Story-wise, which game do you prefer?

[Genome852]

I'm going to be honest, I wasn't planning on buying or playing BioShock 2, since I heard it suffered a lot of bugs from being a console port. It also has imperfect mouse control, and I'm a huge freak on mouse control (used to play FPS at professional level)... but I was pleasantly surprised with how good the game was, and was able to completely look past all that.

ANYWAYS, I find BioShock 2's story to be more emotional, personal, and better paced (BS1 really dragged after the twist whereas the best part of BS2 is the end levels), while BS1's story is more mysterious and intriguing, like a puzzle. They're different stories, and I don't think you can directly compare them, like how you don't directly compare the story of a romance movie to that of an action movie.

However, I've spent a lot more time thinking about BioShock 2 after finishing the game than I had with BioShock 1, and the ending sequences of BS2 will probably remain as some of the most memorable moments I've had in a video game (though the twist scene in BS1 was also done very well), so I prefer BS2's story. Very few games stay in the back of my head days after finishing them, and BioShock 2 is one of them. I did play it ~four years after the first, so my memory of the first game may need some refreshing.

I find that I get a little TOO immersed in emotionally charged stories. I've probably watched the ending of BS2 20+ times already. It's just... so good. I was bummed when I heard the next BioShock wouldn't take place in Rapture. I wanted to see how Eleanor would change the world... maybe I'll have to resort to Fanfic for that.

What do you think? Which game's story do you prefer? (And please explain your thoughts). Thanks!

[Spliced Puppies]

I've always looked towards the first Bioshock in terms of the storyline. Of course, the personalities you meet throughout the story really impact it. However, I do agree that Bioshock's ending proved ambiguous (especially the evil ending). I just thought the first one seemed more logical.

The reason I prefer the first Bioshock's story is because it introduces us to this underwater marvel called Rapture. You enter the bathysphere and listen to Ryan's speel. A city built on an Objectivist philosophy that originates from the psyche of an individual's will to become successful and exceed all his expectations. Basically, a city built on ego. I've always tried to put Rapture in the context of a metaphor, because that is what it represents: the rise, the climax and the eventual downfall of a "laissez-faire" society. The city is just a physical incarnation of that ideology, and is shown that way to highlight why an ideology so severe cannot truly operate.

What got me is your introduction in the Welcome Area. Your first view? A splicer mutilates one of the remaining survivors. From then on, you KNOW this place has fallen to such a low level. Soon, you're introduced to the few sane personalities of Rapture. All have experienced the horrors that have fallen the city, and have been affected by it dramatically. Through each level, you'll find many audio diaries recorded by individuals who have either died or have gone insane. It does impact you emotionally, especially people like Diane McClintock, who never truly deserved their fate.

What I most enjoyed was that you uncovered Rapture's history through these audio diaries. Basically, you're referring to primary sources that are indeed reliable. From them, you discover the events that have occurred, the personalities of these individuals and how Rapture was even before ADAM.

But what really made the story most enjoyable was the presence of a well structured antagonist: Andrew Ryan. A man who escaped the Russian Revolution and eventually became a business magnate in the U.S, driven by the will to succeed. He is an example of one who is uncomfortable with the world around him. His aim was to escape the dangers of the surface, especially after the construction of the nuclear bomb. What makes him an excellent character is that he has a back story. He is, like everyone else, a human being. He constantly denies Rapture's downfall, indicating he has an iron grip on his ideas. Ultimately, he dies for it, but not before realising who his killer is. At this point, he believes he has nothing left. He is an example of a tragic character who was driven to commit notorious actions to uphold his ideals.

In addition to Ryan, Tenenbaum was an excellent example of an atoner. She presents to us the concept of realisation and regret that frequently occurs in individuals. The fact that she remained dedicated to rescuing the Sisters she helped create , even if it meant that she would risk her own life by remaining in Rapture.

Bioshock's story relies heavily on the personalities presented in the game. For me, Bioshock 2 was quite a letdown. The new antagonist has created a pseudo-Communist-collectivist ideology for Rapture's remaining, yet insane population. All we know is that she was a psychiatrist from the surface with little love for her daughter, seeing her as an experiment. Other than that, she is only an example of an overzealous maniac bent on suiting society to her liking. I just felt she didn't possess the character development Ryan had.

I just thought BS2 felt like an attempted reboot. When I finished BS1, I believed that Rapture would eventually flood and collapse, as it should have. I just don't know why the city managed to last another eight years when it seemed as if it would only last for roughly another year before it fell. The second visit to Rapture didn't have the same quality it had before to me, Tenenbaum suddenly disappeared after the second level and new characters who I believe couldn't have survived eight years in Rapture were introduced. I liked the concept of playing a Big Daddy, but the characters let me down.

[FireyFate]

Bioshock 2 was much better for me.

After the WYK part of of BS1, the story felt rushed. The final boss battle was pretty ridiculous IMO.

