Bioshock is awesome, you shut your face!

Over the past few weeks I have noticed a disturbing trend in SW: Bioshock bashing.

Now, let me start this off by saying that I do not believe Bioshock to be perfect, I do not believe Bioshock to be inherently superior to System Shock 2, and I do not believe that what I am posting is anything more than an opinion even if it is a well thought out opinion that makes use of a good deal of evidence. Ok? Good. Now let's get down to buisness.

This Bioshock bashing trend seems to have really gotten its legs after Zero Puctuation released his hilarious video review criticising it on a number of legitimate fronts... and one highly illegitimate one.

His primary point of attack, and the point of attack that has been used by many thereafter, has been the argument that Bioshock is nothing more than System Shock 2 with a fresh coat of paint. This argument seems to many to be a grand indictment against Bioshock and I now feel it is my duty to explain why this argument is totally and flawed.

The "fresh coat of paint" argument seems to imply that the story and the setting of Bioshock are merely superficial agumentations that serve only to keep Bioshock from being an exact copy of SS2. This is an absolutely and completely stupid implication to make, seeing as how the plot and setting of Bioshock are easily its most compelling aspect.

Now, now, don't get me wrong: The gameplay in Bioshock is, indeed, quite fun. I truly enjoyed using all sorts of plasmids to eviscerate Splicers and take down Big Daddies. The combat in Bioshock is brutal, close, and viscerally exciting, and overall the gameplay is smooth, solid, and highly functional... but the story and setting completely overwhelm it. Bioshock's story is the best in recent memory; it's full of amazing writing, captivating events, and shocking twists. The setting is gorgeous and captivating; the mood of the game is dark and fascinating, and though it is not is scary as the setting of SS2, it is many times more compelling.

Is the gameplay similar to SS2? In alot of respects, yes, but to call it SS2 with a fresh coat of paint ignores the things that make Bioshock one of the best games in recent memory; it's presentation on all fronts: Art direction, visuals, music, story, voice acting, writing, etc. Are those things irrelevant to you Bioshock bashers? Do you regard those components as mere standbys that don't matter in the face of a basic gameplay layout that was taken from SS2?

Does Bioshock play like an easier SS2? Hell yes, but why do you care? Are the gameplay mechanics from SS2 overdone in the industry? Do you see alot of "SS2 clones" running around? Hell no! SS2 was a one of a kind game. Why do you care if another game (by the same ****ing devs!) uses a chunk of its mechanics?

I can't understand why you people nitpick on these things when a game that features the best writing, story, setting, and mood in ages is sitting right in fromt of you.

Sure, Bioshock is easy, but really, does every game need to be difficult? Sure the vita-chambers are noobish, but guess what? You don't have to use them. Reload a save when you die, or, if your really hardcore, don't die at all.

But whatever you decide to do, please stop attacking the masterpiece that is Bioshock over such minutia; I think it deserves a hell of alot of credit for exploring the dark themes it does, and I think Levine deserves alot of credit for the best writing I've ever heard in a video game.

Bioshock is an absolutely awesome game, and all of you guys need to relax a little and enjoy it for what it is.

I am a huge SS2 fan, and I am a huge Bioshock fan. At the same time! :o

I love them both for different things, hell, I think they compliment eachother.

Phew. Alright... that's all I have to say about this. And look, guys! I wrote this whole thing without using the word "atmosphere!"

Oh wait... damn it.

AAA Score alone means the haters are, well, haters.

Can't argue with GameSpot's score here in SW. They are the law.

System Shock 2 was a lot better IMO.:\kman3002

In some areas, yeah... but Bioshock beats the hell out of it in many areas as well.

It's not really fair to just say: "Oh, SS2 is better."

They both do very different things very well.

