This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="Vaasman"]No, the point of an argument is to see the other side's point of view or come to a middle ground. Only a complete jackass argues an opinion to be correct. Wrong...its to convince the other that he or she is wrong.Even now you're going to be a complete dickhole and contradict everything I say.[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"] Why do I have to make a consession? Seriously? Isn't the point of argument to say you are correct?
texasgoldrush
The sky is blue.
The grass is green.
Ducks quack.
did anyone actually like using the sky hook thing as a melee weapon?
I missed the drill and wrench, I kept wishing I could use the sky hook as a chainsaw type weapon, like what happened to that sky cops face in the first part of the game.
But no, you just Paunch people. Falcon Paunch, except no Falcon.
Thought it was great for the parts you jumped from the rails and hit them. I mean instant kill on the grunt enemies. Other than that, no. I still like the lightning bolt + wrench combo from 1 the best. Drill was fun though.did anyone actually like using the sky hook thing as a melee weapon?
I missed the drill and wrench, I kept wishing I could use the sky hook as a chainsaw type weapon, like what happened to that sky cops face in the first part of the game.
But no, you just Paunch people. Falcon Paunch, except no Falcon.
ReadingRainbow4
[QUOTE="ReadingRainbow4"]Thought it was great for the parts you jumped from the rails and hit them. I mean instant kill on the grunt enemies. Other than that, no. I still like the lightning bolt + wrench combo from 1 the best. Drill was fun though.did anyone actually like using the sky hook thing as a melee weapon?
I missed the drill and wrench, I kept wishing I could use the sky hook as a chainsaw type weapon, like what happened to that sky cops face in the first part of the game.
But no, you just Paunch people. Falcon Paunch, except no Falcon.
millerlight89
yeah, the lockon skyline attack was the best part about it.
Thought it was great for the parts you jumped from the rails and hit them. I mean instant kill on the grunt enemies. Other than that, no. I still like the lightning bolt + wrench combo from 1 the best. Drill was fun though.[QUOTE="millerlight89"][QUOTE="ReadingRainbow4"]
did anyone actually like using the sky hook thing as a melee weapon?
I missed the drill and wrench, I kept wishing I could use the sky hook as a chainsaw type weapon, like what happened to that sky cops face in the first part of the game.
But no, you just Paunch people. Falcon Paunch, except no Falcon.
ReadingRainbow4
yeah, the lockon skyline attack was the best part about it.
I also felt most of the vigors were useless and not fun to use. I used the bronco one and persuasion most of the game. I think it was because there were so many more enemies at a given time than in the first 2. Usually you would have like 1 to 4 or so in the old games. So while a lot of the powers were the same and just re-skinned from 1 and 2, they felt more useful then because you didn't have a whole army gunning you down.[QUOTE="freedomfreak"]You really can't stand it that people like Infinite more.Krelian-co
he can't stand people having a different opinion than his, thats how dumb he is, he still says mass effect 3 ending was the best thing given to humanity even though most people know it is a colossal failure.
PS: infinite is better.
when did I say this? There is Krelian making up arguments I have not made again. Never siad that ME3's ending was the greatest thing ever....just that it fit the narrative and the fanbase is really too stupid to see it. You simply can't get my argument right.[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"]
But Godfather Part II also needs the original Godfather,
R3FURBISHED
The two greatest movies ever made hold zero significance to a great game (BioShock) and a cash-in (BioShock 2).
What made The Godfather Part II so great is that it was two stories at once where both stories where absolutely phenominal - while at the same time showing the old and new of the Corleone story. You have the trials and tribulations of an humble family man grow into the most powerful crime boss in the country because of ordinary circumstances and how him not asking questions and doing what he needs to leads to all of that.
While at the same time showing how his seed (to use an Infinite reference) has carried on his name and is expanding upon it while dealing with his own very different problems - also showing that Michael has to make decisions that his father never had to make.
So the thing that made The Godfather Part II so great is that it didn't need the first to be as amazing as it is - it just included the two stories into one flawless movie.
