BioShock

 PC
User Score
8.6

Generally favorable reviews- based on 6069 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 5,075 out of 6069
  2. Mixed: 678 out of 6069
  3. Negative: 316 out of 6069
Buy Now
Buy on

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. MarkH.
    Dec 17, 2007
    7
    This is a well made game will little or no replayability. You play though it once or maybe twice and then leave in on the shelf. Multiplayer could have made this a real classic.
  2. apaeth
    Nov 7, 2010
    7
    I'm glad I bought this for only $5 on Steam. Any more than that and I would have felt ripped off. Great graphics, theme, setting and all but the game was just too repetitive and boring. It reminded me of an old arcade game but with a bit more depth added to it. Lame puzzles, the same enemies over and over, linear etc...

    Meh...
  3. Lambda462
    Nov 23, 2011
    7
    I appreciate what they're trying, but it just doesn't work.
    Okay, first off, I'm starting with what some reviewers say of BioShock: It's an AWFULLY bad copy of an older game; System Shock 2.
    Now, if I'm right, BioShock was an attempt to "Modernize" System Shock 2's formula, and they've done it quite well: The story is simply System Shock 2's story with another paint on it, they created a    I appreciate what they're trying, but it just doesn't work.
    Okay, first off, I'm starting with what some reviewers say of BioShock: It's an AWFULLY bad copy of an older game; System Shock 2.
    Now, if I'm right, BioShock was an attempt to "Modernize" System Shock 2's formula, and they've done it quite well: The story is simply System Shock 2's story with another paint on it, they created a quite creepy atmosphere, they have GREAT artwork, sublime voiceacting, and much better gunplay, but they missed the key element:
    The RPG mechanics are gone...
    The RPG mechanics were what made System Shock 2 so good for replaying, and its what BioShock lacks.

    But, now I've got that out of the way, for the actual review:
    BioShock is a FPS with a twist; genetic abilities. With that mean, you can go all Dark Side on your enemies by shooting lightning out of your hands. See what I'm getting at?

    Graphically, the graphics were great for when it released: Beautiful water effects, among them. But, I don't care about graphics, so no further comment there.

    Gameplay wise, the game is cool:
    You get some nice "Tools" to play with, and quite some genetic powers to toy with, so you'll be in for a treat. Each weapon can be modified. I'm saying this becaus it mostly has pretty outcomes for your guns.
    Now, besides fine gunplay, the gameplay, is quite bad.
    Even on hard, the game is terribly easy, not punishing you for dying; only reviving you at some station.
    In System Shock 2(Sorry for this), you really lost money; something that could hurt you in the game(because money was used to hack stuff to, and repair things, etc..>).
    Also something that lacks gameplaywise, is some depth. No, there's nothing wrong with mindless shooters, I enjoy them a lot, but BioShock was not intended to be a mindless shooter, it was clearly intended as a game with deep gameplay. The thing that made System Shock 2 so great, besides a good story, was the incredibly deep gameplay, being able to replay the game multiple times, and get a quite different experience. BioShock doesn't have that.

    Storywise, people who have played System Shock 2 will know it. I won't spoil anything, but it's great, and awesome. But, as with all stories; it'll be fresh for only one time.

    Now, after you read this, dont assume that BioShock's a bad game. It's not. It is bad for what it had to live up to.    … Expand
  4. dreambob
    Nov 20, 2011
    7
    Nice but long for nothing.
    Well,its a nice underwater vintage city that is fun to explore for a will, but after a few hours, it feels like your standard fps. the story and voice acting is good .
    worth playing!
  5. Nostalgium
    Jul 14, 2011
    7
    I found Bioshock very entertaining to some point. They should've done way more with the amazing water effects they had, but I guess Bioshock 2 made up for that part.

