Options

Bioshock 2

2456749

Posts

  • Options
    GrudgeGrudge blessed is the mind too small for doubtRegistered User regular
    edited October 2008
    So, any word on whether we'll be going back to Rapture, or if there is another city?

    Also, playing as a (former) Little Sister: AWESOME

    "Look, Mister Bubbles! It's an angel!"

    Grudge on
  • Options
    liquidloganliquidlogan Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Bought. Day 1...

    My main concern is how they will handle the story and how they deal with the plasmids. A lot of the plasmids I found were absolutely fucking useless and I continually returned to the old favorites. Honestly, some plasmids (lighting, fire, and ice namely) change the way the game can be played. But some of them, not so much.

    liquidlogan on
  • Options
    InquisitorInquisitor Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    I'm not really sure where they will go with the story from here...

    But hey! Maybe if this one has more than 4 types of enemies I'll be interested! :P I agree with the general sentiment in this thread. The game had great design, mood and concept. The story falters after that certain point and then the game just sort of drags itself and you along with it till the end. The combat got old and stale rather quick.

    If they really tighten stuff up in the sequel they could have a real winner.

    Inquisitor on
  • Options
    GlalGlal AiredaleRegistered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Flippy_D wrote: »
    Glal wrote: »
    Flippy_D wrote: »
    This is the correct analysis:
    Plot: Fantastic until 60%, then trainwreck.
    60%? Did you finish the game in 5 hours total or something? o_O
    I went absolutely everywhere I could go and some places I couldn't (fuck you trying to lock me out because I killed a guy earlier. I'm not psychic but I can noclip). I savour games.

    Which actually is probably why it's 60% for me. Game opens up, geographically speaking, a great deal after that bit. Lots to explore.

    Assuming your argument is that the scene is later than 60% through the game, and not that percentage is somehow related to total time spent =P

    Yeah, definitely later than 60%, though it's been a while since I last played it. Maybe I just explored more before that part.

    Glal on
  • Options
    HybridHybrid South AustraliaRegistered User regular
    edited October 2008
    I am looking forward to this. I'm a little bummed that Ken Levine won't be working on this, but still.
    I thought that this game had a fantastic story and gameplay, but the actual environment, Rapture, was just so breathtakingly beautiful it blew me away. I cannot wait to revisit it.

    Hybrid on
  • Options
    Shorn Scrotum ManShorn Scrotum Man Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Grudge wrote: »
    So, any word on whether we'll be going back to Rapture, or if there is another city?

    Also, playing as a (former) Little Sister: AWESOME

    "Look, Mister Bubbles! It's an angel!"

    I think if the game took us anywhere other than Rapture that people would be pissed.

    I know I would be. MOAR RAPTURE

    Shorn Scrotum Man on
    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    SpoitSpoit *twitch twitch* Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    I still need to play the first one. Was going to wait to see how the PS3 is, otherwise I might just go the PC route. This looks good though.

    Just get the PC version, it's half the price

    Spoit on
    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    killamajigkillamajig Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Maybe were looking at
    Assuming it's building off the "good" ending, a Little Sister that was left behind. Or perhaps the little sisters had "triggers" that call them back, a fail safe in case of escape.

    Either way, I highly doubt we'll be the same protagonist.

    killamajig on
    "Oh cruel fate...to be thusly boned...ask not for who the bone bones...it bones for thee."
    Killamajig and Scullykel999 on MTGO
  • Options
    ZzuluZzulu Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    That is a pretty teaser

    I generally agree with what's been said in the thread aready so I don't really have anything else to add :oops:

    Zzulu on
    t5qfc9.jpg
  • Options
    ForarForar #432 Toronto, Ontario, CanadaRegistered User regular
    edited October 2008
    killamajig wrote: »
    Maybe were looking at
    Assuming it's building off the "good" ending, a Little Sister that was left behind. Or perhaps the little sisters had "triggers" that call them back, a fail safe in case of escape.

    Either way, I highly doubt we'll be the same protagonist.

    Assuming that the Good ending is what they build off of (and from experience, this is often/usually the case), I highly doubt we'll be the original protagonist again.

    But knowing what we know about the original protagonist, that doesn't preclude being him again, nor him showing up somewhere in Rapture.