Yes, but was Godfather Part II even necessary? It wasn't....but it was still a very good sequel. And no, Godfather Part II actually DOES need its predecessor because many scenes do need knowledge of the first to appreciate them, such as one of the very last scenes with Sonny, Fredo, and Michael. And in a way, Bioshock 2 IS comparable to Godfather Part II, as it is a sequel AND a prequel. And its far from a cash in, and in fact, Infinite validates Bioshock 2 because ti simply RECYCLES the plot of Bioshock 2. And you simply don't get what makes Bioshock 2 what it was....it was a tragic father and daughter LOVE STORY and it worked. Instead of trying to top the first games epic scope, they decided to go small and tell a far more personal story within the Rapture world. Instead of trying to ride its coattails, it decided to be different from its predeccessor. And in many ways, Bioshock 2 is BETTER than the first game. Infinite is like Godfather Part III....good on its own but lacks what made the predeccessors so great.and the plasmids were far more unique than Infinite's vigors.....and Bioshock 2's new plasmids like Scout and Gravity Well are awesome.I actually liked the combat in 2 more than infinite.
playing as a big daddy was freaking cool. dat drill.
ReadingRainbow4
>>isn't as good as it thinks it is, isn't as deep as it thinks it is, and isn't as relevant.
neither are you.
Â
Bioshock 2 came out years ago and even then there wasn't any discussion about it, stop assuming everyone are you and just played it yesterday you autismal ****
And look, another victim of hype. Can't take the truth? Sorry Bioshock 2 wasn't a railroaded shooter through a paper castle, where blind fans thinks its deep and relevant just because it mentions issues. Nevermind it completely rips Bioshock 2's narrative.>>isn't as good as it thinks it is, isn't as deep as it thinks it is, and isn't as relevant.
neither are you.
Bioshock 2 came out years ago and even then there wasn't any discussion about it, stop assuming everyone are you and just played it yesterday you autismal ****
psych2416256
or maybe correct......can anyone tell me how Infinite's narrative is better? its characters better? Or do they just buy into Infinite's hype and Bioshock 2's stigma, well before either game was released. Because I will tell you this, Infinite is the WORST in the trilogy. Why? Because it lacks the focus and the attention to detail that made the first two games so great.I just came here to state the obvious - OP is insane.
Â
That is all.
bowlingotter
while you make up arguments for me....please.[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"][QUOTE="Krelian-co"]
this thread has been texasized = spamming like idiot nonsensical stuff thinking they are arguments
face it texas, you are wrong again.
Krelian-co
why waste time when i presented you the polls of how much people hated mass effect 3 ending even post EC your "argument" was "a PR and community manager from bioware said the ending was awesome! on his tweeter account it must be true!!!!"
i knew you were a moron but you reached new levels, so why would anyone waste time arguing a moron? you are wrong, live with it.
and which I kept telling you those polls are scientifically irrelevant. Too bad you are too stupid to accept scientific truth.and which I kept telling you those polls are scientifically irrelevant. Too bad you are too stupid to accept scientific truth.[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"]
[QUOTE="Krelian-co"]
why waste time when i presented you the polls of how much people hated mass effect 3 ending even post EC your "argument" was "a PR and community manager from bioware said the ending was awesome! on his tweeter account it must be true!!!!"
i knew you were a moron but you reached new levels, so why would anyone waste time arguing a moron? you are wrong, live with it.
Krelian-co
not rly, you are the one who is too stupid to understand why your "argument" fails(let's go with that word since you like to use it for every nonsense and stupid thing you say), you try to dismiss a poll with THOUSANDS of voters yet you use as argument something someone from their own PR department says.
Again, guess who are people laughing at in this thread *hint hint* is not me. xD
Because all that poll says "scientifically" is that thousands of people chose position x on that specific poll......it shows no scientific majority. And it possibly can fail to show a silent majority.Once again, you are ignorant about polling.
[QUOTE="bowlingotter"]or maybe correct......can anyone tell me how Infinite's narrative is better? its characters better? Or do they just buy into Infinite's hype and Bioshock 2's stigma, well before either game was released. Because I will tell you this, Infinite is the WORST in the trilogy. Why? Because it lacks the focus and the attention to detail that made the first two games so great. You're entitled to your own opinion, of course. I just emphatically disagree.I just came here to state the obvious - OP is insane.
Â
That is all.
texasgoldrush
[QUOTE="bowlingotter"]or maybe correct......can anyone tell me how Infinite's narrative is better? its characters better? Or do they just buy into Infinite's hype and Bioshock 2's stigma, well before either game was released. Because I will tell you this, Infinite is the WORST in the trilogy. Why? Because it lacks the focus and the attention to detail that made the first two games so great.It doesn't, it's the best of the 3, the vast majority disagree with you.I just came here to state the obvious - OP is insane.
