There's always a game that comes along that I intend to play, but never get around to playing it. It happens for many reasons. Maybe it came out with other games that were more interesting. I could have been turned off by the reviews that were released after the game. I also could have simply forgotten about it as was the case with Bioshock 2.
I thought reviewers gassed up the first Bioshock. The game was good, but it holds your hand the whole time. There's an arrow telling you where to go, a button designated to give you a hint just in case your too high too remember what your doing, and killing enemies wasn't ever too difficult. I get that it sacrifices difficulty to tell you a story, but it's too easy. I think reviewers gassed it up because it was the game that ended the summer drought in 2007. After a summer of boring games, any game that is remotely good is bound to get gassed up. Just look at Batman Arkham Asylum. The game ended the drought of 2009 and got rave reviews. Was it fun? Yea, but there wasn't anything about it that made me think it was a classic. Had that game come out in October 2009 with Uncharted 2, Assassin's Creed 2, Forza 3, Ratchet & Clank it would have easily been swept under the rug. Why do you think Bioshock 2 got delayed from all of the madness? It's all about timing.
I don't know why reviewers were surprised that Bioshock 2 felt like the first one. They made the first one seem like it was the be all end all underwater game. Why would the developers do too much to change the formula? I was going to rent Bioshock 2, but after looking at the previews and video reviews it looked like the same game I didn't finish in 2007. Mass Effect 2 was also hot at the time so Bioshock 2's chance of rave reviews were slim due to that. I was rolling with John Shepard at the time so the thought of leaving Mass Effect 2 to play Bioshock 2 was not happening. Oh well. I heard it sold well so there will probably be a Bioshock 3. It'll probably it come at the end of next summer.
I thought reviewers gassed up the first Bioshock. The game was good, but it holds your hand the whole time. There's an arrow telling you where to go, a button designated to give you a hint just in case your too high too remember what your doing, and killing enemies wasn't ever too difficult. I get that it sacrifices difficulty to tell you a story, but it's too easy. I think reviewers gassed it up because it was the game that ended the summer drought in 2007. After a summer of boring games, any game that is remotely good is bound to get gassed up. Just look at Batman Arkham Asylum. The game ended the drought of 2009 and got rave reviews. Was it fun? Yea, but there wasn't anything about it that made me think it was a classic. Had that game come out in October 2009 with Uncharted 2, Assassin's Creed 2, Forza 3, Ratchet & Clank it would have easily been swept under the rug. Why do you think Bioshock 2 got delayed from all of the madness? It's all about timing.
I don't know why reviewers were surprised that Bioshock 2 felt like the first one. They made the first one seem like it was the be all end all underwater game. Why would the developers do too much to change the formula? I was going to rent Bioshock 2, but after looking at the previews and video reviews it looked like the same game I didn't finish in 2007. Mass Effect 2 was also hot at the time so Bioshock 2's chance of rave reviews were slim due to that. I was rolling with John Shepard at the time so the thought of leaving Mass Effect 2 to play Bioshock 2 was not happening. Oh well. I heard it sold well so there will probably be a Bioshock 3. It'll probably it come at the end of next summer.
No comments:
Post a Comment