Is Bioshock worth playing? (need opinions from people who've played System Shock 2 especially)

Freaky Lou

New member
Nov 1, 2011
606
0
0
Now, mind you, I'm definitely interested in the story. The trouble is that I think Bioshock's story is lifted wholesale from System Shock 2.

Now, I've heard praise for Bioshock from people whose opinions I hold in high regard, but the praise is almost always directed towards the atmosphere and story---never the gameplay. This worries me, because of the only strong aspects of a game are taken right out of another...that's not really a good game then, is it? And System Shock 2, by all accounts, had great gameplay, so...is it just a much better game all-around? Should I play it and not bother with Bioshock?

(There's also the fact that the whole "little sister" thing is a really dumb and childish attempt at a moral choice, but no matter; I don't need choices. I'm fine with playing a linear story if it's good).

This review:
is the most in-depth I've seen, and it does not look favourably upon the game. If you disagree or agree with anything in that review, it'd be really helpful if you explained why, but obviously you don't have to watch that massive 5-parter if you haven't got the time or desire.

I'm asking because while I definitely want to experience this story, I want to know if I should acquire SS2 somehow, or go for the much easier option of just getting Bioshock.
 

The Madman

New member
Dec 7, 2007
4,404
0
0
They're both fantastic games in their own rights. And don't let the naysayers get you down either, of course there are going to be similarities between Bioshock and System Shock 2 when Bioshock was penned from the beginning as a spiritual successor to the series, even going so far as to add the 'Shock' in the title as a tribute of sorts. There are similarities between the games plots and story-telling methods as a result, but in the end unless you're really stuck up over the details I truly can't see such a minor quibble detracting from what's otherwise a solid narrative its own rights.

Gameplay-wise I've always felt System Shock 2 was better simply by virtue of having more options for how to play the game, allowing the player to better customize their character to suit their own gaming tastes. But that also came at the cost of difficulty with some inexperienced players choosing less useful abilities and suffering for it. Bioshock meanwhile is much more of a straight-forward experience in that regard with only the lightest sprinkling of rpg mechanics in what otherwise is more of an outright shooter.

Both excel in ambience and style however, with a stunning sense of place and character it puts many other series to shame. Great use of sound design and voice-acting, solid visuals and lighting, and eerie scenario and setting for that added edge of horror.

In the end however it's also entirely subjective. The combat isn't great and the stories aren't particularly spectacular though both use symbolism quite well. You might love em, you might hate em. Easy way to find out is to ask whether you've enjoyed similar games: The Deus Ex series (In some regards) or Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines for example. If you like those sort of sorta-kinda open world hub-based light-rpg first-person experience then you'll probably at least like the Shock games. If not, well, might still be worth a shot if it's cheap.

On a personal note I bloody love System Shock 2, I find the game amazing. Bioshock isn't as good in my mind but it's still a damned solid experience regardless I very much enjoyed. Never played Bioshock 2, can't comment there however.
 

Zhukov

The Laughing Arsehole
Dec 29, 2009
13,769
5
43
Yes, Bioshock is about as worth playing as it is possible for a game to be. It's so cheap these days that even if you end up hating it you'll only have lost ten dollars.

As for the similarities, yeah, there are tons. After all, Bioshock was the game that the developers of System Shock 2 made because they couldn't get the rights to make a SS3. The story is fairly similar and is told in exactly the same way and many of the gameplay mechanics were copied across.

Personally, I consider Bioshock to be the superior game in basically every way. For one, it benefits from nearly a decade of technology advancements so it looks and sounds better by a huge degree. The setting is more interesting (ruined undersea utopia Vs corridor spaceship), the voice acting is tons better and the dialogue is better written. The one area where SS3 excels was in the villain department. Bioshock had one great villain and one shitty villain while SS2 has two great villains.

