Conegamer said:
pezus said:
Another review that doesn't break the embargo because it isn't a review copy
http://www.nave360.com/bioshock-infinite-review-before-rapture-there-was-columbia/
4/5 - "I’m left a little astonished, baffled, disappointed and amazed all at the same time"
Uh, not sure I understand how these things he mentions here are negatives:
"With future DLC updates coming, Bioshock Infinite is a game that deserves it’s place in Bioshock. It’s not as good as the first game, but miles ahead from the second. Whilst the story continues to baffle and the graphics continue to not render the way you hoped, the strong characters and the astonishing gameplay are what holds everything together. It just makes me wonder where the DLC will go; you’ll think the same upon completion. It’s also a real shame they didn’t decide to pursue a multiplayer, but then again Bioshock 2′s wasn’t exactly pretty."
|
Similar criticisms to the other reviews. More should be coming soon!
|
story based dlc is inherently a flaw the first didn't have, unless the dlc ends up being pointless like FF13-2's dlc, but then that makes the dlc pointless. I guess I'd rather have that be the case.
With multiplayer you pretty much can't win unless you're able to create an innovative great multiplayer like uncharted then it's hard for people to complain. If you don't you get critics criticizing you for an 8-12 hour with little replay value, If you do other critics get you for creating a somewhat ordinary but fun enough if you like the universe and screw around for a while (Tomb Raider)
I know people are like blah blah blah games don't need multiplayer. But if everyone did that you wouldn't have had games like mercenaries in RE, and the uncharted multiplayer etc.