Like I said, I think they complement eachother nicely.

its a cool game

but i really didnt have much of an incentive to keep it after my gf and i finished it

the presentation is great, but i wouldnt say it defines next gen gaming

one thing i just wish was the ability to see myself as a big daddy too ;[

Bioshock was a huge dissapointment from me.i-lick-monkeys

I saw you praising Folklore, yet BioShock is a disappointment. :| I doubt you've played it.

SS2 and BioShock are both amazing games. SS elitists were pissed over BioShock though. They should just be happy that they got a game that was as unique as BioShock. Usually those type of hybrid shooters with interesting stories don't do very well in the mainstream.BioShockOwnz

I know, it's so damn weird.

It's like people say: "Oh look, here is this awesome and unique FPS that is better than 99% of the games out there, but it sucks because some of it's gameplay is similar to an FPS from 1999 that didn't sell anything, and has never really been copied."

I just don't get it...

Well I own the game.

I brought the game.

I played the game.

I beat the game.

And I feel that the game is ridiculously over-rated and has no place in being called "one the top games of all-time" or even " one of the top games of the past few years". Nor did I find it original or step up in gameplay by any means at all.

So I'll go with what I think of the game instead of you and some sites review.

What makes Bioshock a good game though I have a 360 and need a little more variety than just shooters, and I tried games like condemned, dead rising and oblivion and didn't like ANY of them. 360 does really well with shooters but lacks in other genres

I played GRAW, Halo, GeoW, Lost Planet and they were all really cool in their own way but I cant get over the fact that I was basically doing the same **** over again, As far as shooters go Im starting to lose interest in the Single Player portions, Online will keep me playing. Something Bioshock DOES NOT HAVE

Id really like to try the game, but not spend money on it, my budget is too tight to spend on another game I'll hate. Plus Im not going out of my way to rent it either, nearest video rental is real far.

People call this game amazing, Im relatively getting tired of shooters. I cant wait for Ratchet&Clank, Assassins Creed, getting Skate and UT3 (online will be incredible) Plus not to mention the AMAZING titles coming out in 08

Bioshock. "Just another shooter"

Well I own the game.

I brought the game.

I played the game.

I beat the game.

And I feel that the game is ridiculously over-rated and has no place in being called "one the top games of all-time" or even " one of the top games of the past few years". Nor did I find it original or step up in gameplay by any means at all.

So I'll go with what I think of the game instead of you and some sites review.

Gunraidan

What's so bad about it?

What makes Bioshock a good game though I have a 360 and need a little more variety than just shooters, and I tried games like condemned, dead rising and oblivion and didn't like ANY of them. 360 does really well with shooters but lacks in other genres

I played GRAW, Halo, GeoW, Lost Planet and they were all really cool in their own way but I cant get over the fact that I was basically doing the same **** over again, As far as shooters go Im starting to lose interest in the Single Player portions, Online will keep me playing. Something Bioshock DOES NOT HAVE

Id really like to try the game, but not spend money on it, my budget is too tight to spend on another game I'll hate. Plus Im not going out of my way to rent it either, nearest video rental is real far.

People call this game amazing, Im relatively getting tired of shooters. I cant wait for Ratchet&Clank, Assassins Creed, getting Skate and UT3 (online will be incredible) Plus not to mention the AMAZING titles coming out in 08

Bioshock. "Just another shooter"

LivingReceiver

Bioshock's story, art direction, setting writing, and atmosphere, more than make it worth a try. Trust me.

What's so bad about it?

Zeliard9

I never said it was bad at all, just that it wasn't "great". If I had to give it a score I'd probably give it in between an 8 and 8.5.

[QUOTE="i-lick-monkeys"]Bioshock was a huge dissapointment from me.BioShockOwnz

I saw you praising Folklore, yet BioShock is a disappointment. :| I doubt you've played it.

Does anyone else find it funny when people can't cohert with something so simple as "opinion"?

[QUOTE="Zeliard9"]

What's so bad about it?

Gunraidan

I never said it was bad at all, just that it wasn't "great". If I had to give it a score I'd probably give it in between an 8 and 8.5.

