BioShock 2 Comments by Tom Bramwell

Sounds good apart from the "dealing with them is a full-time job complicated by the Little Sister's exposure. If she is killed, you lose all that ADAM." I know they're optional but still...escort missions are very rarely fun.

So they take the single most irritating and unfun part of the first game--the escort mission--and expand it into a full game? Seems kind of odd. Unless they're trying to make some kind of point by having it so rescuing little sisters leads to irritation, thus making it into an actual gameplay choice--harvest and have fun, or save and be annoyed. In any case, I'm now looking forward to this a little bit less.

It's not a classic escort mission i guess - seeing as I presume it'll play intuitively and contextually as you progress through an area. And chose to do it. And you carry the LS around, rather than waiting for pathfinding AI/set routes. It's like the Big Daddy fights from 1, but in reverse. But with the same fights from 1 being there too. Plus I can't imagine the loss being game breaking. Maybe it is!

anyway

WANT

My God I wanna read that article... and all your wonderful comments... But don't want it spoiled!!!

That's it, I'm going!

What a breath of fresh air. Intelligent people are designing a great game!! I've been a fan of these boys since system shock/thief era. I'll play anything they make, why not a masterpiece. High hopes on this one.

Oh, and wtf is Ken Levine working on now? I want details!

I'm apprehensive about this. I think it has a massive potential to be a let-down, even if it's very good. Even if it's as good as the first game, that won't be enough, for me. I don't just want a re-run of the first BioShock.

no, we don't want a retread of bioshock. but consider: it is an amazing world to be in, why not revisit it. plus, they're inventing completely new areas for the bulk of bioshock 2, and they're exploring a new (undisclosed) philosophical touchstone for the new storyline. they want to incorporate ryan and objectivism, but go beyond that. they are integrating more thoughtful puzzles and are emphasizing a more open style of gameplay and mission trajectories. it doesn't sound like they are thinking retread one bit.

Looking good! Apart from Mass Effect, if there's a single world that deserves a comprehensive revisiting from the golden age of games in 2007, it's Rapture.

I need to play through #1 again . . .

I can't bring myself to care about this game. Bioshock doesn't need a sequel

I think Bioshock was the MOST overrated shooter for years. I WANTED to like it, but it just, wasn't fun. It had nice graphics and sound, but the actual gameplay was rubbish when compared with Halo 3 for example. Bioshock just doesn't have the depth or physics to be much more than an average shooter. If you need proof of this, ask yourself why there is NO multiplayer mode whatsoever.

It raises an obvious question. Given what Ayn Rand's novel Atlus Shrugged meant to BioShock, what's the equivalent here?


Isn't it Atlas Shrugged?

Would you kindly tell me what possessed you to base a lot of the game around escort missions which as far as I can remember have never been anything but annoying, boring and unnecessary in the entire history of gaming?

@ STKD

Yes, if you keep playing it on Easy difficulty.

STKD:
Your next to last comment may very well be true, but that doesn't mean that Bioshock wasn't one of the most atmospheric and utterly compelling games of the last 5 years.

"no, we don't want a retread of bioshock. but consider: it is an amazing world to be in, why not revisit it. plus, they're inventing completely new areas for the bulk of bioshock 2, and they're exploring a new (undisclosed) philosophical touchstone for the new storyline. they want to incorporate ryan and objectivism, but go beyond that. they are integrating more thoughtful puzzles and are emphasizing a more open style of gameplay and mission trajectories. it doesn't sound like they are thinking retread one bit."

That may all be true (or not, as it may turn out), but that doesn't solve the issue of just how much of an instant-classic BioShock was, and the fact that it was all rather self-contained. BioSock didn't particularly call for a sequel of any kind. In my opinion it should have been left at that, and all the screen shots and videos don't particularly inspire much confidence. This game needs to be utterly amazing just in order to not be a disappointment, in my eyes. That's an extremely tall order. I imagine that it'll ultimately be a pretty good game in it's own right, but a bit of a smudge on the legacy of the original. We'll see. I'm open to the possibility of it being astounding, but I just don't see it happening. The freshness of Rapture is gone, new environments or not, and I don't particularly think the new features sound like they add much. An 'amazing' sequel needs to be more than tweaks and refinements, especially if the preceding game was BioShock.

hunched, closeted in tight strapping, with Polio braces on her legs and little bows tied to her back.

