cool48 said: I thought that was already confirmed and that it was only coming to 360?

They just announced it today.

Dallinor said: Q4 09'? That's a very long way off. Good news however for fans of the original title. New developers handling it might be cause for some concern though. And will it remain 360/PC exclusive?

 January - March 2010 right?

leo-j said: The game is actually a prequal to bioshock, and is being released for unspecified platforms according to the GT article.

I'm sure I read a couple of weeks ago that it would be 360/PC only. I could be wrong, but googling for it now is a waste of time.

Edit:

http://www.gameguru.in/features/2008/04/crysis-for-ps3-and-360-gears-of-war-2-shown-realtime-bioshock-2-staying-ms-exclusive-rumor-101-and-facts/

So will this be a further dumbed down version of System Shock, or will it be a dumbed down version of Bioshock 1?

Either way, I doubt 2K will be able to catch lightning in a bottle twice on this one, Bioshock succeeded despite it's flaws (lack of originality in game play, massively predicable storyline, repetitive enemies, really bad enemy AI), to go to the well again on this one might only serve to make those flaws more apparent and may lose fanbase.
On the other hand, slap some shiny graphics on it, and it will probably sell like gangbusters...

leo-j said: cool48 said: I thought that was already confirmed and that it was only coming to 360? They just announced it today.

 I read it in another thread someone else must of read the thread?!

I bet it won't be on the 360 at all....

If it's coming out around 2010, I am sure MS will push this project to their next console.

mrjuju said: So will this be a further dumbed down version of System Shock, or will it be a dumbed down version of Bioshock 1? Either way, I doubt 2K will be able to catch lightning in a bottle twice on this one, Bioshock succeeded despite it's flaws (lack of originality in game play, massively predicable storyline, repetitive enemies, really bad enemy AI), to go to the well again on this one might only serve to make those flaws more apparent and may lose fanbase. On the other hand, slap some shiny graphics on it, and it will probably sell like gangbusters...

You talk like you're speaking on an industry standard of quality about Bioshock and not your severe minority of an opinion. There are 89 reviews at gamerankings for Bioshock which averages a 95.3 for 360 and a 95.1 for PC. There are 28 perfect reviews and only 2 out of 89 reviews actually dip below a 90 (85 and 80). You can't claim reviewer bias 89 times considering most of them have probably played System Shock and still scored Bioshock well. If you hate BioShock, that's fine, hate on. Just don't spread that opinion like it's a fact.

 

I'm not at all claiming either reviewer bias or my opinion as fact, you read that into my post yourself. In fact, never once did I claim I hated the game, in fact I liked my time with it, the problem is that it was not, as so many claim it to be, groundbreaking. It brought nothing new to the table save for pretty graphics, and actually took several steps backwards from its spiritual forefather in several key areas of gameplay.

To act as though Bioshock had no flaws is...well, flawed thinking.

 

Edit: And how did you get that I hated it when I directly said that it SUCCEEDED dispite it's flaws? I straight up said the game worked, and that my fear was that a follow up, if done in the same way, could bring to light the games flaws. Think of it like "The Matrix" - the first one was cool, but had massive flaws that were overlooked due to what it did right (in this case being groundbreaking, in Bio's case looking cool and being diferent from 99% of the FPS population out there), when the sequels came out they were decidedly less cool, dispite the fact that they were, at their core, the same type of film. Suddenly the flaws in the formula were aparent. Go on and watch The Matrix now, after the sequels, suddenly the overwhelming preachness of the whole thing shines through, the attempt to sound philisophical by saying things that sound philisophical, the almost hairbrained attempt to darw a Croninburgian level of man/machine interaction, all all there, just waiting to come out. Yet the film is still enjoyable, just not quite what it would have been if not for Reloaded and Revolution (that was what it was, right, the name just escaped me for a minute). That is my fear for Bioshock, that an enjoyable (if not a little vapid) experence will become less enjoyable when it is strectched on too long, it happened with The Matrix, it almost happened to KOTOR (thank god it avoided that fate), and it will happen to movies and games long after I'm dead ond gone, just the way the world works...

 On the other hand, if they change up the formula a bit, and try to rectify the games shortcomings, all of this is null, and I'll gladly take back what I said, but if EA has anything to due with it...well, let's worry about that if it happens.

mrjuju said: I'm not at all claiming either reviewer bias or my opinion as fact, you read that into my post yourself. In fact, never once did I claim I hated the game, in fact I liked my time with it, the problem is that it was not, as so many claim it to be, groundbreaking. It brought nothing new to the table save for pretty graphics, and actually took several steps backwards from its spiritual forefather in several key areas of gameplay. To act as though Bioshock had no flaws is...well, flawed thinking.

You mentioned in your original post, "to go to the well again on this one might only serve to make those flaws more apparent and may lose fanbase." That sounds like it goes beyond your opinion of the game and into what the general consensus will think of the sequel. This is how I came to the conclusion you were upping your opinion as fact. If that wasn't your intention then that's fine. 

I too don't think BioShock was without flaws, just trying to point out how much the average BioShock player is not thinking it had such massive flaws as "lack of originality in game play, massively predicable storyline, repetitive enemies, really bad enemy AI".

 

Definitely not a good sign that it is a different dev team. Game still could be stellar, but I doubt it will be as good as the first one, which I enjoyed quite a bit.