I mean, what is it that really let you down about it, mostly? Clearly something must have. I'm not trying to bash or anything, just wondering.

i havnt seen any threads bashing it, do you have some links?

personaly i think its a grand ol' game

Well I own the game.

I brought the game.

I played the game.

I beat the game.

And I feel that the game is ridiculously over-rated and has no place in being called "one the top games of all-time" or even " one of the top games of the past few years". Nor did I find it original or step up in gameplay by any means at all.

So I'll go with what I think of the game instead of you and some sites review.

Gunraidan

Alrighty then, that's your opinion and you are entitled to it.

I mean, what is it that really let you down about it, mostly? Clearly something must have. I'm not trying to bash or anything, just wondering.

Zeliard9

"Let down"?

I wasn't "let down" at all.

See unlike the tens of thousands of people in the gaming community, I never follow the "what's the must have game" BS. I pretty much look at whatever is intresting.

I was pretty curious about Bioshock it looked like it could've taken the crown away from Half-Life 2 as the "Best FPS out there".

So I just spent my money on it not reading any reviews, previews, etc. So my expectaions of the game were zilch.

What was my problem with it?

Short Answer - The Gameplay

Long Answer - The game focus's too much on Presentation then the actual Game.

First of all the level design is nigh existant. Where the enemies where placed right down to where the objects where placed to where the exit and entrance is, the level design just really isn't that good. I'd probably go as far as to say it was sub-par in a few areas.

Second of all is Inconsistancy. So let me get this straight your enemy has brillant A.I., while your gun mechanics lack in skill and depth, not only that but the majority of the bullets you get for your gun are ineffective. So what you get instead of a challenging game what you end up getting is just well.....stupid. It takes numerous seconds and bullets to kill your enemies, I mean sure you have autopersonal bullets and your plasmids but the bullets run low and the plasmids don't really help too often. And because of this the game feels ridiculously stale, with you dying constantly. But instead of other shooters that try this as say Half-Life 1, the enemies aren't tweaked for that "let me load my game again so I can do that shot perfectly" mentality since it takes so long to kill them anyway. Even though that doesn't matter because of the Vita-Chambers.

Third of all was that it was as I said before too presentation focused. Bioshock proved to me what other games have proved to me numerous times before. That no matter how hard it trys to, a game cannot compete to a movie, series, or book when telling a story or tale, well unless you have a HUGE amount of imagination. I mean yes the atmosphere is definately drawn in but that's it. The premise of the game's story is great but due to it being a game it's very limited. Yes I want to save Rapture but that isn't helping me get into more to that mindset if I'm doing stupid errands. While at that.

The Fourth Reason is the pacing. Compared to Half-Life 2 and other games both in and out of the FPS genre it was really averagely done. Shoot shoot, errand, shoot shoot, errand, shoot shoot, find where you need to go, shoot shoot, errand, shoot shoot, find where you need to go. It wasn't that the game was repatitive but just well boring. What the game had me do just wasn't really fun to begin with, I mean why the hell would I want to find some potion to save some trees? And the transitions were at times just arkward and didn't feel right. So after going on a scavanger hunt for 1 hour all of a sudden I'm trapped in a room having a firefight with splicers :?

Overall those were the main problems I had with a game.

Don't get me wrong it was stil a good game just not a great game IMO.

Cows, sheep, shut your faces, because Bio-shock owns your entire exclusive libraries. :lol:V_Isle

Yes because I list every single game I own in my Gamespot list. :roll:

BioShock is awesome, you shut your face.

/Thread

(Yes, my aim was to basically repeat the thread's title)

They left out so much backstory that I felt I was missing something the whole game though. Sure they had "flashbacks," but those weren't really detailed enough to give an accurate impression of what life was like in earlier Rapture. Audiologs gave small details concerning the social life, but I wanted to know more about the whole construction and ideas behind Andrew Ryan's beliefs. I don't think they touched on that enough, and that's why I thought the story was lacking in some parts.
Saturos3091

I feel like Levine wanted you to sort of "absorb" the story of Bioshock from the things you see around you, sort of like you would if you went to rapture in real life.