    /predictatwist

    Forar on
    First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
  • Options
    The_ScarabThe_Scarab Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Was that rapidly growing coral?

    The_Scarab on
  • Options
    Lave IILave II Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    MAJOR SPOILERS:
    The big reveal is (amongst other things) a massive criticism of the do as you are told nature of games. Thats why the bit after sucked. Your eyes were opened to your chains, you cast them off, only to slap them back on and carry on doing what you are told.

    A sequal to the game needs to address the criticisms the first game detailed or undermine the first game.

    And thats going to be fucking hard, all I can think do, is set it just before the fall and let you be a citizen who does what ever you want...

    Lave II on
  • Options
    Speed RacerSpeed Racer Scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratchRegistered User regular
    edited October 2008
    I think it's significant that the city is rising out of the ocean in the trailer. Ryan insisted that the city was reviving itself, but at the time I just kind of assumed he was in denial.

    Speed Racer on
  • Options
    CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    I thought it was about a new city being built as sort of a new rapture, but I prefer your interpretation.

    Couscous on
  • Options
    Mr BubblesMr Bubbles David Koresh Superstar Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Or rising from the ashes.

    Ho hum

    I have a nasty feeling it will be a cheap cash in sequel

    Mr Bubbles on
  • Options
    CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    If it was a cheap cash in sequel, they would just reuse all of the old textures, models, etc. from the first game.

    Couscous on
  • Options
    Speed RacerSpeed Racer Scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratchRegistered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Lave II wrote: »
    MAJOR SPOILERS:
    The big reveal is (amongst other things) a massive criticism of the do as you are told nature of games. Thats why the bit after sucked. Your eyes were opened to your chains, you cast them off, only to slap them back on and carry on doing what you are told.

    A sequal to the game needs to address the criticisms the first game detailed or undermine the first game.

    And thats going to be fucking hard, all I can think do, is set it just before the fall and let you be a citizen who does what ever you want...
    I disagree. Yes, in part the twist is supposed to be a critique of how video games work. The idea isn't that you just "slap the chains back on," it's that unrestricted freedom is a bad thing, and you've seen examples of that point throughout the entire game. Also, Jack can't possibly have a goal other than what the game makes you do. If he doesn't get Lot 192, he's gonna die, so you probably should listen to Tenenbaum. After that, Jack would either want more ADAM, want to kill Fontaine for either revenge or to take his place, want to get the hell out of dodge, or want to save Tenenbaum and the little sisters. He can't accomplish any of these goals by doing anything other than what Tenenbaum tells him to do. In the good ending, Jack willingly restricts himself according to his moral conscience, which is represented by Tenenbaum. In the bad ending, in which he's exercised his free will to hurt whomever he wants for his own gain, he follows along with Tenenbaum so he can get to Fontaine, then fucks her over afterward

    There's problems with the wind-down of Bioshock, but inconsistency isn't one of them.

    Speed Racer on
  • Options
    InzignaInzigna Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    I just want to see a prequel where you play someone that is trying to survive the initial weeks when Rapture starts to go to pieces. Imagine seeing all the torn up places brand new, with people running amok and being caught in a war.

    I like what I see in my mind.

    Inzigna on
    camo_sig2.png
  • Options
    Speed RacerSpeed Racer Scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratchRegistered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Also something to consider:
    A lot of people talk about how the Vita-Chamber in Ryan's office was turned off, so that must mean he really died. That's not how Vita Chambers work though; you get revived at the nearest one. Ryan either came back to life at some secret Vita Chamber he set up, or the one that Jack uses in the final room of Hephaestus, either way he probably escaped.

    Though, I really don't hope they play that card because honestly it would really cheapen the first game.

    Speed Racer on
  • Options
    Mx. QuillMx. Quill I now prefer "Myr. Quill", actually... {They/Them}Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    I second the notion of making more useful Plasmids. I only really used Electrobolt for the main part, but even around the half way point it just became more efficient to pump lead into some Splicers. Ammo was a lot more common than EVE Hypos thanks to the U-Invents.

    Also, they should make the Big Daddies (assuming they return) more difficult as time goes on. Again, half way point I could kill them in a minute or less with little to no planning, whereas the beginning had me desperately running away from the charging brutes.

