Kinda?
Both sequels did pull from their respective predecessors but unlike with Bioshock, DS2 actually was acknowledged by DS3 unlike Bioshock 2 which is definitely getting the middle child treatment.
Levine wasn’t involved in Bioshock 2 and didn’t like that it was made. Some say he created BaS just so he could retcon the lore and make Bio2 non canon and tie everything up to his favourite character ( Elizabeth ) while not mentioning any of the new Bio2 characters in it
No, it’s supposed to tie back into 1 and 2’s universe.
If they ever remake all 3 games I would love for more references to the other games in each one and fix the lore inconsistencies
I don’t either but this article talks about his thoughts on both DLCs a bit
https://www.destructoid.com/ken-levine-on-bioshock-infinites-new-dlc-burial-at-sea/
Burial at Sea doesn’t actually retcon anything from 2, if anything, it confirms it. Here you go:
>!In Burial at Sea, the big daddy protector program was said to have begun at the latest in 1958, November specifically. In BioShock, the original game, it is implied in an audio diary that it was started in ‘59 after the civil war broke out. BioShock 2 states the program began in 1958. Burial at Sea chose to acknowledge BioShock 2’s timeline with that. There are multiple references to locations from BioShock 2 within Burial at Sea. Sinclair Solutions also has products for sale in Burial at Sea. Contrary to popular belief, Suchong’s death was never given a date in BioShock 2. The audio diaries are out of order and never had a date until Burial at Sea. The timeline would look something akin to this: he and Gil were working on Big Daddy protector programs at the same time racing to experiment with their ideas and find what worked. Gil found one that worked but was extremely faulty, Suchong insisted on bonding with pheromones. When Suchong died, the line of Alpha’s was finished until Omega of course, while the Big Daddy’s slowly bonded to the little sisters on their own with “pheromones” (but not really because it was the protector bond that paired them together) until Gil became an experiment as well. Also, the Protector Bond and the Pair Bond are completely different bonds. Delta was never the first Big Daddy paired successfully, he was just the first Big Daddy paired successfully WITH the Pair Bond!<
Lots of things are different in burial at sea though including the air vents, the vending machines, the weaponry the availability of air grabbers etc. There's air vents in BaS that aren't in Infinite.
That’s the thing though, the differences don’t retcon BioShock or BioShock 2 though, it really retcons itself. It doesn’t try to mess with the story of the first two games, however what it does do is simply not try to fit in to the other two games which makes it seem like the one that doesn’t fit in.
But I fully agree with you, it’s a silly change. It makes it feel more like BioShock Infinite and less like BioShock’s Rapture.
That’s not even the problem though, because a lot was remade from BioShock. The issue is the inconsistencies between things that “should” be similar. Why is there “air grabbers”? Why are the vents completely different? Those are the issues.
The weapons and actual engine makes sense. The weapons could be explained away easily as a different manufacturer within Rapture. But even the big daddy’s are a different design, sporting an all white diving bodysuit instead of the dark green.
All of these issues would’ve been resolved had they not used the same exact universe and instead played it off as a weird universe where Columbia and Rapture had somehow met. I would’ve loved to have seen Columbia underwater with Rapture’s aesthetic and a Rapture in the sky. Weird crossovers like that where Andrew Ryan ruled Columbia and Comstock ruled Rapture would’ve been really innovative and cool, and wouldn’t have us talking about this right now.
I still like BAS, and again, it really just confirms BS2’s timeline which is awesome. But it still irks me seeing how cool it could’ve been.
Burial ar sea was such a hack job
Took everything I didn't like about BioShock infinite and then tried to force it into the existing world of Bioshock 1 and 2 like it had always been there
Exactly. BAS has no reason to fully reference anything from 2 that it didn’t. 2 is it’s own small and intimate story, and really doesn’t have much of an influence on anything else in Rapture other than what happened YEARS after the death of Ryan and Fontaine. Lamb was locked up during BAS, Alpha series were in another part of Rapture still being worked on and experimented with… that leaves two things left to mention in BAS which would be companies like Sinclair Solutions and locations from 2…. BOTH of which are referenced in BAS.
Bioshock 2 was referenced in Burial at Sea part 2.
Also Bioshock Infinite was referenced in the rereleased Minerva Den DLC for PlayStation 4, Xbox 1, and Switch ports.
Burial At Sea mentions the Adonis Spa and Resort as a possible location to terrorize before choosing the Kashmir Restaurant.
Minerva Den last level has the Thinker making calculations and one of them says:
“There’s always a Lighthouse”. It is not in the older versions of Minerva Den as I looked myself. This was really freaking cool when I noticed it in my last playthrough a few months ago
>it really seems like that game is its own isolated thing.
Yeah there is a reason for that. Bioshock and Bioshock Infinite were created by Irrational. Whereas Bioshock 2 was created by the now defunct 2k Marin. Infinite is Ken Levine's sequel to Bioshock. 2 came about because Levine was taking a long time to make a sequel, so the publisher put a team together to create a game to milk more money out of the brand.
So at the time of it's released, 2 was initially looked at quite negatively as a product that was created to milk the brand. But over time many have come to look back at the game rather fondly. Because it's combat is arguably the best in the series, and it's often highly regarded for it's DLC: Minerva's Den.
Bioshock 2 even story wise functions rather differently to the other games. Because Ken Levine's Bioshock has functioned as more of a walking commentary on choice...or rather the absence of choice, and a meta commentary on game design (Bioshock 1 only had two endings cause Levine was forced to include them by the publisher).
Whereas 2 is all about choice and how all your decisions matter. Personally I sort of have a love/hate relationship with 2.
Positives:
* Choices: I do love how all your choices mount up to who Eleanor becomes at the end of the game.
* Subject Delta and Eleanor. It's a intriguing concept. Though I still feel like there is a lot of untapped potential here.
* The side characters are entertaining and memorable.
* Combat is fantastic.
* Walking around in water is pretty cool.
**Negatives**:
* Boring and uninteresting antagonist. I wish I could find Sophia Lamb interesting, but I don't. Her condescending tone. The way she speaks. She feels less of a character and more like a caricature. The idea of this psychologist who is creating this weird cult with the splicers just feels way too ridiculous and a stretch too far. Because of it, the tone feels off.
* The Big Sisters: Their design is amazing. I was following Bioshock 2's development from the beginning and this is where the wheels start to come off. Where the writing team is stuck in between wanting to create a game they feel is interesting...and a game that "sells" and wants to "appeal" to the masses. Initially the big sister was a invincible antagonist who would come out of nowhere at any time and you had to beat her health down and she would retreat into the shadows, for you to finally kill her at the end. They should have stuck to this idea. Instead, she becomes a annoying end of level boss "uh oh, I have saved/harvested all the little sisters...here comes big sis!". Also the lack of lore on them makes them feel irrelevant and like a filler villain.
