>people who couldn't comprehend infinite's ending saying its trash
Go play mass effect 3 shithead. The slopjobs been document at this point. Do you know what would be a wicked game? Taking Comstock's perspective and trying to have a nice day with an army.
Which sucks because I really liked the setting of infinite, but the game was just mindless shooting most of the time with a meh story. Would the original ideas for the game could have saved it?
Which sucks because I really liked the setting of infinite, but the game was just mindless shooting most of the time with a meh story. Would the original ideas for the game could have saved it?
BS2 also had some really fun concepts that didn't make the cut.
Stuff like underwater combat, Splicers mutated to the point of becoming mutant marinelife hybrids (with a unique sharkman Splicer being one of those enemies) or grotesquely mutated and deformed Big Daddies.
I'm putting 2 above 1, I don't care about the story, worldbuilding, etc, half the time I don't pay attention to the audio diaries, 2 had a better gameplay imo
2>1>infinite. Bioshock 1 is still just a consolized SS2 though
2 > infinite > 1
2 has the best gameplay out of 3, that's a game where rapture became beautiful
Infinite has elizabeth, nice dlc, beautiful rapture again
1 is just too old now - bad weapons, cramped rapture, enemies are just some splicers and two types of a big daddy
2>1>[...].
Based people who actually fricking care about gameplay
the first and second ones are perfectly serviceable games but they're clunky and a little basic. the serie's biggest strength is the atmosphere and scenery like some big fricked up disney ride but they're a little clunky
the biggest strength is the games tend to go for pretty cheap nowadays. the gunplay is basic b***h and feels a bit like fallout without the VATs or exiting things like perks and mini-nukes.
BioShock 1: graphically mediocre even for the times, excellent intro, beautiful world, has some original ideas and has a satisfying but limited gameplay. 8/10
BS2: refined gameplay from the first, still graphically mediocre, a bit of wonder in the game world was lost, still a pleasant story 7/10
Infinite: again graphically mediocre, reduced and impoverished gameplay of the first two, even if with some plothole the story and game world is at the highest levels. 6½/10
>BioShock 1: graphically mediocre even for the times
What are you talking about? It was one of the best looking games when it released. Nobody ever said it had shitty graphics back then.
I understand it's remembered for the graphics and the story, but for the graphics no, just read the answers in this thread that mention it, nobody but me and not in a good light. If context helps, I played it shortly after d1 on 360.
Why are you like this? All the replies about the graphics that aren't yours mention the graphics as impressive for the time.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Nobody spontaneously talked about good graphics, if it was that good why didn't anyone mention it before me? Because no one remembers BioShocks for graphics.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Oblivion looks objectively shit in almost every aspect, especially the 360 version.
That didn't stop people thinking it was absolutely stunning at time time. It was the best looking open world game to ever release. There was nothing better. Kids on the bus would all be talking about needing a new GPU or more RAM to play it, and again, all the reviews at the time praised it for the outstanding graphics.
I'd argue the same for Bioshock for FPS games. Give me an example of something that looked as aesthetically pleasing as the graphics in Bioshock that came out before it.
2 years ago
Anonymous
The jump from the PS2 graphics to 360 was huge. Oblivion looked great except for the characters.
You don't know what you're talking about, but it did have some jank, like the game would run at 60 fps or more, but the physics would look like they were at 30 fps.
2 > infinite > 1
2 has the best gameplay out of 3, that's a game where rapture became beautiful
Infinite has elizabeth, nice dlc, beautiful rapture again
1 is just too old now - bad weapons, cramped rapture, enemies are just some splicers and two types of a big daddy
I played through BS1 last week, and started 2 this week.
The story of one was great, but playing them back-to-back, I really like how they filled in a lot of the gaps from the first game and expanded on their beliefs and backstories.
The combat, hacking, QoL and level design are much better in 2 overall. It feels like they really thought about what made the first good and improved on every part of it.
I haven't played Infinite since release, but I remember it being pretty good. Looking forward to playing it again when I finish 2. Never got around to the DLC.
You're actually fricking moronic if you think 1 is better than 2.Gameplay is all that matters in this situation, if you want a proper atmospheric game go play SS2 since is mogs the shit out of bioshit. Just skip Infinite since its garbage.
only people who shat on it were extreme morons that think 1 is a masterpiece.
its a good game and replayable but holy frick its not "le art" and they didn't like 2 on the basis that it somehow devalues the first game by just mere existing because god forbid a incredibly interesting setting has 2 WHOLES GAMES SET IN IT.
these same gays proceed to say shit like bioshock 3 should take place in space or underground
it reveals their true colors. their pseudo intellectual morons that just think placing the exact same game but with different skyboxes means its now also art. meaning and worldbuilding that made the first game special went completely over their head
2 felt kinda pointless; 1's ending made it seem like you were leaving a Rapture for good, a dark city full of terrible people who brought it all on themselves left to rot at the bottom of the ocean. And then suddenly you're back there in Bioshock 2.
