So... how is this one "bad" exactly?

[MiskatonicFox]

Seems most BioShock fans hate this game, like REALLY hate it. My question is "Why"? Just because Irrational didn't make it? Because the story is admittedly not as good? I can understand why some people criticize it for feeling... unnecessary, and I'll agree; I think BioShock wrapped up its story fairly nicely and even some of the holes that Infinite opened up were then wrapped up as well with a neat little bow in Burial at Sea. But I don't get why this is a bad game per se, the core BioShock gameplay is good and honestly I think combat is vastly improved, although I suppose it does rob some of the creepiness that permeated the first game though really I don't think this one was trying for a horror atmosphere as much. I also don't think the story is that bad, no it isn't as good as the first game or Infinite's story but it's engaging, Lamb is a decent villain and the lore behind Rapture is still strong and yaddayaddayadda. I can agree it is not as good as BioShock 1 or Infinite overall, even if I do like that it keeps the open ended levels over the more linear nature of Infinite's level design, but dammit it ain't a bad game. :<

[Clever Monkey]

Some people hate just for the sake of hating. to those people I say "Dont hate the game, Hate the player."

[Eat3n]

Mr. McSuave a écrit :

Oh come on, the story in BioShock 2 is miles behind Infinite. There's no mystery, no suspense, nothing to get you engaged. Just a bunch of (mostly) unlikeable characters feebly attempting to be as good or interesting as their counterparts from the original. Sinclair is a perfect example. It's obvious that 2K were just trying to recreate the success of Atlas with that one, but frankly he's not nearly as well done.

The B2 story is far more relatable, it's basically a story of revenge: Lamb took something from you and tried to kill you, now you (the player) are reborn and gonna kick ass until you get what's yours back. There was nothing in Infinite i really connected to. Elizabeth after awhile just ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ annoys me.

[Eat3n]

Doctor Killjoy a écrit :

HEY BOOKER, HEY BOOKER, BOOKER CATCH! BOOKER CATCH!.
like that didn't become annoying after the first time she opened her mouth.
infinite's main problem is because kevin levine being the hack he is, decided to rewrite the story in the last 6 months of development. basicly gutting the game.
elizabeth was supposed to have powers and a more active role in the game, but then levine changed it to making her an immortal bulletproof dispenser machine.

I agree.

[RegionalDialect]

-Eaten- a écrit :

Mr. McSuave a écrit :

Oh come on, the story in BioShock 2 is miles behind Infinite. There's no mystery, no suspense, nothing to get you engaged. Just a bunch of (mostly) unlikeable characters feebly attempting to be as good or interesting as their counterparts from the original. Sinclair is a perfect example. It's obvious that 2K were just trying to recreate the success of Atlas with that one, but frankly he's not nearly as well done.

The B2 story is far more relatable, it's basically a story of revenge: Lamb took something from you and tried to kill you, now you (the player) are reborn and gonna kick ass until you get what's yours back. There was nothing in Infinite i really connected to. Elizabeth after awhile just ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ annoys me.

What do you mean take back what's yours? Lamb just took her own daughter back from you, so the story is about you trying to kidnap Eleanor back. You're pretty much the villain in this game.

[Graphcalibur]

From what I've gathered from th is topic . Simkmilar to dark souls 2 , and origns. Its a sequel made by a diffrtent developer to a beloved game. They feel like they tread to much of the same ground is the orginal games , rehasing most of the core mechanics and plot points with slight varation . At the same time tweaking a few mechanics in a way that rubs orignial fans of the series the wrong way .

[Knight Captain Otaku]

Agreed not bad at all, In fact I love all three equally, they're just different from eachother if you ask me.

[Himitsu]

The first has a nice atmosphere of course but that Atlas character from the start is somewhat irritating. I knew he was 'off' from the start and perhaps that was too obvious for me. The submarine scenes made it extremely obvious. Then he just becomes plain unlikeable with absolutely no redeeming qualities at all. All the fantastic audio diaries I came across made up for this though. Great acting throughout. 2 seems more naturally a scary and subtle an experience and just builds upon everything with relative ease. Of course, Rapture is in even worse a shape.. And that Andrew Ryan comes across as more understandable in his vision/s rather than largely unlikeable. Lamb makes a great female antagonist, intelligent and classically attractive in her propaganda which slowly builds upon her egotistical nature.

