Bioshock 2: A letdown?

[magicman4443]

Bioshock 2 came out a little under two months ago, and there has been pretty mixed response to it. Some people enjoyed the game, and thought it was well made, while others think the game never should have been made. So, what is your opinion? Should it enter the hallowed halls of a game worth playing more than once, or should it be condemned to an unnamed landfill in New Mexico?

Personally, I thought it was a worthwhile game, even though there were quite a few letdowns. The Plot was lacking in places, and the final battle was still pretty dull. But the gameplay was improved on from the original, and definitely made the game better.

 

[magicman4443]

I don't know what people are talking about who say the story sucked. I really enjoyed it, and I realize I'm in the minority on that one.


And to all you Bioshock fans just waiting to hit me with a cardboard cutout of Yahtzee, yes, I did understand Bioshock 1. Probably better then you did.

I wouldn't say the story sucked, but I felt some of the characters could have been developed more. A large portion of the audio diaries seem to involve common citizens of Rapture, but the overall essence of those diaries seem pointless. Billy Parson was cute, but what was the point? What does it really reveal about Rapture?

Trust me, I fully understood Bioshock 1. I've played it many times, and loved every minute of it.

 

[Sprogus]

I thought Bioshock 2 was awesome. I was one of the people that was a bit sceptical of Bioshock 2 thinking that there didn't need to be a sequel as the first game closed off rather nicely. But to my surprise the game really impressed me. And it serves as a good way for new people to delve into the world of Bioshock with out haven't to put up with the clunky controls of Bioshock 1.

P.S. I loved Bioshock 1. Just in case people were wondering.

 

[bassdrum]

I liked the game. It didn't have the same spark that the first Bioshock did (mostly because the creators so neatly tied up the story of the first one, so the sequel had to be muscled in somewhat strangely). Also, I found Andrew Ryan's Randian ideologies to be really interesting, and the communist follow up in Bioshock 2 doesn't add quite the same interesting factor to the story that objectivism did--mostly because communism is pretty much everywhere, but objectivism is known to most only by means of Atlas Shrugged.

That said, there are some things that the sequel did do better, in particular the incorporation of scare tactics. The first game just kind of flickered the lights every once in a while, but the follow up featured a much more unsettling overall vibe (throw religion into the mix and it all goes screwy--before you yell at me, keep in mind that we're talking about a bunch of people in the loony bin practicing their faith, I'm not particularly anti-religious. It's just that a cult of nutjobs is a little bit disturbing).

So no, I don't think that Bioshock 2 was that much of a letdown. It would only let you down if you expected it to be as brilliant as the first game. And really, if you thought that, you should have learned your lesson a long time ago.

 

[magicman4443]

In my eyes, Bioshock 1 and 2 are pretty much equal. Bioshock 2 greatly improved on the gameplay, while I found Bioshock 1's story slightly better. Ont he other hand, Bioshock 2's story was much, much more compelling. I actually found myself almost forming a connection with Delta and Eleanor, even if Delta seems like some faceless stranger put in a pretty serious predicament. During the ending sequence,I got the good ending, I actually found myself crying. I've never cried at the end of a video game before. But Bioshock 2 really made me feel for the characters.

 

[Meggiepants]

I liked both of them. I wasn't let down by Bioshock 2. It improved on a great deal of things from the first one.

I think it's just really hard to compare the experiences. The first time you see Rapture, it is going to awe you. The second time you see Rapture you aren't going to get to have that experience.

It might seem like a let down because you've been there before, but there was plenty of depth to the world, and it was definately worth a second visit.

 

[Anticitizen_Two]

I wasn't really let down by it because I wasn't expecting anything that great, but it was nowhere near the standard set by the first game. The story and characters were just lacking in comparison (although Mark Meltzer was really great) and the gameplay, while improved over the gameplay of the first, was really quite sub-par (then again FPSes aren't really my thing so that might just be me). I personally thought that harvesting ADAM was boring as hell and very tedious, and the moral choice system STILL SUCKS. Although the final nail in the coffin for me was when I found out the DLC was on the disk. Greedy, slimy bastards.

 

[magicman4443]

I wasn't really let down by it because I wasn't expecting anything that great, but it was nowhere near the standard set by the first game. The story and characters were just lacking in comparison (although Mark Meltzer was really great) and the gameplay, while improved over the gameplay of the first, was really quite sub-par (then again FPSes aren't really my thing so that might just be me). I personally thought that harvesting ADAM was boring as hell and very tedious, and the moral choice system STILL SUCKS. Although the final nail in the coffin for me was when I found out the DLC was on the disk. Greedy, slimy bastards.

Mark Meltzer's story is a bit interesting really. If you were a follower of There's Something in the Sea, you had a lot of back-story going on. You know why Mark is in Rapture before you even hear the diary. You know about his struggles in trying to find his way to Rapture, by besting OOL's puzzles. But then there's the resolution. Some people say it was a fitting end, while others are utterly depressed with how his story turned out.

