Scared to play Bioshock 2

Sgt Pepper

New member
Dec 7, 2009
100
0
0
Personally I liked BioShock 2 slighly more than 1.

The ethos behind 1 was amazing, the philosophies of Ayn Rand taken to an extreme and so forth.

But, I feel the character you play in 2 is more sympathetic than 1 and develops more. I'd say more but wouldn't want to spoil it too much :)
 

Latinidiot

New member
Feb 19, 2009
2,216
0
0
Ragetrain" post="9.301576.12030409 said:
I quite enjoyed bioshock 2. I turned off them tubes you get brought back to life too when you die and did first playthrough on hardest difficulty. Made it feel alot more survival stratergy was needed.[/quote

but it wwas still easy. I couldn'tbelieve it.a shooter i'm being good at? ridiculous!
 

CrashBang

New member
Jun 15, 2009
2,604
0
0
It's obviously not as mind-blowing as Bioshock so it doesn't have that "wow" factor. However, I loved every second of it. The gameplay (at least, the combat) is better than the first game and it has more flow to it. The big sisters up the challenge a lot and are interesting characters in their own right and I personally had great fun with it

Ignore the nay-sayers and enjoy!
 

Robert Ewing

New member
Mar 2, 2011
1,977
0
0
I thought it was very average. I didn't like that you play as the big daddy one bit, ruined the novelty. Because the big daddy was the symbol of fear and power in the first one. Making yourself the symbol of fear and power just makes it kinda boring.
 

MiracleOfSound

Fight like a Krogan
Jan 3, 2009
17,776
0
0
Phlakes said:
It's actually quite fun. Not as good as the first, and it was completely unnecessary, but it's worth a play.
Kinda how I felt too.

It had a wonderful ending and great story, along with one sublime twist near the end, yet for some reason I found myself losing the will to play halfway through my second playthrough.
 

TheMadDoctorsCat

New member
Apr 2, 2008
1,163
0
0
Justyn Stahll said:
I just recently got Bioshock 2 (thanks Nebraska) and to celebrate I re-played Bioshock. I finished it and had a lot of fun from playing it again. Then I looked at Bioshock 2 and I don't know I just couldn't bring myself to play it and I don't know why. It's just Bioshock with a new look,character and story. I don't know if I'm scared to play it or I just can't bring myself to play it? HELP ME ESCAPISTS! PWEEZ!

P.S- this is my first thread and I expect A grand total of 5 people are going to see this awesome I am on an Internet fourm :D
The gameplay is definitely ok. I haven't played far enough to see how good the story is, because some of the voice acting and the lack of imagination have so far ruined it for me. It's a very, very, very poor copy of Bioshock in the ways that Bioshock was best.

Also, if you thought Bioshock's main villain
Fontaine
was bad compared to Andrew Ryan (and he was - a pseudo-machiavellian prat whose character "twist" made no sense on any logical level, and who exuded about as much menace as a custard creme) then you'll be begging for his return after hearing two sentences spoken by the villain of Bioshock 2. "Lamb" is a horrible, horrible character with voice-acting to match.

Yep, Yahtzee got this one right. Sorry. I don't often agree with him, but I do in this case.

Also if you're going to buy it - and I wouldn't recommend that you do - then look on the Internet to see how you can create an "offline account" for "Games for Windows Live". (You have to "scroll down" at a point where it's not obvious you can do so.) Seriously. You'll save yourself about three hours of pure frustration if you do this.
 

TheMadDoctorsCat

New member
Apr 2, 2008
1,163
0
0
Sorry... didn't read your post properly, didn't see you'd ALREADY bought it.

So the point is, you've bought the game already, but you want our help to encourage you to play it? Ok then! Sorry to be the negative nancy of the forum, but I gotta tell it like it is. The gameplay is ok, but the overall experience bored me to tears, and the "Games for Windows Live" thing left me with a horrible experience before I could even get it to save.