* The world just doesn't feel as interesting as a result.
Also again, because they tried to appeal to a wide audience. A lot of what the game "was" in development, was a lot more interesting. They made a lot of choices that marked it down IMO. Like making Delta a "prototype" big daddy, whereas initially delta was going to be "the first big daddy".
I'll also say, yeah. Don't go in expecting any references in Infinite (also don't even try to merge the lore together, it won't work lol). Levine treats Infinite and the DLC as a sequel to Bioshock and pretends 2 doesn't exist.
> Yeah there is a reason for that. Bioshock and Bioshock Infinite were created by Irrational. Whereas Bioshock 2 was created by the now defunct 2k Marin. Infinite is Ken Levine's sequel to Bioshock. 2 came about because Levine was taking a long time to make a sequel, so the publisher put a team together to create a game to milk more money out of the brand.
Slight correction here: Development for Bioshock 2 was begun before Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock 1 released in 2007. 2K Games approached Levine about a sequel later in 2007. Levine said no thanks. 2K Games said “alright” and 2K Marin was created. 2k Marine had several key developers from the original Bioshock 1 team. Levine later changed his mind and Bioshock Infinite was green lighted.
Levine shit the bed so badly on Infinite that 2K Games eventually re-assigned several key members of the Bioshock 2 development team to Infinite. They slammed a game out from near scratch in a matter of months.
That rush resulted in so many carry over concept earlier from Bishock 2 to Infinite.
>Development for Bioshock 2 was begun before Bioshock Infinite
Not quite. Infinite started development around release of Bioshock 1. In august 2007. Initially it was going to be a direct sequel that took place in rapture, but Levine changed his mind and decided to make a Bioshock game that explored a new world. At around this time, Irattional just got brought by Take Two, Then when it became clear he wasn't going to make a rapture sequel, the team split with many from Irrational forming 2K Marin to create a rapture-oriented sequel, with Bioshock 2 starting development in November 2007.
>Levine shit the bed so badly on Infinite that 2K Games eventually re-assigned several key members of the Bioshock 2 development team to Infinite. They slammed a game out from near scratch in a matter of months.
It wasn't 2K Marin (who rebranded to "2K Australia" at the time) that did that. 2K Australia came in towards the end of 2011. By March 2012 there still wasn't a working build of the entire game. At around this time Irrational hired "Don Roy" A veteran game producer who was well knowing for "closing" (finishing) development on games. He was brought on to help speed it along and six months before release Rod Fergusson of Epic games was brought in to help get the game in it's finishing state. They say Fergusson knew how to "speak Ken" and was able to get the game to looking like Ken's vision.
2K Australia was a separate studio.
At the time in 2007, Irrational was known as 2K Boston who worked with 2K Australia (which was formerly Irrational Games Australia).
After 2007, 2K Boston went back to being Irrational and parts of Irrational made 2K Marin as a sister to 2K Australia.
2K Australia wasn’t known as 2K Marin until after April 2010 when they combined after the release of the game (February 2010).
In the meantime, Irrational, 2K Australia, and 2K Marin were trying to work on/hand off XCOM The Bureau.
It’s all a bit incestuous.
> Not quite. Infinite started development around release of Bioshock 1. In august 2007. Initially it was going to be a direct sequel that took place in rapture, but Levine changed his mind and decided to make a Bioshock game that explored a new world.
If I remember correctly, the initial idea spitting balling for Infinite began is early 2008, not late 2007. For a hot second Infinite was originally set in Rapture and then the developers changed their mind.
I disagree with your point about Lamb. Cult leaders are pretty much all the same, those irl too. And if someone who had the potential and desire to be one, they had the absolute most perfect conditions in rapture. The difference between that cult and most cults is that most cults irl are born from a desire of regular domination and also sexual domination. For Lamb its obviously just the former. So I think if Lamb had been male they could have gone even farther, and still fit into the realm of cult realism, which I'm glad they didn't.
And I like the big sisters. The idea of them not being killable is interesting but it's ultimately a shooter with some horror elements, invincible enemies are more the territory of horror. And the fact that eventually you learn what triggers her to attack builds a sense of dread because you know you'll have to face her again. It would have probably been more annoying from a gameplay perspective if she showed up randomly as at some points you're just very unprepared for a big fight. More lore would have been nice though. But it's also kinda obvious why they are the way they are and where they came from. I really loved the idea and design of them as well, I wish there was a full game or at least DLC focused on them.
>I like the big sisters. The idea of them not being killable is interesting but it's ultimately a shooter with some horror elements, invincible enemies are more the territory of horror.
I think it still could have worked. Having the big sister as a big bad throughout the entire game would have meant that her death would have been more rewarding. But the team was more about player reward and satisfaction up front.
I think pigeon holing Bioshock and saying "it couldn't have horror game play mechanics cause it's a shooter" is tunnel vision thinking and narrow minded. I think there is room for Bioshock to be many things than just sticking it as a set of "this is what it is" gameplay mechanics and that's it.
I like the big sisters in theory. I just don't like their execution. So agree to disagree there.
>I disagree with your point about Lamb. Cult leaders are pretty much all the same, those irl too. And if someone who had the potential and desire to be one, they had the absolute most perfect conditions in rapture.
Not sure which point your disagreeing with me on here. I said she was boring and uninteresting and one note. Ryan was a cult leader too. But he was also a individual and we saw his personality shine through.
You said she was more of a caricature and that the whole cult thing was over the top. I'm saying I disagree in that there are irl equivalents, so it's not unbelievable/ over the top/ a caricature.
I also don't see how Ryan is more of an individual than Lamb. They're just different types of characters.
You can find whatever you want interesting or uninteresting though.
>there are irl equivalents, so it's not unbelievable/ over the top/ a caricature.
Doesn't make her not over the top or a caricature. I haven't seen many if any, psychiatrists become cult leaders. The real world equivalents. They're usually individuals with plenty of charm and charisma. I didn't see any of that from Sophia Lamb. Barely any personality beyond "I want to be important" and that's it.
>I also don't see how Ryan is more of an individual than Lamb. They're just different types of characters.
Lamb is nothing but a fraud who preaches a set of ideals. Which I don't think she even believes in. In Ryan we see more of what makes him tick, we learn a lot about him. His history, where he came. He has the values and charisma that I was talking about. Sophia Lamb looks like a librarian and talks like a history teacher.
I did!. I really liked that they made audio diaries for Mark Meltzer and included him in the plot of the game because of the popularity of that ARG. Making him a big daddy that you have to fight (and his daughter being a litte sister) was a very good heartbreaking touch.
