Why is Bioshock 1 so praised?

[eva01beserk]

Wright said:

Veknoid_Outcast said:

I believe it deserves the praise. In my mind it's the single best game of the seventh generation and one of the top five first-person shooters ever made.

There are a lot of great things going on in BioShock -- art direction, graphics, sound design, music -- but to me what makes the game so special is the way it transcends the boundaries typical of shooters. It features elements of role-playing games, adventure games, and horror games, all wrapped up in a totally immersive and customizable experience.

The thing is, Metro: Last Light also have all those great things going on with it: art direction, atmosphere, graphics, sound design; and while it is a bit more streamlined than Bioshock on the role-playing department, it mashes horror and adventure in a very unique and meaningful way.

It also presents a very subtle but very well-done morality system, which is certainly more inmmersive than PRESS A to Save, PRESS X to Harvest.

I'm not hating on Bioshock with this, neither I want to make it look like Metro:Last Light out of my opinion is far superior. My main complain is that critics gave a free pass on Bioshock's 1 flaws, whereas everyone punished Last Light for its flaws.

Because Bioshock was one of the first to do it and metro last light is 6 years later than bioshock. I f you where to compare it to metro 2033 wich still came 3 years after bioshock it would still be unfair. If a game that came 6 years later canot improve on the standart made so far back(I do belive bioshock set the standart) then it should be punished, it does not deserve a free pass cuz its better maybe just cuz is newer(maybe, never played it).