When BioShock 2 launched in 2010, it was a pretty normal sequel.
The 2K Marin-developed imsim took two-and-a-half years to develop.
It was about the same size as its predecessor.
It retreaded similar ground.
And it served more as a mechanical refinement, not an entirely new direction for the series.
What’s Wrong With BioShock 1.5 Anyway?
Eventually, a big game-changer would come along, but it wasn’t usually the first follow-up.
But many others offered more of the same, with minor improvements.
Ms. Pac-Man.Doom 2.Donkey Kong Country 2.Spyro 2.
These are games that offer another serving of what you liked the first time around.
The mechanics were often refined, but not wildly different.
Even in the late 2000s and early 2010s, games were still following this trend.
Ken Levine has been praising Infinite’s ending, but still misses why it hit people so hard.
Longer Development Cycles Mean Bigger Expectations
Over time, expectations have risen.
We now expect a sequel to be a huge event, not a stopgap.
When games take five years to make, players aren’t going to be satisfied with incremental change.
For example, I loveThe Last of Usseries.
And if you’ve waited a decade for something, you want it to be worth the wait.
When studios could pump out a sequel in a year, there was less pressure to make something era-defining.
They could just, y’know, make a game.
If BioShock 2 came out in 2025, it would get theSpider-Man: Miles Moralestreatment.
2K would make it abundantly clear that it wasnota sequel.
BioShock Infinite Predicted Our Future
15 years later, every sequel is more like BioShock Infinite.
That isn’t to say that Infinite has been influential on game design in a meaningful way.
When I think back to BioShock 2, I think of a different era of triple-A video games.
Nobody knows for sure, but it looks like well find out soon.