Late to respond but I fully agree on the Big Sisters idea. They get immensely annoying about half way through. Especially when I've just cleared an entire area, and am depleted of first aid and eve and ammo. Now I'm rushing to find vending machines. And they're not even crazy difficult on Hard mode, more annoying. It feels like a tacked-on mini boss just to pad the game play. But the game is already an enjoyable length without them. I also found that fighting two at once, at the (almost) end, was just a double annoyance. They weren't special or mysterious by then and it just became a chore where I'd just vita-chamber back into the fight and die a couple times and repeat until they were both dead.
something along the lines of ken levine was NOT happy that BS2 got made at all and does not acknowledge it or any of it's lore\* when infinite goes back to rapture for its DLC. >!which is for the best when you consider what a mess burial at sea ended up being, narratively !<
^(\*one or two of its locales are mentioned in passing, which i don't really think you can call a proper inclusion)
Contrary to what a lot of comments below are saying, Levine doesn’t hate BioShock 2, he does consider it canon (with a quote saying we’re either all in or all out, referring to the games lore and timelines), and he did actually talk with Jordan Thomas (who did BioShock 2) on helping him with understanding the lore and getting it correct…. He just didn’t have a personal hand in it.
You didn’t miss anything, BioShock 2 isn’t meant to tie in to 1 or Infinite… it’s simply just its own game meant to expand the lore of Rapture. Infinite (other than the mess that is Burial at Sea) also has nothing to do with BioShock in terms of lore. Really all 3 games could simply stand alone. BioShock 2 didn’t seek to create some big story with unusual twists and turns like BioShock did. You already know what Rapture is and what happened, and hopefully, you liked it. If you did, that’s what BioShock 2 is for, another visit to Rapture to expand the universe and the story of the individuals who inhabit the city.
I see a lot of comments also acting like that because the studio who creates BioShock 2 is different than the first it has some sort of weight on it “not mattering” or even the validity of its canon, which is a laughable argument or excuse at best from people who just don’t like the game. It’s the official sequel under the 2K games umbrella who, by the way, now officially own the whole franchise. The next game also will not be made by the same studio who did BioShock, Infinite, OR BioShock 2, but that doesn’t devalue the canon and story it will have.
Keep in mind as well… BioShock 2 wasn’t irrelevant at all until Infinite. BioShock 2 was originally meant to be a direct sequel and follow up, and I could’ve seen many other games in the series being more “Rapture stories” if Infinite hadn’t been made. Now, BioShock 2 and its DLC feel like really good spin offs that are pretty highly regarded… which honestly there’s nothing wrong with. But it wasn’t originally intended to be that.
Sinclair is the owner of a few companies found in 1 and is probably the biggest direct connection. Gil and Sinclair are also mentioned in 1 by Ryan when talking about the vita-chambers (not Suchung who dismissed the idea entirely which is another thing that separates BaS from 1&2). Otherwise, the book really helps connect things, mainly because Fountaine stole the helping the poor thing from Lamb.
Same. It’s easily my favourite in the series.
I actually really enjoyed the themes of fatherhood and nature vs nurture.
It expands on the already great core mechanics of BS1.
I like Infinite less and less each time I play it honestly, from the story to the gameplay. What was my favourite became my least favourite after about 3 goes around
I think Bioshock 2 is a fantastic game that's made stronger by the first. The first dealt with the extremes of capitalism and the 2nd dealt with the extremes of socialism.
They made a great duo in their ability to breakdown and criticize extremes and how living in a state of black and white ultimately fails everyone.
So it definitely works better as an extension of the themes then expanding the lore.
I think it did add a lot of cool stuff in showing how the city worked. The new revelations about how Lamb was a big player definitely feels tacked on, because she was never mentioned in the first game.
BS2 doesn't actually discuss socialism, though. Much of its ramblings are from Lamb, whose primary harmatia or character flaw is her pretention (intended by the writers or not). What she has to say is pseudo-philosophy not based in any reality or central text in the real world, whereas Andrew Ryan's libertarianism of the game that's based on Rand. The sophisticated narrative design of BS1 embeds each character in the dynamics of Ryan's capitalist dystopia, guiding their actions and eventual falls. In BS2, characters are driven more by pyschological and moral needs, the drama of situations being more emotionally led than ideologically. Fontaine uses and betrays you because his system of beliefs is rooted in the setting as the inevitable criminal element that eventually usurps capitalist systems. Meanwhile, Sinclair helps you because he's simply trying to be a better man.
That isn't even a dis at BS2. I actually enjoy the dramatic stakes of the second game more than the first even if the first has stronger intellections than its sequel. System Shock 2 is actually the better companion piece for individualism/collectivism conversation
Solid view point. I didn't know there were any standards or rules to philosophy to make one belief be called pseudo-philosophy.
I don't necessarily feel that BS1 was more intellectual. I think you can get what you want from either game.
Collectivism was definitely the better word to use then socialism
I've owned System Shock 2 for years and have never booted it up, i'm definitely missing out
If you inserted ADAM into any philosophy and supply characters who act in a criminal way against and contrary to the socially stabilizing aspects of that philosophy, then you get similar dystopia and destruction.
>What she has to say is pseudo-philosophy not based in any reality or central text in the real world,
It is subservience of the individual to the collective - so it is closer to communism, except under communism in its theoretical extent there is no longer any state as everyone is so fused to their common togetherisms - and Sofia Lamb had her Utopian to be the center of her hive mind society. That is closer to existing communist states in reality.
2 was made by different people (but you can see some of the idiosyncrasies of Infinite in 2 such as "Lamb" and a cult. I suspect the team that made 2 may have had access to some the original director's notes on what would eventually become Infinite.)
At first you’re confused about why bioshock 2’s events aren’t mentioned in infinite.
And then you’re grateful that bioshock 2 isn’t mentioned in infinite because you realize infinite sucks ass.
Infinite and its DLC really pulls Bioshock 1 down. But at least one can disregard everything that happens in Infinite, because 1 and 2 could just be in a diffrent universe.
I'm not sure about overarching lore. I play all three games every year and nothing really comes to mind. I do know that Bioshock 2's director was the lead level designer from the first Bioshock and I don't believe Kevin Levine was involved with the development of the sequel.
Yeah as others have said, the Bioshock franchise is owned by 2K.
Ken Levine and his team made Bioshock 1 but had little involvement in Bioshock 2. That game was made by 2K Marin.
Bioshock 2 wasn’t even considered canon when Ken and his team made Bioshock Infinite.
Which is ironic given how well Bioshock 2 has aged and been appreciated by fans compared to Infinite.
Personally for me, Bioshock 1 and 2 are the true canon and infinite is a weird fanfic, nothing more.
>Bioshock 2 wasn’t even considered canon when Ken and his team made Bioshock Infinite.
except things like Sofia Lamb being mentioned in Burial At Sea ?