The gameplay was definitely improved, and the I didn't feel it was sub-par at all. It flowed well, and the number of weapons and plasmids allowed you to kill things in many different ways.

Harvesting ADAM tended to get tedious at times, but I still found enjoyment out of setting up some huge, contrived machine to stem the flood of splicers I knew would be coming. But it's totally up to opinion.

The moral choice in BS2 was also definitely improved. That's not to say it was great, as there was still basically one ending where they changed the mood, the weather, and some of the lines, but they also made them seem to be more representative of your actions. Compared to BS1, it's definitely improved.

I'm not even going to touch on DLC philosophy. There are some lovely articles here that discuss DLC, and even mention that DLC package in particular.

 

[Darquenaut]

I went into Bioshock 2 thinking of it as simply as a sequel to a fantastic game, and I was not disappointed. Honestly, I can't comprehend how some people were expecting them to capture the same lightning bolt twice in a row- it's like going on the same roller coaster twice and expecting it to be as thrilling as the first time. The second ride is still fun, but you know what to expect - and that doesn't mean the experience is lessened.

As it stands though, I really don't think it is needing another sequel, but I wouldn't be surprised to see one come down the pipe in a couple of years.

 

[MiracleOfSound]

I thoroughly enjoyed it, as you can see here:

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/326.175856-Miracles-Whip-Bioshock-2

 

[Bonkekook]

I loved it. But the more I thought about the game, the more disappointed I was. As with Mass Effect 2, I thought the last 2-3 hours of the game were incredible. But I was a little disappointed with how "matter-of-factly" the game shoved the enemy at you. I played through the game expecting a twist that never came.

And I already have a pretty good idea of what the Single-Player DLC and the next BioShock game will entail, which is disappointing IMO.

 

[magicman4443]

The multiplayer is surprisingly entertaining. You wouldn't expect it at first glance, but it's pretty addicting. The biggest problem is on the xbox it tends to randomly freeze, and some people experience serious lag a lot. But 2K is working on a patch, so we'll see what comes around.

 

[Bonkekook]

The multiplayer is surprisingly entertaining. You wouldn't expect it at first glance, but it's pretty addicting. The biggest problem is on the xbox it tends to randomly freeze, and some people experience serious lag a lot. But 2K is working on a patch, so we'll see what comes around.

I played through the MP to level 40. It's novelty wore off around level 15, and then picked up around 35 again. But in my experience, it REALLY helps to have a true friend playing with you for those "not exciting" moments.

 

[Jandau]

Bioshock 2 was a better game than Bioshock 1. Also, I don't understand the whole "It never should have been made" argument. Hell, you could argue that for over 2/3 of the games ever made...

 

[The Ultimate 2]

Now I loved Bioshock in fact I would go out and say that it is the best example of a prefect game. And when Bioshock 2 was comming out I was over the moon and going insane from waiting. and when BS2 finally came out I felt it was well worth the wait. But there are just some tiny things that are keeping me from making it as the new best game ever. Like for example in the first game when you got that first view of Rapture you were amazed beyond belief. And there were cretain parts of the game that scared the crap out of you. But in BS2 there are some slightly scary moments but like in Batman Arkem Asylum the whole palce looks really creepy but the reason you don't get scared is because of the fact that you're Batman or in BS2 a Big Daddy. I guess that it's a lot like "Star Trek: The Next Generation". In many ways it's superior but will never be as recognized as the original.

 

[Willwillwritehiswill]

Just more of the same, sans the twist that made the first bioshock so enthralling. It's still Rapture. they're still sploicers.

 

[Reep]

I loved it immensely, i loved how the gameplay was improved and how the Mark Meltzer plot unfolded (my favourite part was the carousel audio diary), i also loved the little sister section, blew me away.

One part i felt let down was that it wasn't as scary as the first game. There was only one part where i truly felt scared and it was when i went into the flooded solitary confinement cells and everything went black (ill stop here).

What BS2 didnt have was places you really didnt want to go, i remember a flooded bathroom full of plastered spider splicers with a flickering light(its always a flickering light), once i saw that room i just thought "fuck that" but i manned up later, took me 5 minutes to go in and it turned out there wasnt anything there. BS2 didnt have the creepy thing that made you very, very cautious.

The game played with my mind with the story, it pleased me with the gameplay, bit it didnt make me pee myself with the horror.

 

[Nomanslander]

I've seen thousands of cases where a sequel wasn't as good as the original, people seem to be treating this particular case as being special.....0o

There's going to be a Bioshock 3 whether you like it or not, and a movie is also coming out.

So another words I'm really not looking forward to people continuing to complain how they're ruining Rapture, this isn't Star Wars people...lol

 

[spacer]

Bioshock 3: Set on land. Adam replaced with midichlorians.

 

[Julianking93]

Bioshock 2 was fucking awesome but I liked God of War 3 and FFXIII better.