[Spliced Puppies]

Bioshock 2 was much better for me.

After the WYK part of of BS1, the story felt rushed. The final boss battle was pretty ridiculous IMO.

I'll agree with you on some points there. Everything up to Ryan did flow very well. The problem afterwards was that it suddenly twisted into the obvious trope of "stopping the bad guy before he destroys everything". But regarding Fontaine's last act of desperation is intriguing. It does seem very sudden, and yet it shows us how desperate one can become in an ever growing threat. But still, to enjoy the story you can't really rely on Fontaine. It's all about factors such as visuals, personalities and listening to the audio diaries.

[Atlas-]

I have to say I loved them both and although my first thought was that I prefered the first bioshock my second playthrough of 2 made me question that. I never make my mind up about a game on feeling it's always based on facts

Rapture itself was almost stale for the first half of number two in one you get introduced to this great city (which is still largley intact) and every level I found mesmerizing with the crazyness of it all truly the most gripping game I've played.
In Bioshcok 2 the first levels really lacked something probably because they had no one in charge (Steinman, Wilkins, Langford, Cohen) which is probably why I found the farmers market so boring in number one. This of course changed when you got to Fontaine futuristics when you had a truly crazy opposition and as such was an enjoyable level (no i'm not counting wales un' wales as they were faceless) and in Persephone you got to know more about Lamb

The guides in both games are great. In both games I found myself forming a very strong bound to them. both had flaws but were enjoyable espicialy the phrases they come up with as they guide you through the game some of my faviroute qoutes come from Sinclair and Atlas. Tenembaum on both games I found to be quite boring with none of those quirky catchphrases I loved from the others.

The Antagonists in both game were interesting but I have to say Andrew Ryan wins hands down just going through the game you really see how "great" he is and the way you see him off is one of the best scenes I've seen in all my times playing games
Lamb on the other hand lacked quite the depth of Andrew Ryan and seemed quite bland and 2 dimensonal but this is compared to Ryan on her own I would say she holds up as a villian quite well

I felt more of a connection with Delta than Jack as he had more of a back story (Jack was about 8 years old) and the ending I feel was much more powerful as you see the ruins of the once great city unlike the first one where you saw it as you entered (and is one of the things which makes me think that Rapture is done)

Overall I think that I was more engrossed my the first one all the way through (the twist had a lot to do with that) but I find the ending to the second one more memrable

P.S on a side note rapture is still running 8 years later because of the thinker maintaining all the systems and big daddies doing repair work (you see a rosie fix a window in Adonis)

Edit: I wrote this before the previous 2 posts

[Atlas-]

I'll agree with you on some points there. Everything up to Ryan did flow very well. The problem afterwards was that it suddenly twisted into the obvious trope of "stopping the bad guy before he destroys everything". But regarding Fontaine's last act of desperation is intriguing. It does seem very sudden, and yet it shows us how desperate one can become in an ever growing threat. But still, to enjoy the story you can't really rely on Fontaine. It's all about factors such as visuals, personalities and listening to the audio diaries.

I think that the Revenge mission against fontaine was brilliant and really helped tie it up as well as showing how hopeless the situation in rapture is one ruler thrown over by another who is then killed aswell.

[Spliced Puppies]

I have to say I loved them both and although my first thought was that I prefered the first bioshock my second playthrough of 2 made me question that. I never make my mind up about a game on feeling it's always based on facts

Rapture itself was almost stale for the first half of number two in one you get introduced to this great city (which is still largley intact) and every level I found mesmerizing with the crazyness of it all truly the most gripping game I've played.
In Bioshcok 2 the first levels really lacked something probably because they had no one in charge (Steinman, Wilkins, Langford, Cohen) which is probably why I found the farmers market so boring in number one. This of course changed when you got to Fontaine futuristics when you had a truly crazy opposition and as such was an enjoyable level (no i'm not counting wales un' wales as they were faceless) and in Persephone you got to know more about Lamb

The guides in both games are great. In both games I found myself forming a very strong bound to them. both had flaws but were enjoyable espicialy the phrases they come up with as they guide you through the game some of my faviroute qoutes come from Sinclair and Atlas. Tenembaum on both games I found to be quite boring with none of those quirky catchphrases I loved from the others.

The Antagonists in both game were interesting but I have to say Andrew Ryan wins hands down just going through the game you really see how "great" he is and the way you see him off is one of the best scenes I've seen in all my times playing games
Lamb on the other hand lacked quite the depth of Andrew Ryan and seemed quite bland and 2 dimensonal but this is compared to Ryan on her own I would say she holds up as a villian quite well

I felt more of a connection with Delta than Jack as he had more of a back story (Jack was about 8 years old) and the ending I feel was much more powerful as you see the ruins of the once great city unlike the first one where you saw it as you entered (and is one of the things which makes me think that Rapture is done)

Overall I think that I was more engrossed my the first one all the way through (the twist had a lot to do with that) but I find the ending to the second one more memrable

P.S on a side note rapture is still running 8 years later because of the thinker maintaining all the systems and big daddies doing repair work (you see a rosie fix a window in Adonis)

Edit: I wrote this before the previous 2 posts

I think what I enjoyed most in Bioshock 2 was Sinclair. He still has the idea that he'll profit from Rapture, even though it's quite literally a fishtank. I agree with you regarding the endings. When I did my second playthrough of BS1 I didn't really follow the bad ending. The good ending, however was quite fitting.

Fontaine Futuristics was by far the best level thanks to Gilbert. He's not only a great character, but he's one that you can also sympathise with in one way or another, regarding his ADAM mutation.

Thanks for clearing up that issue. I kept on forgetting about the Thinker and Big Daddy repairs.

[Atlas-]

I think what I enjoyed most in Bioshock 2 was Sinclair. He still has the idea that he'll profit from Rapture, even though it's quite literally a fishtank. I agree with you regarding the endings. When I did my second playthrough of BS1 I didn't really follow the bad ending. The good ending, however was quite fitting.

Fontaine Futuristics was by far the best level thanks to Gilbert. He's not only a great character, but he's one that you can also sympathise with in one way or another, regarding his ADAM mutation.

Thanks for clearing up that issue. I kept on forgetting about the Thinker and Big Daddy repairs.

One of the things that I like about Gil is that he brings a moral dilemma to it as do the rest of the charcters though it is especially pronounced with Gil.

[Spliced Puppies]

One of the things that I like about Gil is that he brings a moral dilemma to it as do the rest of the charcters though it is especially pronounced with Gil.

That was the hard part. I couldn't decide whether I'd want to let that thing live, or perform a mercy killing.

[Atlas-]

That was the hard part. I couldn't decide whether I'd want to let that thing live, or perform a mercy killing.

He wanted too live that was enough for me to let him.

[Spliced Puppies]

He wanted too live that was enough for me to let him.

Sadly, he mutated into a gargantuan creature. I couldn't let something like that swim around.

[Atlas-]

Sadly, he mutated into a gargantuan creature. I couldn't let something like that swim around.

It might eat all the fish that we were going to eat anyway, truly evil.

[Spliced Puppies]

It might eat all the fish that we were going to eat anyway, truly evil.

I like my tuna, thank you very much! In fact, maybe that's why I killed him....

But yeah, it was a very difficult choice. The sane Gilbert wants you to kill him, while his current form begs for mercy. I guess it's just determined by what you believe is right.

[Atlas-]

I like my tuna, thank you very much! In fact, maybe that's why I killed him....

But yeah, it was a very difficult choice. The sane Gilbert wants you to kill him, while his current form begs for mercy. I guess it's just determined by what you believe is right.

One of the brilliant things about bioshock 2 is that the descions get progressivley harder:
Grace is deluded but in no way evil all she does is belive what lamb has told her
Stanley sold you an elanor out to ryan and killed everyone in dionisis
Gil Says he wants to die but new gil says he dosn't

[Big Bad Sister]

Both games had good stories, but the story of BioShock the original appeals more to me because I didn't feel anything for Eleanor, even though I was supposed to want to rescue her.

Yes, go ahead and flame me.

[Spliced Puppies]

Both games had good stories, but the story of BioShock the original appeals more to me because I didn't feel anything for Eleanor, even though I was supposed to want to rescue her.

Yes, go ahead and flame me.

-proceeds to egg your house- HOW DARE YOU?!?! :P

Not to fear, you're not alone!

[Reborn in the Ocean]

For me I found that I liked the second Bioshock a bit more just because honestly I got more emotionally attached to Eleanor since it was a type of Father/Daughter bond where you want to help and protect the innocent little girl who can't defend her self and is just by her self in the world and on top of that with the Little Sister's since they made them "likeable" so to say as in they looked better more of a little girl feel than a demonic little thing that is there for one purpose.That's what I mainly got out of Bioshock 2 it was a good game sure there were some stale moments in different level's with the leadership, since each one was different and how you learned about the different area's of Rapture that weren't visited much once the Bathysphere's were made or were just area's of the poor of Rapture. To me the second one was a bit more interesting and in some points a bit more creepy than the first one.

Though the first one in my opinion was really good I loved the story and up to Ryan was just mainly learning about the city and the different major players in it and who was still left and doing different things for them and mainly helping Atlas all along the way until you find out that he is really Fontaine and then you go and kill him. Though with Bioshock 1's ending you if you get the good one you get to see your self and some of the Little Sister's if not all of them leaving Rapture and then a couple scene's with them growing up and then them being there while you are dying. Though also with Bioshock 1 I liked the different leader's of the different area's such as Cohen with Fort Frolic, and Peach with the Fisheries you just get to learn about the different people and the history. I would also say that the first part when you are in the lighthouse and headed down to Rapture was really good with Ryan's whole speech about what he learned from topside and why he made Rapture.

Overall I would still have to say I liked the second one honestly because I felt like I learned more about Rapture from the audio dairies and what led up to the civil war and how it collapsed as opposed to the first one where you are there as it is falling. Just liked the second one because honestly it had more of a emotional attachment to it though the first one got me crazy about the idea of a city underwater and Bioshock in general.

[adam&eve]

i will keep my answer short and sweet i LOVE both 1 & 2 equally i really do lol

[Spliced Puppies]

i will keep my answer short and sweet i LOVE both 1 & 2 equally i really do lol

Hey, you like them. It's good enough for us all :P

[IllusionOfLife]

I've written many long posts defending BioShock 2, but I'm going to try to keep this one relatively short. The BioShock series is one of my favorite game series of all time and I think both games are brilliant, Ken Levine did something with the original BioShock that no one had ever done before in a video game and it was stunning, but then, as everyone knows, the third act fell apart on itself and the game ended in a cliché boss battle and two unsatisfying cutscenes.

In my opinion, BioShock 2 takes what Levine did with Bio 1 and refines it in almost every way, the combat is stronger, the story is paced better, the characters are more relatable on a personal level, and the element of player choice was much more dramatic, it also has a much stronger ending than the first game did. The fatal flaw with BioShock 2 was that it followed Bio 1, it could never recreate that sense of awe and mystery you had when playing Bio 1 for the very first time, but at the same time, it really didn't try to do any of that. Some people resent the game for that, but I think it was a smart move because by not focussing on trying to top Bio 1 they could spend they're time making the best story and the best gameplay they could and I think they succeeded in that.

BioShock will always hold a special spot in my gaming collection, and I truly consider it one of the best games ever made, but for all intents and purposes I think BioShock 2 is a stronger overall experience.

[FireyFate]

^^ That is exactly what I would have said had I not been too lazy to type all that.

[Codex]

I've been trying for a couple of days to figure out where I stand on which game is better, and I honestly don't think I can. I'm currently replaying the first Bioshock game (and I just beat Peach - a character that I always feel doesn't get much sympathy from fans even though he was right about who Jack is working for) and it, honestly, still stands the test. I love it - it's fun, entertaining and, in general, just awesomely fun to play. The story (up until the noice werk boyo scene) is strong and amazingly well written, however it really, really does lag in the third act. The only thing that I can really draw on from those last few levels are Fontaine's crazy ramblings and a few of Tennenbaum's guilt ridden speeches, but over all there's nothing that really stands out.

For Bioshock 2, however, I felt that the story kept driving right until the very end. There is a constant feeling of "I have to get to her," even if it's not for you "own" sake but for Deltas. The "heart attacks" in Persephone feel, to me, like the epitome of this. You sort of have a feeling that there is only one way this can end, right until the final cutscene starts. There's a moment of "maybe we will get out of here" and then Eleanor falters. You know it's over then, you know there's nothing else that can happen to stop it and yet... you hope that there's going to be a way out. However, it never comes (well... it kind of does if you played a certain way).

To be honest with you all, and this is a position I've held since Bioshock 2 came out and I beat the game, Bioshock 2 makes everything feel more... human, more real and something that can be better empathized with. It doesn't matter that you don't really care about Eleanor, you care that Delta does. There is this underpinning desperation throughout the whole thing that just gets lost in the first game, probably because you realize that you are and have always been an instrument of your creator.

Now, I believe that this is an interesting difference between the two. With jack, you go into the game thinking you're free and end up feeling like a tool to be used. In Bioshock 2, the opening cutscene reminds you that you are a tool, with absolutely no free will of your own that can be manipulated by the will of other folks whenever they want to. However, the choices you make (and subsequently Delta makes) end up effecting everything. It's that final drive, combined with the realization that you're not just a tool that, I feel, makes Bioshock 2 stronger and it's predecessor slightly weaker.

Whilst Bioshock tried to point out at the end that now that you are free you can do whatever you want to make things right, it never really feels as if it is you (and subsequently Jack) who are making the decisions. The illusion of freedom that you had with Atlas gets stripped away and there is nothing that brings back that feeling again. I honestly feel that this is what makes those last few levels of the first game weaker than the second one. you still feel like you're a tool up until the very end, except your master has changed.

I don't know if that's a very clear explination so I'll put it in a TL;DR form:

Bioshock: Awesome, but loses it's drive very early on and keeps going down (even though you don't realize it until later)

Bioshock 2: Awesome, keeps its drive, but is slow to get going.

In the end: I love them both - getting more interested in Infinite to see what Levine does next and hoping that Thomas finishes off Rapture with Bioshock 3.

[Genome852]

Now, I believe that this is an interesting difference between the two. With jack, you go into the game thinking you're free and end up feeling like a tool to be used. In Bioshock 2, the opening cutscene reminds you that you are a tool, with absolutely no free will of your own that can be manipulated by the will of other folks whenever they want to. However, the choices you make (and subsequently Delta makes) end up effecting everything. It's that final drive, combined with the realization that you're not just a tool that, I feel, makes Bioshock 2 stronger and it's predecessor slightly weaker. what Levine does next and hoping that Thomas finishes off Rapture with Bioshock 3.

You have clearly spent some time thinking about this. This is a great point that I have never considered. Similar to how Lamb is essentially the polar opposite of Ryan in terms of political philosophy, Delta and Eleanor's realization that they are free and in fact not tools to be used is completely opposite to what Jack experiences in BioShock 1.

P.S. I am actually quite shocked by the number of well thought-out and detailed posts here... I could get used to this. I think I'm too used to only seeing one-liners and immature arguments on most forums nowadays... probably explains why I avoid CoD multiplayer like the plague. My thought that these games cater to the more patient and 'intellectual' gamer seems to be pretty spot-on after all. This makes me happy, however weird that may be. >_>

[IllusionOfLife]

Too add to Codex's point, one of the problems with the original BioShock was that two-thirds or the way through the game you effectively kill off the two most interesting characters: Atlas and Ryan. The two of them are multi-faceted characters that are interesting to listen to because even if you don't agree with Ryan, if though you think he's the villain, you can at least see where he's coming from. They both have humanity, but then they are both replaced by Fontaine a character who was very underdeveloped.

While Atlas and Ryan were both interesting multi-dimensional characters, Fontaine has only one character trait: evil with a bad Brooklyn accent. You still have Tenenbaum chirping in from time to time, but for the most part you're stuck with Fontaine who just isn't very interesting. If they would have taken time to establish Fontaine earlier in the game and fleshed out his character more, I think it would have been successful, but instead you have several brief mentions of him and a single audio diary to set up the game's ultimate bad guy.

[Codex]

... but then they are both replaced by Fontaine a character who was very underdeveloped.

That's not my point at all. I really like Fontaine as a bad guy (not as the Oscar Trophy, but hey. Whatevs, can't have it all). However, i do agree that Ryan and Atlas are huge personalities constantly at war with one another. The only time they take a back seat is when another huge personality comes into play - Sander Cohen.

However, after they are both "dead" all we have is Tennenbaum and Fontaine's increasingly insane rants. Personally, I think that Fontaine has been nuts for years. He's spliced, whether we want to remember that or not, and as is described in Bioshock 2 he spliced to change his appearance (just as the "change your race change your sex" Steinman audio diary says). He's probably been going ADAM crazy for years before we see him, and as such as soon as he drops his well built wall of Atlas, he's got nothing to back him up.

The only other personality we get after that point is Tennenbaum, who is arguably the most laid back character in the game because she is dealing with her guilt the whole time, doesn't have the same stage presence. Now, I like Fontaine, but his "unravelling" wasn't done as well as it could have been. However, if he had already unraveled, we don't get to "hear" that and I do agree that it makes him a little bit weaker.

[Vito_Lucente]

I really can't make up my mind. They're both awesome games, with awesome stories. So, I'll say both.

[IllusionOfLife]

That's not my point at all. I really like Fontaine as a bad guy (not as the Oscar Trophy, but hey. Whatevs, can't have it all). However, i do agree that Ryan and Atlas are huge personalities constantly at war with one another. The only time they take a back seat is when another huge personality comes into play - Sander Cohen.

I wasn't trying to say that was your point, I was just using your point as a springboard for my own but anyway, I'd have to disagree (except for the Oscar Trophy part, I think we can all agree that was lame). In a certain kind of story, a one-dimensional villain like Fontaine could work, for instance, many of the most memorable Disney villains are completely unsympathetic and one-dimensional (Jafar, Gaston, The Wicked Stepmother), but in those stories, part of the point is drawing a clear line between good and evil. In BioShock, the way the story is presented from the beginning through the end of Act II is very much shades of grey, there isn't that clear cut line of heroes and villains, good and evil, it's all very murky. You've got Andrew Ryan who is in the position of antagonist, but you can also understand his point of view and sympathize with him to an extent, then you've got Tenenbaum who wants to help, but was the willing creator of Little Sisters and a huge part of Rapture's ADAM problem, you finally have Atlas who seems like a good guy but is asking you to murder both Rapture's founder and some of it's inhabitants (including Little Sisters).

Fast forward to Act III and you've got Fontaine in all his mustache-twirling villainy and it feels out of place. He is like a cartoon character in many ways because he's just so over-the-top megalomaniacal. There's no more shades of grey, there's just Fontaine with his "This is how I'm going to take over the world" monologues. Then, at the end, the last two cutscenes are also completely black and white, there's no opportunity for redemption, there's no moral ambiguity, if you listened to Atlas and harvested the first Little Sister then thought better of it with literally every single other Sister in the game you'll still end the game as an equally cartoony villain leading an army of splicers and hijacking a nuclear missile. In BioShock 2, Sofia Lamb, Sinclair, Gil Alexander, Grace, and even Poole are all morally ambiguous characters, even the ones as corrupt as Poole and as depraved as Alex the Great you can feel a bit of sympathy for, and in the end there is the opportunity for redemption which is far more powerful than anything at the end of Bio 1.

That's where I think BioShock failed, it set up these great moral choices and had a great twist and then dissolved into clichés. Fontaine is a cliché, the Oscar Trophy boss battle is a cliché, and the endings are clichés, even the type of game play devices in the third Act are cliché (need I mention the escort mission?). In a game that was so original, those things had no business being there.

[TheParasite]

The only thing that kept me interested in Bioshock 2 was Sinclair. Aside from him all the other characters fell flat in my eyes. Yes you can actually see them and what not but it still didn't hold any significant emotional movement. I really didn't like the story in Bioshock 2 because it was so clear cut and obvious. "Save Eleanor and escape" that's all you were meant to do. In the first Bioshock you didn't know what you had to do; if you had to figure a way out, go deeper into the rabbit hole or just surviving for as long as you could. Your objective kept changing and evolving and that's what kept me so interested in the story.

Ok, Bioshock 2 had some characters in it but, they failed to be as loud and pronounced as say, Cohen or Steinman who have huge huge impacts on how I felt about Rapture, and the best part is, you could vividly imagine their fall from their pedestals via their demeanor and the diaries. The other character that felt strong in Bioshock 2 aside from Sinclair was Alexander. He had both Steinman and Cohen qualities that made him incredibly interesting. A real shame that there wasn't alot of interaction with him.

I felt 0 emotional grip for Delta nor Eleanor. They just weren't likable characters to me. Delta reminds me of Dead Space 1 Isaac; an emotionless brick that you're constantly told to feel sorry for because he misses his daughter. You could say the same thing for Jack but his vulnerability, human shell, and unknowing of Rapture made him feel like a real person and in a way, you could relate to Jack since we were lead to believe he was just an average man with a stroke of incredibly bad luck. I found Eleanor annoying, clingy and the only reason I wanted her around was near the end so she could clear out most of the splicers.

Last thing, Lamb was not crafted as a very good anti-hero. Her smugness made me hate her, not her message or what she was trying to do to Rapture. Her smugness covered up her message and just made her sound like a nagging school teacher. I think that if they made her less smug and condescending, she would've been great.

[Spliced Puppies]

The only thing that kept me interested in Bioshock 2 was Sinclair. Aside from him all the other characters fell flat in my eyes. Yes you can actually see them and what not but it still didn't hold any significant emotional movement. I really didn't like the story in Bioshock 2 because it was so clear cut and obvious. "Save Eleanor and escape" that's all you were meant to do. In the first Bioshock you didn't know what you had to do; if you had to figure a way out, go deeper into the rabbit hole or just surviving for as long as you could. Your objective kept changing and evolving and that's what kept me so interested in the story.

Ok, Bioshock 2 had some characters in it but, they failed to be as loud and pronounced as say, Cohen or Steinman who have huge huge impacts on how I felt about Rapture, and the best part is, you could vividly imagine their fall from their pedestals via their demeanor and the diaries. The other character that felt strong in Bioshock 2 aside from Sinclair was Alexander. He had both Steinman and Cohen qualities that made him incredibly interesting. A real shame that there wasn't alot of interaction with him.

I felt 0 emotional grip for Delta nor Eleanor. They just weren't likable characters to me. Delta reminds me of Dead Space 1 Isaac; an emotionless brick that you're constantly told to feel sorry for because he misses his daughter. You could say the same thing for Jack but his vulnerability, human shell, and unknowing of Rapture made him feel like a real person and in a way, you could relate to Jack since we were lead to believe he was just an average man with a stroke of incredibly bad luck. I found Eleanor annoying, clingy and the only reason I wanted her around was near the end so she could clear out most of the splicers.

Last thing, Lamb was not crafted as a very good anti-hero. Her smugness made me hate her, not her message or what she was trying to do to Rapture. Her smugness covered up her message and just made her sound like a nagging school teacher. I think that if they made her less smug and condescending, she would've been great.

Yay! Someone who has similar opinions to the characters!

Sinclair was a wonderful character. Not only did his Southern accent give his personality the flavour that Atlas had with his Irish accent, he still believed he had a chance of benefiting from what was left of Rapture. That goal would cling on until the very end, despite his eventual attachment to his companion. He is depicted as an opportunist as well as a man of honesty in a time of crisis, especially after you kill Simon Wales and when you first meet him. His fate was pretty upsetting, especially as he reminisces on all the bad deeds he has committed in Rapture while he suffers. In the end you feel sympathetic for him.

Cohen and Steinman were very well portrayed. They were both undeniable talents who eventually became beyond fanatical in their professions. Steinman really played on our fears of medical procedures, with his constant fixation on aesthetic ideals that led to him mutilating his patients. His visions of Aphrodite show what ADAM has done to what was possibly once his goal: To achieve perfect physical appearance through surgery. Through Steinman, we see many of the extremes of ADAM and what it has done to individuals who were once great. Cohen is also an example of this.

Actually, I did talk about the concept of ADAM with one of my friends (Christ, we're such nerds) and we thought about it for quite a while. We decided to place ADAM in the context of a metaphor, as we believed that is how it is portrayed. Think about it. Brilliant individuals invited to this Utopian city. Many of these individuals are the finest in their work. Sander Cohen, a brilliant producer, song writer and playwright. Langford, an expert in botany. Tenenbaum and Suchong, skilled in the fields of science and others such as Fontaine, while he was a malicious and cunning manipulator, he possessed the intelligence that would eventually bring down Rapture. Now what happens to these minds when ADAM comes into play? Cohen goes insane and locks down Fort Frolic. Langford remains trapped in her laboratory, tinkering with the Lazarus Vector. Tenenbaum develops an eternal sense of guilt. She then longs to redeem herself. Suchong is eventually brutally murdered and Fontaine would finally give in to the temptation in order to destroy Jack once and for all.

So my friend and I agreed on the fact that substance ADAM is basically a metaphor which portrays all of humanity's flaws. Greed, selfish desires, manipulation, apathy, regrettable actions, murder, discrimination, stubborn behaviour, you name it. ADAM represents it all. The city's metaphor of Objectivism is merely the beginning, and ADAM acts as the final trigger that would lead to the city's destruction. The remainder of the population panicked and resorted to ADAM, eventually losing their sanity. Doomed to roam Rapture with no clear conscience or motive. This is just one way of the game's method of representing the concept of "karma" (call it whatever you like).

I think Bioshock 2 managed to succeed due to Lamb's manipulation of ADAM. In other words, to utilise sin in order to form Utopia. You can see the consequences just by looking at Gilbert's mutation. Her plan is incredibly twisted, bending on insanity. Unfortunately, Lamb did not truly succeed as an antagonist. TheParasite is correct regarding Lamb's behaviour. All she seemed to do during the game was to insult and beat you down. Now of course, Ryan did the same thing, but not at the same frequency as Lamb. While derogatory comments are a common trope in antagonists, there is a certain bar that shouldn't be knocked over. Lamb was portrayed as an overbearing lunatic. Malevolence is one thing, Lamb is over exaggerated. She obviously does not care for the Family, she sees her daughter as some twisted amalgamation of the Stanford Prison Experiment and Nazi genetic experiments on prisoners, and would go so far as to threaten to destroy Persephone with explosives, killing herself in the process. I think they gave Lamb too much of an evil aura. But don't get me wrong, she could have had much more potential if they didn't cram in every aspect of demonic nature into her.

[Atlas-]

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that I liked the third act of the game from Bioshock.

For a start it contained some of my favorite levels I find appolo square quite amazing although tenembaum was lacking what the other guides had in terms of personality I think that she fitted in very well with the last levels the line
"You will not believe me, but there was a time when this was all so beautiful ... " really highlights what these levels were about Kashmir Restraunt: Introduces us to Rapture
Medical Pavilion: Helps introduce us to plasmids and adam (playing on our medical fears)
Neptunes Bounty: Introduces fontaine but really geared towards the end with the sub
Arcadia: Showing Ryans brutality and also helps as a change of scene
Fort Frolic: Highlights the decadence of Rapture and gives a nice change of pace (the levels before and after are collection missions)
Hephestaus: Heart of Rapture showing Ryans power and probably the most atmposheric level in the game and of cousre intoduces Would You Kindly
Olympus Heights: Is now more about sorrow showing what has happened to rapture and some very emotianol scenes (3 dead children)
Point Prometheus: Helps shed some lights on the procceses of making bid daddies and little sisters and also brings you to the ending and the final confrontation

I think the final two levels are crucial to the game and Tenembaum really suits these levels as she is full of regret for the "Littles Ones" and would have an indepth knowledge to allow you to become a big daddy. I think that Olympus Heights is the most provocing level in the game and is defenitly my favorite level as through the audio diaries and the scenery itself you really connect with the people of rapture, this is also the first time you get to go in there homes where you see the hastily thrown together barricades and dead bodies of the creators behind them. I also find that fontaine was interessting in these levels going through the stages of splicing and the first "Realist" you meet in rapture I find he's one of the easiest to relate to as he is just in it for the money

As for the "Oscar Trophy" boss I actually prefer that to the ending in two where you never get to meet lamb I think it was good to face your Enemy and after Ryan went the way he did (which was brilliant) I would have felt unfufiled if the same happened to Fontaine and the look just made him stand out from the other splicers and really show how badly the splicing has affected him.

As for the cut scenes at the end I found them a good way to finish of the game, sure they could have had more the more you have the better but although they were extreme oppisites I think that they showcased the game quite well

one thing I'm not quite sure of is how Jack got his suit off at the end as Fontaine says it's a one way street?

