[SpA]ProtectMyBalls wrote:
i quite like yahtzees review of BS2, sums up some of my issues with it
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/ ... BioShock-2
Wow.

That man is a tool.
Ok - first up his entire argument that "BS2 <BS1" is based on the idiotic, and oft quoted, premise that Bioshock was the peak of plot writing combined with the best "de-constructed linear gameplay" (ie he, like so many other utterly stupid people think that BS1 was not 110% linear - it was. Deal with it) and therefore any attempt to do anything else with this self contained, fully resolved bottle of perfection will just end in failure.
What a retard.
BS1s plot is hilarious. It makes precisely no sense on any level, from the way Adam works to the economy of Rapture to the actual existence of this underwater metropolis in the first place. It's utter crap. Because Mr Reviewer cannot see that though, and is blindly staggering about with his inch thick, NHS, rose tinted glasses on, he is utterly incapable of seeing that BS2 holds water just as well (or badly rather) as the original, but has far superior gameplay, a lot of which genuinely IS none linear (I note that whiny boys main complaint was that he did not like the fact you had choices as to what you wanted to do and how you wanted to behave - idiot).
TLDR: BS2 took the only semi-interesting parts of the first game (The scenery, the Little Sisters and the Big Daddies and made a game that actually functions while injecting some real choice for the player. God forbid that should happen.
Oh, and for those of you (most of you I'd wager that didn't play enough of it, you missed some genuinely good set pieces later on (particularly when you play as a Little Sister) and a far more logical set of endings.
