Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2014 11:15:28 GMT
I like all the Bioshock games but the thing i didn't like about Infinite was the fact that you where forced to use all the Vigors, i preferred the way you could choose which ones you wanted in Bioshock 1&2 by buying them from the vending machines. The thing is that a lot of them were the same though, so you really only used a few. Crows were a stun. Lightning was a stun. Bucking Bronco was a stun. They only had slight variations.
|
|
|
Post by Bioshock Infinite WD on Jun 22, 2014 3:48:54 GMT
In my opinion Bioshock two was not fantastic, its not bad, its just average to okay, it doesn't add all that much, the story is weaker, the gameplay is a step up from Bioshock, that is one thing it did right, but it doesn't need to be played to understand everything, and as of Burial at Sea part 2, its not canon, and the multiplayer was nothing special, not the worst game I have ever played, but not the best, its a good game, but from the Bioshock standard it's below average. It is still canon, Ken Levine said it was still Canon. And don't even talk about the story when you think Infinite is the best. Just don't. Sofia Lamb is a much better villain than Comstock, and her relationship with Delta doesn't involve any huge fucking plot holes. The relationship between Delta and Eleanor is better than that of Booker and Elizabeth. Mainly because Elizabeth doesn't act like she should. Someone who's never had contact with people who most of her life? Naturally she'd be happy and dancing and talking to everyone! No. Infinite is awful with gameplay. It removed hacking, multiple ammo types, the more unique weapons, you can only carry two weapons, removed unique enemy types, removed research, I think crafting also wasn't included in Bioshock 2, they got rid of gene tonics, the plasmids aren't as good, not as many chances for strategy, removed Adam(you just use money), gun upgrades aren't as good. Those are basically all facts... What did they add, let's see... Gear. Skylines. Tears. Gear are gene tonics, but not as good, and most of them relate to skylines. Skylines are fun, but a gimmick. They're useless most of the time. Tears are cool, but do not make up for removing just about everything else. Also in my opinion, the aesthetic and feel of Bioshock 2 was better than that of Infinite, and even the first. Marginally for the first... The story of Infinite was full of holes, and that's mainly what I've got against it. Bioshock 2 was very well done. Sofia Lamb was an incredible villain. Not as good as Ryan or Fontaine, but better than Comstock. Eleanor is a believable character, Sinclair is great, and generally, I liked many of the characters from Bioshock 2 compared to those from Infinite. I will say that counting Burial at Sea, Elizabeth is a great character, but I also count Burial at Sea as being separate form Infinite. So... Yeah, Bioshock 2 is much better than Infinite. Incredibly better. Niccc, if you play the Bioshock series, do not skip Bioshock Two, it's amazing. Trust me, Ken Levine has never said Bioshock 2 was canon, he never says anything about it when questioned, like he wants to ignore it. As I said, Burial at Sea part 2 recons Bioshock 2, remember how Delta was the first to be pair bonded with a Little Sister? Remember how that was before the 1958 New Years Eve riots? Well in Burial at Sea, the first pair bond is done weeks after in 1959, a Big Daddy is paired with a Little Sister named Leta, not Eleanor. I admit, Sofia Lamb was a good villain, not close to Fontaine but good, I give you that. Now let me ask you this, your saying a character with no personality had a better relationship with a character that did have a personality? In my opinion one of the things Infinite has over both Bioshock's is a speaking protagonist, one with a personality, one with strengths, with flaws, one who changes over time, one voiced by one of the best voice actors around today, it was a improvement. Eleanor was good, not Elizabeth or Clementine, but very good, probably the best thing about Bioshock 2. Now let me ask you something, how do you know how a person would react when released for the first time? I don't know what it would be like, but for Elizabeth it makes sense, she has only heard of these great things, it was a new experience for someone that always wanted to know more things, I fail to see how that is not human like. Yes, I admit I would have liked hacking and more ammo types, but it was not the most important feature, it wasn't, yes its a shame but I feel like it wasn't needed to make the game better. Unique weapons, there were never truly unique weapons in Bioshock or Bioshock 2, lets count shall