    Mx. Quill on
  • Options
    Speed RacerSpeed Racer Scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratchRegistered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Inzigna wrote: »
    I just want to see a prequel where you play someone that is trying to survive the initial weeks when Rapture starts to go to pieces. Imagine seeing all the torn up places brand new, with people running amok and being caught in a war.

    I like what I see in my mind.

    The problem with this is that we already know the whole story. There's nothing new to tell.

    Speed Racer on
  • Options
    Speed RacerSpeed Racer Scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratchRegistered User regular
    edited October 2008
    I second the notion of making more useful Plasmids. I only really used Electrobolt for the main part, but even around the half way point it just became more efficient to pump lead into some Splicers. Ammo was a lot more common than EVE Hypos thanks to the U-Invents.

    Also, they should make the Big Daddies (assuming they return) more difficult as time goes on. Again, half way point I could kill them in a minute or less with little to no planning, whereas the beginning had me desperately running away from the charging brutes.

    See, I liked that. It made you feel like you were actually getting stronger.

    And to be fair they upgrade to Elite Big Daddies in Fort Frolic.

    Speed Racer on
  • Options
    InzignaInzigna Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    The problem with this is that we already know the whole story. There's nothing new to tell.
    Perhaps, but they can always put in new backstory. Little details that they did not have a chance to tell.

    And I would really like to see what Rapture was like before shit happened.

    Inzigna on
    camo_sig2.png
  • Options
    hojuhoju Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    killamajig wrote: »
    It drives me a little nuts that I will forever associate this game with Mad Men.

    And anyone how says this doesn't need a sequel, apparently doesn't enjoy awesome.

    As long your not some generic spec op guy going in to clean up the mess.

    Not necessarily a bad thing, both are kind of about the destruction of the American (Capitalist) Dream.

    I doubt we actually "know" anything after watching the trailer plot wise. Just a way to get us excited again.

    hoju on
    426647-1.png
  • Options
    Mx. QuillMx. Quill I now prefer "Myr. Quill", actually... {They/Them}Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Even so, the Elite Big Daddies still died too easily. And they weren't necessarily new or anything, they just had more health and defense. They could've added some new models outside of the Bouncer and Rosie.

    Mx. Quill on
  • Options
    shanisshanis LCDR, US Navy Maryland, USARegistered User regular
    edited October 2008
    I'm with you guys; I think they've told the story, and its probable that anything they've come up with for a sequal would feel stretched. Still, I'm excited to return to Rapture in any new form, even if they're just shaking the money tree on this one. I'm a sucker for this game, I think it's my favorite game in my 360 library purely because of the atmosphere.

    shanis on
    Origin(BF4) - hunter28100 / Steam - Shanis

    "Uh, I have never said that you are not good at what you do. It's just that what you do is not worth doing." -S.C.
  • Options
    ForarForar #432 Toronto, Ontario, CanadaRegistered User regular
    edited October 2008
    The_Scarab wrote: »
    Was that rapidly growing coral?

    I thought it looked like a scale model rising up from the sand of the beach.

    Which could be implying that the grown Little Sister has telekinetic powers manifesting subconsciously... or just that it was a cool effect that they wanted to use.

    Forar on
    First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
  • Options
    Speed RacerSpeed Racer Scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratchRegistered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Even so, the Elite Big Daddies still died too easily. And they weren't necessarily new or anything, they just had more health and defense. They could've added some new models outside of the Bouncer and Rosie.

    Now that I will agree with.

    I really wish the Big Daddy with the weelchair made it into the game.

    Speed Racer on
  • Options
    ForarForar #432 Toronto, Ontario, CanadaRegistered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Further thought; the original was set around 1960, correct?

    Assuming a natural life cycle for the Little Sisters (IE: they grew up at a regular rate once freed, and you died of old age at a natural rate several decades later) wouldn't this theoretically set the sequel in the 1980's or 1990's, if not later?

    That said, the woman shown may or may not be in her 20's or 30's or older, so it's not something we can necessarily pinpoint yet. My point is more "Bioshock was set in the past at a given date, and this is feasibly in the not so distant past, if not nearly the present".

