Question of the Day, June 29, 2010

[Woodsey]

It topped the original in every way for me.

In fact, I bought it off of Steam and got Bioshock free with it, and I HATED Bioshock.

Hideous pacing, repetitive, and with a one-note story whose high-point lasts 5 minutes. Oh, and why was the HUD in such a low resolution compared to the rest of the screen? That always bugged me. Oh, and it pretended to be deep but wasn't at all.

 

[Disaster Button]

It wasn't as good as the first but it wasn't disappointing.

 

[Brad Shepard]

There was no need for it yes, but it was still good in my eyes.

 

[revjay]

This question needs a "there was a difference?" option. Aside from the minor tweaks I really didn't see enough to separate one from the other.

That said, I DID like both games it just felt like 2 was a patch or dlc for the first.

 

[Arkhangelsk]

It's not as good as the original, but it's still a great game.

 

[riotwraith]

I feel like there should be a middle-of-the-road choice here. I didn't actually think Bioshock was great. It was certainly good and I had a lot of fun, but it wasn't THAT memorable. I was actually expecting 2 to be a giant steaming pile, so I was pleasantly surprised that it was pretty good in it's own way. I can't say that it wasn't as good as 1 because I wouldn't want to compare the two. Besides, Bioshock 2 is already at a disadvantage because I was familiar with the concept (rapture, plasmids, big daddies, little sisters, etc. were now familiar to me so they couldn't really be scary or mysterious any more.) when I started playing it.

 

[Nurb]

Wow.

I forgot the game was even released ><

 

[Phoenixlight]

#!My post has a spoiler in it!#

I enjoyed the story more in Bioshock but I enjoyed the gameplay more in Bioshock 2. The only major dissapointed I had with Bioshock 2 was at the end of the game where you play as a little sister, it wasn't very interactive. Aside from that, you couldn't always see your diver helmet unless you were underwater which was annoying, but at least those annoyingly hard minigames were removed.

 

[V8 Ninja]

Can we have a "Don't Care" option?

 

[Swarley]

Kind of a terrible poll. It wasn't as great as the original, but it wasn't by any means a bad game. It did a lot of things right, it's only real fault was the weak story, though the loss in mysticism in Rapture from the first game is definitely a factor in how some people view it as a disappointment.

 

[Joe Matsuda]

See, if before you played it you imagined that its goona be the worst game ever...

that it in no way shape or form would even come close to being in the ball park of the firsts greatness...

...its really a pretty good game

 

[Kapol]

Honestly, BS2 wasn't as good as BS1 was, but it was still a good game in it's own right. I'd only say it's a dissapointment if you built it up too high.

 

[CrashBang]

Saying that it wasn't as good as the original doesn't make it a disappointment when you consider how freakin' incredible Bioshock was. 2 wasn't as good but I still think it was a really fun game, I really enjoyed it

 

[Reaper69lol]

I was actually very satisfied with Bioshock 2, to me, it is better than original.

 

[Dioxide20]

Always two choices that are at complete ends of the spectrum (although that is the point of these).

I was disappointed, but I was thrilled with it. I was looking forward to multiplayer on the PC, and that was terribly laggy and almost unplayable. The single player campaign was enjoyable though not as amazing as the original.

 

[poiuppx]

I think it was a great game. Was it superior to Bioshock 1? Goodness no. But how could it be? I think the issue is, the bar was set so high in some people's minds that nothing short of it dispensing ADAM and Plasmid hypos to the players themselves would have made it meet those expectations.

That said, I strongly prefered two elements in 2: the gameplay as a whole, and the ending. Never felt so impacting for an ending, or for a storyline, as I did when I went full-savior mode in Bioshock 2. No, it never had a Would You Kindly moment. No, Lamb is no Andrew Ryan, or even a Fontaine. But sometimes, you don't need to be perfect to be damn good. I got my money's worth and then some outta Bioshock 2, so to me, it was FAR from a dissapointment.

...I am still kinda disappointed I never got any swag out of the ARG, though. I'd have killed to get my hands on some wine from Rapture...

 

[Podunk]

I take exception to the poll choices. The problem with BioShock 2 wasn't that it didn't live up to the original, it would take some severely unrelenting optimism to hope for that. No, the problem simply was that it was bad. On its own merits, judging it as independently as you can a sequel so interwoven with the first game, it was simply(sadly) not good due to the events it includes, the plot and story in general, the endings(and ways to obtain said endings), and on very rare occasion the gameplay itself. (Assuming that not everyone had horrible game-crashing glitches on their playthroughs as well.)

 

[HTID Raver]

not as great but i clicked the wrong one!

 

[Interference]

Great, but not as great as the original. An option that, no surprises, you completely missed out of the poll.

While BS2 is a great game, because the wonder of Rapture as a new environment is gone it's less of an experience because of it. They do, however, still managed to tell a good story and introduce some fun new mechanics that had me hooked for the duration.

Plus, of course, it brought those of us that need a catchphrase to psychotically yell at the elderly the immortal "BUT THE PARASITE SAYS NOOOOOO!"

Ho yes.

 

[Bored Tomatoe]

The combat was a lot better. Everything else was well below the original.