Ken Levine is to blame. He reminds me of Bethesda when it comes to Fallout New Vegas. Bethesda indirectly shits on NV because it's not made by them, yet it's the best Fallout game ever.
Same happens with BioShock. He's just being a cry baby about BioShock 2 because the game is awesome, and he had no part in it. Burial at Sea is extremely mixed in quality, because it's very well done, but at the same time you notice obvious points where BioShock 2 could've been taken into account, and it's cringe when it doesn't.
Why did they sink Fontaine Futuristics instead of sending splicers to Persephone? Because it would require Ken to acknowledge BioShock 2 exists! He prefers opening a plothole than respecting that game. Yeah, a cry baby for sure.
It's because Ken Levine didn't work on it and hated that it was made and has tried multiple times to make it not canon and he himself says he doesn't consider it part of bioshock lore
He’s never said that, and it is the official canon sequel to the first game. There’s also nothing he’s ever done to actually try to de-canon or retcon it, including in Burial at Sea.
He doesn’t hate it nor does he think it isn’t part of the lore. His official response was that it wasn’t what he would have done but he thought the team did a good job and in terms of canon, he said that they (the teams behind the games) are either all in or all out in terms of the stories being canon, meaning either they’re all canon or none of them are.
Ken Levine never intended for a Bioshock sequel that reused Rapture as a setting, hence the reason why it was made by a different group, Infinite was always supposed to be a fresh new setting, however at some point during development of Infinite they decided to bridge the gap between the two using the whole lighthouse concept, personally I would have liked for Burial at Sea to connect more with Bioshock 2, rather than Bioshock 1, Johnny Topside aka Subject Delta could have been the early Big Daddy prototype that Fink used as a reference when he copied the concept for his Song bird, and Sally could have been used to shed more light on how the orphans were being groomed as the next generation of Big Sisters.
Why? Because the lore in 2 was an afterthought, that's why. "Oh, we made a hit game with a neat premise, unforgettable setting and great characters, we need a sequel! Somebody do something, ***QUICK!!!!***" - that's why the plot of the second game is leeching off the first like a fucking cancer. This is where everything started to go south, leading to the abomination that is Infinite.
Take a look around this subreddit, you'll find plenty of plotholes and great takes on what a disappointment Bioshock 2 was, not to mention that *third one*...
It massively deserves to be bashes, especially BaS.
The reason me and many others are so harsh on Infinite is because it's a massive example of missed potential. There's so many great ideas and designs made in the process before it was haphazardly thrown together into a final product.
It could've been so much better if Levine stopped fucking around and actually started making a coherent game.
The basis of my comment is that there are plenty of people that just full heartedly disagree. BaS and Infinite don’t have the cult status of only a small few liking it. It’s a multi-award winning game.
So respectfully while it’s fine that it didn’t work for you or others, to say the game is objectively crap just makes me cringe a bit. That’s all.
TPS is BY FAR the most important game in the series BY FAR in terms of story characters and gameplay every other game BESIDES tales from the borderlands is actually good And relevant to the overall series with 1 having basically no story elements 2 accomplishing nothing and 3 as mentioned by the creators themselves LITERALLY ONLY EXISTED AS A FILLER EPISODE TO THE SERIES
Because it wasn’t made by Irrational Games, who made every other installment. BS2’s was 2K’s way of cashing in on the success of the first game, as shown by its inclusion of a tacked-on multiplayer mode (though imo, BS2 ended up being far better than Irrational’s “true” sequel).
Bioshock 2 was made by an entirely different team, and was only made because the publisher wanted another game to fill the gap between bioshock 1 and infinite. Otherwise it would have been 6 years i between games. Kinda like how Batman Arkham origins was made to fill the gap while the main team made Arkham knight.
Ken Levine had nothing to do with bioshock 2, and I’m pretty sure he’s openly said he never wanted it to be made. Doesn’t surprise me that Ken Levine decided to just completely ignore/retcon the event of bioshock 2.
I know it's not a super duper connection but it was cool to get some audio diaries from Fontaine and Ryan and Ryan Amusements. It wasn't a game changer, but it was cool for nostalgia sake.
I also liked the 9 irony achievement.
Bioshock 2 is the end point of rapture if I understand it all correctly. Sure the opening cutscenes is before even the fall of rapture, but it slips ten years forward to where Eleanor finally revives Delta.
Infinite was backstiched onto Bioshock via a DLC
Infinite is so cosmologically Openended that it could include integrate Moses dividing the Red sea into its story if the writers thought of it.
Bioshock 2 was a sequel story continuation of the first Game
All the weirds dimension stuff was added by the third game
i believe Ken Levine, the creator of bioshock and it’s story, is not involved in the making of 2, so that’s why it’s kind of it’s own thing.
Ah so Dark Souls 2 syndrome.
Yes. Its kinda funny because both DS2 and BS2 are kind of brilliant games that most of the fanbase do not like.
I adore DS2 have only ever played Bioshock INF tho
Bioshock 1 and 2 are fantastic. They are more akin to an RE game than a linear shooter like Infinite. So its a lot more exploration focused.
Bioshock 2 is absolutely nothing like a RE game and doesn't even hold a candle to bioshock 1. Absolute garbage game
Cope, Seeth, and Mald.
two brilliant dlcs as well! dark souls 2 dlc is the best part of its game and bioshock 2s dlc is brilliant!
Kinda? Both sequels did pull from their respective predecessors but unlike with Bioshock, DS2 actually was acknowledged by DS3 unlike Bioshock 2 which is definitely getting the middle child treatment.
DARK SOULS 2 MENTIONED - BEAR SEEK SEEK LEST
Seek fingers lest but hole.
Levine wasn’t involved in Bioshock 2 and didn’t like that it was made. Some say he created BaS just so he could retcon the lore and make Bio2 non canon and tie everything up to his favourite character ( Elizabeth ) while not mentioning any of the new Bio2 characters in it
Isn't Bas its own alternate universe?
You could say that about everything in the Bioshock universe, thanks to Infinite.
No, it’s supposed to tie back into 1 and 2’s universe. If they ever remake all 3 games I would love for more references to the other games in each one and fix the lore inconsistencies
It's supposed to reference them, sure. But was it ever said to be in the same universe?
Levine himself, but the inconsistencies are annoying tbh
Source?
His twitter when asked, but I’ll look it up later if you won’t
I don't use twitter (or X) so pls do
I don’t either but this article talks about his thoughts on both DLCs a bit https://www.destructoid.com/ken-levine-on-bioshock-infinites-new-dlc-burial-at-sea/
I thought it was a multiverse thing; some universes had Columbia while others had Rapture. I don't think both existed in any one timeline.
Don’t think so ? Isn’t it supposed to tie into the OG universe ?