Â
That is all.
texasgoldrush
I really think you should just accept it, at this point you're being even more obnoxious than usual.Â
[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"][QUOTE="bowlingotter"]or maybe correct......can anyone tell me how Infinite's narrative is better? its characters better? Or do they just buy into Infinite's hype and Bioshock 2's stigma, well before either game was released. Because I will tell you this, Infinite is the WORST in the trilogy. Why? Because it lacks the focus and the attention to detail that made the first two games so great. You're entitled to your own opinion, of course. I just emphatically disagree. Then tell me....no one has really told me why Infinite is truly better, in detail.I just came here to state the obvious - OP is insane.
Â
That is all.
bowlingotter
[QUOTE="bowlingotter"][QUOTE="texasgoldrush"] or maybe correct......can anyone tell me how Infinite's narrative is better? its characters better? Or do they just buy into Infinite's hype and Bioshock 2's stigma, well before either game was released. Because I will tell you this, Infinite is the WORST in the trilogy. Why? Because it lacks the focus and the attention to detail that made the first two games so great.texasgoldrushYou're entitled to your own opinion, of course. I just emphatically disagree. Then tell me....no one has really told me why Infinite is truly better, in detail.What's the point? You just refute every single point anyone tries to make with some asinine criticism ad infinitum, whether you're legitimately correct or not. Just like every arguement you've ever made.
Then tell me....no one has really told me why Infinite is truly better, in detail.What's the point? You just refute every single point anyone tries to make with some asinine criticism ad infinitum, whether you're legitimately correct or not. Just like every arguement you've ever made. Because you have no argument, thats what.[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"][QUOTE="bowlingotter"] You're entitled to your own opinion, of course. I just emphatically disagree.Vaasman
[QUOTE="Krelian-co"]
[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"] and which I kept telling you those polls are scientifically irrelevant. Too bad you are too stupid to accept scientific truth.
musalala
not rly, you are the one who is too stupid to understand why your "argument" fails(let's go with that word since you like to use it for every nonsense and stupid thing you say), you try to dismiss a poll with THOUSANDS of voters yet you use as argument something someone from their own PR department says.
Again, guess who are people laughing at in this thread *hint hint* is not me. xD
He is bashing Infinite because its getting way to much attention, particularly for its narrative and becasue it acheived what mass effect 3 tried to achieve with its ending.The texasgoldrush rule is anything that gets more praise than a Mass effect 3 its overrated.He is a biodrone, so debating with him is pointless...his next move is to claim he is not a bodrone beasue he doesn't like DA:origins and then eventually he will start calling eveyone a moron or imbecle as with every other thread that he posts. Same sh*t differnt day.
And because you are imbeciles for calling me a Biodrone. Oh and Bioshock 1 gets more praise than ME3, but I don't think its overrated, hell I called it a masterpiece. Go back a few posts..... oh wait, you are just another moron making up arguments for me.Because you have no argument, thats what.I do, but why would I bother at this point when I've made the argument a thousand times already in other threads? As seanmcloughlin showed in the beginning, it really doesn't matter what anyone says, you'll never admit they're right and you were wrong. You'll just give some vapid rebuttal that ultmately amounts to your opinion Why can't they admit that I am right and they are wrong? Because they are scared to...they see I have a legitimate argument making the case that Bioshock 2 may in fact be better in many many areas or that Infinite may have its cracks. And it violates their belief system that Bioshock 2 has to suck. Its ME3 anti-enders all over again....can't see that maybe the ending in fact does work. Bioshock 2 is the same case....it has to suck, it wasn;t made by Levine, it just has to.[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"][QUOTE="Vaasman"]What's the point? You just refute every single point anyone tries to make with some asinine criticism ad infinitum, whether you're legitimately correct or not. Just like every arguement you've ever made.
