Bioshock 2 came out fifteen years ago today and during that time we have completely redefined what it means to be a sequel to a big, successful game.
When Bioshock 2 was launched in 2010, it was a fairly normal sequel. The 2K Marine developed IMSIM took two and a half years to develop. It was about the same size as the predecessor. It reflected similar land. And it worked more like a mechanical refinement, not a whole new direction for the series. If it came out today, it is the type of game that players would refer to as Bioshock 1.5.
What's wrong with Bioshock 1.5 anyway?
But during most of half a century that games have existed, sequels have been iterative, with relatively smaller tweaks on its predecessor's formula. Eventually, a large gaming exchange would come along, but it was usually not the first follow -up. Some sequels, such as Zelda 2: The Adventure of Link and Super Mario Bros. 2 (both versions) tangled with their predecessor's formula in great ways. But many others offered more of the same, with less improvements.
Miss Pac-Man. Doom 2. Donkey Kong Country 2. Spyro 2. These are games that offer another serving of what you liked the first time. The mechanics were often refined, but not very different. Even in the late 2000s and early 2010s, games still followed this trend. The new rock band and Guitar Hero Games were not much different from their predecessors, and when Assassin's Creed 2 established series drawing, the following games were largely iterative until origin.
Family
Bioshock Infinites End Have me worried about Judas
Ken Levine has praised Infinite's end, but still lacks why it hits people so hard.
Longer development cycles mean greater expectations
Over time, expectations have risen. We now expect a sequel to be a huge event, not a stop gap. This is not completely NY-Valve handled Half-Life 2 in the same way, waiting for six years to follow up its debut hit-but the majority of sequels treated in this way is new, and it is a product of swelling development cycles. When games take five years to do, players will not be satisfied with incremental change. For example, I love The Last of US series. But given that Intergalactic is Naughty Dog's next match, maybe the last of us part 3 may not come out until 2030 or later. And if you have waited a decade for something, you want it to be worth waiting. When studios were able to pump out a sequel in one year, there was less pressure to do something era-define. They could only, you know, make a game.
This method of refinement lives on in similar a Dragon series, which becomes new, iterative items every year or two.
If Bioshock 2 came out in 2025, it would receive Spider-Man: Miles Morales treatment. 2k would make it very clear that it was not a sequel. It would keep the two as far away from the title as humanly possible, and it would require it to be called something like Bioshock: Return to Rapture or Bioshock: Big Daddy. Like Miles Morales, Bioshock 2 is a return to the attitude that defined the first game, but seen through the eyes of a different character.
Bioshock Infinite predicted our future
15 years later, every sequel is more like Bioshock Infinite. It is not to say that infinitely has been influential on game design in a meaningful way. Rather, Ken Levine's attitude to making sequels – forever has tried to reinvent the wheel and then reducing the reach for slightly larger and shiny, but in the end quite similar – has become the rigueur.
Infinitely, all kinds of great ideas while it was under development – had enough for “five or six full games” – but many were scaled back so it could finally send. It reminds me of how the last of us part 2's world design was originally blood-cage inspired and the battle was more melee-focused before Naughty Dog returned to the average that was determined by the first game. When games take seven years to come out, you do not want to promote fans by taking huge gaming risks.
Especially if in part 2 cases you will already promote some fans with ambitious stories.
When I think back to Bioshock 2, I think of another era of Triple-A-video games. It was a time when you could expect news about a sequel to a game you loved within a year or two. That sequel may not be very ambitious – even if some were – but you could actually play it while you were at the same stage of life as you were when the predecessor came out. When we look forward to sequels like The Elder Scrolls 6 and GTA 6, which must deliver the ambition to compensate for decade-plus turns, I cannot help but feel nostalgic for the industry that gave us Bioshock 2.
Next
Will Bioshock 4 be open world? And will it suck?
No one knows for sure, but it looks like we will soon find out.