Gameplay-wise, they're quite similar. Sadly, Bioshock definitely suffered from some simplification. However, SS2 was an unbalanced mess, so whether you regard this simplification as a good or bad thing is up to you. Personally I think they went a little too far. Also, Bioshock is ridiculously easy. You'll want to play on the hardest setting and disable vita-chambers in the options.

Lastly, that video review is just the kind of angry fanboy bullshit that can be found by the truckload on the internet. I really wouldn't advise letting it inform your opinion of either game.
 

The_Blue_Rider

New member
Sep 4, 2009
2,190
0
0
I havent played System Shock 2 but I have played Bioshock 1 and 2. Bishocks gameplay simply put is nothing special, it does its job but to me it didnt feel very fun, im not sure why though. Its definately worth playing through once though, its a world you just cant pass up, your first journey to Rapture will be a magical one
 

Skoldpadda

New member
Jan 13, 2010
835
0
0
The story isn't lifted wholesale from SS2, but its twist (which should be It Was His Sled Territory by now) is certainly very similar. No matter, it's still a blast. Great game, and available cheap.

I only have one real gripe with it: it's way too easy, even with the self-imposed challenge of not using the Vita Chambers (you can turn them off in the sequel).
 

Freaky Lou

New member
Nov 1, 2011
606
0
0
The Madman said:
In the end however it's also entirely subjective. The combat isn't great and the stories aren't particularly spectacular though both use symbolism quite well. You might love em, you might hate em. Easy way to find out is to ask whether you've enjoyed similar games: The Deus Ex series (In some regards) or Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines for example. If you like those sort of sorta-kinda open world hub-based light-rpg first-person experience then you'll probably at least like the Shock games. If not, well, might still be worth a shot if it's cheap.
Ooh...that flicked a light switch, because while I haven't yet played Bloodlines or the original Deus Ex, I'm VERY intrigued by both, given the former's being a Troika creation and the latter being a revered classic in basically my favourite genre: first-person RPG. Is it true though that if you specialize in the wrong things in SS2, it's possible to get outright stuck in the later stages of the game with no way to progress?

Zhukov said:
Personally, I consider Bioshock to be the superior game in basically every way. For one, it benefits from nearly a decade of technology advancements so it looks and sounds better by a huge degree. The setting is more interesting (ruined undersea utopia Vs corridor spaceship), the voice acting is tons better and the dialogue is better written. The one area where SS3 excels was in the villain department. Bioshock had one great villain and one shitty villain while SS2 has two great villains.

Gameplay-wise, they're quite similar. Sadly, Bioshock definitely suffered from some simplification. However, SS2 was an unbalanced mess, so whether you regard this simplification as a good or bad thing is up to you. Personally I think they went a little too far. Also, Bioshock is ridiculously easy. You'll want to play on the hardest setting and disable vita-chambers in the options.
I've heard that Bioshock kinda goes to crap after the showdown with Ryan. How bad exactly is that decline?

Zhukov said:
Lastly, that video review is just the kind of angry fanboy bullshit that can be found by the truckload on the internet. I really wouldn't advise letting it inform your opinion of either game.
It does sound that way at the beginning, but over the course of 5 parts he does look at every aspect of the gameplay and analyze in ways that at least SOUND fair, even if his conclusion seems a bit harsher than any of the individual analyses sounded.
 

The Virgo

New member
Jul 21, 2011
995
0
0
I played it and, while so far it hasn't hooked me (I'm at Fontaine's Fishery), I do admit that it has great atmosphere and some good graphics. Then again, maybe I haven't given it enough time. There's been many a game like that.

I haven't played System Shock 1 or 2, so I can't say how similar or dissimilar they are, but if $9.99 USD on Steam isn't too much to swing, I would give it a shot. And if you don't like it, you can always gift it to someone. What have you got to lose?
 