Vaasman
Ok see this is exactly what I'm talking about, you won't make a single concession, there's no room for discussion, you're either completely right or they're completely wrong. Nothing is your opinion, everything is fact. Why do I have to make a consession? Seriously? Isn't the point of argument to say you are correct? Entering in arguing that a subjective opinion is a FACT is fantastic reason to dismiss it outright.[QUOTE="Vaasman"]
[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"] Why can't they admit that I am right and they are wrong? Because they are scared to...they see I have a legitimate argument making the case that Bioshock 2 may in fact be better in many many areas or that Infinite may have its cracks. And it violates their belief system that Bioshock 2 has to suck. Its ME3 anti-enders all over again....can't see that maybe the ending in fact does work. Bioshock 2 is the same case....it has to suck, it wasn;t made by Levine, it just has to.texasgoldrush
Why do I have to make a consession? Seriously? Isn't the point of argument to say you are correct?No, the point of an argument is to see the other side's point of view or come to a middle ground. Only a complete jackass argues an opinion to be correct. Wrong...its to convince the other that he or she is wrong.[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"]
[QUOTE="Vaasman"]Ok see this is exactly what I'm talking about, you won't make a single concession, there's no room for discussion, you're either completely right or they're completely wrong. Nothing is your opinion, everything is fact.
Vaasman
Wrong...its to convince the other that he or she is wrong.Even now you're going to be a complete dickhole and contradict everything I say.[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"][QUOTE="Vaasman"]No, the point of an argument is to see the other side's point of view or come to a middle ground. Only a complete jackass argues an opinion to be correct.
Vaasman
The sky is blue.
The grass is green.
Ducks quack.
Or you can't admit that you are wrong?[QUOTE="Vaasman"]Even now you're going to be a complete dickhole and contradict everything I say.[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"] Wrong...its to convince the other that he or she is wrong.texasgoldrush
The sky is blue.
The grass is green.
Ducks quack.
Or you can't admit that you are wrong?That depends, can you admit that the sky is blue?Or you can't admit that you are wrong?That depends, can you admit that the sky is blue? and the sky can be orange, grey, or black, and grass is not always green.[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"][QUOTE="Vaasman"]Even now you're going to be a complete dickhole and contradict everything I say.
The sky is blue.
The grass is green.
Ducks quack.
Vaasman
and the sky can be orange, grey, or black, and grass is not always green.That's what I thought. You are not getting the picture here.....argument, simply put, is to persuade the other that he is wrong, or to persuade others listening that he is wrong. Consessions are optional....its a tactic not the end goal.[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"][QUOTE="Vaasman"]That depends, can you admit that the sky is blue?
Vaasman
[QUOTE="Vaasman"]That's what I thought. You are not getting the picture here.....argument, simply put, is to persuade the other that he is wrong, or to persuade others listening that he is wrong. Consessions are optional....its a tactic not the end goal.Whatever you say man, whateverrrr you say.[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"] and the sky can be orange, grey, or black, and grass is not always green.texasgoldrush
this thread has been texasized = spamming like idiot nonsensical stuff thinking they are arguments
face it texas, you are wrong again.
while you make up arguments for me....please.this thread has been texasized = spamming like idiot nonsensical stuff thinking they are arguments
face it texas, you are wrong again.
Krelian-co
This. Bioshock 1 is still depsite its flaws, a masterpiece. Other than a lackluster ending (I actually have no complaints about the Atlas fight), I do not see any real major flaws in Bioshock 1's narrative. In fact, I find it one of the best criticisms against objectivism I have seen, or at least extreme forms of it. However, it was smart enough not to completly bash the philosophy, only truly suggesting it simply doesn;t work in its pure form in a vaccum. However, its Andrew Ryans ABANDONMENT of his own values he founded the city on, truly led Rapture to its downfall, and Frank Fontaine benefitted majorly from the lack of scientific ethics and morals (I find Fontaine a bigger criticism of pure onjectivism than Ryan was). Bioshcok 1 was simply put, very smart, that always kept focus on those ideas. Bioshock 2 comes around and now collectivism and its ideas are put into focus, but here, its how they relate to the Pairbond, Delta and Eleanor. BS2 successfully shows how when one ideology fails, another opposite ideology, equally terrible, can take its place. Lamb: "Ryan saw the individual as a hero, a noble survivor. And Rapture was his paradise, a shrine to the supremacy of the self. The result? Slavery, genocide, chaos. Now that the tyrant is dead, we are a true collective, a single Family." Sofia Lamb comes in here, bashes Ryan for being a tyrant, but displays her ultimate tyranny....trying to destroy her daughters humanity for the greater good. This here shows the flaws of extreme collectivism, while Bioshock 2 still focuses on the