The thing that makes me the most angry is the incredibly stupid "big sister".
Big Daddies were BIG for a reason, they were faceless killing machines that made you tremble at the prospect of killing one. And the fact that they were docile until you attacked them, thus releasing an unstoppable force, made you think twice. like charging a tank that doesn't see you with a pop-gun.
Making a female Big "Daddy" that's capable of jumping around like a long jumper on crack soils the whole feeling. Fighting a small, agile, yet strong enemy isn't frightening, it's irritating. just look at Wesker from RE5.
double post my bad
this kid's a noob fag
what's your problem d-bag. . . yay yay I know
But I just read on giant bomb that multiplayer has been announced, that might make or break Bioshock 2. Oh well, still too early to tell ;)
Well i'm curious to see what's become of Rapture in the aftermath of the events of the first game. And interested to see how they'll change up the gameplay and mechanics.
If all you want is the exact experience of the first game, just go play it again. No one can take it away from you.
Yeah, it's just about everything I hate about sequels.
The one thing you didn't mention that really infuriates me is the multiplayer addition. Bioshock, more than a lot of series, was a really complete single player experience, and doesn't benefit from multiplayer.
I mean, I felt that Gears 1 and 2 were very complete experiences and the multiplayer felt as tacked on and pointless as I thought it would be. I bought Gears 1 and 2 because it was a very complete single/coop experience and it felt like a $60 experience.
Just like Shadow of the Colossus didn't need a multiplayer deathmatch of horseback archery to make it a more complete package. It already was a complete, fulfilling experience that didn't need to have a diluted multiplayer tacked on.
The other point is: there is ONE better sequel to Secret of Mana, Seiken Densetsu 3, which is more than just mechanical repetition of Secret of Mana.
I read your article Hugh, and you give some Damn straight reasons how the sequel is gana Suck, i Really didnt know that the creator of BS left and wont be in BS2. But i Promise, that you will play this game and comes out, games can either go up or down, But Bioshock was a Masterpiece, dont stab the sequel in the back yet until it's in your xbox, 2k has gone a long way, but i Promise, that you will play this game and either secretly love it, or openly Hate it.
This article contains much truth. As much as I want it to, I can't see this being as good as the original. At first I thought it was cool to get to play as a Big Daddy, but after I thought about it, I realized how much it ruins the scare factor. Fighting a Big Daddy is no longer intimidating when you ARE a Big Daddy. Throw in a story that borders on nonsensical, and you've got a game that looks to follow in the footsteps of Resi 5: good, but instant classic like its predecessor.
I hate to be a contrarian, but I think I'm the only person alive who didn't like Bioshock. I mean, I never got a sense of claustrophobia while I played it. I was kind of scared and freaked out sometimes sure, but that does not a good game make. Shooting was frustrating and not satisfying, plasmids weren't really all that special, the story wasn't nearly as good as it was hyped up to be. In all I thought it a very mediocre game...
A lot of very very good reasons in there, but there are two points that you brought in yourself that save Bioshock 2 from utter dismissal.
1. Resident Evil 5 failed not because it was more of what people wanted, it's because it continued the obtuse backstory from earlier games instead of carrying on RE4's interesting new storyline and was TOO MUCH the same. It copied RE4 too much when what we wanted was a continuation of the brilliance, not a retread.
2. A game you refer to several times, and everyone who talks about Bioshock mentions. System Shock 2. Notice how people don't mention System Shock 1. The first System Shock was brilliant and absolutely did not need a sequel. The story was done, Shodan was destroyed and to carry on would be to insult the great achievement of Looking Glass. System Shock 2 went on to outshine its predecessor in every way.
Come to think of it, all the negative info. about B2 I never thought of that. Since I luved Bioshock, I thought the 2nd one would be good since this story happened before the 1st Bioshock story took place.
I'm with you on this. Even though SS2 was a sequel of sorts it was really its own game. The game was awesome. You experienced it. A sequel would have been SS light really. In SS2 everything felt new and original and that made it great, a sequel would have been a poor copy.
I feel the same way about BioShock. A sequel in 10 years might be ok but a sequel now would be poor.
I am sure it will be a great game, but am not sure it will be a great BioShock game.
For me only Half Life had the gonads to make a better sequel, but in that case the story needed more to be complete.
Have to say tho stylistically the franchise has legs!
I'm looking forward to this even though I know that there is no way it will live up to the original but sequels never do. My only wish would be that they drop multiplayer and focus on the studio. It doesn't help either that a whole nother studio is working on the multiplayer. Are we all gonna be running around as Big Daddies? I really don't find that intriguing at all.
One last thing. How can the Big Daddy be able to walk outside Rapture. It's it super deep in the ocean? The pressure would crush the suit. The idea is ok but I think they put up a bunch of post it notes with ideas on them and threw darts and the wall and whatever got hit at that meeting was put into play.
Of course this is all speculation because none of us have played it and we've only seen images.
But it is definitely on my must play this for this year.
UM....it didnt come out yet, so just stop right here. dont knock before you try it. remember everyone said this would be just like system shock 2? it turned out to be awesome.
Well that's the problem with the interactive(game) artform, it's more about small evolutionary steps and not so much about the avant-guardesk purposeful breaking of expectations. the main cause for that is "people have to eat", art needs people who don't have to worry about money or at least tend to put the product over the earnings.