Bioshock and Mass Effect, Game Informer Drives it Home

[Lysserd]

I'll start by saying that I liked both Bioshock 2 and Mass Effect 2.
Today I got my Game Informer magazine and did what I normally do. Go to the ratings section and see how my favorite games faired. Mass Effect was graced with a 9.75 and Bioshock with a 8.25.
This doesn't make any sense to me! Both games make a marginal improvement to the actual gameplay mechanics; both games use a new plotline that is not as interesting as the first, and really only develops into its fullness at the end; and both take place in the same types of environments as their prequels.
Personally I would have given both games a 9, as both are very fun to play, provide interesting plot, but are no better then their predecessors overall.
My question to the world would be why do you think Game Informer game Mass Effet 2 such a higher rating then Bioshock 2?

 

[TheDoctor455]

Huh... congratulations, you've just managed to combine the two single-game focused threads that have been plaguing this site into one package for maximum efficiency. Well done.

On topic, however...
Overall, I felt that Mass Effect 2 was a huge improvement over the original in every way... except for mineral collection... its a bit hard to tell which game made it more tedious.
Bioshock 2, on the other hand... I felt it was a bit more of the same... or rather... came dangerously close to pulling a Tomb Raider... i.e. changing up the level design a bit (fortunately, the level design was radically different, but still made sense for Rapture), and adding minor gameplay improvements (fortunately, these actually made the game run more smoothly).

 

[Axeli]

If Bioshock 2 is much like the original game... Well, it deserves to get a much lower score. That game was very pretty, but didn't strike me as extraordinary at anything else.

 

[Lysserd]

Huh... congratulations, you've just managed to combine the two single-game focused threads that have been plaguing this site into one package for maximum efficiency. Well done.

On topic, however...
Overall, I felt that Mass Effect 2 was a huge improvement over the original in every way... except for mineral collection... its a bit hard to tell which game made it more tedious.
Bioshock 2, on the other hand... I felt it was a bit more of the same... or rather... came dangerously close to pulling a Tomb Raider... i.e. changing up the level design a bit (fortunately, the level design was radically different, but still made sense for Rapture), and adding minor gameplay improvements (fortunately, these actually made the game run more smoothly).

Guess I should've looked harder for those threads then, oh well.
Maybe I'm just the only guy who felt Mass Effect 2 didn't really have improvements to it. I only got one of my friends to agree, and that was after he beat it 2 times. :/
It's just, when I played ME2 I saw all the changes they made and thought "ok, how is this really any different from the function of the predecessor"?

 

[scnj]

So because, in your opinion, two different sequels aren't as good as the two different games that spawned them, they should have the same review score? That makes no sense to me.

 

[Axeli]

Huh... congratulations, you've just managed to combine the two single-game focused threads that have been plaguing this site into one package for maximum efficiency. Well done.

On topic, however...
Overall, I felt that Mass Effect 2 was a huge improvement over the original in every way... except for mineral collection... its a bit hard to tell which game made it more tedious.
Bioshock 2, on the other hand... I felt it was a bit more of the same... or rather... came dangerously close to pulling a Tomb Raider... i.e. changing up the level design a bit (fortunately, the level design was radically different, but still made sense for Rapture), and adding minor gameplay improvements (fortunately, these actually made the game run more smoothly).

Guess I should've looked harder for those threads then, oh well.
Maybe I'm just the only guy who felt Mass Effect 2 didn't really have improvements to it. I only got one of my friends to agree, and that was after he beat it 2 times. :/
It's just, when I played ME2 I saw all the changes they made and thought "ok, how is this really any different from the function of the predecessor"?

Story is much darker and grittier than the old one. Combat is much more streamlined and focused on action. RPG elements take the back seat. The characters are explored much more. Art design is also a lot darker and the environments are much more lively on habited worlds. The game pioneers the idea of the player's having an impact in the sequel. The dialogue is richer and more humorous.

There's what comes to my mind when you ask that...