Infinite at the very least had a unique setting and a well written story even if the gameplay was lack luster.
For that reason alone 1>Infinite>2
Infinite/2/1
Here's why: Infinite just has the better pace with the most action. 2 has the stupid little sister bullshit where you fight waves of enemies and the camera. 1 has the stupid little hacking minigame where you fight waves of pipes and sewage. And think about it Ganker, you get to kill white and black people equally in infinite. This is what you always wanted the end
Bioshock > Bioshock 2
Fpbp
Go play mass effect 3 shithead. The slopjobs been document at this point. Do you know what would be a wicked game? Taking Comstock's perspective and trying to have a nice day with an army.
1>2 >Infinite. Not that hard, anon
Agreeable
1 and 2 could maybe be switched but Infinite is clearly dead last
agreed
1 had the best story, 2 had the best combat, infinite had the worst of both and was a rushed mess but it had alot of potential
Which sucks because I really liked the setting of infinite, but the game was just mindless shooting most of the time with a meh story. Would the original ideas for the game could have saved it?
BS2 also had some really fun concepts that didn't make the cut.
Stuff like underwater combat, Splicers mutated to the point of becoming mutant marinelife hybrids (with a unique sharkman Splicer being one of those enemies) or grotesquely mutated and deformed Big Daddies.
correct
you could argue it was fricked up to sell 2 at full price when it was basically just an expansion pack but at least it was a finished game
Objectively correct, that's when it turned from a real game into a highlight reel of a theoretical future game
Top to bottom.
Agreed.
Bioshock 1 is head and shoulders above the others.
Bioshock 2 was more of the same, but did have good DLC campaign.
Infinite was just dumb and had a half assed connection to Rapture City.
wait a minute that card
>people who couldn't comprehend infinite's ending saying its trash
Infinite's plot stopped making sense in the warehouse with the weapons and never recovered.
I'm putting 2 above 1, I don't care about the story, worldbuilding, etc, half the time I don't pay attention to the audio diaries, 2 had a better gameplay imo
Based people who actually fricking care about gameplay
shitty
super shit
god awful
you will never
be
a woman
thanks I'm proud of my manhood
like on release or now? presuming now.
> 7/10
> 8/10
> 7.5/10
the first and second ones are perfectly serviceable games but they're clunky and a little basic. the serie's biggest strength is the atmosphere and scenery like some big fricked up disney ride but they're a little clunky
the biggest strength is the games tend to go for pretty cheap nowadays. the gunplay is basic b***h and feels a bit like fallout without the VATs or exiting things like perks and mini-nukes.
2>1>infinite. Bioshock 1 is still just a consolized SS2 though
System shock 1 = SS2 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
2
1 = Infinite
never played 1 and 2
BioShock 1: graphically mediocre even for the times, excellent intro, beautiful world, has some original ideas and has a satisfying but limited gameplay. 8/10
BS2: refined gameplay from the first, still graphically mediocre, a bit of wonder in the game world was lost, still a pleasant story 7/10
Infinite: again graphically mediocre, reduced and impoverished gameplay of the first two, even if with some plothole the story and game world is at the highest levels. 6½/10
>BioShock 1: graphically mediocre even for the times
What are you talking about? It was one of the best looking games when it released. Nobody ever said it had shitty graphics back then.
Are you serious? I remember those days, graphically it was nothing exceptional and in fact nobody remembers it for the graphics.
It looked amazing when it came out, frick off zoomer.
Past the intro it was anything but "amazing", it was ok with a very good style in architecture
The graphics, story and atmosphere were what it was known for.
I had friends who bought 360s and new graphics cards just to play it. Even the shitty PS3 version I had years later looked great.
I understand it's remembered for the graphics and the story, but for the graphics no, just read the answers in this thread that mention it, nobody but me and not in a good light. If context helps, I played it shortly after d1 on 360.
*atmosphere and story
homie read any review and they all mention how impressive the graphics are. I just googled it because I wanted to prove you were gaslighting me.
You're misremembering. Fricking look it up now.
I don't read reviews, I talked about it at the time on forums and nobody was entranced by the pure raw graphics but by the graphic style.
>The niche group of people I talked to thought it was bad so it must be
I bet you're the kind of person to take all the shitty opinions on Ganker and take them on as your own.
