Bioshock 2 [PS3/360/PC]

[ezee ryder]

The atmosphere is still there but most of the time it is lost in the endless spawning and "shoot-out" sections. Don't get me wrong Rapture is still a fantastic world but it is a pity the game "forces" you to rush through so you can't take it all in, well at least not the way you would want to.

It does pick up during towards the end but by then you can't help shake off the frustration/disappointment of what came before it. I'm not sure if I would be so harsh as to call the combat generic because there are certain parts of it that are original and enjoyable. However, it is so hard to enjoy the finer points of the combat when you are being spammed with enemies and not given time to take things in.

Like Jebus said, it was always gonna be hard for this to live up to the quality of the original (still one of my favourite games of this generation) but, personally, I am very disappointed that it falls short by quite a margin.

[Eight Rooks]

I didn't know that going in, I'd avoided media as much as I could, especially given how Bioware decided to blow the opening to their game, these people cannot be trusted.

Fair enough... just saying, for all the obvious faults (I can see how you could find it annoying) I don't really think that ranks as some great conspiracy.

Oh, and the first game's final boss was instantly obvious after the halfway twist, and it was mediocre at best, so the second game couldn't be much worse in that respect.

EDIT:

But nobody was realling extolling the virtues of the first games actual gameplay!

Actually I remember quite a few internet fans who were, along the lines of 'well if the variety is there it must automatically be amazing'.

[mr_woo]

Which is exactly why the game shouldn't have been made. I felt that before, and I still feel it.

It's dripping in all the wrong kinds of atmosphere though. The repetitive nature of the game, fetch quests interspersed with harvesting, then, yet again that sound goes off to let you know that a

->Open Spoiler<-

big sister

is coming, again. The first time, okay, it was a bit unnerving, but after that..."oh really? I have to do that again?" It felt like "No, you can't move on yet, we need to slow you down some more with this"...it's making the game longer artificially.

Then, the end fight? Quelle suprise,

->Open Spoiler<-

two big sisters

. It's all so obvious, ham-fisted and you can telegraph it a mile off...it's so far from the original in that aspect it's not even funny.

I mean, the trailers led me to believe that the

->Open Spoiler<-

big sisters

were one of a kind, something to truly fear, not something I'd fight and kill multiple times.

As I said, the game was on a hiding to nothing, which is why I'm not "angry" per say, about the lack of story/atmosphere, but it's just reinforces my belief that for once in this bloody industry they had crafted something unique, yet they just had to make another one.

The worst thing is that it's not going to end there either.

That's fair enough, I can't say I agree with you but you obviously feel very strongly about it I'm really happy about all the gameplay flaws they've corrected with this sequel and that's what is most important to me. Just being back in Rapture again is fun for me with the world being the star and the story being secondary. I felt that in the first one and feel that about the sequel. It's just that in the sequel it's more fun to actually fight things. Basically I guess I wanted different things than you do in the sequel.

Then again I guess I don't hold Bioshock in the same high regard a lot of people do so never felt that having a sequel was an insult. Not that I think Bioshock was in any shape or form bad, just that whilst great it had many flaws. Ending far later than it should have, knowing who the bad guy was from near enough the beginning (I thought of System Shock 2 straight away and turned out to be right) and a really crap last boss.

I'm still stunned by how fun the multiplayer is in this, spent another 2 - 3 hours playing it last night. Great stuff.

[mr_sockochris]

Well I for one think this is the better game. The fact that the original still sits unfinished on my shelf after all this time while I just finished Bioshock 2 in three days shows how much I preferred it

[ChrisF]

Well I for one think this is the better game. The fact that the original still sits unfinished on my shelf after all this time while I just finished Bioshock 2 in three days shows how much I preferred it

Careful... Saying you like a game seems to go against what the forum stands for these days!

[Jebus]

A bit harsh there don't you think Chris? There's plenty of gushing praise for other games and this game as well in the first play threads!

[ChrisF]

I dunno... maybe I'm just hitting the wrong threads

[Neon Ignition]

Christ, this thread is a savage place I'm starting this tonight after getting held up with Dante's and it's interesting reading people's thoughts. The trouble with Bioshock is that it impressed so many people in different ways that when Bioshock 2 is discussed it's hard decifering between people who are genuinely disappointed and people who were never going to give it a real chance just by virtue of being a sequel.