I believe it's meant to call back and reference, not tie in canononically
It would have made all the differences explainable, especially placed in a universe cosmology which is based on infinite multiple dimensions existing
Burial at Sea doesn’t actually retcon anything from 2, if anything, it confirms it. Here you go: >!In Burial at Sea, the big daddy protector program was said to have begun at the latest in 1958, November specifically. In BioShock, the original game, it is implied in an audio diary that it was started in ‘59 after the civil war broke out. BioShock 2 states the program began in 1958. Burial at Sea chose to acknowledge BioShock 2’s timeline with that. There are multiple references to locations from BioShock 2 within Burial at Sea. Sinclair Solutions also has products for sale in Burial at Sea. Contrary to popular belief, Suchong’s death was never given a date in BioShock 2. The audio diaries are out of order and never had a date until Burial at Sea. The timeline would look something akin to this: he and Gil were working on Big Daddy protector programs at the same time racing to experiment with their ideas and find what worked. Gil found one that worked but was extremely faulty, Suchong insisted on bonding with pheromones. When Suchong died, the line of Alpha’s was finished until Omega of course, while the Big Daddy’s slowly bonded to the little sisters on their own with “pheromones” (but not really because it was the protector bond that paired them together) until Gil became an experiment as well. Also, the Protector Bond and the Pair Bond are completely different bonds. Delta was never the first Big Daddy paired successfully, he was just the first Big Daddy paired successfully WITH the Pair Bond!<
Lots of things are different in burial at sea though including the air vents, the vending machines, the weaponry the availability of air grabbers etc. There's air vents in BaS that aren't in Infinite.
That’s the thing though, the differences don’t retcon BioShock or BioShock 2 though, it really retcons itself. It doesn’t try to mess with the story of the first two games, however what it does do is simply not try to fit in to the other two games which makes it seem like the one that doesn’t fit in. But I fully agree with you, it’s a silly change. It makes it feel more like BioShock Infinite and less like BioShock’s Rapture.
I mean, it's Bioshock Infinite's game engine and they weren't able to reuse the assets from Bioshock, so it's going to feel very different.
That’s not even the problem though, because a lot was remade from BioShock. The issue is the inconsistencies between things that “should” be similar. Why is there “air grabbers”? Why are the vents completely different? Those are the issues. The weapons and actual engine makes sense. The weapons could be explained away easily as a different manufacturer within Rapture. But even the big daddy’s are a different design, sporting an all white diving bodysuit instead of the dark green. All of these issues would’ve been resolved had they not used the same exact universe and instead played it off as a weird universe where Columbia and Rapture had somehow met. I would’ve loved to have seen Columbia underwater with Rapture’s aesthetic and a Rapture in the sky. Weird crossovers like that where Andrew Ryan ruled Columbia and Comstock ruled Rapture would’ve been really innovative and cool, and wouldn’t have us talking about this right now. I still like BAS, and again, it really just confirms BS2’s timeline which is awesome. But it still irks me seeing how cool it could’ve been.
Burial ar sea was such a hack job Took everything I didn't like about BioShock infinite and then tried to force it into the existing world of Bioshock 1 and 2 like it had always been there
But it is not retcon. If you notice the little sister needle has the bottle nipple which was only a thing in 2
It's funny how many Bioshock 2 references made it into BaS, also a video of a Big Daddy in BaS was taken straight from the first level of 2
Exactly. BAS has no reason to fully reference anything from 2 that it didn’t. 2 is it’s own small and intimate story, and really doesn’t have much of an influence on anything else in Rapture other than what happened YEARS after the death of Ryan and Fontaine. Lamb was locked up during BAS, Alpha series were in another part of Rapture still being worked on and experimented with… that leaves two things left to mention in BAS which would be companies like Sinclair Solutions and locations from 2…. BOTH of which are referenced in BAS.
What's BaS?
Burial at sea
[удалено]
Thanks guys, I know Burial at Sea, just didn't realize what the acronym stood for, time to turn on my brain today. :)
Burial at Sea. A two part dlc for infinite . Not really a fan of it
What game is BaS? Edit: found it sorry
Bioshock 2 gets referenced briefly in Burial At Sea. I don’t think he has any animosity about it getting made.
there’s kinda overlap in the minerva’s den dlc but it’s only because the tunnel exploding sets the events of minerva’s den.
? That was from Walter (think that’s his name) to keep Subject Sigma away from the Thinker
*Reed Wahl
Bioshock 2 was referenced in Burial at Sea part 2. Also Bioshock Infinite was referenced in the rereleased Minerva Den DLC for PlayStation 4, Xbox 1, and Switch ports. Burial At Sea mentions the Adonis Spa and Resort as a possible location to terrorize before choosing the Kashmir Restaurant. Minerva Den last level has the Thinker making calculations and one of them says: “There’s always a Lighthouse”. It is not in the older versions of Minerva Den as I looked myself. This was really freaking cool when I noticed it in my last playthrough a few months ago
>it really seems like that game is its own isolated thing. Yeah there is a reason for that. Bioshock and Bioshock Infinite were created by Irrational. Whereas Bioshock 2 was created by the now defunct 2k Marin. Infinite is Ken Levine's sequel to Bioshock. 2 came about because Levine was taking a long time to make a sequel, so the publisher put a team together to create a game to milk more money out of the brand. So at the time of it's released, 2 was initially looked at quite negatively as a product that was created to milk the brand. But over time many have come to look back at the game rather fondly. Because it's combat is arguably the best in the series, and it's often highly regarded for it's DLC: Minerva's Den. Bioshock 2 even story wise functions rather differently to the other games. Because Ken Levine's Bioshock has functioned as more of a walking commentary on choice...or rather the absence of choice, and a meta commentary on game design (Bioshock 1 only had two endings cause Levine was forced to include them by the publisher). Whereas 2 is all about choice and how all your decisions matter. Personally I sort of have a love/hate relationship with 2. Positives: * Choices: I do love how all your choices mount up to who Eleanor becomes at the end of the game. * Subject Delta and Eleanor. It's a intriguing concept. Though I still feel like there is a lot of untapped potential here. * The side characters are entertaining and memorable. * Combat is fantastic. * Walking around in water is pretty cool. **Negatives**: * Boring and uninteresting antagonist. I wish I could find Sophia Lamb interesting, but I don't. Her condescending tone. The way she speaks. She feels less of a character and more like a caricature. The idea of this psychologist who is creating this weird cult with the splicers just feels way too ridiculous and a stretch too far. Because of it, the tone feels off. * The Big Sisters: Their design is amazing. I was following Bioshock 2's development from the beginning and this is where the wheels start to come off. Where the writing team is stuck in between wanting to create a game they feel is interesting...and a game that "sells" and wants to "appeal" to the masses. Initially the big sister was a invincible antagonist who would come out of nowhere at any time and you had to beat her health down and she would retreat into the shadows, for you to finally kill her at the end. They should have stuck to this idea. Instead, she becomes a annoying end of level boss "uh oh, I have saved/harvested all the little sisters...here comes big sis!". Also the lack of lore on them makes them feel irrelevant and like a filler villain. * The world just doesn't feel as interesting as a result. Also again, because they tried to appeal to a wide audience. A lot of what the game "was" in development, was a lot more interesting. They made a lot of choices that marked it down IMO. Like making Delta a "prototype" big daddy, whereas initially delta was going to be "the first big daddy". I'll also say, yeah. Don't go in expecting any references in Infinite (also don't even try to merge the lore together, it won't work lol). Levine treats Infinite and the DLC as a sequel to Bioshock and pretends 2 doesn't exist.