Ordinaryundone

New member
Oct 23, 2010
1,568
0
0
The story may be similar, but Bioshock has one very important thing over System Shock 2: It's characters are WAY better. Far more memorable across the board. Also, it's a situation where I feel modern gameplay conventions have dramatically improved the game and made it far less frustrating to play. Sure, there is no inventory or anything, but you never really miss it (at least, I didn't). If you don't like the vita-chambers, then you can turn them off and play the whole game where death=reload.

And as others have said, you can probably find it for $10 or less. You've really no reason not to if you have even the slimmest bit on interest.
 

Magnicon

New member
Nov 25, 2011
94
0
0
Bioshock is one of the single greatest games I've ever played. Its worth it for everyone to play it, even if they don't like shooters, or video games.

Same goes for Bioshock 2, but a tiny bit less so overall. Still better then 99% of other games.
 

Wintermute_

New member
Sep 20, 2010
437
0
0
Freaky Lou said:
should acquire SS2 somehow, or go for the much easier option of just getting Bioshock.
I haven't had the pleasure of playing System Shock 2, even though I really do want to, but I can still highly recommend Bioshock as a stand alone title. Firstly, if you do decide to pick it up, don't bother with the sequel (it was a piss poor cash-in that sullied the atmosphere the first game cultivated).

I will say this about Bioshock; it was fun. The story carries the game fantastically. I may be biased to the whole silent protagonist thing, I concede, I can almost guarantee that you will become immersed in the beautifully crafted underwater universe of Rapture. The setting, combined with unique gameplay mechanics makes for a truly engaging experience. I can liken it to Fallout in the sense the setting is what makes the game interesting.

Please do not forego Bioshock simply because the game that it borrows heavily from may or may not be favorable in some core aspects. It would be like not playing Twilight Princess because Ocarina of Time was great and it borrowed heavily from it. You miss out on the experience.

I actually think that the "moral choice" involving the little sisters wasn't poorly done. It was a very subtle feature that actually has a lasting effect on the outcome of the game. If you choose to harvest the little sisters, you receive an immediate reward of Adam, allowing you to immediately purchase upgrades, and the ending of the game is altered. If you choose to spare them, you receive less Adam, but get gifts of rare upgrades.

Again, you WILL have fun with at least some aspect of the game. I personally was so invested in the wonderful narrative of the story that I quite literally cried at the end, I admit it. There are some really intense moments in the games plot. Furthermore, while the gameplay is essentially a Half-life like FPS, the addition of the Plasmids and the available weapons upgrades, plus the fun of taking down Big Daddies, all while traversing a sprawling and complex environment helps to ensure that, to use Yahtzee's rating system, the context of the game is stellar, the I'm fairly sure the vast majority of people can get a surplus of gratification from the experience, and it is certainly no cake-walk;

Actually, EDIT: I take that back. I will have to agree, bioshock was pretty damn easy in hindsight. A few area's were tedious to slog through, but overall, if you diligently upgrade your weapons and plasmids, you are a splicer mutant murdering monstrosity. While it was still pretty fun to be able to hose enemies with enhanced weapons (which there are a lot of) and perk yourself with tonic bonuses + the camera bonuses, you can essentially spam health packs in a pinch. Careful though! Run out of ammo/health packs or money, are your are screwed. I was stuck for an eternity because I was out of ammo and I Big Daddy blocked the way to the next area.
It isn't a game breaker though, at least for me. I noticed it only passively, and didn't subtract to much from the experience.

and in regards to your concern that the game losses momentum after the Ryan showdown (a freaking amazing encounter, btw), I admit there is a lull, and I feel as though the Ryan encounter could have been done later, or that some of the in-between prior to the end could have been foregone, the end itself more than made up for it, at least to me. Consider it a gradual falling action with a dramatic spike at the end. Again, not a deal breaker.

This is all IMHO, or course, but I would recommend Bioshock to anyone. It is a superb game, regardless of whether System Shock 2 is or not.
 

bartholen_v1legacy

A dyslexic man walks into a bra.
Jan 24, 2009
3,056
0
0
My recommendation: Play it. Then you'll know.

