BioShock Was "a Blessing and a Curse" for BioShock 2

[Andy Chalk]

BioShock Was "a Blessing and a Curse" for BioShock 2

The people behind the BioShock 1 [http://www.amazon.com/Bioshock-2-Xbox-360/dp/B0016BVYA2/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=videogames&qid=1278513719&sr=1-1].

The BioShock 2 promotional campaign went way above and beyond what we're used to seeing for a videogame. The "bottles of wine [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/89989-Theres-Something-In-The-Sea] from a fictitious Rapture winery washing ashore on beaches, along with some truly awesome conventional ads on television and the internet. One of the big reasons the campaign was so aggressive, according to two of the men behind it, was the success of the original BioShock and the strong feelings it aroused in fans.

"One of the main things that was 'a blessing and a curse' was BioShock 1. You had many scores that were 100 and you had a lot of people who felt it was a contained, finite experience," the-a-listdaily [http://www.2kgames.com/]. "So you had hardcore fans that weren't convinced that they needed a sequel and here we were two years later with BioShock 2."

On the other side of the coin were those who didn't play the original game and for whom a "return to Rapture" would have little appeal. Explaining that knowledge of the first game wouldn't be necessary to enjoy the second was one of the big challenges facing the marketing team. "We had campaigns for the hardcore and we had one for those who weren't fans, with the understanding that the same message would not work for everyone," he noted.

"The hardcore gamer has a higher level of aesthetic experience," added 2K Vice President of Marketing Matt Gorman. "Then there's the gamer who wants to go, 'What is it? Is it a shooter, RPG, basketball game?' What we do find is there's a bit of confusion from the consumer, so part of our strategy was to say that it is a shooter with an incredible amount of depth."

"One of the great things about BioShock (and troublesome parts for us) is that you can't describe it in the elevator ride!" Bass said. "The brand sort of engenders risk; for instance, for the ad we were using the music from the period, which we were initially scared to do! Not everyone is like, 'lets use a music from 1931' for it, but fans like the uniqueness. So we were careful to not make it 'Call of Duty [http://www.callofduty.com/] meets X under the sea!'"


Permalink

 

[Jared]

Well, They certaily did a great job! I have to admit I loved what they did with it, and, the stuff that was discovered after was epic!

 

[Alar]

I have yet to try out BioShock 2. All the reviews seem to say that it's more-or-less a cheap knock-off of the original without a lot of the elements that made the original good.

And I'm really not a multiplayer First Person Shooter kind of guy. Not online, at least. I prefer to have my buddies in the same room so we can yell and laugh.

 

[Lord Mountbatten Reborn]

It's annoying that some will buy the sequel without having played the first, making the developers have to pander to them. If they complain, it's their own fault for not starting chronologically.

 

[maddawg IAJI]

I would imagine that it would. Explaining the Little Sisters, the Splicers and everything would be diffcult. Although I missed Ryan, I felt that they did a great job of immearsing the player with just Lamb.

Although I still believe that any new gamer should at least try Bioshock 1. That was a great game in my opinon.

 

[Assassin Xaero]

I was going to buy it even without the huge marketing thing. When the first sells great or is really highly reviewed, doesn't the sequel sell great too, no matter if it does or does suck? It was a good game, but I don't know if I'll be playing it again. About 30 crashes to get through one game was a bit... annoying.

 

[Druyn]

Shit, reading this makes it sound like they had already planned for a sequel before even releasing the first. I dont like that. No company should plan to hav emore than one game if they dont know how the first is going to do.

 

[CoverYourHead]

BioShock 2 was much better than the original (gameplay wise, as in, I can actually bear to play it. Then again, my dislike of BioShock is probably well known around here by now). I can see their problem though, it's tough living up to something that has so much hype behind it.

I loved their marketing though. Really innovative and cool.

 

[ItsAPaul]

Maybe you shouldn't make a sequel when one isn't needed and avoid the whole situation, especially when the first ended the series.