    After Fort Frolic, for me, the game fell apart and became boring, until the plot twist of course. But after Sander Cohen's part, the game became extremely repetitive and boring, even when playing on hardest difficulty.
  6. LevelsAndGear
    Oct 10, 2011
    7
    I usually avoid deep story driven games because my time is limited, and my memory is poor. Bioshock is a game that was suggested to me by a few friends, and had received critical praise, so I finally gave in. After an initial disaster with the Telekinesis plasmid almost made me quit, I stuck through the gameâ
  7. Mashley
    Nov 9, 2011
    7
    Honestly didn't get the hype about this game. Don't get me wrong I enjoyed the story and the setting but the gameplay and overall experience just didn't cut it for me. I didn't think it was bad, far from it, but it's nowhere near as good as the critics make it out to be.The ending is especially bad.
  8. josincano
    Oct 14, 2012
    7
    Lo cierto es que estoy algo decepcionado con el juego. Me esperaba un Half-Life 2 submarino y me he encontrado con un juego correcto.
    El juego es tremendamente repetitivo y las misiones se reducen a un "ve a tal sitio y coge tal objeto o mata a tal tipo" , los combates estan bastante mejor gracias a los plásmidos pero todo el rollo de mejorarlos, cambiarlos o comprar equipamiento    Lo cierto es que estoy algo decepcionado con el juego. Me esperaba un Half-Life 2 submarino y me he encontrado con un juego correcto.
    El juego es tremendamente repetitivo y las misiones se reducen a un "ve a tal sitio y coge tal objeto o mata a tal tipo" , los combates estan bastante mejor gracias a los plásmidos pero todo el rollo de mejorarlos, cambiarlos o comprar equipamiento es demasiado engorroso con 8000 máquinas diferentes cada una para una función.
    La historia es interesante y mejora en el final del juego pero tampoco me ha entusiasmado.
    Gráficamente el motor es de sobra conocido por lo que tendremos buenos efectos de luz y personajes bien modelados.
    En definitiva un buen diseño y una gran ambientación pero demasiado repetitivo.
    GRAFICOS: 9 SONIDO: 8 JUGABILIDAD: 6,5 DURACION: 7    … Expand
  9. jZero
    Oct 7, 2013
    7
    BioShock does a great job of atmosphere. The environments, music, story and art style combine to create the fantastic underwater city of Rapture. There are some tense moments against some well designed enemies as you progress through this "utopia" as it's falling apart. The mechanics are where the game loses some of its shine. The weapons and plasmids while interesting aren't wellBioShock does a great job of atmosphere. The environments, music, story and art style combine to create the fantastic underwater city of Rapture. There are some tense moments against some well designed enemies as you progress through this "utopia" as it's falling apart. The mechanics are where the game loses some of its shine. The weapons and plasmids while interesting aren't well balanced. It seemed to force playing enemies a certain way. Beating ranged big daddies with certain weapons and plasmids was almost impossible while others almost made it too easy. The customization with buffs and the invention mechanics are deep but don't feel gameplay changing. If you can get used to the mechanics BioShock has a lot to offer.… Expand
  10. Desthro
    Aug 8, 2014
    7
    Bioshock.
    This game was supposed to be the spiritual successor to a very powerful game, System Shock 2. The environment and the story are supposed to be dark and horrifying, with every piece you learn building up to a terrifying and emotional breakdown as the game progresses.
    Does Bioshock deliver? Yes and no. The game is fanciful and beautiful, a graphical piece of art at the time.    Bioshock.
    This game was supposed to be the spiritual successor to a very powerful game, System Shock 2. The environment and the story are supposed to be dark and horrifying, with every piece you learn building up to a terrifying and emotional breakdown as the game progresses.

    Does Bioshock deliver? Yes and no.
    The game is fanciful and beautiful, a graphical piece of art at the time. But if we just wanted to look at pretty things, we wouldn't play games right? And that is where Bioshock's ultimate problem lies, it is a beautiful, polished game on the outside, but on the inside it is affected by a hideous gameplay, and so-so story telling.

    The gameplay is repetitive from within itself, go here, do this, kill the big daddy, get some more juice and pump yourself up. It's boring and unimaginative; it was cool the first, and maybe even second time it happened, but once you realized it for what it was, it quickly became stale. The boss at the end was incredibly contrived, I found him to be an incredibly comical looking, shallow villain. He wasn't scary, or monstrous, but colorful and without real history or depth. The developers tried to sell him off as someone that went mad with his lust for power and evolution, but in the end he was just another NPC to destroy.

    The storytelling was borrowed from System-Shock's progressive method of sharing what happened in audio logs. This is a fantastic way of sharing a story, though the characters that leave the logs need to be believable, true and above all, REAL to us. While the story of how Rapture was conceived, built, rotted from within, and eventually collapsed was intriguing, the delivery was poor, and you couldn't connect as easily with the former inhabitants of Rapture due to the lack of emotional connection with the characters who left the logs behind. In System Shock 2, I was dying to find the next log, the next piece of the puzzle, the next E-mail that might explain what was going on. In Bioshock, I wasn't that excited, and the game's plot was static and predictable.

    Some might argue that comparing it to System Shock isn't fair and that it should be judged on it's own merits. I disagree because this game is riding on the coattails of greatness and promised an experience that would rival its spiritual predecessor. It didn't completely live up to expectations.

    It is, though, at least entertaining, and is worth playing. Do not expect it to be a groundbreaking, game-changing experience however. It is neither of those.    … Expand
  11. jim109109
    May 30, 2012
    7
    Pros: Great story, relatively fun gameplay. Cons: Extremely easy, linear, simple. The gameplay itself is a linear FPS with few depth, and you get no penalty for dying. Overrated, but the game is still fun.
  12. stvartak
    Sep 17, 2012
    7
    I recently bought a new computer and decided to go back and play some of my favorite older games with the graphics jacked way up, just to see how much better they look. When I did this with the original Bioshock, it reminded me of a few things, both good and bad, about this game. GOOD: The graphics are stunning, both technically and aesthetically. The art deco design of the underwaterI recently bought a new computer and decided to go back and play some of my favorite older games with the graphics jacked way up, just to see how much better they look. When I did this with the original Bioshock, it reminded me of a few things, both good and bad, about this game. GOOD: The graphics are stunning, both technically and aesthetically. The art deco design of the underwater city of Rapture perfectly captures the look and feel of an era. With settings maxed out, Bioshock looks as good as any game I would hope to see today, five years after its initial release. Also, as a shooter, Bioshock is pretty much unsurpassed. Enemies are quick, smart, and well-armed, and level design provides plenty of cover and obstacles. BAD: Bioshock really is just a shooter. When it was released, there was a lot of attention paid to the "moral choices" involving the Little Sisters, but in the end, the choices you made painstakingly through hours and hours of gameplay culminate in...two irritatingly brief cut-scenes, one if you took the good path, one for the bad. Yawn. And Bioshock's incredible visual style distracts from the fact that it is almost perfectly linear. Thanks to the many bits and pieces of backstory and Ayn Rand philosophy that are gradually uncovered as you progress, the game feels deeper and more nuanced than it really is. SUMMARY: Bioshock is worthwhile no matter what style of action-adventure-RPG you prefer, but I believe it will appeal most to fans of straightforward, Doom-style shooters who just want to get their blast on, albeit in some of the best-designed game environments in recent years.… Expand
  13. faceless-1
    Apr 2, 2013
    7
    Very good game and spiritual successor of system shock. Story and graphics style is awesome. Combat is fun thanks to the plasmids. Gameplay is something between System Shock 2 and Doom 3.
  14. triplettt
    Oct 14, 2012
    7
    Although there is not questioning Bioshock's greatness, i found it has more flaws than people make out. maybe its just not my kind of game but it seemed to be a bit dull through most of it.
  15. santo_ameno
    Jul 17, 2013
    7
    I must say I've got a problem with this one. The whole setting of the game is imbued with an unprecedented amount of artistry, the background of all events is incredibly rich and consistent. Rapture is enchanting beautifully designed location and ubiquitous art déco feel. The history is quite good and I just loved the characters and audio layer of the game (incredibly good voice actingI must say I've got a problem with this one. The whole setting of the game is imbued with an unprecedented amount of artistry, the background of all events is incredibly rich and consistent. Rapture is enchanting beautifully designed location and ubiquitous art déco feel. The history is quite good and I just loved the characters and audio layer of the game (incredibly good voice acting and music). All of this creates a coherent universe which significantly exceeds the technical aspects of the game itself. Bioshock as a game just doesn't offer enough fun. I accept the plasmids because the story behind them is plausible, but i just can't find justification for tonics. The gameplay isn't satisfying the guns don't give that special feel, permanent lack of ammo and too much plasmids to choose the tonics the hacking vending machines adam eve Power to the People Gene Banks Gatherer's Garden Health stations bots turrets photos everything... much exaggerated. The game mechanics is overcomplicated and bewildering.
    Also the level design (in macroscale as a route from beginning to end) isn't very sophisticated I would say it's like small villages sparsely placed by the main road Fort Frolic for example. Unnecessary detour to Fleet Hall and Poseidon Plaza justified only by the designers willingness to add extra content to the game (although I think mentioned location are well designed and eye-catching) heck, why couldn't you just walk straight to bathysphere. Most of the game player seems to travel from node to node.
    I think the game tries to be too long everything goes well if you are driven by plot you gather informations and audio diaries but then you reach a moment in which writers took a pause. It's easy to forget what and why you're supposed to do. The best choice would be to cut those moment since they contain only shooting & fighting and those aspects of the game doesn't defend themselves.
    Another disadvantage of Bioshock is the design of the enemies they aren't very diverse, their animation is poor and they're ugly. Just ugly (and I don't mean scary). Some characters and events related to them are insistently weird. Too mature, too bizarre... you can't really identify with them or with their motives and choices.
    I've got really hard time finishing it some moment are really dull but I'm glad I did it finally.
    Yes, I agree the game is overrated but I will not score Bioshock to 0. And I will not discourage anyone to buy the game.    … Expand
  16. gracjanski
    Nov 22, 2015
    7
    The beginning ist really great: atmosfere, the background, philosophy. But after 2-3 hours the game becomes average and you begin to see the weak sides of this game: you are immortal, bad controlling, few enemies, childish dialogues. there are much better shooter out there. But the end is a masterpiece of videogames: DO THE GOOD side and rescue the sisters, the end sequence is brilliant.
  17. lawilson
    Jun 24, 2013
    7
    'BioShock' is a game that you have to play to find out what everyone is talking about—and it is definitely worth the time—even though I tend to ignore horror games. I loved that the gamemakers allowed Objectivist philosophy to heavily influence the game. The thought of living in a world inspired by Ayn Rand should terrify any sane person, but the player of 'BioShock' must navigate the'BioShock' is a game that you have to play to find out what everyone is talking about—and it is definitely worth the time—even though I tend to ignore horror games. I loved that the gamemakers allowed Objectivist philosophy to heavily influence the game. The thought of living in a world inspired by Ayn Rand should terrify any sane person, but the player of 'BioShock' must navigate the ruined aftermath of that retro-futurist nightmare, while fighting tortured madmen, managing resources, and solving puzzles along the way. Sadly, I did not finish this game. I became enamored with the 'Fallout' series at the time, and 'BioShock' fell off my radar through no fault of its own. I would like to finish the game, so that I can fully appreciate the dystopian intersection of intellectual and adrenaline-pumping gameplay as wrought by Irrational Games.… Expand
  18. SL539
    Dec 26, 2015
    7
    This is a game I was never able to truly get into, perhaps it's because I started off with BioShock Infinite. However it's a very good game, from what I've seen and the little I did play. Very cinematic for an FPS game. Sorry can't really give much more of a review - I just wanted to clean out my old review since it was pretty stupid.
  19. yokerclown
    Dec 5, 2014
    7
    Great pre-game of that, what "Bioshock: Infinite" saved and done more goodly, than here!.. But dont forgetting about that fact, that this is really one of the best "first person shooter games" ever!
  20. SupaChigga
    Nov 19, 2013
    7
    Single Player/Multi Player (2/2)

    (If the single player is better than the multiplayer, review this section as if it had no multplayer) (If the multiplayer is better than the multiplayer, review this section as if it had no single player) Gameplay (1/2) Visuals/Story (2/2) (If the visuals are better than the story, review this section as if it had no story) (If the story is    Single Player/Multi Player (2/2)

    (If the single player is better than the multiplayer, review this section as if it had no multplayer) (If the multiplayer is better than the multiplayer, review this section as if it had no single player)

    Gameplay (1/2)

    Visuals/Story (2/2)

    (If the visuals are better than the story, review this section as if it had no story) (If the story is better than the visuals, review this section as if the visuals didn’t matter)

    Accessibility/Longevity (1/2)

    (Review this section only on Accessibility if the game has no longevity) (Review this section only on longevity if the game isn’t accessible)

    Pricing (1/2)

    Wildcard (0)

    This is a guideline for how to properly review games. Many reviewers like to get a “feel” for a game, and arbitrarily give a game a score that they believe it deserves. This results in wildly different scores between different reviewers, and vastly different scores between similar games. This guideline addresses these problems and scores games fairly and consistently. This guideline also gives scores that are usually similar to the metacritic score.

    The review score is based out of 10 points. There are no “half” or 0.5 increments. It is impossible to have a score above 10 or below 0. The review score will change as the game gets new dlc, drops in price, or if more secrets are found through the game increasing its appeal.

    The scoring is split into 6 sections. The first five sections can add a possible 2 points to the final score. The first 5 sections are Single Player/Multi Player, Gameplay, Visuals/Story, Accessibility/Longevity, and Pricing.

    Notice that 3 of these sections have two parts. These particular sections will be scored based on the stronger part of the game of the two. For example, if a game has a lousy single player campaign, but an excellent multiplayer component, that section will be based solely on the multiplayer as if the single player did not exist. This allows games to be based on their own merits, as many unnecessary features are shoehorned into video games by publishers to reach a “feature quota”. Games that excel in both areas of a section don’t receive should be noted in the written review, but cannot increase the score past 2 in that section. However, it can be taken into account in the final section

    The final section can add 1, add 0, or subtract 1 to the final score. This final section is the “wildcard” section. This section is for how the reviewer “feels” about the game, but limits this only to this section, rather than the entire 10 point review. This section can include any positive or negative point that was not covered in the previous 5 sections.    … Expand
  21. ShawnD
    Dec 13, 2017
    7
    Great ideas, bad execution. 7/10

    The concept and art style of the game are great, but the actual gameplay is pretty bad. I'm not just saying that because it's 2017 and I'm unfairly judging a 10 year old game; I had these same complaints when Bioshock came out. The combat is horribly unbalanced and poorly thought out. The wrench and the tommy gun are probably the only weapons that work    Great ideas, bad execution. 7/10

    The concept and art style of the game are great, but the actual gameplay is pretty bad. I'm not just saying that because it's 2017 and I'm unfairly judging a 10 year old game; I had these same complaints when Bioshock came out. The combat is horribly unbalanced and poorly thought out. The wrench and the tommy gun are probably the only weapons that work well and have appropriate levels of ammunition. It feels like the designers originally wanted the game to be survival horror, but they also wanted the game to be fun, so they went half way and created a game that is neither scary nor fun. It always feels like there is a shortage of resources that forces the player to switch back and forth between weapons and plasmids, but the shortage leads to a feeling of anger and frustration.

    Pistol:
    Maximum pistol ammo is 48 bullets, but it can easily take 15 bullets to kill enemies later in the game, and that's with all of the pistol upgrades and playing on normal difficulty. If the enemies are going to be bullet sponges, I should be carrying 200 bullets. Is the game supposed to be survival horror where I'm sneaking around due to a lack of bullets, or is it supposed to be a fun game where I shoot things? The game has no sneaking and it has no bullets, so I get the worst of both worlds.

    Shotgun:
    Bioshock has the worst shotgun in any shooter I have ever played. Its effective range is a couple yards even though it fires 00 buckshot. In real life, buckshot's effective range is about 50-100 yards. It should be possible to shoot things across the room and have them die in a few shots. The original Doom shotgun and the Duke Nukem 3D shotgun are a lot closer to how a shotgun should work. Bioshock is a bit more like Doom 3 - the shotgun is useless. In addition to doing no damage and having no range, it has a 4 round magazine. It might be more effective to swing the shotgun like a baseball bat.

    Camera:
    The inclusion of a camera for research is just mind boggling. Here's how this plays out: You'll buy 100 camera ammo then take about 5 pictures per encounter for every enemy you encounter. Just run up to them and keep clicking the mouse button until it says it didn't take a picture because the score was too low. After seeing maybe 5 of each monster type, you'll have every monster type maxed out. Then you'll never use the camera again. What was the point of including this in the game? It's just mindless busy work.

    Grenades:
    The grenade launcher is awesome, but the ammo limits are stupid. You get a max of 6 of each type, and it takes about 6 grenades to kill a big daddy on normal difficulty. Since every other weapon in the game is basically useless against a big daddy, this means you'll carry grenades just for the sake of killing big daddies. It's like the game is mocking the player. We get this amazing weapon to carry around, but we can't use it on anything because that ammo is reserved for killing one specific enemy type.

    Chemical Thrower:
    This is another one of those really bizarre design choices. The chemical thrower can do all 3 types of elemental damage - fire, cold, electricity. The cold and electricity essentially do no damage, so those act very similar to the plasmid powers. This means you would be expected to freeze an enemy with the thrower and then switch to a different weapon to inflict damage. This is a horrendous idea. Switching back and forth between guns and plasmids is easy because it just involves right clicking. Switching back and forth between guns is a lot more involved because it involves hitting different numbers on a keyboard, and people playing on console would probably switch weapons using the D pad. It's a lot clumsier than clicking a single button to toggle back and forth. The chemical thrower seems like an idea that would work if it were possible to assign it as a plasmid power instead of a gun. Since that isn't possible, you'll probably just resort to using the plasmid versions of elemental damage and not using the chem thrower at any point in the game.

    Enemies:
    Bioshock is one of those games where enemies blend into the background very easily. I find myself using the fire plasmid just because it marks targets effectively. I can always see an enemy that is on fire.

    The damage in the game is so incredibly broken that I'm certain this is the reason the game gives free respawns when you die. On normal difficulty, 2 shots from a big daddy rivet gun will kill you, and there's no way to dodge them other than line of sight.This means you will die all the time. If one of your hacked devices fires a stray bullet that hits a big daddy, you will die in a few seconds unless you are already behind cover. Rather than fix the stupid amount of damage done by enemies, the game just gives the player a free respawn with no loss of equipment or ammo. They know players would be punching their monitors if the game did a game over screen every time that happened.    … Expand
  22. Nuker
    Jun 26, 2015
    7
    - Good: Mood/Atmosphere, Art Direction, Audio
    - Mixed: Gameplay, Story, Writing, Setting
    - Bad: ---

    Overrated game in my honest opinion, i rushed this game at the end because i was bored.
  23. agurczuk
    Jun 21, 2016
    7
    A very atmospheric first person shooter with an interesting story ,

    In game you are put in the shoes of a airplane crash survivor who finds himself in the middle of the ocean. Only to discover an entrence to an underwater city called Rapture. The city once glorious is now falling apart. It also is overrun by twisted for a lack of a better word mutants. You are led by a voice on the    A very atmospheric first person shooter with an interesting story ,

    In game you are put in the shoes of a airplane crash survivor who finds himself in the middle of the ocean. Only to discover an entrence to an underwater city called Rapture. The city once glorious is now falling apart. It also is overrun by twisted for a lack of a better word mutants. You are led by a voice on the radio following his advice in a hope to escape the city without dying. In order to do that you use a wide array of weapons with aid from Adam - a genetic rewriting fluid that essentially gives you magic powers.

    What I liked about the game. Definitely the setting - Rapture is extremely well designed with a very unique and constant atmospehre which holds out through the whole game. The enemy design is interesting and fits the setting. All locations, missions and progress make sense and push the story ever forward. Ammo is scarce - you value each shot and try to save every bullet as much as you can - which adds to the atmosphere. The big daddy's are pretty scary and first encounter with them is really unforgeable.

    What I didn't like was definitely the combat design. Enemies run around what feels like frantically around and are extremely hard to hit. What others might consider a plus it felt more annoying than anything else. Also all of them seem pretty tanky so you need to put a lot of bullets to put them down. Another thing I disliked was the camera mechanic - having to take pictures of enemies to learn their weaknesses might be a good idea but in a game where stealth is next to not existent having to take pictures of enemies in the middle of gunfight is a bit silly.

    Overall I really did enjoy the game and can recommend it mostly for the ambience and atmosphere it comes with.    … Expand
  24. ashketchum
    Mar 10, 2018
    7
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Bioshock is a good game. However, it starts off with a lot more potential than it ends up with. You can see that there is an interesting setting in this underwater city, but you can only go to select places, which leads to it feeling restrictive at times. Some of these locations, like Fort Frolic, are memorable in design, while others, like Arcadia, feel bland. There is a good range of Plasmids to choose from, though, which allows for different ways to attack enemies. The penultimate escort section of the game, however, feels tedious and forced in to lengthen time, and the final boss is a bit of a letdown, compared to how much the game hypes it up. The game is great at setting atmosphere, though, with it's use of sounds, and the stylistic posters and pictures of some locations also help to increase tension, such as with Sander Cohen. A good game, with some missed potential.… Expand
  25. brendo214
    May 21, 2019
    7
    I'm not gonna lie. This game was disappointing. People hype this game up so much, and I don't think this game deserves it to the degree it gets it. The story was good, but it's better in theory than it is in practice. The combat is aight, nothing special. The best part is easily the setting, but that kind of gets pushed aside in like the second half of the game, and that's pretty upsetting.
  26. Cafe_8bits
    Apr 5, 2020
    7
    This game its a great shooter, with an amazing ambientation and level design. Bioshock its great, and have a memorable story. Im glad to had replayed this game.
  27. GraysonUA
    Mar 31, 2020
    7
    Шутер з різними здібносятми, в антуражі ретрофутуризму. Досить атмосферний, сюжет пробує дивувати, але не завжде викликає цікавість. Стрільбу поступово починаєш смакувати.
  28. Rustick
    Jul 7, 2022
    7
    пока что не успел пройти до конца атмомфера очень хорошая геймплей довольно интересный
  29. Otacat
    Jul 7, 2020
    7
    점수는 나왔던 2007년도를 생각해서 7점 줍니다. 솔직히 지금 플래이하면 딴 게임들에 비해 이제 많이 좀 딸리죠. 제가 이 게임을 한게 좀 오래되긴 했어요. 한 3년 전에 리마스터 나온거 끝냈습니다. 게임 플레이도 재밌게 할만하고, 배경도 판타지 세계 같은 거여서 어드벤쳐 같은 느낌 있고, 미스테리 요소가 꽤 많아 여기저기 둘러보는 재미도 있고 첨에는 주인공이 좀 성격이 없어서 별루 였는데 나중에 스토리 반전도 있고 리틀 시스터 구하기도 하면서 몰입되는 캐릭이더라고요. 나왔을 때 점수 매겼으면 10점 줬을 거예요. 그런데 지금 시대로는 게임이 많이 오래 됬네요. 그래픽도 별로지, 할 수 있는 게임 플레이도 딴 게임보단 적지, 스토리도 약간에 반복성과 그냥 시대차가 있는 뭐 그런거 있잖아요.점수는 나왔던 2007년도를 생각해서 7점 줍니다. 솔직히 지금 플래이하면 딴 게임들에 비해 이제 많이 좀 딸리죠. 제가 이 게임을 한게 좀 오래되긴 했어요. 한 3년 전에 리마스터 나온거 끝냈습니다. 게임 플레이도 재밌게 할만하고, 배경도 판타지 세계 같은 거여서 어드벤쳐 같은 느낌 있고, 미스테리 요소가 꽤 많아 여기저기 둘러보는 재미도 있고 첨에는 주인공이 좀 성격이 없어서 별루 였는데 나중에 스토리 반전도 있고 리틀 시스터 구하기도 하면서 몰입되는 캐릭이더라고요. 나왔을 때 점수 매겼으면 10점 줬을 거예요. 그런데 지금 시대로는 게임이 많이 오래 됬네요. 그래픽도 별로지, 할 수 있는 게임 플레이도 딴 게임보단 적지, 스토리도 약간에 반복성과 그냥 시대차가 있는 뭐 그런거 있잖아요. 그래서 7점 줬습니다.… Expand
  30. Kemp
    Mar 12, 2021
    7
    I think maybe my perception of this game is a bit skewed by the fact that I am playing this game in 2021, and video games have advanced a lot since it came out. It still holds up as a good game, but I do not see how it is the masterpiece everyone says it is. That said, having played all three games in the series now, I do think the original is the best of them.