love story between Eleanor and Delta. And really, I find 2 even more consistant than the first game, because instead of exploring a city, you explore the lives of those involved in the story...of those that affected Eleanor and Delta. It never deviated. Each level featured a character that impacted the lives of Eleanor and Delta, and each of them was responsible in some way of Delta becoming a big daddy or Eleanor a little sister. And how you dealt with these people and the sisters brought about the games strongest aspect......the theme of parenthood. How an actions of the father can influence a daughter. Its the game strongest statement and Eleanor's character in the endgame is defined by her fathers actions. Did he forgive those who wronged him? Did he punish the guilty while saving the innocent? Did he take what he needed to survive at the cost of innocence? So unlike BS1, the ideas of collectivism are only part of the story....the theme of parenthood is the most important here, with the Pairbond, the Metzler story, and even the upbringing of Sofia Lamb revolves around this theme. But collectivism and its ideas are in harmony consistantly throughout the narrative. Bioshock 2 goes from plodding beginning to profound ending. Infinite is a mess. I do agree that the first half of the game is very strong, until Fink's section, the story was indeed strong. But then they lost focus, they lost the attention to detail, they failed to provide depth in areas they should have had depth in (Songbird, Daisy), Elizabeth;s development becomes more and more forced. The game completely goes off its rails. With the multiverse ideas now in focus, plot holes appear because the focus on the world became secondary, characters become caricatures (diabolus ex machina Daisy Fitzroy for example), the world made less sense (why are Raven units fighting for the Vox????!!!??), and all the political and social statements this game could have made are pissed away. Don't forget the utterly thematically dissonant ending that even with all the foreshadowing, is contrived and goes againt the themes of the narrative. Here is where Levine should have actually listened to his game designer instead of forcing his ending but neutering the story. And Infinite shows the industry still doesn't know how to handle religion. The game simply put isn't as good as it thinks it is, isn't as deep as it thinks it is, and isn't as relevant. And this is why the Rapture games are better.It wasn't as good as Bioshock 1 because the story was inconsistent. Â It started off like Bioschock did - a "visualization" of political, moral and economic philosophies. Â Bioshock 1 had that same theme throughout the entire game, the big reveal was entirely devoted to the ideas explored during the game. Â
The world of columbia and the people in it were ALL representations of ideas that Ken Levine was showing. Â The entire POINT of the world was those ideas. Â Then all of a sudden about half way through, the writers almost entierly forgot about those ideas and pushed them into the background. Â Instead of those ideas being the driving force for the world and story, they ended up becoming secondary in importance to the tears and multiple universe's idea. Â
The story by the end of the game had absolutely nothing to do with the world and the story at the beginning of the game. Â I don't say its worse than the original bioshock because it is popular or whatever, I say it is worse because the story went from being "really good, better than Bioshock" to "what the heck is this crap story about multiple universes doing in Bioshock?" Â I honestly think Ken Levine couldn't think of a way turn the world and ideas he created into a workable story like he did with the Bioshock 1. Â I felt like the first made a statement, Infinite just had a generic story without any meaning. Â It started off good, but went downhill after the first hour or so. Â Â
hoola
[QUOTE="Krelian-co"]while you make up arguments for me....please.this thread has been texasized = spamming like idiot nonsensical stuff thinking they are arguments
face it texas, you are wrong again.
texasgoldrush
why waste time when i presented you the polls of how much people hated mass effect 3 ending even post EC your "argument" was "a PR and community manager from bioware said the ending was awesome! on his tweeter account it must be true!!!!"
i knew you were a moron but you reached new levels, so why would anyone waste time arguing a moron? you are wrong, live with it.
[QUOTE="Krelian-co"]
[QUOTE="texasgoldrush"] while you make up arguments for me....please.texasgoldrush
why waste time when i presented you the polls of how much people hated mass effect 3 ending even post EC your "argument" was "a PR and community manager from bioware said the ending was awesome! on his tweeter account it must be true!!!!"
i knew you were a moron but you reached new levels, so why would anyone waste time arguing a moron? you are wrong, live with it.
and which I kept telling you those polls are scientifically irrelevant. Too bad you are too stupid to accept scientific truth.not rly, you are the one who is too stupid to understand why your "argument" fails(let's go with that word since you like to use it for every nonsense and stupid thing you say), you try to dismiss a poll with THOUSANDS of voters yet you use as argument something someone from their own PR department says.
Again, guess who are people laughing at in this thread *hint hint* is not me. xD
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment