Bioshock 2 Reviews

[DigiQ8]

• PSM3 awarded the follow-up 93%, saying it "tops the original in terms of storytelling and combat."
  
• PC Gamer meanwhile went with a lower but still impressive score of 90%, concluding that "the mechanics that made the original BioShock such fun return, better than before," and "it's still better written than pretty much anything else out there."

 

[Tagaziel]

I'll wait for some gamer reviews. Hype is literally drooling from these reviews.

 

[Dynasty]

Its one of the biggest releases hitting shelves at the same time; Bioshock 2 and Mass Effect 2, something like a week apart from each other.

Jan-March is just mind-blowing for games. Stupid MW2 pushing back dates...

Already pre-ordered Bioshock 2. DOnt even need to see the reviews. Bioshock is in my top 5 games of all time, if anything its probably my 2nd favourite, and I dont care what people say about the first or second game. The storytelling and atmosphere were and still are completely unrivalled.

Bioshock was the first time a game truly shocked me in its story. To think 'Oh my god, no ***king way!' when the twist hit, to the point where I was practically pacing back and forth across my room looking at the screen in disbelief. May sound over the top, but thats how much it blew me away.

If they can throw in the awesome characters such as Sander Cohen again..sporting a semi at the thought! Best character in a game.

 

[jverne]

Its one of the biggest releases hitting shelves at the same time; Bioshock 2 and Mass Effect 2, something like a week apart from each other.

Jan-March is just mind-blowing for games. Stupid MW2 pushing back dates...

Already pre-ordered Bioshock 2. DOnt even need to see the reviews. Bioshock is in my top 5 games of all time, if anything its probably my 2nd favourite, and I dont care what people say about the first or second game. The storytelling and atmosphere were and still are completely unrivalled.

Bioshock was the first time a game truly shocked me in its story. To think 'Oh my god, no ***king way!' when the twist hit, to the point where I was practically pacing back and forth across my room looking at the screen in disbelief. May sound over the top, but thats how much it blew me away.

If they can throw in the awesome characters such as Sander Cohen again..sporting a semi at the thought! Best character in a game.

lol


Anyways...Bioshock would be alright if the shooting part was more modest, it basically ruined everything.

 

[Barnz]

I don't trust the press anymore.

 

[Cpt Tenacious]

I plan on buying it and having a lot of fun, so there.

 

[Sledgehammer]

I might wait on a demo, just to ensure that it works on my pc. I have a feeling they'll mess up pc performance again.

 

[Lucid]

How the hell?
This looked so awful.

 

[Deleted member 56031]

My copy of PC gamer arrived today and I have the review in hand although I've not read it yet but the closing paragraph does state:

The first bioshock was a singular, staggering work, filled with memorable scnese, a unique sense of place and brilliant new characters. The second time around, those characters are no longer new, that place is no longer unique, and there's no single moment as significant as the climactic meeting with Ryan.

But it's still a great game. The small gap between great and bioshock's status as an instant classic only feels enormous-it's not a condemnation. The mechanics that made the original bioshock such fun return, better than before. It's still better written than pretty much anything else out there. It doesn't all go to shit at the end. The multiplayer is fine. It is a great game.

90 - Similar and slightly improved mechanics make this a worthy sequel, despite a sadly less memorable story.

So it sounds like what alot of people expected. 90 sounds quite high given that segment though but i'll read the rest later.

BTW for comparison PC Gamer gave bioshock 1 a 95

PS: There's also a review for Mass Effect 2 in here and that got 90 aswell.

 

[Dynasty]

I guess its the case with most sequels these days that dont add much to the original, just continue the story.

Yes ME2 adds new classes, but everything else is either the same or extremely similar from what Ive seen.

Not surprised at the lower score than the original, but any game above 90 should be bought without hesitation.

 

[unozero]

My copy of PC gamer arrived today and I have the review in hand although I've not read it yet but the closing paragraph does state:



So it sounds like what alot of people expected. 90 sounds quite high given that segment though but i'll read the rest later.

BTW for comparison PC Gamer gave bioshock 1 a 95

PS: There's also a review for Mass Effect 2 in here and that got 90 aswell.

Why do some people get PCG so early I bet I won't get mine til next week. :-\

 

[jondy]

PS: There's also a review for Mass Effect 2 in here and that got 90 aswell.

Interesting, anybody know what the original got?

 

[Acepilotf14]

All the reviews are going to circlejerk and wet their pants all over the game, I can tell you that right now.

BAM.
char

 

[Deleted member 56031]

Interesting, anybody know what the original got?

It got 89

 

[kupocake]

I'll wait for some gamer reviews. Hype is literally drooling from these reviews.

Hype never has an effect on gamer reviews. Never.

People are just waiting for the one review that is a few steps below the others. Just buy it and hate it already.

You let me down, man. Now I don't believe in nothing no more. I'm going to law school.

NNOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

 

[Tollbooth Willie]

So how much did they pay these reviewers? Any estimates?

 

[Tagaziel]

Hype never has an effect on gamer reviews. Never.

People are just waiting for the one review that is a few steps below the others. Just buy it and hate it already.

You seem to be hard of understanding, so let me state it clearly. Gamer reviews are infinitely more honest than "professional" reviews, because, well, they're honest. People who don't get paid for reviewing games for magazines that thrive off of game advertisements will always be more sincere and objective than people who do get paid for it.

 

[jondy]

You seem to be hard of understanding, so let me state it clearly. Gamer reviews are infinitely more honest than "professional" reviews, because, well, they're honest. People who don't get paid for reviewing games for magazines that thrive off of game advertisements will always be more sincere and objective than people who do get paid for it.

Let's forget for a moment that 'gamer reviews' are less useful than you make them out to be, and ignore the fact that your dismissing the opinions of anyone paid to review games constitutes a rather wonderful example of the motive fallacy, to instead ask the question - why do you have to be such a douche?

I mean I'm being facetious in the main but there are much less abrasive ways of expressing yourself

It got 89

Lol 1 point better, oh yeah! It is the era of sweet sequels

 

[jimbo118]

I'll wait for some more reviews to surface but I'll probably give it a go. I have no expectation of how good it will be so will probably be pleasantly surprised.

 

[DigiQ8]

I'll wait for some more reviews to surface but I'll probably give it a go. I have no expectation of how good it will be so will probably be pleasantly surprised.

This.

 

[kupocake]

Gamer reviews are infinitely more honest than "professional" reviews, because, well, they're honest.

What kind of after-school special crap is that? Honesty and the power of the pure of heart will always triumph over the corrupt professional games reviewers!

The pantomime never stops, does it?

"Gamer reviews" are subject to the same pitfalls as every other opinion on the internet. And once you've cut out the utter illiterate smacktards, the rest are written at best by games reviewer wannabes who fellate the house style of the very publications you demonise.

And yes, the press has to be careful in its dealings with the industry it leeches off, but you're grossly overstating the extent to which the obligation runs. Maybe those first two reviews are the direct result of a good old fashioned round of handjobs. But the only possible reason anyone would discount an entire industry of different professionally employed voices saying something is good for a bunch of pure-hearted rainbow reviewers spouting truth from their fuzzy love fingers, is if they're really digging to be able to say 'I told you so'.

Come on people. There's still a chance that game we all want to be bad is still going to be bad without us pretending that the saints of opinion can be found in independent voices regurgitated onto the net by some chronically masturbating late twenty-year old still living in his parent's basement because the facist gaming press won't accept his 'radical' opinions.

 

[Wanted Bob]

You seem to be hard of understanding, so let me state it clearly. Gamer reviews are infinitely more honest than "professional" reviews, because, well, they're honest. People who don't get paid for reviewing games for magazines that thrive off of game advertisements will always be more sincere and objective than people who do get paid for it.

I totally disagree with that. Both professional reviewers and gamers (you know, like fanboys or boycotters) can give abosolutely awful reviews.

You have to treat each review individually, and see which ones to take with a grain of salt, and which ones to heed advice from.

 

[Tagaziel]

Let's forget for a moment that 'gamer reviews' are less useful than you make them out to be, and ignore the fact that your dismissing the opinions of anyone paid to review games constitutes a rather wonderful example of the motive fallacy, to instead ask the question - why do you have to be such a douche?

I'm opinionated and have no problems with sharing my opinions. Apparently, that makes me a douche. Wonderful.

What kind of after-school special crap is that? Honesty and the power of the pure of heart will always triumph over the corrupt professional games reviewers!

The pantomime never stops, does it?

"Gamer reviews" are subject to the same pitfalls as every other opinion on the internet. And once you've cut out the utter illiterate smacktards, the rest are written at best by games reviewer wannabes who fellate the house style of the very publications you demonise.

And yes, the press has to be careful in its dealings with the industry it leeches off, but you're grossly overstating the extent to which the obligation runs. Maybe those first two reviews are the direct result of a good old fashioned round of handjobs. But the only possible reason anyone would discount an entire industry of different professionally employed voices saying something is good for a bunch of pure-hearted rainbow reviewers spouting truth from their fuzzy love fingers, is if they're really digging to be able to say 'I told you so'.

Come on people. There's still a chance that game we all want to be bad is still going to be bad without us pretending that the saints of opinion can be found in independent voices regurgitated onto the net by some chronically masturbating late twenty-year old still living in his parent's basement because the facist gaming press won't accept his 'radical' opinions.

Beautiful rant.

Now, let me do the most abominable thing of all and agree with you, that some reviewers have merit and aren't actually all hype whores. That still doesn't change my opinion that most are.

Case in point: Fallout 3, Bioshock 2, Modern Warfare 2 etc. All good games, but nowhere near the praise levied upon them by the (supposedly) professional press.

Generally, the more marketing a game has, the more likely are scores to be inflated.

I totally disagree with that. Both professional reviewers and gamers (you know, like fanboys or boycotters) can give abosolutely awful reviews.

You have to treat each review individually, and see which ones to take with a grain of salt, and which ones to heed advice from.

I've never said you should be a mindless drone taking everything written as gospel.

 

[MJ12]

but any game above 90 should be bought without hesitation.

That is terrible advice.

there are much less abrasive ways of expressing yourself

Uhhh, wha-

I'll wait for some gamer reviews. Hype is literally drooling from these reviews.

Oh god! It's so abrasive! Like sandpaper to my emotions!

 

[jondy]

Oh, I get that you're opinionated, Mikael. Yep. But what I was going for really was that maybe you could express said opinions without managing to patronise/belittle anyone. Doesn't matter really, we'll just go our separate ways.

Oh god! It's so abrasive! Like sandpaper to my emotions!

Listen ZT that wasn't what I responding to so you TAKE YOUR SARCASM BACK TAKE IT BACK

 

[Acepilotf14]

Hey guys, remember Borderlands?
Neither do I.

 

[Deleted member 56031]

Borderlands sucked >_>

 

[Tagaziel]

Borderlands was decent.

 

[Wanted Bob]

I've never said you should be a mindless drone taking everything written as gospel.

That wasnt my point. I'm just saying its not right to discredit every review the press writes, because some of them are very truthful (as you pointed out above).

 

[Tagaziel]

That wasnt my point. I'm just saying its not right to discredit every review the press writes, because some of them are very truthful (as you pointed out above).

Which is true, but most can be easily discredited, because they are inflated.

 

[Wanted Bob]

I agree, but the same goes for gamer reviews. Dont get me wrong - I've read some fantastic non-professional reviews which really help make or break a purchase for me, but there are so many reviews done by fanboys, boycotters, or people who otherwise succumb to hype that tarnish the honesty of gamer reviews as a whole.

 

[kupocake]

Which is true, but most can be easily discredited, because they are inflated.

But I'm sure you'll agree that you simply take this knowledge to a suspicious review and work out the 'real' score for yourself. And then, it's usually the score alone that is inflated. I've never felt outright lied to by a professional reviewer, just wary of the half-truths and white lies.

 

[Tagaziel]

But I'm sure you'll agree that you simply take this knowledge to a suspicious review and work out the 'real' score for yourself. And then, it's usually the score alone that is inflated. I've never felt outright lied to by a professional reviewer, just wary of the half-truths and white lies.

Yes, I agree. When I actually read reviews, that is. Generally, I consider them untrustworthy and base my opinion off of demos, media released, interviews and opinions of fellow gamers, including HL2.net.

And half-truths and white lies are one of the things I'm getting at.

 

[Acepilotf14]

I'll read the reviews.

I skip over parts that describe it positively, and just read descriptions of the mechanics of the game or examples.

I usually disregard the 'score' as well.

 

[Deleted member 56031]

yeah I feel reviews are fine but I ignore the score largely due to:

A) retardation of petty squabling over an 8.8 to 8.9 (seriously who gives a flying **** there's clearly not any discernible difference :flame: )

B) Some scores certainly don't match what is said in review (I've noticed this particularly with reivews from gametrailers. I like their reviews and them descriptive enough but the score almost always never matches what is said)

 

[Sledgehammer]

Point of interest: PC Gamer advertised a demo of the game to follow in their next issue.

 

[the cow says moo]

I guess its the case with most sequels these days that dont add much to the original, just continue the story.

Yes ME2 adds new classes, but everything else is either the same or extremely similar from what Ive seen.

Not surprised at the lower score than the original, but any game above 90 should be bought without hesitation.

Seriously? From what I've seen they've changed a lot in ME2. Well, mostly the combat anyway.

 

[Mirage]

If there is a section that mirrors the very entertaining and atmospheric "Fort Frolic" from the first, I'll be content with my purchase. I'm not expecting anything amazing in the sequel, to be honest.

 

[Dynasty]

IGN gave it a 9.1

Aparently the storytelling IS better (wow, hard to believe that, good job 2K).

The only downside to the game at all is that the graphics arent improved, but they arguably didnt need to be as the art style is one of the best ever made.

And that the game is all too familiar. All of the sense of confusion and awe from the first game is gone.

Like in Bioshock when you see the Big Daddy for the first time, youre like 'what the hell is THAT?'. Now you see a Big Daddy and youre like 'Ah a Big Daddy, I know I have to kill him to get the Little Sister to get Adam to upgrade myself' etc etc.

Atleast they didnt do the whole porthole view like in Bioshock when you get the suit on. That wouldve been seriously annoying.

Been waiting for this game. Insta-buy without a moment's hesitation.

 

[Barnz]

yeah keep telling yourself how good it is
2K didn't even make the game, but who cares. people like you buy anything that have the name on the product

brb going to shit on my floor, and call it bioshock