Shouldn't that be corseted in tight strapping?

Just saying, is all.. : )

@ Pro_Gamer

Dude, if that's how you think about games, then BioShock is most definitely Not For You. You don't like it? That's fine - it doesn't like you either. It's a breathtakingly atmospheric, creepy, philosophical game. I feel it was done in first person primarily for the immersion value, not because it's trying to be anything like a Tom Clancy style 'shooter'. It's rich in qualities which probably wouldn't seem of value to you, if all that matters to you are top notch physics and multiplayer.

If I want world-standard setting multiplayer and balanced gameplay, I go to Halo 3.
If I want atmosphere and a thought provoking story, I sure as hell don't. Bioshock would have been so, so much less if they'd not been entirely devoted to the single player narrative, and instead insisted on including multiplayer (see: The Darkness et al).

Lastly, if that's how you really feel, why exactly are you even posting in this thread? Do you live under a bridge?

@Martin85

I agree that it needs to completely blow away expectations in order to stand next to the original. Whether it will succeed in this I'm not sure. I'm just really encouraged by the A-Grade level design team in place and thoughtful underpinnings they are creating the next story with. Like you, I wouldn't want to go back to Rapture for 10 more hours of Bioshock. In fact, that's kind of what the last 3 hours of the first game felt like (!). I am keeping fingers crossed that the Bioshock 2 designers understand this, too.

So... System Shock 3? No? Bah, humbug!

@ aaronali

I agree. Rapture almost out-stayed it's welcome first time round. When the game ended, it was just about right, and I wasn't hankering for any more running around in that setting. I was hoping for the sequel to go somewhere else, or perhaps chronicle the days leading up to the first 'outbreak'. Or something. But even then I'd rather they just didn't bother, and left it at one game. I find what they have proposed in the actual BioShock 2 to be rather uninspiring. They've already touched on Randian philosophy, and rather than explore that further in a different setting, they're now talking about going into different philosophies. In my opinion, this has a large potential to negate much of the intricate plot of the first game.

Ultimately, there's many pitfalls that BioShock 2 needs to overcome in order to be a proud entry to the series, rather than just a decent but pointless game that everyone wishes never got made. They created something so great with the first game, I think they'll just end up undoing it all with this sequel.

@Reihn, Bioshock was as thought provoking as peeling a banana. Go read a book, maybe Atlas Shrugged. Anyway, hope the ending is better than the first. For such a critically lauded, overhyped game the ending was stupid.

@Reihn

NO! This is a 'comments' section which CAN and WILL include fair critiscisms. If you don't like it then post elsewhere.

The ending stunk of we don't know how to finish the game so we'll just through something together that seems vaguely plausible even if it ruins the whole tone of the game.

@kenshin001

..."as thought provoking as peeling a banana?" I'm curious to know: what games do you find more thought-provoking than bioshock? is that really a fair criticism to level at this game; my opinion is that it's one of the more intelligent interactive experiences i've seen in the last few years. please school me if i'm missing some great ones.

@ Pro_Gamer

Okay, sure - I'm all about fair comment and criticism. But you've stated that Bioshock was overrated and wasn't fun (for you) because the gameplay, physics and mulitplayer don't stack up against Halo 3.

I'm pointing out that if that those are the standards by which you rank your games, if those are the things which matter most to you, then Bioshock is most definately not going to be your cup of tea. Which you've said. Which I've agreed with.

But I also think that there's a much smarter, more engaging way of phrasing your point, if you actually wanted to open a dialogue about it with your fellow Eurogamers.

@ Kenshin001

Bioshock was as thought provoking as peeling a banana. Go read a book, maybe Atlas Shrugged. Anyway, hope the ending is better than the first. For such a critically lauded, overhyped game the ending was stupid.