    Forar on
    First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
  • Options
    shanisshanis LCDR, US Navy Maryland, USARegistered User regular
    edited October 2008
    I wouldn't worry too much about the timeline, since Rapture will probably still be stuck in its retro time period no matter what year it is outside.

    shanis on
    Origin(BF4) - hunter28100 / Steam - Shanis

    "Uh, I have never said that you are not good at what you do. It's just that what you do is not worth doing." -S.C.
  • Options
    Speed RacerSpeed Racer Scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratchRegistered User regular
    edited October 2008
    The only thing I'd like better is if this teaser were set to "I Did it My Way" by Frank Sinatra.

    Also, if this is somewhat significantly in the future, like in the 80s or 90s, then either the city has revived itself somehow, or we're not going to Rapture, because the thing would be devoid of life and fully flooded by that point.

    Heck with the size of some of the leaks I wouldn't even give the thing five years.

    You should have listened to McDonagh and built it like a bathtub, Ryan!

    Speed Racer on
  • Options
    Shorn Scrotum ManShorn Scrotum Man Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Forar wrote: »
    Further thought; the original was set around 1960, correct?

    Assuming a natural life cycle for the Little Sisters (IE: they grew up at a regular rate once freed, and you died of old age at a natural rate several decades later) wouldn't this theoretically set the sequel in the 1980's or 1990's, if not later?

    That said, the woman shown may or may not be in her 20's or 30's or older, so it's not something we can necessarily pinpoint yet. My point is more "Bioshock was set in the past at a given date, and this is feasibly in the not so distant past, if not nearly the present".

    Well, it could be one of them, like 10 years later (which would mean late teens, early 20's) could be going back to get ADAM to try and prolong your life or something. You could be dying an early death, going through the same transformation that happened to the splicers. So it could be as early as the 70's.

    Shorn Scrotum Man on
    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    ShimShamShimSham Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    So I'm pretty psyched, the first Bioshock was one of my favorites in the past several years.

    My interpretation of the teaser was that maybe some government, or research group is going to attempt to pull Rapture to the surface. And then hell breaks loose up top.

    ShimSham on
    QcGKhPm.jpg
  • Options
    killamajigkillamajig Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    given the events of the first game, you can forget about logically pacing the development of time based on the apparent aging of anyone.

    killamajig on
    "Oh cruel fate...to be thusly boned...ask not for who the bone bones...it bones for thee."
    Killamajig and Scullykel999 on MTGO
  • Options
    mastmanmastman Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    DeathPrawn wrote: »
    BioShock 2: The Re-Rapturing.

    I lolled, more so than I should have probably. But yea, prequel imo

    mastman on
    ByalIX8.png
    B.net: Kusanku
  • Options
    killamajigkillamajig Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    I'd be happy just being a splicer during the events of the first game.

    killamajig on
    "Oh cruel fate...to be thusly boned...ask not for who the bone bones...it bones for thee."
    Killamajig and Scullykel999 on MTGO
  • Options
    DeathPrawnDeathPrawn Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    Lave II wrote: »
    MAJOR SPOILERS:
    The big reveal is (amongst other things) a massive criticism of the do as you are told nature of games. Thats why the bit after sucked. Your eyes were opened to your chains, you cast them off, only to slap them back on and carry on doing what you are told.

    A sequal to the game needs to address the criticisms the first game detailed or undermine the first game.

    And thats going to be fucking hard, all I can think do, is set it just before the fall and let you be a citizen who does what ever you want...
    I disagree. Yes, in part the twist is supposed to be a critique of how video games work. The idea isn't that you just "slap the chains back on," it's that unrestricted freedom is a bad thing, and you've seen examples of that point throughout the entire game. Also, Jack can't possibly have a goal other than what the game makes you do. If he doesn't get Lot 192, he's gonna die, so you probably should listen to Tenenbaum. After that, Jack would either want more ADAM, want to kill Fontaine for either revenge or to take his place, want to get the hell out of dodge, or want to save Tenenbaum and the little sisters. He can't accomplish any of these goals by doing anything other than what Tenenbaum tells him to do. In the good ending, Jack willingly restricts himself according to his moral conscience, which is represented by Tenenbaum. In the bad ending, in which he's exercised his free will to hurt whomever he wants for his own gain, he follows along with Tenenbaum so he can get to Fontaine, then fucks her over afterward

    There's problems with the wind-down of Bioshock, but inconsistency isn't one of them.

