txgoldrush wrote...
FlamingBoy wrote...
I would disagree, anyone who truly loved the orginal bioshock (I did not like ittxgoldrush wrote...
Mr.House wrote...
BS2 had no depth at all. It was a cash cow.txgoldrush wrote...
Mr.House wrote...
Very simple. How far are you willing to go to undo your sins.Sauruz wrote...
What message did BS:I have?
Which was really underdeveloped.
Unlike the first two games, Infinite lacks depth in key areas.
Wrong...absolutely and utterly wrong.
The PAIRBOND had a TON of depth.) would know that it did not need a sequel. Everything that was need to be said was said.
Bioshock 2 is not a bad game, but it exsitence is to cash in on the success of the previous entry , instead of being a game the market wanted to play. Hence the term "cash cow" is appropriate
Also if you call out someone for being "wrong" you should argue your point than just repeating the words ("wrong") over and over.
No, its existance is because the designers wanted to use Rapture to tell a more personal story.
Godfather didn't "need" a sequel either.
I hope your talking about godfather part 2, because 3 was a cash in. Godfather part 3 exists for the purpose of making money on the success of the previous iteration (that reason by it self is not enough).
Actually godfather part 3 is a perfect metaphor for bioshock 2





Retour en haut