 

[Cliff_m85]

I'll start by saying that I liked both Bioshock 2 and Mass Effect 2.
Today I got my Game Informer magazine and did what I normally do. Go to the ratings section and see how my favorite games faired. Mass Effect was graced with a 9.75 and Bioshock with a 8.25.
This doesn't make any sense to me! Both games make a marginal improvement to the actual gameplay mechanics; both games use a new plotline that is not as interesting as the first, and really only develops into its fullness at the end; and both take place in the same types of environments as their prequels.
Personally I would have given both games a 9, as both are very fun to play, provide interesting plot, but are no better then their predecessors overall.
My question to the world would be why do you think Game Informer game Mass Effet 2 such a higher rating then Bioshock 2?

Story. Bioshock 2 had a story that just utterly disappointed me. I was expecting a clever twist and never got one. Sure the gameplay is alot better, but what hooked most people on Bioshock 1 was the story and the atmosphere.

Mass Effect 2 had a brilliant story and better gameplay (albeit the damned mining).

For my $60 I'd go with Mass Effect 2. I'd just rent Bioshock 2.

 

[S.R.S.]

What you didn't think something was up when they gave AVP a 5?

Angry Rant: AVP Game Informer Review (5.75/10)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnICrawZLTE (not a rick roll)

 

[SnootyEnglishman]

Because maybe they just liked Mass Effect 2 a little bit better? It just an opinion y'know no need to make such a big fuss over it.

 

[ProfessorLayton]

Because it's an opinion? I really liked BioShock 2, but not everyone did. I like polka music and Woody Allen films. Everyone has their own opinions.

 

[Pingieking]

Haven't played Bioshock 2. However, I have received the opinions of a trusted source. His impression of Bioshock 2 was "It plays more like an over-sized expansion rather than a sequel. Basically the only changes were the levels, and that you are now playing as a Big Daddy." So if I simply used my opinion of Bioshock for Bioshock 2, then I'd score it in the 8.5~9 range.

Mass Effect 2 had some significant changes from the first. The complete elimination of inventory, the removal of Mako and the addition of planet scanning. Not to mention the extensive reworking of combat. My personal review score would be 9.0~9.5.

I think that one of the major picking points that a lot of reviewers had with Bioshock 2 was that it was nearly indistinguishable from the first. It's not exactly fair since the game is still of great quality, but it gives the player an overwhelming sense of "been here, done that" and kind of detract the reviewers from actually enjoying the game. Since the reviews are ultimately based on how much fun the reviewers had, that "been here, done that" feeling can drag down the overall score a lot.

 

[Lysserd]

So because, in your opinion, two different sequels aren't as good as the two different games that spawned them, they should have the same review score? That makes no sense to me.

I'm saying that Bioshock 2 is rated down for not being better then the first. I thought ME2 was also no better, but it was rated up.

@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.

@Cliff_m85, I found Bioshock 2's story to be quite good. It didn't have as many twists as the first story did, true. But I really got into the character with this one, you wake up from a coma as a big daddy (a simply creature) and the plot is simple. Find girl, get girl. As you learn more of what's really happening and awaken more the story grows in complexity.

 

[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.

 

[Generator]

Most people I know seem to like the original Bioshock better for its superior story and better environment. Bioshock 2 seems to just be the same formula as the original anyways. Not that that's a bad thing, mind you.

However, Mass Effect seems to have more of an Assassin's Creed situation going on: the original was good, but the sequel improves upon it in every single way and ends up making it a much more enjoyable experience. Sure, it may be similar to the original, but that's to be expected of a sequel and, from what I've heard, ME2 took all of the best parts from ME1 and redesigned all of the bad.

 

[Baconmonster723]

While I agree that Bioshock 2 at 8.25 was fairly low I do believe Mass Effect 2 did deserve a high score.

What I got from Bioshock 2 was that they tried to keep the same feeling, and in doing so they made the game almost exactly the same (minus the story of course). However, this isn't a bad thing. I just feel that Bioshock 2 was punished by GI because they thought it was essentially Bioshock with a different story. I would disagree with some areas of that (due to new additions i.e. the hack dart gun).

I do have to say, there were moments in Bioshock where I had to pause the game and think about what was happening, or I had a moment where I almost crapped myself, for example in a side room where you go in and see the shadow of a splicer as you trudge through the water, then the lights go out and the splicer is gone when they come back on. I just didn't get the same feeling from Bioshock 2 as I did from Bioshock 1. I believe it was a step back (a damn fine game still) but Bioshock was just hard to improve on. However, 8.25 is kinda weak of them, it deserved higher.