    I meant to respond to this point in the last BioShock thread we had, but never got around to it.
    I think your interpretation of the story is a very good one, and perhaps the best one if you just look at the story. But the gameplay doesn't support this: the reason the first half of the game through the plot twist works so well narratively is that you the player are being manipulated and controlled the same way that Jack is. When Jack is shocked at the plot twist, so is the player.

    In the second half, Jack chooses to obey Tenenbaum, yes, and that choice to subjugate himself to Tenenbaum and everything she represents is (as you have noted) a significant one. But the player isn't given this choice; the second half of the game plays the same as the first half. If, as our going interpretation of the story suggests, it is the conscious choice to obey that is important (along with, yes, the basic action of obeying) it is absurd that the player gets to make no such choice. It goes against the thematic elements of the piece, as well as weakening the connection between the player and Jack. I'm not saying I know how to make the gameplay work in context of the narrative, but as it stands it does nothing to support it like in the first half of the game

    DeathPrawn on
    Signature not found.
  • Options
    killamajigkillamajig Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    DeathPrawn wrote: »
    Lave II wrote: »
    MAJOR SPOILERS:
    The big reveal is (amongst other things) a massive criticism of the do as you are told nature of games. Thats why the bit after sucked. Your eyes were opened to your chains, you cast them off, only to slap them back on and carry on doing what you are told.

    A sequal to the game needs to address the criticisms the first game detailed or undermine the first game.

    And thats going to be fucking hard, all I can think do, is set it just before the fall and let you be a citizen who does what ever you want...
    I disagree. Yes, in part the twist is supposed to be a critique of how video games work. The idea isn't that you just "slap the chains back on," it's that unrestricted freedom is a bad thing, and you've seen examples of that point throughout the entire game. Also, Jack can't possibly have a goal other than what the game makes you do. If he doesn't get Lot 192, he's gonna die, so you probably should listen to Tenenbaum. After that, Jack would either want more ADAM, want to kill Fontaine for either revenge or to take his place, want to get the hell out of dodge, or want to save Tenenbaum and the little sisters. He can't accomplish any of these goals by doing anything other than what Tenenbaum tells him to do. In the good ending, Jack willingly restricts himself according to his moral conscience, which is represented by Tenenbaum. In the bad ending, in which he's exercised his free will to hurt whomever he wants for his own gain, he follows along with Tenenbaum so he can get to Fontaine, then fucks her over afterward

    There's problems with the wind-down of Bioshock, but inconsistency isn't one of them.

    I meant to respond to this point in the last BioShock thread we had, but never got around to it.
    I think your interpretation of the story is a very good one, and perhaps the best one if you just look at the story. But the gameplay doesn't support this: the reason the first half of the game through the plot twist works so well narratively is that you the player are being manipulated and controlled the same way that Jack is. When Jack is shocked at the plot twist, so is the player.

    In the second half, Jack chooses to obey Tenenbaum, yes, and that choice to subjugate himself to Tenenbaum and everything she represents is (as you have noted) a significant one. But the player isn't given this choice; the second half of the game plays the same as the first half. If, as our going interpretation of the story suggests, it is the conscious choice to obey that is important (along with, yes, the basic action of obeying) it is absurd that the player gets to make no such choice. It goes against the thematic elements of the piece, as well as weakening the connection between the player and Jack. I'm not saying I know how to make the gameplay work in context of the narrative, but as it stands it does nothing to support it like in the first half of the game
    I picture the events following the scene with Ryan and visiting the Sister's hideaway being a game changer that opens rapture in it's entirety as a sort of sandbox mode. Where you can work towards either stopping Fontaine, or taking out Tenenbaum. Or neither, and just developing control of a portion of Rapture yourself. Granted this would be a huge pain.

    I always felt like the game could have reasonably ended right after the twist reveal, the subsequent sections with becoming a Big Daddy felt more like publisher interference demanding some sort of action conclusion then part of the original game's vision.

    Maybe ending it there, and having the sequel open up just after those events with the player getting to decide which direction to go in.