I felt it was realistically fleshed out.

[QUOTE="i-lick-monkeys"]Bioshock was a huge dissapointment from me.BioShockOwnz

I saw you praising Folklore, yet BioShock is a disappointment. :| I doubt you've played it.

"Let down"?

I wasn't "let down" at all.

See unlike the tens of thousands of people in the gaming community, I never follow the "what's the must have game" BS. I pretty much look at whatever is intresting.

I was pretty curious about Bioshock it looked like it could've taken the crown away from Half-Life 2 as the "Best FPS out there".

So I just spent my money on it not reading any reviews, previews, etc. So my expectaions of the game were zilch.

What was my problem with it?

Short Answer - The Gameplay

Long Answer - The game focus's too much on Presentation then the actual Game.

First of all the level design is nigh existant. Where the enemies where placed right down to where the objects where placed to where the exit and entrance is, the level design just really isn't that good. I'd probably go as far as to say it was sub-par in a few areas.

Second of all is Inconsistancy. So let me get this straight your enemy has brillant A.I., while your gun mechanics lack in skill and depth, not only that but the majority of the bullets you get for your gun are ineffective. So what you get instead of a challenging game what you end up getting is just well.....stupid. It takes numerous seconds and bullets to kill your enemies, I mean sure you have autopersonal bullets and your plasmids but the bullets run low and the plasmids don't really help too often. And because of this the game feels ridiculously stale, with you dying constantly. But instead of other shooters that try this as say Half-Life 1, the enemies aren't tweaked for that "let me load my game again so I can do that shot perfectly" mentality since it takes so long to kill them anyway. Even though that doesn't matter because of the Vita-Chambers.

Third of all was that it was as I said before too presentation focused. Bioshock proved to me what other games have proved to me numerous times before. That no matter how hard it trys to, a game cannot compete to a movie, series, or book when telling a story or tale, well unless you have a HUGE amount of imagination. I mean yes the atmosphere is definately drawn in but that's it. The premise of the game's story is great but due to it being a game it's very limited. Yes I want to save Rapture but that isn't helping me get into more to that mindset if I'm doing stupid errands. While at that.

The Fourth Reason is the pacing. Compared to Half-Life 2 and other games both in and out of the FPS genre it was really averagely done. Shoot shoot, errand, shoot shoot, errand, shoot shoot, find where you need to go, shoot shoot, errand, shoot shoot, find where you need to go. It wasn't that the game was repatitive but just well boring. What the game had me do just wasn't really fun to begin with, I mean why the hell would I want to find some potion to save some trees? And the transitions were at times just arkward and didn't feel right. So after going on a scavanger hunt for 1 hour all of a sudden I'm trapped in a room having a firefight with splicers :?

Overall those were the main problems I had with a game.

Don't get me wrong it was stil a good game just not a great game IMO.

[QUOTE="V_Isle"]Cows, sheep, shut your faces, because Bio-shock owns your entire exclusive libraries. :lol:Gunraidan

Yes because I list every single game I own in my Gamespot list. :roll:

I've played A LOT of FPS's and Bioshock might just take the crown IMO. The game is like a 4 star movie with kick-a$$ gameplay... Sure it's short, but it was just long enough. Everybody should try out this game because it's nearly perfect... So anybody who doesn't appreciate Bioshock, SHUT YOUR FACE!tccavey2

Agreed. This game has the best writing of any video game to date.

Over the past few weeks I have noticed a disturbing trend in SW: Bioshock bashing.