Again, sorry dude, just telling it like I see it.
 

jamesworkshop

New member
Sep 3, 2008
2,683
0
0
Gameplay wise it's very hard to go back to the original after 2, more enemy types, more on screen, vastly improved plasmids(biggest improvment), hacking is better, research is better.

it's simply a much better "game"

 

SpaceBat

New member
Jul 9, 2011
743
0
0
You should be scared to play Bioshock 2, but not because it's scary (it's not), but because it's a mediocre game.

The entire atmosphere that made Bioshock 1 good, is now gone. Remember first arriving in a city under water? Seeing the first splicer try and murder you? Remember starting out with a melee weapon and visiting lots of eerie stuff and fighting lots of weird and interesting bosses? It's all gone now. Because now you're a killing machine ready to kick the entire city's ass. For the second time.

The story is downright horrible, because it only takes you a very short amount of time to realize that everything the antagonist says is flawed bullshit and you'll be stuck listening to her condescending shit for the rest of the game. Sounds fun, no? Just play it until the very end, think about what happened in the game for just a few seconds and you'll see what I mean. There are a few things that deserve a praise, but I can't praise them without spoiling the game and they are by no means high in number and do not pick the story out of its shitty status.

Thought the gameplay was unbalanced in 1? Now you can pick insect swarm 3 for regular enemies, Ice 2 for the big guys, spend the rest on whatever you want (Like Electro Shock, health, Eve and other stuff) and just beat the game with no problem whatsoever. YEAH!

The bosses are uninteresting, the ending formula is still flawed, the gameplay is worse than it was in the first game, the atmosphere hasn't changed whatsoever but having been here before, it's inferior, some sound files feel out of place, the game itself is unnecessary and you will miss out on absolutely nothing if you skip the game. It's just an uninteresting game on every level.

There is only one thing that has improved and it's the endings themselves. Not the requirements to get the endings, mind you. Those are still ridiculously flawed. And there are only two good characters you'll come across in the game.
 

Arakasi

New member
Jun 14, 2011
1,252
0
0
It's story isn't as good as the first.
It has no /major/ bosses, aside from the Big Sisters.
It's a shitload easier.
The hacking is better.
The atmosphere is lessened because Big Daddies are no longer scary, though Big sisters kinda fill that void.

But it's still a fun game to play. It's only natural that this one couldn't live up to the first considering how fun, original and shocking it was.

EDIT: About the Big Sisters being a challenge, I found that the Ice Drill was a gamebreaker in terms of fighting them and Big Daddies. They almost couldn't touch me.
 

Azahul

New member
Apr 16, 2011
419
0
0
Cleril said:
I'm scared to play Bioshock 2 because I'd be going for the evil playthrough and there's spoiler reasons why I don't want to do it, for I am scared.
Good god, I'm in the exact same boat. Played it through as a good character the first time, replayed it twice since then, and the most evil I've ever managed to make myself be was in the decision over Gil Alexander's fate (and that's such a grey area that I can never tell whether one decision is more or less evil than the other).
Anyway:
Justyn Stahll said:
I just recently got Bioshock 2 (thanks Nebraska) and to celebrate I re-played Bioshock. I finished it and had a lot of fun from playing it again. Then I looked at Bioshock 2 and I don't know I just couldn't bring myself to play it and I don't know why. It's just Bioshock with a new look,character and story. I don't know if I'm scared to play it or I just can't bring myself to play it? HELP ME ESCAPISTS! PWEEZ!
Play it. In my opinion, it surpasses the first in every way. As stated, the gameplay is better, and I won't really be going over that in much detail. The antagonist, while she doesn't have the charisma of Andrew Ryan, at least makes a helluva lot more sense than Fontaine, and given the state of Rapture it's easy to see how someone like her would come to power (plus, I find the idea of a religion set up by a psychologist to give her control over people that were already rather crazy to begin with far more plausible than Ryan's mysterious pheromones).

