Question of the Day, June 29, 2010

[Talvrae]

Question of the Day, June 29, 2010



Take Two boss Brian Feder explained that "[BioShock 2] was ultimately successful, but not hugely successful." Do you agree? What would you have changed in BioShock 2?

Permalink

There was some choice i wasnt in agreement right from the start in the game... I would change thouse first
1: dont play a big daddy
2: Made it a prequel to the first one, taking place in the War betwen Fontaine and Ryan

I wasnt in agreement with the Multiplayer too but in the end i jsut dont care about that part

 

[MetaKnight19]

Its a good game, I really enjoyed it. Just not as much as BioShock 1

 

[Xocrates]

Did anyone actually expect Bioshock 2 to be better than the first one? Would the game automatically be disappointing if it wasn't as good as the first one?

I think what saddens me the most is that most people hold the original in such high regard that many didn't even gave the second one a chance. Sure, they played it, but they never measured it on its own merits.

Bioshock 2 was a great game! Not as memorable or atmospheric as the first certainly, but not deserving of the criticisms many throw at it.

 

[CovertCell]

I only just got it and I like it so far. However I do still feel that it wasn't entirely necessary. I never completed the first, but from what I've heard and read, it doesn't seem like the game needed a second chapter.

 

[PoliceBox63]

BioShock 1 was better but that's because it was the original. I wasn't disappointed with bioshock2. I enjoyed it very much and was impressed with it.

 

[Zhukov]

I had a lot of fun playing it. Enough to go back for a second run.

But it still wasn't as good as the first one.

 

[Chase Yojimbo]

The only thing i really hated was the fact that those type of games have horrible replay value, you sit there bored like a marooned pervert in sausage central while your trying to complete the game again but you just can't. Gameplay was good, the Story was good, the graphics were good, the replay value, nothing.

 

[pneuma08]

This poll hurts me, because both options are applicable.

The game was great, but not as great as the original. The game tries way too hard at some points,

Spoiler

for instance, when they're flooding the area as a "trap" - terrible smoke-and-mirrors

and the story on the whole is not as strong as the original, but putting it all together I was impressed with what they were able to do with the franchise and how they were able to expand the world, mythos, and even gameplay is a meaningful way - especially the multiplayer and what it adds to the setting. I was skeptical about turning Bioshock into a franchise, but they managed to pull it off.

It's not perfect and it's no Bioshock 1, but it didn't leave me disappointed either.

 

[Nannernade]

I loved it, especially with all of the new weapons and upgrades, for the perfect killer combo of Telekinesis 2 and the Harpoon Gun, took out most of the Big Sisters that way. =P

 

[Firia]

Who ever runs these daily polls needs to get with the program, and consider more options. Seriously. Very few polls are worth answering because of how neither option applies to my opinion.

I never played Bio Shock 2. How about THAT for a choice?

 

[soren7550]

Can I choose the middle non-existent option? I mean, I guess it wasn't as good as the original, but it wasn't bad at all.

I mean, both are fun, and both of the good endings nearly got me to cry.

 

[Booze Zombie]

I didn't play it, nothing really drew me in, unlike the first.

 

[The Night Shade]

It was good but the first one was better

 

[Chunko]

I didn't even bother beating Bioshock 2.

 

[The Austin]

It was good, just not as good as the original.

What he said. Their needs to be an "in the middle" option.

It's not like the game was bad, just not as good as the original.

 

[Shoggoth2588]

Technically I wasn't disappointed by it. I wasn't planning on it being great and I didn't see it as being great.

 

[Unhappy Crow]

I don't know. I only got bored with the online after reaching level 30. That was the only thing that I didn't like about the sequel.

 

[The Lizard of Odd]

I really enjoyed it. It has its flaws like any game and, of course, it couldn't live up to the awe-inspiring reveals (or dramatic storyline twists) of the first game...but combat was a lot of fun, and I loved the story. I was particularly impressed with how much they improved the character development and graphics.
I'd say I enjoyed it almost as much as the first one, but for different reasons at different points of time. So while it wasn't quite as good, I wasn't disappointed at all.
But then again I'm a bit biased for professional reasons. >.>

 

[Rain_dog]

Well, on the one hand, over several replays, I've found myself VERY bored with the opening levels, since they're pretty much exactly like the original. But on the other, the story, the themes, the option to kill or be merciful to the people you meet and having that affect the end of the game, AUGUSTUS SINCLAR (and Augustus Sinclair's voiiiiceeee :3), the themes of fatherhood and mercy and humanity, and oh sweet jesus, the level where you're a Little Sister, which was pretty much one of the most unexpected things I'd played in a long, long time, and it was delightful.

It wasn't a perfect game. Killing Little Sisters flat-out didn't make sense from a thematic standpoint, and why on earth were you given the option to only save SOME of the boss characters you met? Some of the levels were far, far too similar to the original, and I agree that the idea of multiple, easily killable Big Sisters made them far less scary. (Although the bits where she's chasing you and making the televisions explode and the screen shake were incredible.)

I also think that it took the theme from the original Bioshock (If given the opportunity to do the right thing when you're in deep shit and there's no light at the end of the tunnel, would you do it?) and expanded on it in a really effective way. I very much enjoyed it, and have rented it more than once. Flawed, but still worthwhile.