Now, let me start this off by saying that I do not believe Bioshock to be perfect, I do not believe Bioshock to be inherently superior to System Shock 2, and I do not believe that what I am posting is anything more than an opinion even if it is a well thought out opinion that makes use of a good deal of evidence. Ok? Good. Now let's get down to buisness.

This Bioshock bashing trend seems to have really gotten its legs after Zero Puctuation released his hilarious video review criticising it on a number of legitimate fronts... and one highly illegitimate one.

His primary point of attack, and the point of attack that has been used by many thereafter, has been the argument that Bioshock is nothing more than System Shock 2 with a fresh coat of paint. This argument seems to many to be a grand indictment against Bioshock and I now feel it is my duty to explain why this argument is totally and flawed.

The "fresh coat of paint" argument seems to imply that the story and the setting of Bioshock are merely superficial agumentations that serve only to keep Bioshock from being an exact copy of SS2. This is an absolutely and completely stupid implication to make, seeing as how the plot and setting of Bioshock are easily its most compelling aspect.

Now, now, don't get me wrong: The gameplay in Bioshock is, indeed, quite fun. I truly enjoyed using all sorts of plasmids to eviscerate Splicers and take down Big Daddies. The combat in Bioshock is brutal, close, and viscerally exciting, and overall the gameplay is smooth, solid, and highly functional... but the story and setting completely overwhelm it. Bioshock's story is the best in recent memory; it's full of amazing writing, captivating events, and shocking twists. The setting is gorgeous and captivating; the mood of the game is dark and fascinating, and though it is not is scary as the setting of SS2, it is many times more compelling.

Is the gameplay similar to SS2? In alot of respects, yes, but to call it SS2 with a fresh coat of paint ignores the story and setting that make Bioshock one of the best games in recent memory; it's presentation on all fronts: Art direction, visuals, music, story, voice acting, writing, etc. Are those things irrelevant to you Bioshock bashers? Do you regard those components as mere standbys that don't matter in the face of a basic gameplay layout that was taken from SS2?

Does Bioshock play like an easier SS2? Hell yes, but why do you care? Are the gameplay mechanics from SS2 overdone in the industry? Do you see alot of "SS2 clones" running around? Hell no! SS2 was a one of a kind game. Why do you care if another game (by the same ****ing devs!) uses a chunk of its mechanics?

I can't understand why you people nitpick on these things when a game that features the best writing, story, setting, and mood in ages is sitting right in fromt of you.

Sure, Bioshock is easy, but really, does every game need to be difficult? Sure the vita-chambers are noobish, but guess what? You don't have to use them. Reload a save when you die, or, if your really hardcore, don't die at all.

But whatever you decide to do, please stop attacking the masterpiece that is Bioshock over such minutia; I think it deserves a hell of alot of credit for exploring the dark themes it does, and I think Levine deserves alot of credit for the best writing I've ever heard in a video game.

Bioshock is an absolutely awesome game, and all of you guys need to relax a little and enjoy it for what it is.

I am a huge SS2 fan, and I am a huge Bioshock fan. At the same time! :o

I love them both for different things, hell, I think they compliment eachother.

Phew. Alright... that's all I have to say about this. And look, guys! I wrote this whole thing without using the word "atmosphere!"

Oh wait... damn it.

jethrovegas

Its one of the better console games in the past 5 years or so.

Bashing either it or Portal is downright wrong. Do the games have their faults? Sure, but show me a game that doesn't. They are two high quality games and arguing otherwise is just stupid.

Cows, sheep, shut your faces, because Bio-shock owns your entire exclusive libraries. :lol:V_Isle

Well, WarioWare did get a 9.1... I personally disagree with the score, but this is a GameSpot forum, so I have to go by it.

Its one of the better console games in the past 5 years or so.

Bashing either it or Portal is downright wrong. Do the games have their faults? Sure, but show me a game that doesn't. They are two high quality games and arguing otherwise is just stupid.

NavigatorsGhost

I need to go get Orange Box... like, right now.

