Bioshock Infinite is a good game but a bad Bioshock game

Missing the 10 year anniversary by about six months, it's the perfect time to discuss the controversial "ending" to the Bioshock trilogy. This is a soft review on Bioshock Infinite's place in the trilogy and it's obvious shortcomings when compared to it's predecessors. All the while, the game still attracts fans to this day and continues to be affiliated with the legacy of Bioshock 1 and 2. (However detrimental those affiliations are).

Controversial Story

Should a story in any medium (not just videogames) be entertaining? Or should they be more than that? Is the greatest thing a story can do is ask profound questions and force the viewer to tap into their philosophical mind? At the end of the day, there is no right or wrong answer. The only answer that is "true" is the one you justify yourself.

Bioshock Infinite's story has it's fair share of haters, especially within the Bioshock community. However, on it's own the game's story is actually quite entertaining and engaging. Recent movie tropes have popularized the whole father/daughter narrative and now it seems like every superhero movie is dealing with the multiverse. However, Bioshock Infinite struck gold within the video game medium and delivered both of these expositions effortlessly. As a game, the dynamic of Booker Dewitt and Elizabeth brought the world to life. Thanks to the talents of both the animators and the voice actors, these characters feel more alive than anything (especially for a game released in 2013). Even so, this wonderland ain't what it appears. Looking deeper at it's "Bioshock" lore and even the game's own original plot, problems occur. As you'd imagine, people are quick to criticize it.

The first problems start to show through an aspect that should be the least confusing (especially when dealing with a story about the multiverse). The overall plot and character betrayal of the game has problems if you look hard enough. The character betrayal begins with Elizabeth. She is special and essential to the story because she can open what's called tears (to pull apart portals). These portals lead to other universes. Essentially, she can go wherever she wants. So, why doesn't she? If she can leave the tower she is trapped in, why does she wait to escape with Booker? This question isn't brought up in the game however, an obvious clue stares you right in the face once you first meet Elizabeth. She opens a tear to a busy city street meaning, she could have just walked right through. So, why didn't she? The game doesn't provide any answers to this in it's own narrative. Were only left to assume, as a player, that the story needed to have conflict and progress some way. If she just left from the tower then there would be no story to progress.

As you can see, the inclusion of multiverse time-jumping portals needlessly convolutes the story and asks unanswerable questions. (Especially with the explanation from one of the prominent side characters about Schrödinger's cat). It's like the plot is more focused on shock and awe instead of telling a coherent story. At the end of the day, this is a Bioshock game though. Not just a Bioshock game but it's namesake is a trilogy. Yet, the game forces this entirely new narrative and plot that has nothing to do with the story/characters of Rapture. It's clear from the rocky development that this game was meant to be something else yet they slap the Bioshock name to it.

Controversial Gameplay/Level Design

This, like the critique with the story is subjective as the game can be seen as a proper sequel to Bioshock and it can also be seen as it's own game. Both sides, yet again, have no right or wrong answer, it's just how you chose to see them

For a game in itself, I personally think it suffers in both level design and overall gameplay. The gameplay is rather cumbersome when compared to the first two games and the flexibility in movement you had. This is apparent with the lack of diverse weapons, why run around and flank if I can just blast enemies with my upgraded machine gun? For example, Bioshock 2's use of the drill perfectly shows off the equal strength and weakness of a weapon. Making it's versatility specialized and limited at the same time. The drill can be useful in staggering enemies and even closing the distance. However, it fell short on bigger enemies like bosses, which forced the player to cycle through other weapons and not just rely on the drill. The weapons offered in Infinite are all rather the same rifle/machine gun variant that all pack-a-punch. Leaving no room to really force the player to maybe switch it up if a particular enemy appears too tough.

This feeling is doubled by the roller coaster of level design this game suffers from. It always feels like your constantly on the move and in dire need to blast your way through a group of enemies and onto the next. It also doesn't help that the game's narrative also enforces this roller coaster level design. Elizabeth runs from Booker a total of two times and forces the player to catch up to her. So, in a sense, the player just mindlessly blasts through enemies only to get back to Elizabeth. Why take the time to flesh out the characters and the area you are stranded in. A great annotation of this is, Bioshock 2's level design was more like different amusement parks with entirely different roller coaster to check out in each level. Bioshock Infinite's levels are more like a single roller coaster that just ejects you from the ride and onto the next. (Inspiration from Monty Zander).

On the other hand, many people love the gameplay and level design. Namely, people who just want to have fun with a video game and shoot some bad guys. You won't ever really get bored of this game if you just turn your brain off and click. Some people have no problem when it comes to how fast you move through levels and how fast the characters shift the plot. (It can help a story keep you on your toes as you don't really know what's going to happen next).

Good Game (Bad Bioshock Game)

As I've said a few times in this 10 year (late) critique of Bioshock infinite, the game itself serves it's purpose as a fun game. At the same time, it's almost everything a Bioshock game isn't. At the end of the day, that's okay as Bioshock Infinite is widely considered to be the most recognizable "Bioshock" game. Even with the general 50/50 split within Bioshock's own community, the game still receives love from many unfamiliar fans alike.

P.S.

I will never forgive what Bioshock Infinite's Burial At Sea did to the lore and legacy of Bioshock 1. As a Bioshock 2 enthusiast, I laugh in the face of Burial At Sea! Rise Rapture rise!