I really don't get the vast amount of criticism Bioshock received for its gameplay. Critics called it repetitive and lacking variety. I call massive bullshit on that. Bioshock lets you fling bees, ice, fire, lightning, heat-seeking RPG's at mutant people in the most imaginative settings modern gaming has seen. And it gives you 8 weapons, doesn't have regenerating health and has a lot of exploration elements, making it way more worthwhile than 80% of the AAA shooters of today.

My only gripe is that the game is WAY too easy. Even on the hardest setting you'll be practically swimming in ammo, money and medkits if you explore even a little.
 

striderkiwi

New member
Jul 15, 2010
93
0
0
One of my friends is a System Shock/Bioshock fan and he would say that their stories are indeed similar (Bioshock is a spiritual successor to system shock) but that should not keep you from playing either game and I'd have to agree. Give Bioshock a try, it's one of the best games I've ever played.
 

Arqus_Zed

New member
Aug 12, 2009
1,181
0
0
I would definitely recommend BioShock, especially for the price you can nab it these days.

The atmosphere an story get the most praise because they really are that good.
The game had a lengthy pre-production process and, dammit, it shows!

As for the gameplay... I liked it.
The weapons are pretty standard, but you can't argue with the results. Ammo should be handled sparingly and some discretion is advised when taking on enemies. Also, the Big Daddies are always great fun, the way they lurch and grunt... They won't do a thing if you leave them - or their Little Sister - alone, but you lay one finger on either of them and shit does tend to hit the fan. A little preparation goes a long way, but the Big Daddies do keep you from feeling like the stereotypical "invincible FPS hero".

The different powers are also a nice touch, but in all honesty, you'll probably only use a handful of them.
 

DarkRyter

New member
Dec 15, 2008
3,077
0
0
You can shoot bees.

Personally, I find that more than enough reason to buy the game.

I'm sure you would like to know more about the non-bee shooting elements, but it's been awhile, and I don't really remember anything else.
 

Rariow

New member
Nov 1, 2011
342
0
0
I'd say, go for both. BioShock improved much of what System Shock 2 did badly, and System Shock 2 did a lot of what BioShock did badly a lot better. The story is of similar quality, but I personally prefer the atmosphere of BioShock to System Shock's. This said, if you can only choose one, that'd depend on what type of player you are. If you're someone who tends to charge in yelling "HELL YEAH, LET'S DO THIS!", then you're gonna prefer BioShock. If you're more for the planning/exploring/point-putting type, you're gonna prefer System Shock.

But then again, you can get BioShock dirt-easy, dirt-cheap, whilst System Shock might give you some more problems to find. But honestly, I would really go for both. Despite the similarities, both are games that you owe yourself to play.

And damn did that sound cliche.
 

Freaky Lou

New member
Nov 1, 2011
606
0
0
Hrmm. The idea I'm getting from this thread is that yeah, I'd probably prefer SS2, but I think I'm going to give Bioshock a run anyway. It is really easy to get ahold of now, after all.

Thanks everyone who responded!
 

Smooth Operator

New member
Oct 5, 2010
8,162
0
0
Why not get both? You get them dirt cheap now.

I would suggest starting with Bioshock because it is the lighter of the two, simplified action oriented gameplay with great atmosphere and story.
Then when you finish and are spoiling for more go into SS2, that game will be a lot harder on you, everything from the story to the gameplay is much heavier, not to mention it is very old and not that good looking.
Playing SS2 these days you will need some foreplay to get you heated up for the main event.
 

AetherWolf

New member
Jan 1, 2011
671
0
0
Even though my opinion is likely invalid since I played System Shock 2 after playing Bioshock, I still say that yes you should play it. You specifically mentioned gameplay, and while Bioshock's isn't perfect, it's more polished that SS2's. Bioshock 2 improves on it quite a bit, though unfortunately sacrifices everything else in the game... And like everyone else said, it's cheap so there's no reason not to pick it up.