    Ultimately, they wrote themselves into a corner. It's not possible to grant a player true 100% freedom, even if you made bioshock 2 some sort of new style of MMO with 100% player generated content.

    killamajig on
    "Oh cruel fate...to be thusly boned...ask not for who the bone bones...it bones for thee."
    Killamajig and Scullykel999 on MTGO
  • Options
    DeathPrawnDeathPrawn Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    killamajig wrote: »
    DeathPrawn wrote: »
    Lave II wrote: »
    MAJOR SPOILERS:
    The big reveal is (amongst other things) a massive criticism of the do as you are told nature of games. Thats why the bit after sucked. Your eyes were opened to your chains, you cast them off, only to slap them back on and carry on doing what you are told.

    A sequal to the game needs to address the criticisms the first game detailed or undermine the first game.

    And thats going to be fucking hard, all I can think do, is set it just before the fall and let you be a citizen who does what ever you want...
    I disagree. Yes, in part the twist is supposed to be a critique of how video games work. The idea isn't that you just "slap the chains back on," it's that unrestricted freedom is a bad thing, and you've seen examples of that point throughout the entire game. Also, Jack can't possibly have a goal other than what the game makes you do. If he doesn't get Lot 192, he's gonna die, so you probably should listen to Tenenbaum. After that, Jack would either want more ADAM, want to kill Fontaine for either revenge or to take his place, want to get the hell out of dodge, or want to save Tenenbaum and the little sisters. He can't accomplish any of these goals by doing anything other than what Tenenbaum tells him to do. In the good ending, Jack willingly restricts himself according to his moral conscience, which is represented by Tenenbaum. In the bad ending, in which he's exercised his free will to hurt whomever he wants for his own gain, he follows along with Tenenbaum so he can get to Fontaine, then fucks her over afterward

    There's problems with the wind-down of Bioshock, but inconsistency isn't one of them.

    I meant to respond to this point in the last BioShock thread we had, but never got around to it.
    I think your interpretation of the story is a very good one, and perhaps the best one if you just look at the story. But the gameplay doesn't support this: the reason the first half of the game through the plot twist works so well narratively is that you the player are being manipulated and controlled the same way that Jack is. When Jack is shocked at the plot twist, so is the player.

    In the second half, Jack chooses to obey Tenenbaum, yes, and that choice to subjugate himself to Tenenbaum and everything she represents is (as you have noted) a significant one. But the player isn't given this choice; the second half of the game plays the same as the first half. If, as our going interpretation of the story suggests, it is the conscious choice to obey that is important (along with, yes, the basic action of obeying) it is absurd that the player gets to make no such choice. It goes against the thematic elements of the piece, as well as weakening the connection between the player and Jack. I'm not saying I know how to make the gameplay work in context of the narrative, but as it stands it does nothing to support it like in the first half of the game
    I picture the events following the scene with Ryan and visiting the Sister's hideaway being a game changer that opens rapture in it's entirety as a sort of sandbox mode. Where you can work towards either stopping Fontaine, or taking out Tenenbaum. Or neither, and just developing control of a portion of Rapture yourself. Granted this would be a huge pain.

    I always felt like the game could have reasonably ended right after the twist reveal, the subsequent sections with becoming a Big Daddy felt more like publisher interference demanding some sort of action conclusion then part of the original game's vision.

    Maybe ending it there, and having the sequel open up just after those events with the player getting to decide which direction to go in.

    Ultimately, they wrote themselves into a corner. It's not possible to grant a player true 100% freedom, even if you made bioshock 2 some sort of new style of MMO with 100% player generated content.
    Yeah. If there's a way to feasibly make the gameplay work with the written story and current technology, I can't figure it out. But now I'm thinking about how incredible and artsy-fartsy avant-garde the ending could have been if they ended it at the plot twist. You kill Ryan and then Fontaine comes on the radio and tells you he's activated a fast-acting poison inside you. You stagger around a bit as the game fades to black...

    DeathPrawn on
    Signature not found.
  • Options
    The_ScarabThe_Scarab Registered User regular
    edited October 2008
    I really enjoyed the post twist parts of the game. Really a lot.

    Apollo Square was creepy as FUCK. I think the gameplay suffered but the atmosphere was to a completely new level. The tenements, the high pitched wails every so often. The constant unrelenting sound of roaring flames. The museum.

    Incredible setting.

    While the twist could have been a great ending, I think despite the ham fisted final boss gameplay wise it was thematically a satisfying ending. The good one of course. The bad ending was just that.

    The_Scarab on
This discussion has been closed.