we? Bioshock had seven weapons, the Wrench, a pistol, a machine gun, a shotgun, a grenade launcher, a chemical thrower, and a crossbow. Now none of these are really unique, the most unique is the chemial thrower, and that is really just a flame thrower that can also freeze and electrocute Splicers. Bioshock 2 six weapons, a drill, a rivet gun, a machine gun, a shotgun, a spear gun, and a launcher. Once again, none of these are really super unique, the drill is just a more badass wrench, the rivet gun is just a badass rail gun, the machine gun and shotgun are just that, the launcher is just the grenade launcher, the most unique weapon is the spear gun, and that is just the crossbow. Bioshock Infinite has 14 weapons, the RPG, the sniper rifle, the Mouser C96, the Winchester 1887 and the heater, the carbine and burstgun, the Colt 1951 Navy revolver, my favorite weapon, the crank gun, the volley gun or flak canon and hail fire, the MP 18 and repeater, and the Skyhook. Now most of these are not unique, I admit that, but really, there have never been unique weapons in the series outside of the Plamids and Vigors. Yes you can only carry two weapons, but its really a preference if that bothers you or not, it doesn't bother me, but again its a preference, it vary's from person to person. Unique enemy's? So the Zealots of the Lady don't count? Neither do Motorized Patriots? Handymen? Firemen? Boy's of silence? Now these are nothing like Bioshock enemy's, but they are unique, it sounds to me like you would have preferred it to be more like Bioshock, am I wrong? I personally liked research, but again it didn't make or break Bioshock did it? Not really. Crafting was not in Bioshock 2, your right, and yet you still love it to death, so why is it a problem to again not have it in Infinite? The Vigors are similar to Plasmids, but that doesn't make them any worse then they were in Bioshock 1, hell a few were entirely unique, like Return to Sender. Yes ADAM was removed in exchange for money buying upgrades, I think this is a good thing, one, you still can't buy everything, and it ties into fixing the biggest problem with Bioshock, more on that later. I really liked gun upgrades in Bioshock, and yes they are more standard in Infinite, but I suppose that would have made Infinite more similar to Bioshock, and I know for a fact that was something Levine did not want. Gear is Gene tonics, you are correct, but they are just as good, most are not really for Skylines, a lot of them are, but not most. I disagree with Skylines being a gimmick, they are useful in a pinch, it just vary's from playstyle to playstyle. Now trust me, saying the aesthetic for Bioshock 2 is better is purely 100% preference. You must understand, the turn of the century 1900s is my favorite time period, I like the innovation, the fashion, the music, all of it, and Infinite was dripping in that aesthetic. Now don't get me wrong, I love Bioshock's aesthetic a lot, its just I prefer Infinite due to my love of the time period, they really are just as great, just preference. You say Infinite is full of plot holes, explain them, don't just say they are there without giving details as to which. Here is my biggest problem with Bioshock 2, it has no right to exist. Were there any plot points not tied up in Bioshock? Where there any lingering questions that needed to be answered? If I told you in 2007 that there would be another Bioshock would you believe me? It is more of the same, it doesn't innovate in the story department, it does in the gameplay maybe, but not the story. The story is more of the same, with somethings that really never made sense, you want plot holes? How does Eleanor communicate with Delta? Why is the prototype Big Daddy better then all Big Daddy's? How the hell does he even eat food? Why does he need to? Now let me explain in great detail why the lack of ADAM in Infinite is better, one word, difficulty. In Bioshock, death carried next to no penalty, if you die, it respawn's you and that's it. You don't lose ADAM, you don't lose money, and the enemy's health does not go back up. It makes it possible to kill a Big Daddy with a wrench and nothing else if you have the time. This is my greatest problem with Bioshock, and it was fixed in Infinite very easily. You lose money when you die, and money has more value then it did in Bioshock, also enemy's get there health back, its a simple change but it fixes the biggest problem with Bioshock. So in conclusion, in my opinion Bioshock 2 is inferior to both 1 and Infinite, but it IS my opinion, just as yours is yours. So lets leave it at that.
|
|
|
Post by Bioshock Infinite WD on Jun 22, 2014 4:12:43 GMT
Also this video sums up my opinion well enough.
|
|
|
Post by Rock114 on Jun 22, 2014 4:26:12 GMT
It is still canon, Ken Levine said it was still Canon. And don't even talk about the story when you think Infinite is the best. Just don't. Sofia Lamb is a much better villain than Comstock, and her relationship with Delta doesn't involve any huge fucking plot holes. The relationship between Delta and Eleanor is better than that of Booker and Elizabeth. Mainly because Elizabeth doesn't act like she should. Someone who's never had contact with people who most of her life? Naturally she'd be happy and dancing and talking to everyone! No. Infinite is awful with gameplay. It removed hacking, multiple ammo types, the more unique weapons, you can only carry two weapons, removed unique enemy types, removed research, I think crafting also wasn't included in Bioshock 2, they got rid of gene tonics, the plasmids aren't as good, not as many chances for strategy, removed Adam(you just use money), gun upgrades aren't as good. Those are basically all facts... What did they add, let's see... Gear. Skylines. Tears. Gear are gene tonics, but not as good, and most of them relate to skylines. Skylines are fun, but a gimmick. They're useless most of the time. Tears are cool, but do not make up for removing just about everything else. Also in my opinion, the aesthetic and feel of Bioshock 2 was better than that of Infinite, and even the first. Marginally for the first... The story of Infinite was full of holes, and that's mainly what I've got against it. Bioshock 2 was very well done. Sofia Lamb was an incredible villain. Not as good as Ryan or Fontaine, but better than Comstock. Eleanor is a believable character, Sinclair is great, and generally, I liked many of the characters from Bioshock 2 compared to those from Infinite. I will say that counting Burial at Sea, Elizabeth is a great character, but I also count Burial at Sea as being separate form Infinite. So... Yeah, Bioshock 2 is much better than Infinite. Incredibly better. Niccc, if you play the Bioshock series, do not skip Bioshock Two, it's amazing. Trust me, Ken Levine has never said Bioshock 2 was canon, he never says anything about it when questioned, like he wants to ignore it. As I said, Burial at Sea part 2 recons Bioshock 2, remember how Delta was the first to be pair bonded with a Little Sister? Remember how that was before the 1958 New Years Eve riots? Well in Burial at Sea, the first pair bond is done weeks after in 1959, a Big Daddy is paired with a Little Sister named Leta, not Eleanor. I admit, Sofia Lamb was a good villain, not close to Fontaine but good, I give you that. Now let me ask you this, your saying a character with no personality had a better relationship with a character that did have a personality? In my opinion one of the things Infinite has over both Bioshock's is a speaking protagonist, one with a personality, one with strengths, with flaws, one who changes over time, one voiced by one of the best voice actors around today, it was a improvement. Eleanor was good, not Elizabeth or Clementine, but very good, probably the best thing about Bioshock 2. Now let me ask you something, how do you know how a person would react when released for the first time? I don't know what it would be like, but for Elizabeth it makes sense, she has only heard of these great things, it was a new experience for someone that always wanted to know more things, I fail to see how that is not human like. Yes, I admit I would have liked hacking and more ammo types, but it was not the most important feature, it wasn't, yes its a shame but I feel like it wasn't needed to make the game better. Unique weapons, there were never truly unique weapons in Bioshock or Bioshock 2, lets count shall we? Bioshock had seven weapons, the Wrench, a pistol, a machine gun, a shotgun, a grenade launcher, a chemical thrower, and a crossbow. Now none of these are really unique, the most unique is the chemial thrower, and that is really just a flame thrower that can also freeze and electrocute Splicers. Bioshock 2 six weapons, a drill, a rivet gun, a machine gun, a shotgun, a spear gun, and a launcher. Once again, none of these are really super unique, the drill is just a more badass wrench, the rivet gun is just a badass rail gun, the machine gun and shotgun are just that, the launcher is just the grenade launcher, the most unique weapon is the spear gun, and that is just the crossbow. Bioshock Infinite has 14 weapons, the RPG, the sniper rifle, the Mouser C96, the Winchester 1887 and the heater, the carbine and burstgun, the Colt 1951 Navy revolver, my favorite weapon, the crank gun, the volley gun or flak canon and hail fire, the MP 18 and repeater, and the Skyhook. Now most of these are not unique, I admit that, but really, there have never been unique weapons in the series outside of the Plamids and Vigors. Yes you can only carry two weapons, but its really a preference if that bothers you or not, it doesn't bother me, but again its a preference, it vary's from person to person. Unique enemy's? So the Zealots of the Lady don't count? Neither do Motorized Patriots? Handymen? Firemen? Boy's of silence? Now these are nothing like Bioshock enemy's, but they are unique, it sounds to me like you would have preferred it to be more like Bioshock, am I wrong? I personally liked research, but again it didn't make or break Bioshock did it? Not really. Crafting was not in Bioshock 2, your right, and yet you still love it to death, so why is it a problem to again not have it in Infinite? The Vigors are similar to Plasmids, but that doesn't make them any worse then they were in Bioshock 1, hell a few were entirely unique, like Return to Sender. Yes ADAM was removed in exchange for money buying upgrades, I think this is a good thing, one, you still can't buy everything, and it ties into fixing the biggest problem with Bioshock, more on that later. I really liked gun upgrades in Bioshock, and yes they are more standard in Infinite, but I suppose that would have made Infinite more similar to Bioshock, and I know for a fact that was something Levine did not want. Gear is Gene tonics, you are correct, but they are just as good, most are not really for Skylines, a lot of them are, but not most. I disagree with Skylines being a gimmick, they are useful in a pinch, it just vary's from playstyle to playstyle. Now trust me, saying the aesthetic for Bioshock 2 is better is purely 100% preference. You must understand, the turn of the century 1900s is my favorite time period, I like the innovation, the fashion, the music, all of it, and Infinite was dripping in that aesthetic. Now don't get me wrong, I love Bioshock's aesthetic a lot, its just I prefer Infinite due to my love of the time period, they really are just as great, just preference. You say Infinite is full of plot holes, explain them, don't just say they are there without giving details as to which. Here is my biggest problem with Bioshock 2, it has no right to exist. Were there any plot points not tied up in Bioshock? Where there any lingering questions that needed to be answered? If I told you in 2007 that there would be another Bioshock would you believe me? It is more of the same, it doesn't innovate in the story department, it does in the gameplay maybe, but not the story. The story is more of the same, with somethings that really never made sense, you want plot holes? How does Eleanor communicate with Delta? Why is the prototype Big Daddy better then all Big Daddy's? How the hell does he even eat food? Why does he need to? Now let me explain in great detail why the lack of ADAM in Infinite is better, one word, difficulty. In Bioshock, death carried next to no penalty, if you die, it respawn's you and that's it. You don't lose ADAM, you don't lose money, and the enemy's health does not go back up. It makes it possible to kill a Big Daddy with a wrench and nothing else if you have the time. This is my greatest problem with Bioshock, and it was fixed in Infinite very easily. You lose money when you die, and money has more value then it did in Bioshock, also enemy's get there health back, its a simple change but it fixes the biggest problem with Bioshock. So in conclusion, in my opinion Bioshock 2 is inferior to both 1 and Infinite, but it IS my opinion, just as yours is yours. So lets leave it at that. OMFG SO MUCH TEXT EYES BLEEDING CAN'T READ, TEXT WALL RUSHING UP TO MEET ME SOMEONE HELP-
|
|
|
Post by Bioshock Infinite WD on Jun 22, 2014 4:31:29 GMT
There you go Rock.
|
|
|
Post by Bioshock Infinite WD on Jun 22, 2014 4:36:05 GMT
In my opinion Bioshock two was not fantastic, its not bad, its just average to okay, it doesn't add all that much, the story is weaker, the gameplay is a step up from Bioshock, that is one thing it did right, but it doesn't need to be played to understand everything, and as of Burial at Sea part 2, its not canon, and the multiplayer was nothing special, not the worst game I have ever played, but not the best, its a good game, but from the Bioshock standard it's below average. It is still canon, Ken Levine said it was still Canon. And don't even talk about the story when you think Infinite is the best. Just don't. Sofia Lamb is a much better villain than Comstock, and her relationship with Delta doesn't involve any huge fucking plot holes. The relationship between Delta and Eleanor is better than that of Booker and Elizabeth. Mainly because Elizabeth doesn't act like she should. Someone who's never had contact with people who most of her life? Naturally she'd be happy and dancing and talking to everyone! No. Infinite is awful with gameplay. It removed hacking, multiple ammo types, the more unique weapons, you can only carry two weapons, removed unique enemy types, removed research, I think crafting also wasn't included in Bioshock 2, they got rid of gene tonics, the plasmids aren't as good, not as many chances for strategy, removed Adam(you just use money), gun upgrades aren't as good. Those are basically all facts... What did they add, let's see... Gear. Skylines. Tears. Gear are gene tonics, but not as good, and most of them relate to skylines. Skylines are fun, but a gimmick. They're useless most of the time. Tears are cool, but do not make up for removing just about everything else. Also in my opinion, the aesthetic and feel of Bioshock 2 was better than that of Infinite, and even the first. Marginally for the first... The story of Infinite was full of holes, and that's mainly what I've got against it. Bioshock 2 was very well done. Sofia Lamb was an incredible villain. Not as good as Ryan or Fontaine, but better than Comstock. Eleanor is a believable character, Sinclair is great, and generally, I liked many of the characters from Bioshock 2 compared to those from Infinite. I will say that counting Burial at Sea, Elizabeth is a great character, but I also count Burial at Sea as being separate form Infinite. So... Yeah, Bioshock 2 is much better than Infinite. Incredibly better. Niccc, if you play the Bioshock series, do not skip Bioshock Two, it's amazing. Trust me, Ken Levine has never said Bioshock 2 was canon, he never says anything about it when questioned, like he wants to ignore it. As I said, Burial at Sea part 2 recons Bioshock 2, remember how Delta was the first to be pair bonded with a Little Sister? Remember how that was before the 1958 New Years Eve riots? Well in Burial at Sea, the first pair bond is done weeks after in 1959, a Big Daddy is paired with a Little Sister named Leta, not Eleanor. I admit, Sofia Lamb was a good villain, not close to Fontaine but good, I give you that. Now let me ask you this, your saying a character with no personality had a better relationship with a character that did have a personality? In my opinion one of the things Infinite has over both Bioshock's is a speaking protagonist, one with a personality, one with strengths, with flaws, one who changes over time, one voiced by one of the best voice actors around today, it was a improvement. Eleanor was good, not Elizabeth or Clementine, but very good, probably the best thing about Bioshock 2. Now let me ask you something, how do you know how a person would react when released for the first time? I don't know what it would be like, but for Elizabeth it makes sense, she has only heard of these great things, it was a new experience for someone that always wanted to know more things, I fail to see how that is not human like. Yes, I admit I would have liked hacking and more ammo types, but it was not the most important feature, it wasn't, yes its a shame but I feel like it wasn't needed to make the game better. Unique weapons, there were never truly unique weapons in Bioshock or Bioshock 2, lets count shall we? Bioshock had seven weapons, the Wrench, a pistol, a machine gun, a shotgun, a grenade launcher, a chemical thrower, and a crossbow. Now none of these are really unique, the most unique is the chemial thrower, and that is really just a flame thrower that can also freeze and electrocute Splicers. Bioshock 2 six weapons, a drill, a rivet gun, a machine gun, a shotgun, a spear gun, and a launcher. Once again, none of these are really super unique, the drill is just a more badass wrench, the rivet gun is just a badass rail gun, the machine gun and shotgun are just that, the launcher is just the grenade launcher, the most unique weapon is the spear gun, and that is just the crossbow. Bioshock Infinite has 14 weapons, the RPG, the sniper rifle, the Mouser C96, the Winchester 1887 and the heater, the carbine and burstgun, the Colt 1951 Navy revolver, my favorite weapon, the crank gun, the volley gun or flak canon and hail fire, the MP 18 and repeater, and the Skyhook. Now most of these are not unique, I admit that, but really, there have never been unique weapons in the series outside of the Plamids and Vigors. Yes you can only carry two weapons, but its really a preference if that bothers you or not, it doesn't bother me, but again its a preference, it vary's from person to person. Unique enemy's? So the Zealots of the Lady don't count? Neither do Motorized Patriots? Handymen? Firemen? Boy's of silence? Now these are nothing like Bioshock enemy's, but they are unique, it sounds to me like you would have preferred it to be more like Bioshock, am I wrong? I personally liked research, but again it didn't make or break Bioshock did it? Not really. Crafting was not in Bioshock 2, your right, and yet you still love it to death, so why is it a problem to again not have it in Infinite? The Vigors are similar to Plasmids, but that doesn't make them any worse then they were in Bioshock 1, hell a few were entirely unique, like Return to Sender. Yes ADAM was removed in exchange for money buying upgrades, I think this is a good thing, one, you still can't buy everything, and it ties into fixing the biggest problem with Bioshock, more on that later. I really liked gun upgrades in Bioshock, and yes they are more standard in Infinite, but I suppose that would have made Infinite more similar to Bioshock, and I know for a fact that was something Levine did not want. Gear is Gene tonics, you are correct, but they are just as good, most are not really for Skylines, a lot of them are, but not most. I disagree with Skylines being a gimmick, they are useful in a pinch, it just vary's from playstyle to playstyle. Now trust me, saying the aesthetic for Bioshock 2 is better is purely 100% preference. You must understand, the turn of the century 1900s is my favorite time period, I like the innovation, the fashion, the music, all of it, and Infinite was dripping in that aesthetic. Now don't get me wrong, I love Bioshock's aesthetic a lot, its just I prefer Infinite due to my love of the time period, they really are just as great, just preference. You say Infinite is full of plot holes, explain them, don't just say they are there without giving details as to which. Here is my biggest problem with Bioshock 2, it has no right to exist. Were there any plot points not tied up in Bioshock? Where there any lingering questions that needed to be answered? If I told you in 2007 that there would be another Bioshock set in Rapture ten years later, would you believe me? It is more of the same, it doesn't innovate in the story department, it does in the gameplay maybe, but not the story. The story is more of the same, with somethings that really never made sense, you want plot holes? How does Eleanor communicate with Delta? Why is the prototype Big Daddy better then all Big Daddy's? How the hell does he even eat food? Why does he need to? Now let me explain in great detail why the lack of ADAM in Infinite is better, one word, difficulty. In Bioshock, death carried next to no penalty, if you die, it respawn's you and that's it. You don't lose ADAM, you don't lose money, and the enemy's health does not go back up. It makes it possible to kill a Big Daddy with a wrench and nothing else if you have the time. This is my greatest problem with Bioshock, and it was fixed in Infinite very easily. You lose money when you die, and money has more value then it did in Bioshock, also enemy's get there health back, its a simple change but it fixes the biggest problem with Bioshock. So in conclusion, in my opinion Bioshock 2 is inferior to both 1 and Infinite, but it IS my opinion, just as yours is yours. So lets leave it at that.
|
|
|
Post by Rock114 on Jun 22, 2014 4:38:35 GMT
Okay, I will edit it Rock. It was a joke, man. I mean yeah, it looks like the Text Wall of China, but I wasn't gonna read it anyway. That last part isn't just me being an asshole, I'm attempting to avoid any information about Infinite until I get it. Yes, I'm extremely slow with these things. I've already had a few choice things spoiled, and I'm trying not to have any more spoiled.
|
|
|
Post by Bioshock Infinite WD on Jun 22, 2014 4:41:24 GMT
You don't have it? Well I didn't spoil the story don't worry, I just said why its better in MY opinion.
|
|
|
Post by Rock114 on Jun 22, 2014 4:59:35 GMT
Okay, read it. Most of it, at least.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2014 22:32:44 GMT
I'm just going to say this, as you've failed to change my opinion in the slightest, and it seems that that is mutual. you have your own opinion, but stop telling people to skip Bioshock 2(which is still canon). Let them make their own decision about it. There are plenty of people who like Bioshock 2, and it's clearly not just some piece of crap. Just stop, please.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2014 22:35:20 GMT
Oh as for plot holes... Let me see if I can find the video(s).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2014 22:38:57 GMT
And I love this video, a bit more critical than I am, I really do like Bioshock Infinite, but it does address most of the problems I have with it:
|
|
|
Post by Bioshock Infinite WD on Jun 22, 2014 22:41:17 GMT
I'm just going to say this, as you've failed to change my opinion in the slightest, and it seems that that is mutual. you have your own opinion, but stop telling people to skip Bioshock 2(which is still canon). Let them make their own decision about it. There are plenty of people who like Bioshock 2, and it's clearly not just some piece of crap. Just stop, please. I am not saying Bioshock 2 is absolute crap, trust me I know what those are like, its not Ride to Hell, its just, average, and for the last time, its not canon, if you can show me proof that my favorite game developer in the industry says its canon, then please, show me, I wouldn't be complaining, sometimes I am wrong, but as far as I know, he never talks about it, he skips conversations about it, and Burial at Sea part 2 reconned a major plot point, how is that still canon?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2014 23:30:08 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Bioshock Infinite WD on Jun 22, 2014 23:32:52 GMT
Again, proof? They very clearly made that scene out to be before 1959 in Bioshock 2, in part 2, its clear after, thus retconning Bioshock 2, and notice how nothing Bioshock 2 related is ever mentioned in Burial at Sea, or Infinite for that matter, if Sinclair had not been mentioned in Bioshock 1, then it would have been nowhere.
|
|