 

[The Thief]

Strangely enough, I loved the marketing behind Bioshock 2, but by the time I actually got to play it I completely lost interest after the first hour. It's not that I didn't like it, but that it didn't hook me the same way the first game did. I think the problem was that Rapture was not a mystery anymore; I knew exactly where I was and why everything was the way it was, so I didn't have much drawing me in other than "This Lamb lady is doing stuff to some girl I don't really know." (Also the fact I was still playing Mass Effect 2 didn't help.)

When I finally forced myself past the first few levels and into the bulk of the story I started to enjoy it immensely. The gameplay is vastly improved, the characters are interesting (Mark Meltzer's side story was quite awesome in particular), the moral choice impact is implemented more effectively, and the pace is better developed than Bioshock, which seemed to reach it's best moments too early and felt weaker towards the end. The only things it was really missing were Andrew Ryan's awesomeness as a villain (sorry Lamb), scares (I found the first bioshock to be much, much creepier. Fort Frolic in particular. Also, what happened to the ghost visions? I liked those...), and an epic revelation (Bishock 2 had a revelation, but it wasn't nearly as epic as the original's).

But I digress. The marketing was a success in my case, as I bought the game because of it. The fact that it took me some time to actually play this wonderful game was entirely my fault. (but parlty Mass Effect 2's fault as well.)

 

[Andy Chalk]

I'm firmly in the camp of those who believe BioShock didn't need a sequel. It was a beautiful, well-told experience with a beginning and an end and no need to mess with either. I wasn't militantly opposed to one, Rapture is a big place with a lot of storytelling potential, it was just pretty obvious in my eyes that a sequel would be nothing more than a cash-in. (Which, to be fair, sequels generally are.)

And in the end, that's all it added up to. Lots of BioShock-style shooting action with a ridiculous story and some of the most awkward, ham-handed retconning I've ever experienced. I'd liken it to a fan-made project, really: Same engine, same assets, awkward story, shitty voice acting. The only real difference is that BioShock 2 came out (almost) on time.

Ironically, BioShock 2 would have been better (for me at least) if I hadn't played the first because I wouldn't have noticed so many of the rough edges and "don't look too closely" moments.

But the marketing campaign, that was something else. I wanted so badly for some of those wine bottles and such to turn up on a beach around here; unfortunately, I'm near a Great Lake, not the ocean, so it just wasn't in the cards for me. But it was brilliantly done. The way the marketing and design teams worked together to integrate the Meltzer character into both sides of the equation was a nice touch too.

 

[Eruanno]

The advertising campaign of Bioshock 2 was really great. The "game" parts of Bioshock 2 were also improved upon since Bioshock 1 (for example, no plumbing game to hack stuff).

BUT, the problem is there was no mystery! In the first game, we explored the deepest, darkest mysteries Rapture had to offer. We saw the homes for the Little Sisters, we saw the creation of Big Daddies, we saw the rise and fall of Rapture through ADAM, we got betrayed by what was our only hope in a dark underwater city. In Bioshock 2... we were never really surprised. There were no shocking revelations. It still walked and talked like Bioshock 1, but the "what the fuck is going on, tell me more!"-feeling was lacking.

 

[Podunk]

How dare those bastards make Bioshock 1 so good! It really makes our crappy sequel look bad.
Yeeaahhhh...

In truth, I started Bioshock 2 quite excited, became disappointed, but then tooth and nail it dragged itself up to being actually pretty good... Until about 2/3rds of the way through the game, when it all plummets to rock bottom. I still remember the specific cut scene at which every little thing takes a turn for the terrible. Been re-playing Bioshock since I beat 2, just as sort of a palate cleanser.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

Man, now if only we could get somebody to show this sort of vim and vigor about getting us a proper System Shock 3.

[small]Bitter? Me? Nah, I'm downright acrid.[/small]

 

[Dreyfuss]

I really don't understand why Bioshock was so well-received in the first place. I like FPSs, and it was a decent one but lacked interesting enemies and gave you much too powerful weapons. I like games with RPG elements, but Bioshock's were uninteresting and easily abusable, and I like atmospheric games, but Bioshock was neither scary nor awe-inspiring. Bioshock was just System Shock 2 underwater, and it drowned.

But obviously none of the kids playing this generation with no knowledge or interest of the history of their games have played System Shock 2 so their bars are set understandably low.