. Whoever worked on this aspect of the game should
    be fired.

    No Big Daddies/Little Sisters? That was a Bioshock trademark, and yet they took that out and replaced it with really lackluster
    enemies. Unbelievable.

    Lastly, Elizabeth was there to do the rogue-ish stuff (i.e. pick locks), but a huge flaw was that she didn’t really contribute much to the actual fighting. She should have been able to use her powers to damage/confuse enemies, but instead she just threw you ammo every once in a while and allowed you to open “tears” which weren’t very interesting.

    Overall, the story and characters were good, but the gameplay was absolutely TERRIBLE, especially compared to the previous game. Bioshock Infinite just wasn’t fun at all.

    1. agreed completly. Infinite has turned into a corridor shooter. Thing is, id rather a 5 horu campaign that is actualyl GOOD than endless repetition of the same gunfights like infinite.

  32. I went into this article hoping for better reasons, but all of them seem justified or exist in every other game I’ve played.

    This only difference is that Bioshock Infinite has a better storyline, cinematics, settings and graphics, as well as gameplay elements.

    I can’t help but feel this article is really redundant. If you’re going to write an article like this, at least change the title, for your own reputation’s sake.

    1. Oh please the game is horrible, i could go on and on on how bad this game is, first of all its not even the same game as the awesome E3 demos, nor does anything new or anything well. I played tons of better fps.

  33. I read the title of your article, “5 reasons why it’s overrated” and thought you were going to shred this game apart. Then I read the article and most of your complaints seem relatively minor. You seemed to have actually liked the game. So, do you really think that those 5 minor complaints make the game “overrated?” (well, 4 minor points…if you really did not like the fighting and weapon mechanics, I can see that as being a major issue). I think “overrated” is too strong a term.

    Anyway, now for my opinions:
    One thing that I have noticed about people’s opinions about the game is that it is based on their perceptions. For example, I did not see Elizabeth as invulnerable. I saw her as smart, educated, powerful, and motivated (and protected by my bad ass). In real life, there have been many soldiers, not trained in combat, who have survived a war. And I always liked how Elizabeth would run, or hide behind cover, etc. Plus, don’t forget. It was not anyone’s job to kill Elizabeth….she was “The Lamb”. I would assume that is anyone aimed at her, the punishment would be extreme. So, it would make sense that the game would not try to kill her, giving her more leeway to forage for supplies, etc. She was my favorite part of the game.

    2) I saw no problem with the AI. As far as the Tesla Coil example, remember….these people probably had no idea what a Tesla Coil was and, therefore, had no reason to fear or avoid it (I know that I am inserting my own reasoning for a very minute in-game example, but it fits with my logical understanding the Bioshock universe….so, again I didn’t have a problem). Plus, I liked how the AI would flank you and I thought the ‘most’ of the battles were great.

    3) The story. Now, of course, the story is important and I loved
    it. But, this goes back to my “perceptions” comment earlier. I don’t
    think this game is about the story. I think this game is about the
    relationship between 2 people, with the story serving as background;
    like the movie, Titanic. Titanic was not about a ship sinking nor was
    it about the architect, the ship’s captain, etc. These characters were
    present, but they merely served as a backdrop for the relationship
    between Rose and Jack. Same idea. I never actually saw Bioshock
    Infinite as having a “villain”. It was more a story about Elizabeth and
    Booker, and how external forces affected their lives and their
    journey. Since that was my “perception” of the game, I loved it. Like
    Andrew Ryan, I never expected Comstock to be part of a “boss battle”.

    4) Death had consequences for me because every time you died, you lost money…which sucked. Do you NEED to afford every upgrade to win….no, but I wanted those upgrades so I could extend my game experience. And since you couldn’t save the game and reload (and reloading is the same thing as “death having no consequences”, I thought the system worked well. I do have mixed feeling about not being able to fall to your death; I am glad that I did not have to worry about it, but on the other hand, it would have made some of the battles that much more exciting.

    5) Finally, the weapon mechanics. Sure, Far Cry 3 definitely had better weapon mechanics. However, the story suuuuuucked, the end moral choice was ridiculous, and the entire second half of the game (after a major boss battle….you know the one) was boring as hell. Plus, I just don’t find playing levels that include rape victims locked in cages very entertaining…but that is my personal taste. Therefore, I thought the weapon mechanics in Bioshock were fine…not revolutionary, but fine. Unlike a lot of games, I found myself constantly switching things up depending on the situation and I thought there was a lot of variety in the different battles.

    Now, I don’t think Bioshock is perfect, but it is definitely one of the best, most entertaining games I have played in a long time. I cannot wait to see what Ken Levine does next. Most of the games I have played recently have either been boring, repetitive, or downright depressing.

    I do have some minor complaints. The foraging takes up too much of the game play and I wish games would stop relying on it so much. In the original Bioshock, it made sense…you were in a world that was no longer functioning or producing anything. But, in Bioshock Infinite, I thought it was ridiculous that I am on a sunny beach, with music playing and people happily sunbathing….and I am still eating cotton candy out of a freakin’ garbage can and eating peanuts off of the beach. That really annoyed me and took me out of the game. In addition, that first code book to the first cipher was in such a nonsensical location, it definitely felt like I was following basic game mechanics instead of experiencing a living, breathing world.

    Also, (and this is true of all games), I wish the dialogue was more varied and it’s placement better thought out. I can’t tell you how many times I encountered an emotionally moving, traumatic, or intense game moment, just to hear Elizabeth ‘yawning’ behind me….likes she bored. 🙂 Or, we just had a major fight and she is sad or disappointed….then I ask her to pick a lock and her dialogue is all happy again.

    But these or minor, minor complaints. Bioshock infinite is definitely one of the most amazing games I have ever played.

  34. Ps3 Games i’ve played recently: Dark Souls, GTA V, The Last of US, Nino no Kuni, Bioshock Infinite. All i can say is… Bioshock and Nino Kuni Are not too impressive games. I’d give them 6 or 7/10 max. The other games in my list were masterpieces though.

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.