In contrast 2 had no real feeling to the first levels and no real intention behind them.

So in summary Act III was my favorite part of 1 and the first levels in 2 were lacking what made the levels in 1 so great.

[nenous2]

Both are great games, i cannot pick one over the other.

[Shades]

The original Bioshock is, in my opinion, a much more interesting ordeal than the second outing, but then could you compare them? Both games have completely different themes, in the case of Bioshock, the story is of one man's discovery and survival whereas the second game is about the bond between a Father/Daughter. Bioshock 2 is a spellbinding game and I, like the original, have completed it many times and enjoyed it immensely, it just doesn't have the same 'magic' as its predecessor. But hey, everyone has their own opinion!

[blissskr]

Bioshock>Bioshock 2. I pretty much agree with the points others have made about why BS2 isn't as great. Not to say it's a bad game as the game play is vastly improved but unfortunately the story isn't. However although I do love BS2 because it's a return to Rapture I felt dissatisfied at the end. However to me it's a shame that Minerva's den gives us a small glimpse at the game BS2 could have been and I actually enjoyed it more than the main story of BS2. The early game play videos where we see old familiar places and there's only a single big sister looked very promising also so its unfortunate that BS2 seemed to drown in the very sea of dreams it was meant to be.

[Spliced Puppies]

Bioshock>Bioshock 2. I pretty much agree with the points others have made about why BS2 isn't as great. Not to say it's a bad game as the game play is vastly improved but unfortunately the story isn't. However although I do love BS2 because it's a return to Rapture I felt dissatisfied at the end. However to me it's a shame that Minerva's den gives us a small glimpse at the game BS2 could have been and I actually enjoyed it more than the main story of BS2. The early game play videos where we see old familiar places and there's only a single big sister looked very promising also so its unfortunate that BS2 seemed to drown in the very sea of dreams it was meant to be.

Minerva's Den was much better in my opinion. The antagonist was much more believable, having spliced to the extreme. Tenenbaum had made a return to continue her work, Subject Sigma was much more than the hollow shell that Delta was, and we were introduced to what maintained Rapture: The Thinker. To me, Minerva's Den was a much more believable story compared to Delta's.

[Atlas-]

there's only a single big sister looked very promising also so its unfortunate that BS2 seemed to drown in the very sea of dreams it was meant to be.

The reason why they stuck with more than one was because they thought it would get tedious fighting her at the end of every level only fo her to survive

Minerva's Den was much better in my opinion. The antagonist was much more believable, having spliced to the extreme. Tenenbaum had made a return to continue her work, Subject Sigma was much more than the hollow shell that Delta was, and we were introduced to what maintained Rapture: The Thinker. To me, Minerva's Den was a much more believable story compared to Delta's.

Although I did find Minervas Den brilliant I think it should have been just that a small dlc that tied up rapture with an explenation of tenembaums disaparence and hinting at the thinkers involvment with Delta. The twist at the end was brilliant but I think if the game had been longer I would have found it disatisfying more then anything.

[FireyFate]

Although I did find Minervas Den brilliant I think it should have been just that a small dlc that tied up rapture with an explenation of tenembaums disaparence and hinting at the thinkers involvment with Delta. The twist at the end was brilliant but I think if the game had been longer I would have found it disatisfying more then anything.

Reaaally should be using spoiler tags around here, since PC players are STILL waiting for MD... but I thought the "twist" was painfully obvious. And I am the type who tries to disengage my brain and not guess at endings in order to let the story unfold.

[Vito_Lucente]

Reaaally should be using spoiler tags around here, since PC players are STILL waiting for MD... but I thought the "twist" was painfully obvious. And I am the type who tries to disengage my brain and not guess at endings in order to let the story unfold.

C'mon, no one can say they saw that twist coming.

[FireyFate]

C'mon, no one can say they saw that twist coming.

You mean the twist where the one major new non-evil character ends up being the protagonist big daddy who's background is a mystery in a story which is known for having a giant twist?

Yeah I must be lying... no one could have seen that coming.

[Codex]

You mean the twist where...

I have to agree with you. That was my big complaint about Minerva's Den was that the ending was somewhat obvious. However, I'm not entirely sure that it was a deal breaker for me. I enjoyed it well enough.

However, it just cements the issue that all three (and yeah, I guess I am counting MD as a game here probably inappropriately due to it's length) games share. The first suffered from a weak third act, the second suffered from a slow first act and MD suffered from an "obvious" ending. They've all got a weak point, sadly.

[FireyFate]

I have to agree with you. That was my big complaint about Minerva's Den was that the ending was somewhat obvious. However, I'm not entirely sure that it was a deal breaker for me. I enjoyed it well enough.

Yeah I didn't dislike it as a whole or anything. It did seem a bit like they felt they HAD to make another twist to satisfy BS1 fans or something...

I still look forward to it coming out on PC (hopefully) so I can really enjoy it. I kind of rushed through on my friend's PS3 copy.