I think if you hadn't played any Bioshock before and played the two one after the other (like I have) you can see and feel improvement. Bioshock 1 is a fantastic game however. Two sides to an impressive coin.

[RegionalDialect]

Himitsu a écrit :

The first has a nice atmosphere of course but that Atlas character from the start is somewhat irritating. I knew he was 'off' from the start and perhaps that was too obvious for me. The submarine scenes made it extremely obvious. Then he just becomes plain unlikeable with absolutely no redeeming qualities at all. All the fantastic audio diaries I came across made up for this though. Great acting throughout. 2 seems more naturally a scary and subtle an experience and just builds upon everything with relative ease. Of course, Rapture is in even worse a shape.. And that Andrew Ryan comes across as more understandable in his vision/s rather than largely unlikeable. Lamb makes a great female antagonist, intelligent and classically attractive in her propaganda which slowly builds upon her egotistical nature.

I think if you hadn't played any Bioshock before and played the two one after the other (like I have) you can see and feel improvement. Bioshock 1 is a fantastic game however. Two sides to an impressive coin.

Wait, you found Atlas annoying and Andrew Ryan unlikeable? You're having me on...

[RStriker69 ♥]

I would say that Bioshock 2 simply didn't live up to the standard set by bioshock 1. I really like Bioshock 2, and I think it's a great game in its own right, however, I believe Bioshock 1 was objectively a better game, and it was also miles ahead of the compettition when it came out, whereas bioshock 2 was just competitive with its contemporaries, not vastly superior like Biioshock 1 was compared to the games released near it chronologically.

If I had to rate the three , I'd go 1 > infinte > 2 with infinite being very close to as good as one, while 2 is a distant third, but still better than most other games out there at the time.

[Lesskarr Wolf]

2 and infintite were better in my opinion 2 because of story infinite because of the gameplay and ending

[Skullson]

infinte was good, especially the story but the gunplay IMO was terrible. Bioshock 2's gunplay was great but maybe lacked on the story a bit. I think 1 will always be favourited since it was so fresh and unique when it was released.

[Not So Serious]

rosarioluigi a écrit :

I didn't like the Drill it seemed so slow and clunky. I much preferred my trusty wrench. I also didn't like the way you had to protect the little sisters to get ADAM. Interesting yes but still seemed like a bit of a time-sink to me.

Those are my only gripes.

Protecting the Little Sisters can be a bit irritating but, funny thing, you don't really have to.
If you decide to rescue the little sisters, you just have to walk to a vent and hit rescue. You get less adam, but it essentially lets you skip the entire escort mission (though I usually had her get one corpse because Roleplay)

[Ivlichnov]

Bioshock 2 has some annoying design decisions (like the respawning splicers), but it also had some new features that are good (like the remote hacking).

And it’s worth playing Bioshock 2 to get another slice of Rapture and then to play the expansion called Minerva’s Den.

[Questengine]

Bioshock 2 is my favorite by a long shot. Compared to 1, it has more weapon and plasmid variety, every weapon has a melee (switching to the wrench in 1 was ridiculous), there's more vareity in enemies, more info about the world, more interesting NPCs, more decisions that really matter...I think literally every thing about 2 was better than 1.

The only criticsm that makes sense to me is that 2 was unneccessary. I absolutely agree that 1 could have stood alone in the history of gaming and been a complete thing all by itself. So 2 was unnecessary, but I'm glad they made it because it was awesome.

Bio 1 was more of a horror game than either of the others, so if you're into that play 1.

Infinite was the weakest as far as I'm concerned.

For whoever mentioned Tennanbaum not having a large enough role in 2, you should play Minerva's Den. Her speaking part isn't huge, but her character and that add-on pretty much wrap up every loose thread in the Bioshock 1 and 2 universe. You can get M
inerva's Den on steam now that GFW is gone.

[Casket The Clown]

I'd rate them: 1 = 2 > Infinite.

I prefer the atmosphere in 1, the gameplay in 2, Infinite felt more dumbed-down than Bioshock 1 did from SS2.

Nukem89 a écrit :

I think 1 will always be favourited since it was so fresh and unique when it was released.

I'd like to point out System Shock 2, which Bioshock's story copied pretty closely, including the twist.

I prefer System Shock 2 over all the Bioshock games in story, gameplay, and atmosphere.