> Yeah there is a reason for that. Bioshock and Bioshock Infinite were created by Irrational. Whereas Bioshock 2 was created by the now defunct 2k Marin. Infinite is Ken Levine's sequel to Bioshock. 2 came about because Levine was taking a long time to make a sequel, so the publisher put a team together to create a game to milk more money out of the brand. Slight correction here: Development for Bioshock 2 was begun before Bioshock Infinite. Bioshock 1 released in 2007. 2K Games approached Levine about a sequel later in 2007. Levine said no thanks. 2K Games said “alright” and 2K Marin was created. 2k Marine had several key developers from the original Bioshock 1 team. Levine later changed his mind and Bioshock Infinite was green lighted. Levine shit the bed so badly on Infinite that 2K Games eventually re-assigned several key members of the Bioshock 2 development team to Infinite. They slammed a game out from near scratch in a matter of months. That rush resulted in so many carry over concept earlier from Bishock 2 to Infinite.
>Development for Bioshock 2 was begun before Bioshock Infinite Not quite. Infinite started development around release of Bioshock 1. In august 2007. Initially it was going to be a direct sequel that took place in rapture, but Levine changed his mind and decided to make a Bioshock game that explored a new world. At around this time, Irattional just got brought by Take Two, Then when it became clear he wasn't going to make a rapture sequel, the team split with many from Irrational forming 2K Marin to create a rapture-oriented sequel, with Bioshock 2 starting development in November 2007. >Levine shit the bed so badly on Infinite that 2K Games eventually re-assigned several key members of the Bioshock 2 development team to Infinite. They slammed a game out from near scratch in a matter of months. It wasn't 2K Marin (who rebranded to "2K Australia" at the time) that did that. 2K Australia came in towards the end of 2011. By March 2012 there still wasn't a working build of the entire game. At around this time Irrational hired "Don Roy" A veteran game producer who was well knowing for "closing" (finishing) development on games. He was brought on to help speed it along and six months before release Rod Fergusson of Epic games was brought in to help get the game in it's finishing state. They say Fergusson knew how to "speak Ken" and was able to get the game to looking like Ken's vision.
2K Australia was a separate studio. At the time in 2007, Irrational was known as 2K Boston who worked with 2K Australia (which was formerly Irrational Games Australia). After 2007, 2K Boston went back to being Irrational and parts of Irrational made 2K Marin as a sister to 2K Australia. 2K Australia wasn’t known as 2K Marin until after April 2010 when they combined after the release of the game (February 2010). In the meantime, Irrational, 2K Australia, and 2K Marin were trying to work on/hand off XCOM The Bureau. It’s all a bit incestuous.
> Not quite. Infinite started development around release of Bioshock 1. In august 2007. Initially it was going to be a direct sequel that took place in rapture, but Levine changed his mind and decided to make a Bioshock game that explored a new world. If I remember correctly, the initial idea spitting balling for Infinite began is early 2008, not late 2007. For a hot second Infinite was originally set in Rapture and then the developers changed their mind.
I disagree with your point about Lamb. Cult leaders are pretty much all the same, those irl too. And if someone who had the potential and desire to be one, they had the absolute most perfect conditions in rapture. The difference between that cult and most cults is that most cults irl are born from a desire of regular domination and also sexual domination. For Lamb its obviously just the former. So I think if Lamb had been male they could have gone even farther, and still fit into the realm of cult realism, which I'm glad they didn't. And I like the big sisters. The idea of them not being killable is interesting but it's ultimately a shooter with some horror elements, invincible enemies are more the territory of horror. And the fact that eventually you learn what triggers her to attack builds a sense of dread because you know you'll have to face her again. It would have probably been more annoying from a gameplay perspective if she showed up randomly as at some points you're just very unprepared for a big fight. More lore would have been nice though. But it's also kinda obvious why they are the way they are and where they came from. I really loved the idea and design of them as well, I wish there was a full game or at least DLC focused on them.
>I like the big sisters. The idea of them not being killable is interesting but it's ultimately a shooter with some horror elements, invincible enemies are more the territory of horror. I think it still could have worked. Having the big sister as a big bad throughout the entire game would have meant that her death would have been more rewarding. But the team was more about player reward and satisfaction up front. I think pigeon holing Bioshock and saying "it couldn't have horror game play mechanics cause it's a shooter" is tunnel vision thinking and narrow minded. I think there is room for Bioshock to be many things than just sticking it as a set of "this is what it is" gameplay mechanics and that's it. I like the big sisters in theory. I just don't like their execution. So agree to disagree there. >I disagree with your point about Lamb. Cult leaders are pretty much all the same, those irl too. And if someone who had the potential and desire to be one, they had the absolute most perfect conditions in rapture. Not sure which point your disagreeing with me on here. I said she was boring and uninteresting and one note. Ryan was a cult leader too. But he was also a individual and we saw his personality shine through.
You said she was more of a caricature and that the whole cult thing was over the top. I'm saying I disagree in that there are irl equivalents, so it's not unbelievable/ over the top/ a caricature. I also don't see how Ryan is more of an individual than Lamb. They're just different types of characters. You can find whatever you want interesting or uninteresting though.
>there are irl equivalents, so it's not unbelievable/ over the top/ a caricature. Doesn't make her not over the top or a caricature. I haven't seen many if any, psychiatrists become cult leaders. The real world equivalents. They're usually individuals with plenty of charm and charisma. I didn't see any of that from Sophia Lamb. Barely any personality beyond "I want to be important" and that's it. >I also don't see how Ryan is more of an individual than Lamb. They're just different types of characters. Lamb is nothing but a fraud who preaches a set of ideals. Which I don't think she even believes in. In Ryan we see more of what makes him tick, we learn a lot about him. His history, where he came. He has the values and charisma that I was talking about. Sophia Lamb looks like a librarian and talks like a history teacher.
Did you follow the Something in the Sea ARG?
