Would you kindly play this game and let it blow your mind?
System Shock 2 was one of my favorite games of all time, so when this game came out and I was told it was a spiritual sequel to that series, I had to play it. Plus, I love psychology, philosophy, and liberty, so the story elements having a lot to do with humanity (individuals and groups—I'm being intentionally vague because it's important to the plot) intrigued me as well.
Strangely, the two BioShock games took me a while to get into (I think it's because it has a dash of survival horror to it and your movements are slightly slower than other FPSes, which causes me to progress more slowly and, therefore, not get sucked in as quickly). However, once you get used to how the game wants you to play (e.g., items, combat, abilities) and you play long enough to have a comfortable amount of ammunition, it's fine. The game is absolutely amazing in terms of combining graphics, story, gameplay, audio, and world-building into an art form. And, of course, there is the obligatory mentioning of one of the greatest moments in gaming history being in this game. It will amaze you...if you can handle living in constant fear of those Big Daddies.
The Positives:
-The pinnacle of storytelling in a video game. When this came out, cinematic games were still relatively new. This told a story no different than you would see it unfold in a book, movie, or TV show (in fact, the beginning kind of resembles LOST a tad bit in terms of how it starts with a catastrophe and a mystery). It is constantly giving you new parts of the story and world to learn more about what's going on. It's quite astounding. While it wasn't the first one to do this (games like Resident Evil were combining cinematic views with documents giving you new information throughout), its amazing visuals and audio took it to the next level.
-This game is beautiful. You want to walk through and explore this world—even just to look around. The environment itself tells you a lot about the situation, which is a huge departure from games where the environment is just a setting in which to shoot people along your journey to get to the bad guy. Banners, architecture, etc. all provide information as to what kind of situation you're in.
-It balances the game for players of various skill levels and such. It's difficult, but it offers the respawn points. It has its scary moments, but they don't go too hard for folks who prefer to play it for the story. It's an interesting approach to making it approachable to a variety of gamers.
-It basically set the modern foundations of this kind of game. Every game after this has a mystery to figure out, a story that unfolds through audio logs that play while you explore, items and weapons developed in-game (vs. load-outs at the beginning of levels or random human merchants like other games), and a big reveal at the end. It's kind of become the gaming equivalent of the Hero's Journey but for story-based video games. But add the beautiful graphics and engrossing world, and it just perfected the total package and not just any one element.
The Negatives:
-Probably a huge setback for libertarianism/individualism. They critiqued collectivism in BioShock 2, so hopefully people who took the wrong message from the game (e.g., when left to their own devices, everyone becomes drug-fueled psychopathic killers) were balanced out by that. But they straw-manned Ayn Rand's philosophy when they could've inserted some subtle points that having liberty doesn't necessarily mean you're a selfish jerk and that Andrew Ryan was more like a Pinochet authoritarian than a libertarian. I think they did a better job in 2 of hinting/showing that the leader was a little crazy vs. insinuating that collectivism was completely untenable. Though many people will confirm their pre-existing beliefs regardless, so it's not a big deal. I think some people took it as an indictment of one system when it was really just an example of how any system is at risk of becoming dystopian because humans are flawed.
-They kept the horror elements since it was a spiritual successor to System Shock 2, but I don't know whether it was necessary. I think it could've been more like Half-Life, Fallout, Borderlands, etc. and been more of a story-based shooter with less horror/suspense, but that's their choice and not an objective negative. It's hard to enjoy the amazing environment when you're slowly moving around looking for enemies that might jump out at you like a Resident Evil game. I eventually got over it, but it took a little while to get into it because of my creeping around.
It's really hard to think of negatives for this game. It is that good. I could nitpick more and critique how I felt my movement was a little slow or that the combat required you to play in certain ways (run-and-gun almost guarantees a ton of health and ammo loss; the careful approach worked better for me almost every time), but those are all just personal preference and nothing wrong with the game. The movement goes toward the horror aspect (like how in RE they limit your saves and item slots), and the combat gave you plenty of weapon/ability options even though your approach had to be similar for the best results. It's one of the greatest games of all time for a reason: it's as good as a game can get. Anything I didn't love had nothing to do with the quality of the game and was just preferring a few minor changes. I'd recommend this to anyone, and as millions of games get made over the years, I think it'll still be in the top 100 ever to play for a long time.