As for Mass Effect 2, it may not have been a vast improvement from Mass Effect but I do believe they polished the necessary areas. The overall feeling was it was something fresh. Now don't get me wrong I loved Bioshock 2 but it felt somewhat repeated to me. Granted I have a huge Bias towards Mass Effect, it is my favorite series so far, great games. But I do feel that Mass Effect 2 took what it had to the next level without really changing the basic feel, plus I mean that game had me laughing my ass off at the "easter eggs" so much it was hard to focus sometimes. I believe it deserves its high score.

However, I have lost a lot of respect for Game Informer after they handed Uncharted 2 a 10 for being a weak (yet pretty) Indiana Jones rip off that I was able to predict to a T the exact events that would occur after about 1/3rd of the game. I mean was I the only one who wasn't blinded by the great graphics of this game and actually thought that
1. the AI was pedestrian.
2. the gameplay was repetative.
3. Nathan Drake is a huge tool.

I don't bring this up to trash Uncharted 2. I bring this up to prove a point. 5 years from now, much like I do now with the Ocarina of Time I will be playing both these games and I will not be playing Uncharted 2. Don't let Game Informer's ratings tell you anything about a game. Find out whether you like the game or not and make your own rating. Because other people's opinions (including my own) are garbage. Case in Point, Don't sweat the ratings, all they are are opinions. If a game gets over an 8 it's worth a try, after that I make my own ratings for it.

 

[TheDoctor455]

Huh... congratulations, you've just managed to combine the two single-game focused threads that have been plaguing this site into one package for maximum efficiency. Well done.

On topic, however...
Overall, I felt that Mass Effect 2 was a huge improvement over the original in every way... except for mineral collection... its a bit hard to tell which game made it more tedious.
Bioshock 2, on the other hand... I felt it was a bit more of the same... or rather... came dangerously close to pulling a Tomb Raider... i.e. changing up the level design a bit (fortunately, the level design was radically different, but still made sense for Rapture), and adding minor gameplay improvements (fortunately, these actually made the game run more smoothly).

Guess I should've looked harder for those threads then, oh well.
Maybe I'm just the only guy who felt Mass Effect 2 didn't really have improvements to it. I only got one of my friends to agree, and that was after he beat it 2 times. :/
It's just, when I played ME2 I saw all the changes they made and thought "ok, how is this really any different from the function of the predecessor"?

Umm... the classes have unique skills for starters.
New characters.
Better writing (a feat I thought impossible).
While I did kinda like the heavy inventory and leveling management in the first game... I gotta say that the streamlined approach has grown on me.

 

[Guitarmasterx7]

What you didn't think something was up when they gave AVP a 5?

Angry Rant: AVP Game Informer Review (5.75/10)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnICrawZLTE (not a rick roll)

Well that's because it was reviewed from a gameplay perspective. All of the points the reviewer makes are valid, because they're clear gameplay flaws. Even though they match the source material, most movie videogames match the source material. That doesn't make them good.

Anyways, I haven't played bioshock 2, but the first bioshock was a meh first person shooter with a cool setting/atmosphere and little to no replay value. I had no interest in the second one because you're a big daddy. I would think that any connection with the character or feelings of tension or fear would be thrown out when you become a 600 lb monster with a drill for an arm. I could see points being taken off for that, because the atmosphere was really the main selling point, and Bioshock didn't really do anything else that wowed me. This is all speculation, obviously because I've yet to play it (though I've seen gameplay) but that's just my 2 cents.

As for Mass Effect 2, other than the lack of variety in weapons and armor and that boring scanning minigame, the game didn't really do anything wrong. There's a lot of people bitching that they took things out from the first one, (which was debatably good or bad) but as a standalone game it's incredible. It's not perfect, so a 9 is about what it deserved, but then again I'm not usually a fan of that type of game so from a perspective of someone who liked KOTOR it probably deserves what it got.

 

[Lysserd]

@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.

 

[olee12343]

I think Mass Effect 2 got a better overall rating for its innovation with story-telling and character development. While both games were sequels to great games, the Mass Effect frachise is, in my opinion, the more innovative one. While Bioshock 2 may have been a good game, Mass Effect 2 certainly has more "immersion".

That's all just my opinion of course.