Yes. The first one was so fresh and new so I had high expectations for BioShock 2. I'm not saying its a bad game but from the expectations built after playing the first, Bioshock 2 did not live up to them. Still a very good game nonetheless.
Considering how difficult of a job it was to follow the first one, I think thay did an incredible job of keeping it fresh and interesting.
T-Aldous
I agree. The first one took everybody by surprise, so it was a hard act to follow. I think it is a solid game, with great graphics,and story. So no, I don't think it was a disappointment either.
Not the revelation that the first Bioshock end up being, but this sequel ended up being much better than it had any right to be. I more symphathetic and purely entertaining game than the original, but not quite as rich an overall experience.
Yes. The first one was so fresh and new so I had high expectations for BioShock 2. I'm not saying its a bad game but from the expectations built after playing the first, Bioshock 2 did not live up to them. Still a very good game nonetheless.xTheExploited
This is what I don't understand. I can't really think of a way for the makers of a game not to fall short to smth like this. If you enjoyed the first because it was fresh and original, why would you think the sequel would still be fresh and original? That is Bioshock 2's only major flaw, and its pretty unavoidable. People have been to Rapture before. They know most of the secrets of Rapture, etc. I dont understand why people expected Bioshock 2 to have that same air, its pretty impossible, as you've already been to Rapture. And I dunno, when I look forward to sequels, I dont tend to look forward to huge innovation, as most game makers are far more likely to take the safer (and often better) approach of staying faithful to a successful original.
I really didn't expect the 2nd to outperform the first. I mean the first really was an epic game. However the developers did a really good job with the 2nd game.
There are a few minor flaws in my opinion but really they relate to simple things like the hack darts making the hacking process too easy etc. The little sisters were way more creepy in the first one, etc. However if these are the only real flaws, it is quite a solid game, and one of the few worth full price out there now.
[QUOTE="xTheExploited"]Yes. The first one was so fresh and new so I had high expectations for BioShock 2. I'm not saying its a bad game but from the expectations built after playing the first, Bioshock 2 did not live up to them. Still a very good game nonetheless.MellowMighty
This is what I don't understand. I can't really think of a way for the makers of a game not to fall short to smth like this. If you enjoyed the first because it was fresh and original, why would you think the sequel would still be fresh and original? That is Bioshock 2's only major flaw, and its pretty unavoidable. People have been to Rapture before. They know most of the secrets of Rapture, etc. I dont understand why people expected Bioshock 2 to have that same air, its pretty impossible, as you've already been to Rapture. And I dunno, when I look forward to sequels, I dont tend to look forward to huge innovation, as most game makers are far more likely to take the safer (and often better) approach of staying faithful to a successful original.
Given the circumstances, Bioshock 2 did well
Thats not what I'm saying. I'm saying the first one was so fresh and original that I expected the second one to build on that. Bioshock 2 is not as good as the first which shows they did not do that. Bioshock 1 set the bar really high that I can't help but be disappointed with the sequel. I think they should have given themselves more then 2 years to create a proper sequel to Bioshock.
I really didn't expect the 2nd to outperform the first. I mean the first really was an epic game. However the developers did a really good job with the 2nd game.
There are a few minor flaws in my opinion but really they relate to simple things like the hack darts making the hacking process too easy etc. The little sisters were way more creepy in the first one, etc. However if these are the only real flaws, it is quite a solid game, and one of the few worth full price out there now.
coasterguy65
The hacking may be a legitimate complaint. Don't know, haven't played it yet. However 2K DID say that they redesigned the Little Sisters for the second game so you would feel more sympathetic towards them. They didn't want them to look as creepy since you were going to be a Big Daddy this time.
No. I like it a lot better than the original, mostly because the story is a lot more mature, and low-key. Without spoiling too much from the first game, after the famous plot twist, the game repeats its themes ad nauseam, whereas Bioshock 2 is a lot more subtle, and thoughtful the whole way through.
Nah, the game is ace. It's not as good as the first, but I never expected it to be. It's impossible to make the second trip through rapture as memorable as the first.
Multiplayer is pretty good, but the first update screwed it up so it's laggy as hell now. Here's hoping they fix it soon, unless they already have. I haven't played it in a few days.
Yes. The first one was so fresh and new so I had high expectations for BioShock 2. I'm not saying its a bad game but from the expectations built after playing the first, Bioshock 2 did not live up to them. Still a very good game nonetheless.xTheExploited
the multiplayer is NOT GOOD on bioshock 2. the people playing it should really check out Modern Warfare 2, Uncharted 2, MAG, Left 4 Dead (1 or 2), Resistance 2, or Bad Company 2 competitive online. There really isn't much reason to play the bioshock 2 multiplayer in my opinion. there are too many great MP games out right now. also, yea i was disappointed personally by bioshock 2, but it wasnt a disappointment. it was a good game, but the gameplay was dumbed down, story was less inspired, and the set pieces were much more simple than the original. definately feel like they needed to put more into it. and the graphics were inexcusable. i'm not a graphics whore, but it was 4 years (?) since BioShock1, they could have done a better job. i sometimes think the first had better graphics. and things i looked forward to like walking the ocean floor were so contained and linear that they were a gimmick. i actually thought you could explore some, but it was really kind of pointless the way it turned out. also, all the bioshock junkies need to stop flaming people for speaking badly about the game. If 2k would have let Irrational Games do their thing instead of taking them off the project, we would have had a team much more devoted and innovating than the cookie cutter, money and sales focused studio that made bioshock 2. i actually hoped it would have reviewed lower than it did so if there is a bioshock 3, they would learn to put more effort into it. sorry for the rant!
I don't really like it much. I'm at the part where I'm like just entering Dionysus Park. Think that's what its called. I don't know. I just can't... get into the game. The story cannot pull me in at all. Bioshock1 I had the same problem with. I couldn't even finish Bioshock1, I just lost interest. Meh.
I have yet to play it but Im not too happy about them giving away alot of the information about the game that could have had people by the balls. Big sister? Easily avoidable by not watching vids but its hard to fight temptation. People seem to like it though and Im sure I will too, when I get around to it.
Naturally, it just wont feel as fresh which is ok by me.
I actually find it as a game that exceeded my expectations. It's a sequel to a land mark game, from a different developer and hasn't been in development for a long time at all. In fact during the same time Valve made a couple of episodes they made BioShock 1-2. It puts things in perspective. I really thought it would be a let down, at least in some ways but it's the direct opposite!
Log in to comment