>I bet you're the kind of person to take all the shitty opinions on Ganker and take them on as your own.
If that were true I would have said that BioShock's graphics were gorgeous
Why are you like this? All the replies about the graphics that aren't yours mention the graphics as impressive for the time.
Nobody spontaneously talked about good graphics, if it was that good why didn't anyone mention it before me? Because no one remembers BioShocks for graphics.
Oblivion looks objectively shit in almost every aspect, especially the 360 version.
That didn't stop people thinking it was absolutely stunning at time time. It was the best looking open world game to ever release. There was nothing better. Kids on the bus would all be talking about needing a new GPU or more RAM to play it, and again, all the reviews at the time praised it for the outstanding graphics.
I'd argue the same for Bioshock for FPS games. Give me an example of something that looked as aesthetically pleasing as the graphics in Bioshock that came out before it.
The jump from the PS2 graphics to 360 was huge. Oblivion looked great except for the characters.
You don't know what you're talking about, but it did have some jank, like the game would run at 60 fps or more, but the physics would look like they were at 30 fps.
Good way of outing yourself zoomBlack person.
2 > infinite > 1
2 has the best gameplay out of 3, that's a game where rapture became beautiful
Infinite has elizabeth, nice dlc, beautiful rapture again
1 is just too old now - bad weapons, cramped rapture, enemies are just some splicers and two types of a big daddy
I played through BS1 last week, and started 2 this week.
The story of one was great, but playing them back-to-back, I really like how they filled in a lot of the gaps from the first game and expanded on their beliefs and backstories.
The combat, hacking, QoL and level design are much better in 2 overall. It feels like they really thought about what made the first good and improved on every part of it.
I haven't played Infinite since release, but I remember it being pretty good. Looking forward to playing it again when I finish 2. Never got around to the DLC.
>Never got around to the DLC
if you get off on women being tortured you'll love it
>Bioshock 1 + 2
good
>Bioshock Infinite
bad
Shit
2>1>
.
Consolized and dumbed down FPS games from a better series on PC.
t.nPC
You already did.
But you already put them in the right order
7.5/10
7/10
5/10
Infinite > trash > the rest
Infinite > 1 > 2
Any reasonable person will tell you the same.
You're actually fricking moronic if you think 1 is better than 2.Gameplay is all that matters in this situation, if you want a proper atmospheric game go play SS2 since is mogs the shit out of bioshit. Just skip Infinite since its garbage.
Story-wise: 1st game > 2nd game > 3rd game
Gameplay-wise: 2nd game > 1st game > 3rd game
I remember how calling Bioshock 2 good used to be a meme, like Morbius.
only people who shat on it were extreme morons that think 1 is a masterpiece.
its a good game and replayable but holy frick its not "le art" and they didn't like 2 on the basis that it somehow devalues the first game by just mere existing because god forbid a incredibly interesting setting has 2 WHOLES GAMES SET IN IT.
these same gays proceed to say shit like bioshock 3 should take place in space or underground
it reveals their true colors. their pseudo intellectual morons that just think placing the exact same game but with different skyboxes means its now also art. meaning and worldbuilding that made the first game special went completely over their head
All shit
I only played infinite with it's DLCs and I liked the game
S TIER
Minerva Den
A tier
Bio 2/System shock 2
B tier
Bio1
C Tier
Infinite
D tier
Infinite burial at sea dogshit part 1/2
Bioshock 2
Bioshock
And, then Infinite in a distant third place.
1.Bioshock Infinite
2.Bioshock 2
3.Bioshcok 1
2 felt kinda pointless; 1's ending made it seem like you were leaving a Rapture for good, a dark city full of terrible people who brought it all on themselves left to rot at the bottom of the ocean. And then suddenly you're back there in Bioshock 2.
Infinite at the very least had a unique setting and a well written story even if the gameplay was lack luster.
For that reason alone 1>Infinite>2
2 > 1 > Infinite > Infinite DLC
I suggest playing 1 and 2, rest is terrible
2 > 1 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>3
infinite > 2 > 1
1 2 3(infinite)
3 came out after 2
Elizabeth > Eleanor > 1
Infinite/2/1
Here's why: Infinite just has the better pace with the most action. 2 has the stupid little sister bullshit where you fight waves of enemies and the camera. 1 has the stupid little hacking minigame where you fight waves of pipes and sewage. And think about it Ganker, you get to kill white and black people equally in infinite. This is what you always wanted the end
2>1>Infinite
>but muh twist!
don't care, 1 goes to shit after that and doesn't play as well
Bioshock sucks.