Personally, though I understand some peeps treasure they're first time in Rapture, I enjoy the setting and want to spend more time there so I'm happy for sequels to be made. That and I found nothing wrong with the combat, it's not aiming to be the premier FPS. So, here's hoping

[abigsmurf]

I think the problem I have with it (and a lot of people also have), is that there isn't a sense of exploration this time I'm at

->Open Spoiler<-

the park

now and nothing has come close to Fort Frolic which absolutely blew me away in the first game. The game definitely could do without the respawning enemies which were probably put in to slow progression but just serve to prevent you exploring too much.

The first game was really convincing in portraying a city a year or so after it had gone to hell, the second game moves things on 10 years from there but it really isn't convincing on that front.

It's a good game but a big step down from the first.

[rmoxon]

One thing that dosent make sense is that I'm pretty sure you must have killed half the population of rapture by yourself in the first game, having this take place 10 years later makes no sense what so ever as their seems to be even more splicers running about this time!

I'm still loving it though, which is somthing i never did with the first game. Yes the first game had more exploration, but it was never that well implemented, the fact that it has been filtered out here isnt really a bad thing as far as im concerned

[Lebowski]

not finding it difficult to explore myself and i don’t know what this endless spawning nonsense is reading some comments in this thread you would think it throws enemies at you like modern warfare 2 dose. I've managed to clean out every area so i can have a good explore, found some pretty nice secrets too. You do get the odd few coming back and there are a few chase you to the end of level scenarios but these are mild irritations.

The comments on the winter blast i found interesting as it’s a good tactic but one that has a major downside, if you freeze and shatter all the splicers you come across you are going to be losing out on a **** load of ammo money and food as you can’t search a pile of ice.

Loving this so far lovely atmosphere and if anything the higher amount of enemys just adds to the tension

[mr_sockochris]

I think the problem I have with it (and a lot of people also have), is that there isn't a sense of exploration this time I'm at

->Open Spoiler<-

the park

now and nothing has come close to Fort Frolic which absolutely blew me away in the first game. The game definitely could do without the respawning enemies which were probably put in to slow progression but just serve to prevent you exploring too much.

You say that but Fort Frolic was full of respawing enemies

[Brats]

But nobody was realling extolling the virtues of the first games actual gameplay! The first game was so succesful because it told a great story, it was dripping in atmosphere and it kept it's secrets well hidden.

If I hear you right, you're saying that the gameplay of the first game wasn't that great, but that it didn't matter.

I disagree with that. I know we all play games for different reasons, but I can't understand how someone would enjoy a game like Bioshock if the story, atmosphere and secrets were great, but the rest was average, mainly because the rest makes up the bulk of the game. The story elements are probably only 10&#37; of the actual time taken in the game - the vast majority is actually playing it.

If Bioshock's core mechanics had been average, I wouldn't have enjoyed it even if the story had been Shakespeare. Luckily for me, I didn't think it was, but that was purely down to the experimental nature of the gameplay. The actual gun mechanics were pretty ropey, but messing around with trip wires, behaving changing plasmids and elemental weapons kept it interesting. For me, Bioshock 2 improves those elements and actually has a decent shooting mechanic this time, which means that the core time playing the game is vastly better.

I'd rather play a game with good mechanics and an average story than a game with a good story and bad mechanics.

I don't quite get why people are saying they miss the exploration. Bioshock isn't Fallout 3 or Super Metroid, there is very little exploration in it, save the odd voice recording that was tricky to find. Although the geame allowed you to return to previous levels, it was in fact a very linear game. A person playing from start to finish would see nearly every location without trying.

I can see how some might miss the quieter moments of the first game, which is a different thing. However I can also appreciate the direction that this game takes as the 'standing around watching the art-deco scenery' thing was done to death in the first game. Despite that, there are still plenty of moments to take it all in in this game too.

[Eight Rooks]

I largely played the first Bioshock simply because the setting, the art design and the quality of the writing (well, most of it) was on a level only a tiny, tiny minority of videogames reach. That more than made up for the mediocre-to-all right shooting, the dearth of worthwhile gameplay mechanics and the modest challenge. I'd rather play a game with an astonishing story and so-so gameplay than any number of generic titles with a truckload of polish slapped on. Sure, there wasn't much actual exploration, but there was still a fair few different environments and set pieces to keep me going, so I don't agree that all I had to do in between audio diaries was contemplate yet another round of shock-shock-wrench, shock-shock-wrench etc.

And God, I hated tripwires. Still do. Fiddly, slow, pointless. Shock-shock-wrench, shock-shock-wrench...

[Jebus]

Cheers Eight Rooks, saved me typing it!

That twist in the first game, even now just thinking about it...it stunned me.