. . .well, if you feel that way, then that's your prerogative, but with respect I think you are categorically incorrect. I've said that I found Bioshock to be an atmospheric, creepy and philosophical game with a thought provoking story, and I think the majority of games journalists and consumers would agree on that front. Again, that doesn't mean that you have to like it. But it does mean that bashing it on forums with no backup to your argument makes you seem a little silly. Agreed that the ending was very genre-formulaic in gameplay terms, but as Kieron put it (iirc), "MAYBE THAT WAS THE POINT". All in all, I thought it was a fantastic game, one which I feel is much more worthy of time and attention than a lot of the military combat FPS games out there, which are great fun, but are also pretty similar to each other and don't attempt much in terms of story or artistic value.

As for reading books, well, I read widely and voraciously. I also enjoy video games a great deal. Are you trying to say that all thoughtful or artistic video games are a waste of time, because I could be reading even more? Actually, I'm not sure what your point is on that front. Please explain?

I loved the fiorst one, becau7se it was fresh, and mysterious. This looks dull, the gameplay was never particularly great, it was the narrative and world that pulled you through. I felt this game didnt need a sequel, maybe a prequel would have been better, starting off as this great utopian dream, you could have helped build the station, and see it in all its glory, then in some way be forced to destroy it...hell you could even haveplayed the bad guy from the first one, and learnt to understand what turned him...

but this sequel has little to hold my attention, hell some of the environments are even the same as the last game, but now in deeper water...it just feels cheap somehow.

I still have a sneaking suspicion that they're going to overcook it, but feel free to prove me wrong.

Also, @ Pro_Gamer (sorry all, if I'm flogging a dead horse here..)

NO! This is a 'comments' section which CAN and WILL include fair critiscisms. If you don't like it then post elsewhere.

Errr. . that is not actually a response to anything I said. Perhaps you should read my post again and try to respond to it. I'm in no way against fair comment and criticism! I'm saying that it seems to me that you only like one particular style of game - 'hardcore' FPS action, with a focus on the mechanics of gameplay, and devoid of story. This is my assumption, based on A: your rather telling choice of a handle, B: your comments above, and C: the fact that you feel "Jap[anese] RPGs are a joke . . . why can't the japs put some effort towards a FPS? I'd really like to see what they could do to the FPS genre . . . "

Hence my question 'why are you even posting here' is a fair one, which you haven't responded to.
Also, FYI, 'Jap' is a racial slur. You're doing yourself no favours by using it.

I don't know what to make of this TBH. I loved Bioshock played it on PC and on 360 when I replayed a while back, but this one isn't selling to me right now. That will change when I play it I'm sure.

re: the ending of Bioshock1:

I remember seeing an interview with Ken Levine, where he made comments in the vein that the ending was essentially dictated by "higher-ups", and was not how the game was supposed to end.
Perhaps time has twisted my memory of the comments . . . I can't remember where I saw the interview, and haven't been able to find it since (to be honest, I haven't looked too hard).

Plot sounds like a contrived justification for why the game environment hasn't changed.

I don't see why the environment should change, as long as different areas are visited.

I also found the first dissappointing after a very good start. It should've and could've ended on finding Ryan, though, as the last part was contrived bollocks. Claiming it was the second coming of narrative, however, was a bit much - it was great, but no SS2.

Story sounds pretty contrived to me, it looks lovely (as expected) but it sounds like a real rehash, they could have done a lot more with it imo, setting it in modern day for example? Say a team of military types find and investigate the city only for el shit to hit the fan, I don't know something more interesting than "it's exactly the same but this time you're a big daddy and get to protect the little sisters!!".

Well, the good thing is they won't use a terrible writer and philosopher as Ayn Rand as inspiration for the sequel. Maybe this time it will have a story that isn't too intrusive. And if it will actually have decent gameplay it might turn out to be a nice game for the people that can actually stand the horrible art direction of 2K. The sound will probably alleviate that problem to some extend.

Vita Chambers? Are they in the game?