    The combat must have been    I think maybe my perception of this game is a bit skewed by the fact that I am playing this game in 2021, and video games have advanced a lot since it came out. It still holds up as a good game, but I do not see how it is the masterpiece everyone says it is. That said, having played all three games in the series now, I do think the original is the best of them.

    The combat must have been pretty revolutionary for the time. The AI is really good even by today's standards, and the plasmids are pretty fun to play around with. The world is probably the coolest part of the game, but it's dragged down, for me, by the fact that you don't really form a relationship with any characters in it. There are characters, but your interaction with them is solely via them talking at you over the radio. That said, Andrew Ryan is at least a pretty compelling character.

    It's not a masterpiece for me, though, because the story is just decent. Everyone says it is a masterpiece, everyone says Ken Levine is a brilliant storyteller, but I just don't see it. After playing all of the bioshock games, I do think this is the strongest story, and perhaps one of the best video game stories ever at the time it came out, but it really does not even come close to the standards that have been set in recent years. Granted, my experience may have been tainted a bit by the main twist being spoiled for me because it has become so notorious. But great twists should still be compelling even if you know they're coming (e.g., the Red Wedding), and this was not at all. This is still a good game, but I really do not understand why everyone loves this series so much.    … Expand
Page:

Awards & Rankings

2
#2 Best PC Game of 2007
3
#3 Most Discussed PC Game of 2007
2
#2 Most Shared PC Game of 2007

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
96

Universal acclaim - based on 44 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 44 out of 44
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 44
  3. Negative: 0 out of 44
  1. PC Gamer UK
    95
    A dark and astonishing masterpiece...I spend my career, and my gaming life, waiting for a moment when a game just astonishes me, when I can't believe what I'm seeing, what I'm doing. BioShock has five. [Sept 2007, p.66]
    Read full review
  2. Eurogamer
    100
    The hours spent playing this masterpiece were the perfect encapsulation of why videogaming is such a favourite waste of time for so many of us. Thrilling, terrifying, moving, confusing, amusing, compelling, and very very dark. BioShock isn't simply the sign of gaming realising its true cinematic potential, but one where a game straddles so many entertainment art forms so expertly that it's the best demonstration yet how flexible this medium can be. It's no longer just another shooter wrapped up in a pretty game engine, but a story that exists and unfolds inside the most convincing and elaborate and artistic game world ever conceived.
    Read full review
  3. IGN
    97
    There is art here, despite what many would say isn't possible with games, from Roger Ebert to game designers like Hideo Kojima... BioShock stands as a monolithic example of the convergence of entertaining gameplay and an irresistibly sinister, engrossing storyline that encompasses a host of multifaceted characters. This is an essential gaming experience.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »