Bioshock and Mass Effect, Game Informer Drives it Home

[SeanthePsycho]

If you are confused as to why Bioshock 2 got a still good, but lower score than Mass Effect 2, they clearly state that the first half of the game is a redux of what was Rapture in the first game. That and the fact that gameplay wise, and I have to agree with them on this, if you're a Big Daddy aren't you supposed to at least be stronger than splicers and take names no matter where it comes.

I have yet to play Bioshock 2, but the review GI gave it I thought was fair and it makes sense as I have seen the same response all across the board. With Mass Effect 2, Bioware fixed all the issues Gamers had with the first game and went forward. Bioshock 2 team decided to give Bioshock 1 a new coat of paint before adding the good stuff and some multiplayer.

 

[The Rascal King]

Because EA is bigger and has more money than 2k games?

Bingo was his name-o

 

[Axeli]

@Axeli, I won't argue that there were improvements made. I simply think that, like improvemtns in Bioshock 2, the really don't change how it feels to play the game at all.

And what does that even mean? Most people would agree that a sequel should feel familiar while being different and improved.

Why would you ever buy a sequel if you wanted something completely different? I don't get what point you are trying to make at all.

I'm probably not getting it across well then. Obviously, games have many elements: story, environment, character, etc. The biggest element is actual gameplay, or how it feels to be the character running about. My point is that both sequels have no change in this element from ther predecessors so why the difference.

HOWEVAR! I pretty got what I wanted here already. Nice and clear perspective on the issue. Thanks for wasting your time with me, everybody.

Yeah, but the gameplay is rather different. I suppose the "strolling" parts without any combat are the same, but what is there to change or improve about it anyway?

This just doesn't sound like a valid complaint, more like unnecessary nit-picking. Why would the fact that some parts of ME2 are similar to ME1 make ME2 worse in relation to Bioshock 2?

Didn't you originally say that ME2 isn't any better because it doesn't improve much as sequel? But now you agree it improves quite a lot. I'd say I won this argument. =)

 

[minignu]

I'd argue your point about each game not being that much of an improbement. When I started ME2, I thought there wasn't that much of an overhaul, but now I'm replaying Mass Effect 1 to start a new career in the sequel and I realised just how much of an improvement it really is:

* Far deeper character depth and interaction
* Far, far better combat
* Less flow breaking inventory fiddling
* They removed the bloody Mako (although some lament this change, it was rubbish)
* Excellent level design in comparison to the first(although there is less to do in ME2, the original ME only had 3 levels for all the N7 missions, just with different enemies and some movement of crates)
* Much improved dialogue and QTE that for once, I didn't dislike
* More intuitive controls, particularily with squad command
* Some brilliant set pieces (I'm sure you know what I'm talking about)
* And loads of other minor things here and there

Really, rose tinted glasses made Mass Effect feel better than it actually was and ME2 is by far a superior game (in fact, is now one of my favourite) despite a few steps backwards (planet scanning, less side missions, less customisation). In comparison, Bioshock 2 was pretty samey when you get down and play both (possibly biased on my part as I never thought it was as great as it was made out). But hey, that's my opinion and that's what a review is - opinion.

 

[Axeli]

Really, rose tinted glasses made Mass Effect feel better than it actually was and ME2 is by far a superior game (in fact, is now one of my favourite) despite a few steps backwards (planet scanning, less side missions, less customisation).

I didn't really ever have any bias with ME1: I always kinda thought it wasn't much of an improvement to the usual Bioware formula, you know, from KoTOR and such. ME2 on the other hand tops everything they have done this far.
It still has some flaws, but... Well, you know when you consider going back to start with a new character in ME1 somewhere along the way playing ME2? I realize don't feel like going back to the old one much at all anymore, despite there being a lot more reason to than with most other game series. ME2 just did nearly everything that much better.

I'm still planning on marathoning through the whole series when ME3 comes out though...

 

[ShakesZX]

Story is much darker and grittier than the old one. Art design is also a lot darker and the environments are much more lively on habited worlds.

I will agree that the art direction is grittier and darker than the first. But only in the same way that strip clubs are grittier and darker than a ballet hall. The Story is pretty much the same level of darkness as the first. They merely tried to disguise it as darker by throwing around gangs and darker, harsher lighting.

 

[Acier]

Ah lawdy! Someone having a different opinion than you! The travesty!

Seriously it'snot a big deal if a game reviewer didn't think it's as good as you did. Just calm down and don't panic

 

[Thaius]

Because Mass Effect 2 was a better improvement over its predecessor than Bioshock 2. They were both good games, but Mass Effect completely reinvented itself gameplay-wise, whereas Bioshock 2 merely improved itself (though admittedly, it had no real need to reinvent itself as ME2 did).

I loved them both, but in my opinion Mass Effect 2 is one of the greatest games I have ever played, if not the greatest (and that's not easy for me: no game has even challenged that place in my heart since Final Fantasy VII). Bioshock 2 was amazing, but didn't manage to steal its predecessor's place in my memory, something Mass Effect 2 did relentlessly.

I do think Bioshock 2 deserves more than 8.5, but I agree that Mass Effect 2 deserves a higher rating.

 

[Quad08]

Just calm down and don't panic

Hitchhickers guide?

OT: Haven't played Bioshock 2 yet but I have to say that the overall improvements of ME2 from ME1 were astounding and overall improved an already awesome game

 

[Axeli]

Story is much darker and grittier than the old one. Art design is also a lot darker and the environments are much more lively on habited worlds.

I will agree that the art direction is grittier and darker than the first. But only in the same way that strip clubs are grittier and darker than a ballet hall. The Story is pretty much the same level of darkness as the first. They merely tried to disguise it as darker by throwing around gangs and darker, harsher lighting.

It was more than just superficial changes. I suppose it might fall more into the category of setting than story, but there is a lot of messed up stuff going around you in ME2. And you do deal with darker and more morally ambiguous things.

Take the very first recruitment missions for example. The plague you encounter while getting Mordin, finding Garrus tired and fighting his last stand after his entire team has just been killed right before him. The prison Jack is in doesn't need much elaboration.
And that's from the first quarter of the game.

The main plot might not be that much darker than ME1's (although...), but the setting and a side plots definitely are (and mind you, those make like 90% of ME2's story).

It's much more than art style and lighting.

 

[WayOutThere]

Both games make a marginal improvement to the actual gameplay mechanics

The combat in ME2 was a MASSIVE improvement over the first Mass Effect.
Here's something I wrote in a previous thread about it:

Spoiler

First of all, the combat in the Makko was terribly simplistic and repetitive. Good riddance to it.

The thing about the shooty action in ME1 is either that in the side-missions the level design ruined it (because there was only like one room and you would tediously have to attack and retreat) or in the main missions everything was too easy for some reason. Also, the fact that enemies walked right up to you turned things into a cluster-fuck. It's odd that the actual mechanics of the combat were good but they managed to ruin it anyway.

All these problems are gone in ME2. Not only is Mass Effect now a good shooter, its one of the best.

From what I've heard Bioshock 2 only tweaks the original's combat so its not suprising to me it got a lower score.

 

[ShakesZX]

Story is much darker and grittier than the old one. Art design is also a lot darker and the environments are much more lively on habited worlds.

I will agree that the art direction is grittier and darker than the first. But only in the same way that strip clubs are grittier and darker than a ballet hall. The Story is pretty much the same level of darkness as the first. They merely tried to disguise it as darker by throwing around gangs and darker, harsher lighting.

It was more than just superficial changes. I suppose it might fall more into the category of setting than story, but there is a lot of messed up stuff going around you in ME2. And you do deal with darker and more morally ambiguous things.

Take the very first recruitment missions for example. The plague you encounter while getting Mordin, finding Garrus tired and fighting his last stand after his entire team has just been killed right before him. The prison Jack is in doesn't need much elaboration.
And that's from the first quarter of the game.

The main plot might not be that much darker than ME1's (although...), but the setting and a side plots definitely are (and mind you, those make like 90% of ME2's story).

It's much more than art style and lighting.

Alright, I will admit that there is a little bit of a difference in the mood of the game. Sure, fining out that Garrus has become hardened to the point of revenge for revenge's sake is a "more adult" version of the Garrus from the first game, And Jack and her backstory is a messed up mess of emotion, without question. But the problem to me is that these points are all disconnected from one another. It takes a bit too long to string all of these points together into a coherent portion that is relevant to the game.

I am merely talking about the main game itself. That is what is supposedly the "more hardcore, adult oriented" portion that is taking the main stage. The Characters are more in depth, more realized than they were in the first game, and the ties of emotional baggage that they brings adds some wheight to the main game. However, these parts exist independent of the main story. There is no reason, other than loyalty, tying the darker parts of the universe into the grander tale of Shepard. Except for the gaining an achievement and another ending, there would little difference to the overall story if these backstories didn't exist.

I will accept that the characters of Mass Effect 2 come from a darker reality, but they're still part of the same Universe. I am still unable to commit myself to believing that, due to the separation and disjointed nature of the backstories, they can really be considered part of the main story.

 

[Axeli]

Story is much darker and grittier than the old one. Art design is also a lot darker and the environments are much more lively on habited worlds.

I will agree that the art direction is grittier and darker than the first. But only in the same way that strip clubs are grittier and darker than a ballet hall. The Story is pretty much the same level of darkness as the first. They merely tried to disguise it as darker by throwing around gangs and darker, harsher lighting.

It was more than just superficial changes. I suppose it might fall more into the category of setting than story, but there is a lot of messed up stuff going around you in ME2. And you do deal with darker and more morally ambiguous things.

Take the very first recruitment missions for example. The plague you encounter while getting Mordin, finding Garrus tired and fighting his last stand after his entire team has just been killed right before him. The prison Jack is in doesn't need much elaboration.
And that's from the first quarter of the game.

The main plot might not be that much darker than ME1's (although...), but the setting and a side plots definitely are (and mind you, those make like 90% of ME2's story).

It's much more than art style and lighting.

Alright, I will admit that there is a little bit of a difference in the mood of the game. Sure, fining out that Garrus has become hardened to the point of revenge for revenge's sake is a "more adult" version of the Garrus from the first game, And Jack and her backstory is a messed up mess of emotion, without question. But the problem to me is that these points are all disconnected from one another. It takes a bit too long to string all of these points together into a coherent portion that is relevant to the game.

I am merely talking about the main game itself. That is what is supposedly the "more hardcore, adult oriented" portion that is taking the main stage. The Characters are more in depth, more realized than they were in the first game, and the ties of emotional baggage that they brings adds some wheight to the main game. However, these parts exist independent of the main story. There is no reason, other than loyalty, tying the darker parts of the universe into the grander tale of Shepard. Except for the gaining an achievement and another ending, there would little difference to the overall story if these backstories didn't exist.

I will accept that the characters of Mass Effect 2 come from a darker reality, but they're still part of the same Universe. I am still unable to commit myself to believing that, due to the separation and disjointed nature of the backstories, they can really be considered part of the main story.

Dude, ME2's story must have sucked for you then, because there's much more of character side stories than main plot. And honestly, without those side stories, the main story is is pretty dull and soulless. The reason why you care so much at the last mission isn't what happened on Horizon, dead Reaper or the Collector ship. It's because you are facing impossible odds with the team you spend the whole game getting to know.

The character stories are what makes most of this game (like I said, I'd say about 90%), and most of them are easily equally important for the overall depth and feel of the game. They are equally important part to the setting and atmosphere. No reason I can see to ignore their contribution as "disconnected" when there's obviously as much focus on them.

Edit:
I.e. those side stories ARE the main game, because without them the game is about 3 hours long.

 

[ShakesZX]

Story is much darker and grittier than the old one. Art design is also a lot darker and the environments are much more lively on habited worlds.

I will agree that the art direction is grittier and darker than the first. But only in the same way that strip clubs are grittier and darker than a ballet hall. The Story is pretty much the same level of darkness as the first. They merely tried to disguise it as darker by throwing around gangs and darker, harsher lighting.

It was more than just superficial changes. I suppose it might fall more into the category of setting than story, but there is a lot of messed up stuff going around you in ME2. And you do deal with darker and more morally ambiguous things.

Take the very first recruitment missions for example. The plague you encounter while getting Mordin, finding Garrus tired and fighting his last stand after his entire team has just been killed right before him. The prison Jack is in doesn't need much elaboration.
And that's from the first quarter of the game.

The main plot might not be that much darker than ME1's (although...), but the setting and a side plots definitely are (and mind you, those make like 90% of ME2's story).

It's much more than art style and lighting.

Alright, I will admit that there is a little bit of a difference in the mood of the game. Sure, fining out that Garrus has become hardened to the point of revenge for revenge's sake is a "more adult" version of the Garrus from the first game, And Jack and her backstory is a messed up mess of emotion, without question. But the problem to me is that these points are all disconnected from one another. It takes a bit too long to string all of these points together into a coherent portion that is relevant to the game.

I am merely talking about the main game itself. That is what is supposedly the "more hardcore, adult oriented" portion that is taking the main stage. The Characters are more in depth, more realized than they were in the first game, and the ties of emotional baggage that they brings adds some wheight to the main game. However, these parts exist independent of the main story. There is no reason, other than loyalty, tying the darker parts of the universe into the grander tale of Shepard. Except for the gaining an achievement and another ending, there would little difference to the overall story if these backstories didn't exist.

I will accept that the characters of Mass Effect 2 come from a darker reality, but they're still part of the same Universe. I am still unable to commit myself to believing that, due to the separation and disjointed nature of the backstories, they can really be considered part of the main story.

Dude, ME2's story must have sucked for you then, because there's much more of character side stories than main plot. And honestly, without those side stories, the main story is is pretty dull and soulless. The reason why you care so much at the last mission isn't what happened on Horizon, dead Reaper or the Collector ship. It's because you are facing impossible odds with the team you spend the whole game getting to know.

The character stories are what makes most of this game (like I said, I'd say about 90%), and most of them are easily equally important for the overall depth and feel of the game. They are equally important part to the setting and atmosphere. No reason I can see to ignore their contribution as "disconnected" when there's obviously as much focus on them.

Edit:
I.e. those side stories ARE the main game, because without them the game is about 3 hours long.

I'm not saying i didn't love the game. I actually haven't put it down since i got it. I loved the back stories too. Especially Miranda's and Garrus'. I just wouldn't classify them as part of the main story.

If that is how you define them, then the main story is decidedly much,much darker than in the first Mass Effect.

 

[Nouw]

I haven't played either ( stupid computer!) yet so I can't have a say BUT I think Bioshock 2 deserves a higher rating.

 

[Axeli]

snip

I'm not saying i didn't love the game. I actually haven't put it down since i got it. I loved the back stories too. Especially Miranda's and Garrus'. I just wouldn't classify them as part of the main story.

If that is how you define them, then the main story is decidedly much,much darker than in the first Mass Effect.

I just don't see why'd you put so high wall between the main plot and side stories that you'd not consider them being dark and gritty the same as Mass Effect 2 being dark and gritty. I don't get the reasoning "Mass Effect 2 isn't dark because those aren't examples from the main plot" when they are obviously equal in importance for the game as the main plot is.

Besides, people being abducted for human experiments and to be liquefied into building materials for a grotesque cyborg god isn't dark?

 

[Anticitizen_Two]

Mass Effect 2 is a more popular title. Most fans of the first anxiously awaited the second, while a good number of Bioshock fans didn't think a sequel was necessary. And seeing how Game Informer conducts its reviews by looking at how popular a game is and scoring it accordingly, Mass Effect 2 got a higher score than Bioshock 2.

 

[Mother Yeti]

I think it is hilarious that your proposed fix for this EGREGIOUS ERROR! is to adjust each score by 3/4 of a point.

Basically, this is why I'm generally against numerical ratings of games. They're totally arbitrary and people assign waaaaaay too much importance to them. Did you try, I don't know, reading the actual reviews to find out why they earned those scores?

 

[Hiphophippo]

I'm not going to fuss over a small review score quirk. I personally felt both games improved upon their formers but I am a little afraid they'll do a Bioshock 3. Sometimes it's best to let good games / movies / books end.