| TruckOSaurus said: Was BioShock 2 really that much inferior to its predecessor? |
Gameplay wise no - but as an SP campaign it was both weaker and essentially hobbled by being uneeded or really adding anything to the existing narrative of Bioshock itself. The problem Buishock 2 faced was that the original left nowhere really interesting to go in Rapture - the main story was fully played out. Bioshock 2 - like most sequels - simply fell into the trap of trying to shoehorn something plotwise around the edges of it's predecessor.
The result, as with a lot of game sequels (not all of course) was something that felt solid gameplay wise but less engaging and involving narratively. I mean look at the obvious "hey, what about a Big Sister instead of a Big Daddy?" mechanic - then they didn't really do anything with it : certainly they failed to match the cinematics and marketing concepts they pushed prior to release about how amazing combat would be with the Big Sister. To be fair I could say the same thing about Skyrim and Dragons mind - whenever a game promises amazing, astonishingly dynamic combat it always turns out to mean an initially overpowered foe whose moves you learn pretty quickly who will soon, as you power up over the course of the game, come to feel like nothing to be worried about.
Ironically they did come up with a pretty interesting concept (what if you were a Bid Daddy) but then failed to translate that faithfully gameplay wise in that you were clearly not truly as powerful a wreaking engine as the franchise had already established a Big Daddy to be.
Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...