On top of that, the supporting cast is, as one, far better than any of the characters from the first game. Augustus Sinclair is a character that I actually found myself liking, despite him effectively filling the same role as Atlas (the moment Atlas was egging me on to rip open a little girl, I knew he was going to be evil, so the huge shock reveal that was such a big part of the first game fell a little flat for me). Sinclair gives you the same advice, but he comes off as a good person despite it. I actually really liked him as a character. Of course, Eleanor is the one that hit home the strongest for me, but I can't really say why without major spoilers. Suffice to say, if the Booker-Elizabeth relationship is half as good as the Delta-Eleanor one in Bioshock 2, I will love and adore that game as well.

Which brings me to Delta, who is so much more interesting than Jack they can hardly be compared. People say playing as a Big Daddy diminished the tragic sense of awe you feel towards them, but for me, playing as one and learning about his history reinforced that sense. On a related note, while still hardly excellent, the moral choices in the second game are far better than the first, with choices aside from just rescue or harvest the Little Sister (who benefit from looking more like children than like demonic monsters), choices that fall into steadily greyer areas as the story progresses.

Then there's the world. It takes place in very different parts of Rapture, and for me the second game was what made Rapture feel like a plausible setting. In playing the first game, you get this impression that the entirety of society is made up of nothing but artists, scientists, and others who are all geniuses or tops in their field. For a city based on Objectivist philosophy, there doesn't seem to be anyone who failed in the almighty free-for-all that Rapture was supposed to be. In Bioshock 2, they show the other side of that story. The failures, the dregs, the ones who came to Rapture in search of fortune but fell by the wayside, living in slums and working as common labourers. It was only when playing the second game that I was actually able to believe in the world of Rapture, and as a rule I found the locations in the second game to be larger, more interesting, and a lot more fun to explore.

Finally, the story, while it suffers from horrible pacing (but the first game did too, so no change there), has an amazing ending. The final two levels provide the single best ending sequence of any game I have ever played, in my personal opinion. Just, a bit of advice. If you intend to play the game twice to experience both good and evil endings (and technically there's four different endings that it's possible to see), then be evil first. I played it once doing the good guy options, and since then, despite replaying the game, I haven't been able to bring myself to be evil.


So, to sum up, play the second one. I loved it, I think it's a vastly superior game to the first, and I'm sure you'll enjoy it. While it isn't for everyone, I very much doubt that it will diminsh the first game's experience for you, even if you hate it (unless, of course, you love the game so much the first appears lessened by comparison, which is kinda what happened to me).
 

Fr]anc[is

New member
May 13, 2010
1,893
0
0
I actually liked it more. The story was more personal. In the first you're just some shmuck wandering around for 2/3rds of the game. No the setting isn't fresh anymore but it's still Rapture. Same can be said with the gameplay, it's got improvements but it's more Bioshock, I fail to understand why so many people think that's a BAD thing. It's cheap now, get it, it's good. Don't listen to the angry internet
 

Azahul

New member
Apr 16, 2011
419
0
0
Fr said:
anc[is]I actually liked it more. The story was more personal. In the first you're just some shmuck wandering around for 2/3rds of the game. No the setting isn't fresh anymore but it's still Rapture. Same can be said with the gameplay, it's got improvements but it's more Bioshock, I fail to understand why so many people think that's a BAD thing. It's cheap now, get it, it's good. Don't listen to the angry internet
More or less my opinion, only for me it wasn't just more Bioshock, it was better Bioshock. Certainly didn't deserve the reputation it got. For me, it actually improved my memory of the first game a good bit, as the world actually made a bit of sense after Bioshock 2, where it really didn't in the first game.
 

theevilgenius60

New member
Jun 28, 2011
475
0
0
Also, if you get the chance, Minerva's Den is where it's at. It has the gameplay from part 2, the dark atmosphere from part 1 and a way better ending than either. Plus, ion lance. 'nuff said