In defense of Bioshock 2.....

[Meggiepants]

I thought Bioshock 1 was good enough to play again. Did so recently. But to each his own.

I will be playing Bioshock 2 again as well, but as with Bioshock I will probably give it some time in between. I enjoyed both the titles.

I won't lie. I liked the first Bioshock better, but I think that has more to do with the fact that when I first entered Rapture it was fresh and new, and I loved the setting. The second time I entered Rapture in Bioshock 2, I didn't really have that moment. But it could have had I played it first.

 

[blindthrall]

As one of SS2's original fans, I was kind of unsure about BS1, until I read the synopsis. (Objectivist Dystopia Undersea? Are we mad-libbing term papers?) BS2 is somewhat the game I was afraid of. The Medical Pavilion is a System Shock level. The layout, the paranoia, the ammo starvation...playing that is like a demo for System Shock. The reason I like System better is its characters. The Many and SHODAN are just better antagonists than Andrew Ryan, good as he was. They speak to you on a primal level, whereas Ryan is more about politics. Fort Frolic, and to a lesser extent Arcadia, are better than many System Shock levels. But Hephestaus is like a Quake 2 level, and is only interesting for story. Afterwards the game chokes. At least BS2 had good levels throughout, with the exception of Persephone, which I hated. Only the first half of BS has any replay value. Also, both games needed to severely restrict your resources to be anything like SS2. System Shock didn't have game breaking combinations like BS, either. Natural Camouflage + Fountain of Youth? Scout + Hypnotize? Bees + Drill Specialist? Bees and anything, really. Also, I HATE Sophia Lamb. She's a caricature thought up by a hack. Surprise! Just like all the villans in Rand's stories.