what bioshock 2?

It feels a bit weird that they completely sidestep Bioshock 2 in that DLC, considering it was this great tourist run-through the entire franchise. I didn't find anything wrong with the second part. Bioshock 2 got dealt a shitty hand because the first game had such a great twist and unique setting that it would be really difficult for anyone to follow up those expectations. Instead of getting this mindblowing sequel we got a competent game that simply built atop the foundations of the original without taking too many risks - but who can blame them when you're an outside team and suddenly they dump Ken Levine's baby in your hands and tell you GO MAKE ANOTHER CLASSIC.

I can understand Levine's reasoning for excluding it from the DLC as I remember reading that he was very much against making a second game at that time, but it also feels a little, I dunno, petty maybe? They could have at least put a little bit in there instead of very obviously showing they don't even acknowledge the second games existence because they didn't work on it.

I completely agree with that first statement. It would have been incredibly tough. When it comes to making a reference to 2, all it would have taken is just some kind of reference to the existence of Delta or the Alpha series. Even that would've been literally it. It comes across as a bit petty to me as well, especially since Infinite was clearly inspired by some of the revamped mechanics that 2 introduced. Hell, even Murder of Crows works exactly the same as the Hornet's in 2, including the upgrade path.

I also think that Bioshock 2 did a lot of things better than 1; better moral system, better combat, better hacking mechanics (can't cheese the system any more by just running up to machines and hacking, which paused the game in 1). I also really like how 2 makes it obvious that Rapture is a city being slowly reclaimed by the ocean, with even plant life starting to settle in. I do feel as though the audio logs are not as well written as 1, and obviously the massive shock factor of the twist and the introduction to Rapture is just not there. Some of the logs do fill in gaps left by Bioshock 1, like how the Protector program continued after Suchong's untimely demise.

Also, depending on your point of view, the whole playing as a Big Daddy thing can be seen as incredibly shoehorned, especially since the story had to change slightly to accommodate a Big Daddy that has free will and able to use plasmids. I do really like how the ending worked in the whole fatherhood angle though, was not expecting the it to do that, and I'm glad it did.

I really enjoyed this game even so I consider it canon. People like to say it shouldn't exist but it was still fun and the story was pretty good.

@adequatelyprepared: My only problem with playing as a Big Daddy was that just like in the first game, it has no consequence upon the gameplay whatsoever. A single splicer can reduce my lifebar to nothing with a few shots from a standard pistol, and even if I am a prototype, it still felt like everyone in the game is way tougher than you are. Simply adding louder footsteps and a drill didn't make me feel like I am a towering monster in a suit.

As for the story, well it was fine. I thought it certainly matched those overbearing Ayn Rand~ian tones of the first, albeit from a different angle.

I completely agree that all they would have needed to do was show even a brief glimpse of Delta. Like you come upon a door an airlocks that is stick and through the crack you could see Delta walking by - just that, 5 seconds. Or maybe shown a Big Sister somewhere skulking about. It's a shame and a wasted opportunity to make this a full circle that encompasses all of the fiction.

@humanity: Bioshock Infinite: a wasted opportunity. That's what that entire game feels like. They tried to make a catch-all story and they ended up futzing it up in a lot of really important ways.

I view everything as canon. Those BioShaq photoshops? Just as integral to the story as "Would you kindly".

You're entitled to that opinion but I strongly disagree with that sentiment. I'm not sure what others for looking for going into Infinite, and quite frankly I wasn't even sure myself. They released a lot of early footage that later kept changing and morphing into the game we finally played. What I do know is that despite still not liking the combat a whole lot, for me the story between Booker and Elizabeth became paramount, above anything else. When Crystal Dynamics stated that they wanted the players to "care" about Lara Croft in their latest reboot the internet erupted in outrage at how disgusting and sexist the notion is. But that is exactly how I felt playing the latter half of the game - I actually cared about Elizabeth and when you get separated there was a sense of urgency that I experienced, a feeling like I need to hurry and save her. This emotional resonance followed me through to the end of the game and made the entire experience really satisfying. I didn't care about any of the technical mumbo jumbo, or how this doesn't make sense or that, I cared about the people in the story, something that I think a lot of people overlooked by way of trying to mechanically graph out the story in a very dry and scientific manner.

Maybe to some Levine wasted the opportunity to once again open up Atlas Shrugged on one side with The Dark Tower on the other, and begin concocting some incredibly intricate bridge between the narratives of his past and present endeavors. For me he utilized an opportunity to tell an emotional story about two people in a completely new setting that had some fun hooks reaching back to the original framework - I didn't feel like anything was wasted there.

I liked BioShock 2, I might even have the unpopular opinion that it is the most even of all the games. While the story doesn't punch quite as hard as its richer siblings do, it doesn't lose itself in the third act. The ending feels just as sound as the beginning. Anybody remember the bullshit ending to BioShock? People tend to leave that out when they talk about how great that game is. You can't sit here and tell me this thing is a masterpiece when it flounders through its third act and wraps up its story with a shitty thirty second exposition. Even from a gameplay standpoint BioShock 2 took a lot of the best ideas from the first game and made them better. And while the controls are a bit more tight and action friendly in Infinite, the gameplay feels like a big step backward from a depth perspective. It's an incredibly straightforward game compared to the other two which have ammo types, require the use of traps, hacking, and have moments where you're both on the offensive and defensive.

I really don't want to get into yet another "you're an idiot, Infinite was great" debate, so don't bother.

The only thing I didn't like about the original was the final boss fight - thought the story hung together well enough at the end, even if the final third of the game is the weakest of three very strong acts. Bio2 is an excellent game from a gameplay perspective, better than Bio1 or Infinite in my opinion, it just feels a bit b-side when compared to the rest of the BioShock canon.

Bioshock is a good game and has a nice story ... and I think the big sister has an awesome design and that game has like you know a good ending unlike Bioshock 1 , I dunno why people try to dismiss it and diss it.

I couldn't even begin to tell you why people dislike Bioshock 2. Granted, I've only finished it once and that was some time ago, but I did enjoy it.

My only problem with it is the part where you have to defend Little Sisters if you want the "good" ending, which is easily sidestepped by going for the "bad" ending and getting pretty much the same story.

Bioshock 2 was a cash grab. The combat mechanics were better but it was not a game that needed to be made. Much like how some people feel about The Bureau: XCom Declassified (which I actually like). It seems 2k Marin often makes games a lot of people feel are unnecessary cash grabs- that's actually unfortunate in my opinion as they seem to be a very talented studio and do well with what they're given.

So, game play wise Bioshock 2 is fine and if someone wanted to play it I certainly wouldn't tell them not to. However, Bioshock 2 story wise is terrible, and completely unnecessary in Bioshock canon. I feel Infinite did it right in that it was more Bioshock but a completely different world that ends up having an interesting connection yet maintains its own narrative.

The very first Bioshock had a story that did not need more bolted onto it which is all Bioshock 2 does.

This is, of course, my opinion and not facts.

I honestly think the story in Bioshock one should have concluded after the twist, that was the biggest thing the game had going for it, and once it was over with, it just dragged on for a another few hours before it ended on a weak note. It definitely would have been a much more powerful experience if that was shown at the end of the game, as opposed to the end of the second act. Though I guess they did need you to get the brainwashing removed so you could actually face the big bad and not have him just kill you.

@shagge said:

Pretty much. With the catch-all multi-verse going on, you could just say that BioShock 2 exists in a different universe, separate to the one that featured the original and Infinite. It would explain why Sofia Lamb isn't referenced or mentioned at all in the original BioShock, yet in BioShock 2 was portrayed as being someone of importance within the social structure.

I know you're joking btw, but still, your comment made for a good leaping point to... pointing out why the multi-verse pretty much allows anything and everything to be canon :P

Yup, I agree. BioShock 2 is undoubtedly my favourite of the three even, because it manages to still evoke the same outstanding atmosphere as the first game, but is also the one of the three that I consider to have gameplay that's worth a damn. It controls better the original but still retains all of the versatility and mechanics. Not to mention that it had morality choices that weren't so black & white like in the original at that.

I view it as an alternate universe of Rapture considering there's no mention of anything at all related to BioShock 2 in either of the other two games. I felt like the whole infinite universes thing helped BioShock 2 more than it hurt it because pretty much justifies its existence. On the topic of BioShock 2 being good or not, I think it's a solid game. It's just a shame it had to be BioShock 2. I think literally everything about the first game was better besides the graphical fidelity but BioShock 1 was so much more inspired so it kinda doesn't matter that textures look better here and there. Everything about BioShock 2 felt like an unnecessary sequel that was just going through the motions of aping stuff from the first game and not doing anything clever or interesting with it. Like...yeah, you can dual wield guns and plasmids, I never found that to be a huge advantage to just swapping in the first game. It's not like there was some crazy animation when swapping between guns and plasmids, it was instantaneous. I also found the atmosphere of the first game to be totally lost in the second, part of its because we know the deal with Rapture. You explore it pretty thoroughly and learns its history in the first game. The other part is because you're a 10 foot tall lumbering Terminator, kinda hard to feel vulnerable when you're way bigger than your opponents and you're covering in armor.

Its a alternate universe of Bioshock because the possibilities are infinite

Wasn't there a picture of Subject Delta at the end of Burial at Sea Episode 2?

If Elizabeth invented Big Daddy imprinting and Suchong didn't figure it out until his death in 1959, then how was Subject Delta imprinted on Eleanor Lamb back in 1958????

KEN LEVINE YOU RUINED BIOSHOCK LORE!

It is, the only thing is how bringing back the Little Sisters ten years after kind of ruins Elizabeth's whole "I changed something!" I read some people brought up the point about Suchong's death, and if you play the Burial At Sea 2, they make it seems as if people didn't know if he was dead or not, and that's why Gil Alexander took his place. I think it makes sense as to why it wasn't mentioned, I mean, for one, it takes place ten years apart, and two, if we consider Lamb, she took a backseat to Fontaine in terms of being against Andrew Ryan and so the focus wasn't on her. I don't think of it as alternate universe, everything, if you really think about it and connect it, fits.

I choose to believe that this replaces the first Bioshock, which is no longer canon.

@koolaid: I don't think Suchong figured it out; him and Fink were both having that same problem, which is why it came naturally as Elizabeth helped Songbird, and The Little Sister helped the Big Daddy. Perhaps I didn't get it though, with the whole 'thorn in lions paw' thing.

I think BioShock 2 is great and have no problem believing it's part of the official Bioshock lore.

I really oughta play BioShock 2 again sometime.

Given the infinite possibility setup I think this very much can be considered part of the Bioshock lore and canon.

Of course. It's a fantastic game.

Same here. Partly because I barely remember the game outside a few moments (and a few jokes I made about it when I blogged about it in 2010); partly because of the BioShaq joke opportunities.

I don't think he did either. But the plot hole I'm pointing out is that Subject Delta IS imprinted on Eleanor Lamb when Sofia Lamb makes him shoot himself during the New Year riots, but the Little Sister helping the Big Daddy scene (which presumably carves the way for all future imprinting) happens AFTER the New Years attacks. I'm just joking around, it's a minor plot hole. I just like pointing it out because it this kind of thing happens all the time when you start doing prequel stuff. (Also, I don't think the Bioshock Infinite team gave a shit about what was established in Bioshock 2.)

@koolaid: When Eleanor Lamb shoots him, having him under control, it doesn't have anything to do with imprinting. One of the splicers used the Hypnotize Big Daddy Plasmid, though yes, Sofia and Delta were bonded. Though, while I agree that it is presumed that Elizabeth was the one to start the Big Daddy/Little Sister bond, supposedly, all the different types of Big Daddy's bonded at different times from one another, and the Alpha series, which Delta is is somewhat different than the rest, so depending on what's what, then there's some continuity problems there, but I don't know.

I'm reading the wiki now to see what's possible, but it seems there isn't much issue. Initially I felt Ken Levine and the rest kind of disregarded Bioshock 2, but they didn't really, instead they simply didn't focus on it, but there doesn't seem to be any issue in terms of continuity as I read through all of this on the wiki. Now that I think about it, Infinite didn't really make Bioshock 2 feel less important, Bioshock 2 made the goals that Elizabeth had in the end somewhat pointless, because what happens is it actually ends with Delta saving the Little Sisters when little girls are taken back to Rapture.

So the circle wasn't broken until then, unless they make a sequel where it happens yet again. Sorry if this post seems weird, I kept editing as I read and thought more about it.

Bioshock 2 is an awesome game. It's only sin is being the sequel to one of the most beloved games of the last generation.