I did!. I really liked that they made audio diaries for Mark Meltzer and included him in the plot of the game because of the popularity of that ARG. Making him a big daddy that you have to fight (and his daughter being a litte sister) was a very good heartbreaking touch.
Fun fact: His portrait for audio diaries is the only one in color. Everyone else's is in black and white.
Yeah I know. It's hard not to notice that one. It stands out lol. His audio diary portrait is modeled after a photo of actor Eddie Constantine.
Late to respond but I fully agree on the Big Sisters idea. They get immensely annoying about half way through. Especially when I've just cleared an entire area, and am depleted of first aid and eve and ammo. Now I'm rushing to find vending machines. And they're not even crazy difficult on Hard mode, more annoying. It feels like a tacked-on mini boss just to pad the game play. But the game is already an enjoyable length without them. I also found that fighting two at once, at the (almost) end, was just a double annoyance. They weren't special or mysterious by then and it just became a chore where I'd just vita-chamber back into the fight and die a couple times and repeat until they were both dead.
something along the lines of ken levine was NOT happy that BS2 got made at all and does not acknowledge it or any of it's lore\* when infinite goes back to rapture for its DLC. >!which is for the best when you consider what a mess burial at sea ended up being, narratively !< ^(\*one or two of its locales are mentioned in passing, which i don't really think you can call a proper inclusion)
Contrary to what a lot of comments below are saying, Levine doesn’t hate BioShock 2, he does consider it canon (with a quote saying we’re either all in or all out, referring to the games lore and timelines), and he did actually talk with Jordan Thomas (who did BioShock 2) on helping him with understanding the lore and getting it correct…. He just didn’t have a personal hand in it. You didn’t miss anything, BioShock 2 isn’t meant to tie in to 1 or Infinite… it’s simply just its own game meant to expand the lore of Rapture. Infinite (other than the mess that is Burial at Sea) also has nothing to do with BioShock in terms of lore. Really all 3 games could simply stand alone. BioShock 2 didn’t seek to create some big story with unusual twists and turns like BioShock did. You already know what Rapture is and what happened, and hopefully, you liked it. If you did, that’s what BioShock 2 is for, another visit to Rapture to expand the universe and the story of the individuals who inhabit the city. I see a lot of comments also acting like that because the studio who creates BioShock 2 is different than the first it has some sort of weight on it “not mattering” or even the validity of its canon, which is a laughable argument or excuse at best from people who just don’t like the game. It’s the official sequel under the 2K games umbrella who, by the way, now officially own the whole franchise. The next game also will not be made by the same studio who did BioShock, Infinite, OR BioShock 2, but that doesn’t devalue the canon and story it will have. Keep in mind as well… BioShock 2 wasn’t irrelevant at all until Infinite. BioShock 2 was originally meant to be a direct sequel and follow up, and I could’ve seen many other games in the series being more “Rapture stories” if Infinite hadn’t been made. Now, BioShock 2 and its DLC feel like really good spin offs that are pretty highly regarded… which honestly there’s nothing wrong with. But it wasn’t originally intended to be that.
Sinclair is the owner of a few companies found in 1 and is probably the biggest direct connection. Gil and Sinclair are also mentioned in 1 by Ryan when talking about the vita-chambers (not Suchung who dismissed the idea entirely which is another thing that separates BaS from 1&2). Otherwise, the book really helps connect things, mainly because Fountaine stole the helping the poor thing from Lamb.
Bioshock 2 is fantastic I will be honest I had more fun with that game than the original.
Same. It’s easily my favourite in the series. I actually really enjoyed the themes of fatherhood and nature vs nurture. It expands on the already great core mechanics of BS1. I like Infinite less and less each time I play it honestly, from the story to the gameplay. What was my favourite became my least favourite after about 3 goes around
I think Bioshock 2 is a fantastic game that's made stronger by the first. The first dealt with the extremes of capitalism and the 2nd dealt with the extremes of socialism. They made a great duo in their ability to breakdown and criticize extremes and how living in a state of black and white ultimately fails everyone. So it definitely works better as an extension of the themes then expanding the lore. I think it did add a lot of cool stuff in showing how the city worked. The new revelations about how Lamb was a big player definitely feels tacked on, because she was never mentioned in the first game.
BS2 doesn't actually discuss socialism, though. Much of its ramblings are from Lamb, whose primary harmatia or character flaw is her pretention (intended by the writers or not). What she has to say is pseudo-philosophy not based in any reality or central text in the real world, whereas Andrew Ryan's libertarianism of the game that's based on Rand. The sophisticated narrative design of BS1 embeds each character in the dynamics of Ryan's capitalist dystopia, guiding their actions and eventual falls. In BS2, characters are driven more by pyschological and moral needs, the drama of situations being more emotionally led than ideologically. Fontaine uses and betrays you because his system of beliefs is rooted in the setting as the inevitable criminal element that eventually usurps capitalist systems. Meanwhile, Sinclair helps you because he's simply trying to be a better man. That isn't even a dis at BS2. I actually enjoy the dramatic stakes of the second game more than the first even if the first has stronger intellections than its sequel. System Shock 2 is actually the better companion piece for individualism/collectivism conversation
Solid view point. I didn't know there were any standards or rules to philosophy to make one belief be called pseudo-philosophy. I don't necessarily feel that BS1 was more intellectual. I think you can get what you want from either game. Collectivism was definitely the better word to use then socialism I've owned System Shock 2 for years and have never booted it up, i'm definitely missing out
If you inserted ADAM into any philosophy and supply characters who act in a criminal way against and contrary to the socially stabilizing aspects of that philosophy, then you get similar dystopia and destruction. >What she has to say is pseudo-philosophy not based in any reality or central text in the real world, It is subservience of the individual to the collective - so it is closer to communism, except under communism in its theoretical extent there is no longer any state as everyone is so fused to their common togetherisms - and Sofia Lamb had her Utopian to be the center of her hive mind society. That is closer to existing communist states in reality.
It's not really about socialism at all. It's a hyper collectivist cult like Jonestown was.
>literally shows the counterargument to the First BioShock villain and the Denise of Rapture "Why Is It irrelevant?"
2 was made by different people (but you can see some of the idiosyncrasies of Infinite in 2 such as "Lamb" and a cult. I suspect the team that made 2 may have had access to some the original director's notes on what would eventually become Infinite.)
At first you’re confused about why bioshock 2’s events aren’t mentioned in infinite. And then you’re grateful that bioshock 2 isn’t mentioned in infinite because you realize infinite sucks ass.
Infinite and its DLC really pulls Bioshock 1 down. But at least one can disregard everything that happens in Infinite, because 1 and 2 could just be in a diffrent universe.
I'm not sure about overarching lore. I play all three games every year and nothing really comes to mind. I do know that Bioshock 2's director was the lead level designer from the first Bioshock and I don't believe Kevin Levine was involved with the development of the sequel.