I watch Zero punctiation because it's fun. His opinions are often elitistic or simply ignorant IMO, but he is amazingly good at delivering them in a funny way. With that out of the way, I really thought Bioshock was slightly overrated. GS' 9.0 is certainly deserved, but a place among the 10 greatest games ever? NO! The story and atmosphere are it's greatest strenghts, but I personally found the gameplay lacking. Not because it was boring, but because of the uttely stupid dying mechanism. It simply gave me no incentive to play creatively, and even if I tried it wasn't nearly as fun to make up intricate plans when you knew the outcome wouldn't matter anyway.

"Let down"?

I wasn't "let down" at all.

See unlike the tens of thousands of people in the gaming community, I never follow the "what's the must have game" BS. I pretty much look at whatever is intresting.

I was pretty curious about Bioshock it looked like it could've taken the crown away from Half-Life 2 as the "Best FPS out there".

So I just spent my money on it not reading any reviews, previews, etc. So my expectaions of the game were zilch.

What was my problem with it?

Short Answer - The Gameplay

Long Answer - The game focus's too much on Presentation then the actual Game.

First of all the level design is nigh existant. Where the enemies where placed right down to where the objects where placed to where the exit and entrance is, the level design just really isn't that good. I'd probably go as far as to say it was sub-par in a few areas.

Second of all is Inconsistancy. So let me get this straight your enemy has brillant A.I., while your gun mechanics lack in skill and depth, not only that but the majority of the bullets you get for your gun are ineffective. So what you get instead of a challenging game what you end up getting is just well.....stupid. It takes numerous seconds and bullets to kill your enemies, I mean sure you have autopersonal bullets and your plasmids but the bullets run low and the plasmids don't really help too often. And because of this the game feels ridiculously stale, with you dying constantly. But instead of other shooters that try this as say Half-Life 1, the enemies aren't tweaked for that "let me load my game again so I can do that shot perfectly" mentality since it takes so long to kill them anyway. Even though that doesn't matter because of the Vita-Chambers.

Third of all was that it was as I said before too presentation focused. Bioshock proved to me what other games have proved to me numerous times before. That no matter how hard it trys to, a game cannot compete to a movie, series, or book when telling a story or tale, well unless you have a HUGE amount of imagination. I mean yes the atmosphere is definately drawn in but that's it. The premise of the game's story is great but due to it being a game it's very limited. Yes I want to save Rapture but that isn't helping me get into more to that mindset if I'm doing stupid errands. While at that.

The Fourth Reason is the pacing. Compared to Half-Life 2 and other games both in and out of the FPS genre it was really averagely done. Shoot shoot, errand, shoot shoot, errand, shoot shoot, find where you need to go, shoot shoot, errand, shoot shoot, find where you need to go. It wasn't that the game was repatitive but just well boring. What the game had me do just wasn't really fun to begin with, I mean why the hell would I want to find some potion to save some trees? And the transitions were at times just arkward and didn't feel right. So after going on a scavanger hunt for 1 hour all of a sudden I'm trapped in a room having a firefight with splicers :?

Overall those were the main problems I had with a game.

Don't get me wrong it was stil a good game just not a great game IMO.

[QUOTE="V_Isle"]Cows, sheep, shut your faces, because Bio-shock owns your entire exclusive libraries. :lol:Gunraidan

Yes because I list every single game I own in my Gamespot list. :roll:

I felt that the awesome presentation, the killer plot, and the writing, which is the best in a video game to date, were the things that drove the game forward.

I mean sure, if you took the gameplay of Bioshock and put it in some boring setting with bad atmosphere and a bad plot, then yeah, it woudn't be too great, but that is not the case.

I feel like your argument against Bioshock is somewhat weak, simply because you ignore the fact that Bioshock is the reverse of pretty much every game out there: Instead of the narrative in Bioshock being a tool to push the gameplay forward, the gameplay in Bioshock is a tool to push the narrative forward.

