Bioshock 2 Details: Co-op & Story
Update: Game Informer came out to say that some of the information about Bioshock 2 isn’t true.
If people had actually read the Bioshock 2 cover story from this month’s issue…well, you will see how it matches up with the real deal when it arrives this weekend, as the rumors floating around are so amazingly wrong on a very “big” point. Watch for the magazine in stores and in mailboxes this weekend, so you will have your information soon enough.
So take the following with a grain of salt.
CVG got word from Game Informer subscribers that Bioshock 2 will feature Co-op and a interesting plot:
According to supposed subscriber holders on 2K’s forums the second game will feature two-player co-op, underwater exploration levels and controversially, no Big Daddies what-so-ever.
I think co-op is actually a nice solution to the no versus mode multiplayer that Bioshock had in it’s first game. Co-op makes way more sense than a deathmatch. I can see players doing combinations of plasmid abilities to create a solutions in the game.
One problem that the original Bioshock had was the enemies got very bland towards the end, except for the Big Daddies. But Mr. Muddy face attacks was getting very annoying towards the end of the game. A solution that Bioshock 2 has found is introducing a gene splice zoo which can feature bizarre looking creatures. It can turn out to be lame or a nice solution to one of the in the first Bioshock problems.
I won’t spoil the story much her but it sounds like it’s more about a side character encountering and reacting to Rapture. I think it would be odd having a straight up sequel. This sounds more like a side story that should work better.
Check out CVG for more plot details!
Tags: 2k, 2k marine, bioshock 2, PC, XBOX 360
8 Comments »
Leave a comment!
I really hope there is no co-op in BioShock 2. Part of what made the first game so great was the feeling of solitude. You were one man, alone in a HUGE underwater city. In my opinion, having another player tag along would derive from the compelling story telling that was in the first game. Some online modes that I think would be cool are generic team deathmatch (if there's anyway to do splicers vs. survivors), a 1-on-1 mode with the main character vs. a Big Daddy/Sister, and a Horde-esque mode, in which players try to survive against waves of splicers.
I was one of the few who had no problems with Bioshock being single player only. And I have revisited the world many times. This sequel is starting to look like a train wreck. I could be wrong, but co-op seems awkward, Big Sisters seems ridiculous, and the whole idea of either going back to Rapture, or taking the story out of Rapture seems bad. Its a no-win situation for 2K Games, as they created a huge, successful game, and now they have to create a sequel, which is required of most hugly successful games.
The problem comes from the idea that Bioshock was never really written to support a sequel. The whole idea of choice and manipulation is so fit for that storyline. It kinds of reminds me of what they are doing with Dead Space. The Wii is getting Dead Space: Extraction, that happens shortly before Isaac Clarke shows up on the Ishimura, but we already have seen that story in Dead Space: Downfall. So which one is correct, or are we invalidating one of the mediums?
Have you ever played System Shock 2? SS2 had a similar setup with its story and working *very* well with a co-op mode. In fact, after my first (partial) play through, I only played it in co-op mode.
I'm not saying the game needs it, but rather that it can work and to not get all bent out of shape yet.
I just hate to see developers try to jam something unnecessary into a game, especially if they make it a crucial part of the game. Take Resident Evil 5, for example. All of the previous games did not feature co-op play. Now, they decided to make it a huge part of Resident Evil 5, as if they didn't change up the series enough already.
BioShock was an amazing SINGLE PLAYER game. If that game had co-op I'm sure it would have been fun, but there's no doubt that the best experience would come from solo play. Having another player tagging along really derives from the story, I find. I just don't want them to try and “fix” and already working system.
I really hope there is no co-op in BioShock 2. Part of what made the first game so great was the feeling of solitude. You were one man, alone in a HUGE underwater city. In my opinion, having another player tag along would derive from the compelling story telling that was in the first game. Some online modes that I think would be cool are generic team deathmatch (if there's anyway to do splicers vs. survivors), a 1-on-1 mode with the main character vs. a Big Daddy/Sister, and a Horde-esque mode, in which players try to survive against waves of splicers.
I was one of the few who had no problems with Bioshock being single player only. And I have revisited the world many times. This sequel is starting to look like a train wreck. I could be wrong, but co-op seems awkward, Big Sisters seems ridiculous, and the whole idea of either going back to Rapture, or taking the story out of Rapture seems bad. Its a no-win situation for 2K Games, as they created a huge, successful game, and now they have to create a sequel, which is required of most hugly successful games.
The problem comes from the idea that Bioshock was never really written to support a sequel. The whole idea of choice and manipulation is so fit for that storyline. It kinds of reminds me of what they are doing with Dead Space. The Wii is getting Dead Space: Extraction, that happens shortly before Isaac Clarke shows up on the Ishimura, but we already have seen that story in Dead Space: Downfall. So which one is correct, or are we invalidating one of the mediums?
Have you ever played System Shock 2? SS2 had a similar setup with its story and worked *very* well with a co-op mode. In fact, after my first (partial) play through, I only played it in co-op mode.
I'm not saying the game needs it, but rather that it can work and to not get all bent out of shape yet.
I just hate to see developers try to jam something unnecessary into a game, especially if they make it a crucial part of the game. Take Resident Evil 5, for example. All of the previous games did not feature co-op play. Now, they decided to make it a huge part of Resident Evil 5, as if they didn't change up the series enough already.
BioShock was an amazing SINGLE PLAYER game. If that game had co-op I'm sure it would have been fun, but there's no doubt that the best experience would come from solo play. Having another player tagging along really derives from the story, I find. I just don't want them to try and “fix” and already working system.