I wish BioShock would play more like Fallout. The combat in BioShock was way off. They should've made it an RPG instead, or something inbetween. Say no to drugs and shooters!

Claiming it was the second coming of narrative, however, was a bit much - it was great, but no SS2.

Actually, it was exactly like SS2 - it is revealed that the person guiding you is not who they say they are and their objectives are not what you thought they were.

Anyway, @Pro_Gamer:

You seem to like FPS games (to the exclusion of anything else?) and you didn't like Bioshock. Fine. Here's a possible reason: Bioshock is not an FPS. Proof: I would not have liked it had it been one.

The common assumption these days is that if a game is first person, then it is a shooter. For me, it's all about emphasis. If the emphasis is on running around and shooting things (and in first person), then it's an FPS and I won't even bother playing the demo. If the shooting is, say, just an element of a bigger whole (reading logs, upgrading the character, solving puzzles, etc) then I'll like it and I'd rather call it an FPRPG, if we need a new acronym at all.

Ultima Underworld was not a shooter. SS1, and SS2 indeed as well, were not FPSs in my book either. Thief was not a shooter either. Deus Ex was not a shooter. All first person games. All allow you to shoot. Shooting is not the main element.

This is all IMO. I'm not pretending it's fact.

I'm looking forward to returning to Rapture, but like others I'm worried about the impact of the "ongoing escort mission" element with the little sisters on the pace of the game - in the last section of the first game, I felt hamstrung by having to dawdle around while little madam defiled splicer corpses. Mind you, I didn't feel like I was really playing as a Big Daddy at that point, despite the scenario. Perhaps if they get the feel right, it will work better.
I'm also not too fond of the idea of the Big Sister as a recurrent enemy, as a character who keeps coming back to annoy you through the game, which means you won't actually be able to kill her until the end. But that's probably more a personal thing, since Nemesis in Resident Evil 3 irritated the hell out of me too :)

Big Sister - Still would ;)

I'll be all over this game. Although I have concerns, like many have above (escort mission as a central game mechanic), I'll look past them and give it a go. Don't hang about on the demo Take 2, I'm impatient.

But that's probably more a personal thing, since Nemesis in Resident Evil 3 irritated the hell out of me too :)

You are not alone.

Even worse: having to fight and kill Wesker again and again in one game after another.

@Pro_Gamer

Comparing Bioshock to Halo 3 is like comparing GTA to Gran Turismo. They share some characteristics, but they are only tenuously in the same genre.

For my money Halo 3 is a pure combat FPS, Bioshock is a horror adventure game (that just so happens to have first person combat).

"I am very interested in systems of play as kind of gardens in which you can plant the seed of a question and allow the player to shape how the thing grows," says Jordan Thomas, explaining his ambitions. "And specifically, that doesn't really work unless your mechanics are very unified with the kind of story you're telling, and so I am striving, shall we say [he grins], to generate a similar resonance from the sort of the high themes all the way down to the base mechanics.

I want to kiss Jordan Thomas on the mouth. Although this quote does encourage me to write more 5,000 word rants about games in the future, because it appears to work.

I am so glad Bioshock was released on all 3 platforms. If not, then this thread would have turned into another console argument.
I'm actually reading uninterrupted comments and opinions about a videogame and i'm not in a forum :)

@dominalien

I totally agree with your opinion about FPS games.

I wonder if there are finally going to be some of the much hyped RPG elements...

This is a game that doesn't need or want multi-player. Why can't people understand this?

Bring Back System Shock!

Less of this underwater bio-nonsense.

@ Yossarian

Right on!

Also, is your rant on this site somewhere? I'd love to have a read.. : )

After stealing and raping Rand's philosophy, I surmise that the next game will probably revolve around freeing Plato from his cave. And then they'll get lots of awards and pats on their backs for yet another philosophical masterpiece in gaming. Oh well, at least they're trying.

I was massively inspired by the mention of Looking Glass. At least Thomas knows his heritage.

Still don't know what to make of this. Will probably wait for the reviews before splashing the cash.