You are not viewing Bioshock as a sum total; you are critcising the game with one eye closed. That's not fair.

I likeMetroid Prime 3 better tbh... I don't see whats so funabout Bioshock.ng1234

How about the great story, the awesome graphics, the immersive atmosphere, the dark mood, the compelling setting, the visceral, crazy, intense, in your face combat, the awesome plasmids and environmental interactions or the ultra incredible writing, dialogue and voice acting?

Have you...like... played Bioshock?

Bioshock was a huge dissapointment from me.i-lick-monkeys

Even though I enjoyed the game. It was missing the feeling that System Shock 2 game me when I first played it. So it was disappointing to an extent for me.

The only other reviewer I have come to trust besides gamespot staff. I hate casual trends, and thought I lost interest in gaming, but it turns out, he criticises games for things I recognise as issues in games as well. For example, the good and evil choice; there is no middle ground, when in actual fact, most people, me included would rather be indifferent to the business of those little girls and those weird diver suit things. People hyped the water as well. Why? It looked good from a distance, but if you entered it there would be some big bland decal where you are stood that expands, and it looks crap. Its not like it was volumetric or something.

I thought it was a lot like condemned, too much for its own good as well. Electrocute, and then go for the take down melee, and trails coming from the weapons when swung, and the guns are just as difficult to aim with.

Some of this may be considered a spoiler, I don't really know...

I don't understand what your problem is with the level design. In fact, I don't understand how you can complain about level design unless the layouts are all the same or if all of the environments look the same. Bioshock suffers from neither of those problems.

As for your complaints about the ineffective guns, I'm no going to agree with you. However, there is a reason they did that. The game is supposed to make you feel helpless. Here you are, stuck in a failing underwater city that is full of mind ******, super-powered humans trying to kill you. You have no idea what is going on, where you're going and are essentially being led around by a disembodied voice like a rat in cage.

The only way to survive is to embrace what caused Rapture to fail in the first place. And by using plasmids and the upgrades, you become increasingly god-like, and the game becomes a cakewalk. You are encouraged to play the game using the powers as opposed to traditional guns. Anyone can use a gun, not everyone has the powers you can acquire. The developers do not want players running through the game with the guns tearing **** up. It goes against the whole idea of promoting freedom and inventive thinking. The developers were trying to get you to play this game differently than you would other FPS games like Halo and Resistance.

People ruin this game for themselves. They try and play it like its a run-and-gun FPS. They complain about the weak firearms. They complain that all you need to use is the wrench. They complain about the difficulty, because the vita-chambers make it all irrelevant. The point is play through the game at your pace, using your own tactics. Its about freedom, and its about acquiring power. If you play through the game and are constantly getting killed by stupid splicers, how are you supposed to get a sense of power?

And another reason the vita-chambers are included is this. If you get killed, you should be dead. The ability to ressurect the dead is wrong in so many ways, it goes against both science and religion. The fact that Rapture has this ability shows you why it failed and why their idea of utopia is inherently wrong. There are no consequences.

Gamers who run through the levels with the guns, rarely using their powers, avoid obtaining/reading the audio diaries, will have a completely different game experience than those who take their time going through the levels, EXPERIMENT with the powers, follow the story, and just examine the world of Rapture.

And considering the fact that developers rarely focus heavily on the story and atmosphere in FPS games, this game was a breath of fresh air. Is the gameplay revolutionary? Probably not, and if you had high expectations for it, you might be disappointed. But the story, environment, and atmosphere is what carried this game.

You've heard/seen this story before, where the test subject becomes more powerful than the controller realizes was possible, and eventually the slave overthrows the master.

When you break down any FPS, or most games for that matter, isn't it all just shoot, shoot, do an errand, shoot, do an errand, shoot, find exit, and repeat? Its funny that you used the word "errand" as well, because that is truly what you are doing in this game. You are being ordered to do tasks by a controller.