A First Look At Multiplayer In BioShock 2

[WrongSprite]

Are you that stupid? Its not the single player. Its made by a different developer. Please know what the hell you're talking about before you say something stupid.

Watch the insults, Ace.

Why is run-and-gun multiplayer part of a game like BioShock? Because 2K is attempting to broaden the audience. It needs to be more than just the publisher of GTA and it apparently sees BioShock as its best chance to do that. BioShock was a success but not nearly enough of one to keep 2K viable when Rockstar isn't working its magic.

And if you think for one instant that that isn't going to impact the single-player game, then perhaps you need to turn your question inward.

Hahaha what? The game of the year isn't successful enough? Come on...

 

[Da pyro man 999]

You know, i doubted they could think of a at least a understandable story. I've under estimated them

 

[RavingPenguin]

I think multiplayer could have worked had they made small teams (3 or 4 people) with giant maps. One would still have be careful and the ambient setting that made the first game enjoyable would still be present. I dont know if you have played CoD:WaW with only 4 people on downfall but I have, and its much scarier than having full teams. Thats not to say the single player couldnt have brought over all the components that made the first game great, Im just a bit dishearted at the multiplayer.

 

[Mullahgrrl]

To be honest I didn't really want multiplayer for the following reason:

Any company that creates it always either spends more time on it than they do the campaign so the story is short and not well thought out (Halo 3 and Gears 2 are examples in my opinion).

Or they don't spend much time on it at all and add it just to boost sales as it increases re playability (Turok, Condemned 2 and Tenchu Z, although it was only the connection not the game-play that was the problem with them really).

The video does indeed look too similar to the simple run-and-gun styles of FPS death-matches in general but the plasmids do make a nice twist. Although I can't say that video did the idea any justice.

Basicly like sushi resturants, Either the sushi is crap or the normal food is crap.

 

[T'Generalissimo]

Well, that certainly didn't get me very excited for Bioshock 2. I've not yet lost hope but it really didn't give much sense of how it would actually be to play and it still hasn't made me particularly interested in the multiplayer. I'm obviously still going to buy Bioshock 2 though, because the single player is going to be awesome (please god, don't let it be bad) but I would be suprised if the inclusion of multiplayer increases sales by any significant amount.

Edit: The thing is, they probably could have made a super interesting mulitplayer that actually stuck to the atmosphere of the single player. That way you would have something that felt Bioshock-y and was also a unique and interesting multiplayer experience. It has already been said but relatively large maps with relatively few players would be very good. Also, make catching people a very big advantage and you've got a tense, exciting game, where you've got to be really aware of your surroundings. Add in a healthy dose of terror-inducing sounds and you've got the first game in multiplayer setting. I guess the only problem would be that it might encourage camping, but if you design the levels well enough it should be possible to mitigate that.

 

[ThaBenMan]

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Well... so much for BioShock. I think this just officially became a bargain-bin title.

My thoughts exactly.
The whole ambiance, the dark foreboding deep of Rapture, the hidden perils of the sunken city, has just been pitched into a garbage can. When I played the first one, I rarely ran. I walked meticulously, carefully exploring, looking for those who would be lurking in the shadows to strike, and listening to the distance sounds of the screams and groans of the denizens and dying city alike.

Now people will be running full tilt, bunny hopping all over the place, and practically wiping their asses with any semblance left of the setting of this game. At least the first one was good.

Well, that's just the multiplayer. The single player seems as though it's still going to be as atmospheric and contemplative as the original. The multiplayer looks like it could be fun.

 

[ThaBenMan]

The single player seems as though it's still going to be as atmospheric and contemplative as the original.

On what evidence? It's being made by a different studio, the creator/writer isn't involved, and it's a sequel to a game that clearly didn't need one. Even in the gameplay is solid, there's no chance of the original's brilliant satire being equalled.

I know the multiplayer is being made by a different company, but I thought it was the same for the single player? But you are right about none of Ken Levine's involvement.

And from the previews, I think the single player will be great. I'm sure we can expect an interesting story of an even-further-ruined underwater city, and explore the mystery of the Big Sister and the nature of the Big Daddies - indeed, of being a Big Daddy. I look forward to it.

 

[brainamp]

It looks like it actually might be fun.

 

[Hokutan]

it Seems like the multiplayer might be good but i'll have to wait and see

 

[Andy Chalk]

Hahaha what? The game of the year isn't successful enough? Come on...

Allow me to quote Take-Two Chairman Strauss Zelnick, who you might take a little more seriously:

"We announced it sold around 3 million units. I'd like to see a title like that sell 5 million units," Zelnick said. "That would make the difference for us. If you have four or five titles that are significantly successful, that will meaningfully change our profitability [in non-GTA years]."

link [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/92505-Take-Two-Hopes-BioShock-2-Will-Sell-Five-Million]

So, successful? Yes. Successful enough? Not to carry Take-Two through the lean, non-GTA years, no. Not even close.

 

[Baggie]

I don't think there's too much to worry about, it looks like they've polished the single player campaign off and are devoting development time to the multiplayer now.
It's possible that they saw enough potential to give themselves extra time to get it right.

So far it looks playable and fun, but I'm not convinced that it'll be as good as MW2 or anything. But I'm willing to be surprised.

 

[randomrob]

well i like the sound of that!

 

[randomrob]

no seriously it'll probably be good and if you don't want to use the online mode you don't have to.

 

[Xris]

As long as the story is as great as the first, I have no complaints.

 

[WJeff]

Looks like Quake with a bit of TF2 and HL2M thrown in. I was originally against BioShock 2's multiplayer because in the case of most single and multiplayer games these days, developers often skimp out on the single player because of the multiplayer. It's all with reason. Halo 3 is proof that you can have a terrible, short single player campaign as long as your multiplayer does a good job ripping off Quake and your fans are too stupid to know that it is ripping something off. But then I learned that the multiplayer was being developed by another developer, leaving 2K free to do what they do best, and giving the whiny XBox Live members the Quake-like multiplayer which is all they want anymore.

So you know? I'm fine with it having traditional run-and-gun multiplayer. I already have Quake Wars and UT3 for that, but hey, I don't have to play it if I don't want to, right?

 

[Rancid0ffspring]

Have to say the multiplay aspect will not affect my decision to buy Bioshock2 on release in the slightest. All I'm really interested in is the story mode tbh. I wont say that I won't try it because that'd be complete bull & everyone else who says they won't try it has a pretty dumb attitude. Never know, It could turn out to be awesome & you'll be missing out because of arrogance