| dougsdad0629 said: I played the demo several times waiting to be blown away since everyone has heaped so much praise on this game. However, I found it merely good, not great. The atmosphere is very well done and the graphics are really nice, but I really didn't dig the gameplay much at all. The guns weren't very effective and provided little ammo despite searching every dead body. It seems like the only effective way to play the game is to hit an enemy with a elemental plasmid and then with a traditional weapon and lather, rinse, repeat. Does it get more shooter-like later on, cause that's what I'm into? I think there should be a distinction between games like this and traditional FPS. IMO, games like this and Half-Life 2 would be better referred to as First-Person Adventure games (FPA) rather than FPS. I prefer the individual level based game progression of a Call of Duty for example where I can play a level and stop rather than the persistent, one continuous world game progression of Bioshock or Half-Life. The only exception I've found was Metroid Prime 3 which was AMAZING! Unless someone is adequately able to convince me that Bioshock gets better later, it's gonna be a rental at best for me. That really bums me out, cause I soooo wanted to be blown away. |
The demo pretty much perfectly shows the gameplay portion, minus the extra weapons and plasmids. Depending on how you build your character things change, but every encounter in the game is essentially the same because no encounters are actually setup (except for a few specific ones).
They tried to make Rapture a living world where the AI just wanders so it's always going to be run around, find a splicer, kill them the way you know how, and then continue walking around.
If you don't like that gameplay you won't like Bioshock.