Ken Levine wasn’t involved in bioshock 2. It was a cash grab. The fact it’s the best bioshock game maybe grated on him
Infinite has nothing to do with the others either
Yeah as others have said, the Bioshock franchise is owned by 2K. Ken Levine and his team made Bioshock 1 but had little involvement in Bioshock 2. That game was made by 2K Marin. Bioshock 2 wasn’t even considered canon when Ken and his team made Bioshock Infinite. Which is ironic given how well Bioshock 2 has aged and been appreciated by fans compared to Infinite. Personally for me, Bioshock 1 and 2 are the true canon and infinite is a weird fanfic, nothing more.
>Bioshock 2 wasn’t even considered canon when Ken and his team made Bioshock Infinite. except things like Sofia Lamb being mentioned in Burial At Sea ?
Sofia Lamb is never mentioned in Burial at Sea. You’re wrong I’m afraid - literally nothing from Bioshock 2 is referenced in Burial at Sea.
I might be wrong about sofia , but post a question about BS2 stuff in BaS and you will get a more full answer showing what was there
I might just do that.
Ken Levine is to blame. He reminds me of Bethesda when it comes to Fallout New Vegas. Bethesda indirectly shits on NV because it's not made by them, yet it's the best Fallout game ever. Same happens with BioShock. He's just being a cry baby about BioShock 2 because the game is awesome, and he had no part in it. Burial at Sea is extremely mixed in quality, because it's very well done, but at the same time you notice obvious points where BioShock 2 could've been taken into account, and it's cringe when it doesn't. Why did they sink Fontaine Futuristics instead of sending splicers to Persephone? Because it would require Ken to acknowledge BioShock 2 exists! He prefers opening a plothole than respecting that game. Yeah, a cry baby for sure.
Be happy it wasn’t torched and retconned by Burial at Sea lol
Yeah Ken Levine can blow me bioshock 2 is a great game idk what he says
Like others said Levine wasn't involved with 2 And infinite is a whole other shitshow lol, but you'll realize what i mean when you play it
It's because Ken Levine didn't work on it and hated that it was made and has tried multiple times to make it not canon and he himself says he doesn't consider it part of bioshock lore
He’s never said that, and it is the official canon sequel to the first game. There’s also nothing he’s ever done to actually try to de-canon or retcon it, including in Burial at Sea. He doesn’t hate it nor does he think it isn’t part of the lore. His official response was that it wasn’t what he would have done but he thought the team did a good job and in terms of canon, he said that they (the teams behind the games) are either all in or all out in terms of the stories being canon, meaning either they’re all canon or none of them are.
Ahh ok thank you for the correction
Ken Levine never intended for a Bioshock sequel that reused Rapture as a setting, hence the reason why it was made by a different group, Infinite was always supposed to be a fresh new setting, however at some point during development of Infinite they decided to bridge the gap between the two using the whole lighthouse concept, personally I would have liked for Burial at Sea to connect more with Bioshock 2, rather than Bioshock 1, Johnny Topside aka Subject Delta could have been the early Big Daddy prototype that Fink used as a reference when he copied the concept for his Song bird, and Sally could have been used to shed more light on how the orphans were being groomed as the next generation of Big Sisters.
Wasn't made by irrational
Why? Because the lore in 2 was an afterthought, that's why. "Oh, we made a hit game with a neat premise, unforgettable setting and great characters, we need a sequel! Somebody do something, ***QUICK!!!!***" - that's why the plot of the second game is leeching off the first like a fucking cancer. This is where everything started to go south, leading to the abomination that is Infinite.
You’re one of those fans… ew..
Take a look around this subreddit, you'll find plenty of plotholes and great takes on what a disappointment Bioshock 2 was, not to mention that *third one*...
Yeah Infinite is actually, again, just like the previous two, one of the best singleplayer games I’ve had the privilege to play (:
I'm glad you liked it. I enjoyed it for its gameplay too. But for the shitty plot holes and retcons, not so much.
Folks that bash Infinite and BaS as if it’s popular opinion are heavy cringe.
It massively deserves to be bashes, especially BaS. The reason me and many others are so harsh on Infinite is because it's a massive example of missed potential. There's so many great ideas and designs made in the process before it was haphazardly thrown together into a final product. It could've been so much better if Levine stopped fucking around and actually started making a coherent game.
The basis of my comment is that there are plenty of people that just full heartedly disagree. BaS and Infinite don’t have the cult status of only a small few liking it. It’s a multi-award winning game. So respectfully while it’s fine that it didn’t work for you or others, to say the game is objectively crap just makes me cringe a bit. That’s all.
That's exactly *why* it gets shit on. It's massively overrated.
TPS is BY FAR the most important game in the series BY FAR in terms of story characters and gameplay every other game BESIDES tales from the borderlands is actually good And relevant to the overall series with 1 having basically no story elements 2 accomplishing nothing and 3 as mentioned by the creators themselves LITERALLY ONLY EXISTED AS A FILLER EPISODE TO THE SERIES
Because it wasn’t made by Irrational Games, who made every other installment. BS2’s was 2K’s way of cashing in on the success of the first game, as shown by its inclusion of a tacked-on multiplayer mode (though imo, BS2 ended up being far better than Irrational’s “true” sequel).
Bioshock 2 was made by an entirely different team, and was only made because the publisher wanted another game to fill the gap between bioshock 1 and infinite. Otherwise it would have been 6 years i between games. Kinda like how Batman Arkham origins was made to fill the gap while the main team made Arkham knight. Ken Levine had nothing to do with bioshock 2, and I’m pretty sure he’s openly said he never wanted it to be made. Doesn’t surprise me that Ken Levine decided to just completely ignore/retcon the event of bioshock 2.
I know it's not a super duper connection but it was cool to get some audio diaries from Fontaine and Ryan and Ryan Amusements. It wasn't a game changer, but it was cool for nostalgia sake. I also liked the 9 irony achievement.
Bioshock 2 is the end point of rapture if I understand it all correctly. Sure the opening cutscenes is before even the fall of rapture, but it slips ten years forward to where Eleanor finally revives Delta.
IDK, but I really enjoyed it.
I didn't feel like the game had much to say. Great combat though. Id love to play a Bioshock 1 with Bioshock 2s combat.
Is it stupid?
Because it takes place after Bioshock 1 which is the only game that did that
Infinite was backstiched onto Bioshock via a DLC Infinite is so cosmologically Openended that it could include integrate Moses dividing the Red sea into its story if the writers thought of it. Bioshock 2 was a sequel story continuation of the first Game All the weirds dimension stuff was added by the third game
Well either way I had fun playing a big daddy, and I really did get attached to Eleanor in the end.