Well I just finished System shock 2 for the first time. And by that I mean about an hour ago. So did I like it. Short answer, yes. Long answer, well.......
Let me put it like this. Before 2011 I'd never thought of seeing video games as anything more that a pastime when listening to audiobooks. I can list most of the games I'd played before then then now.
Orly's draw a story, Lemmings. Worms 2. The Simpson's Hit and Run, Midtown Madness 1&2, Age of Empires 2 and 3. Rome and medieval 2: Total war, and Dawn of War.
None of them games you paly for the story. But as the winter of '11 closed in and I was forced to finaly get and internet connection for my room I decieded to get two games the required internet connection to test it out. I randomly chose The Orange Box and Bioshock.........

I didn't expect to play Bioshock for more than 10 minutes (I couldn't imagine that playing a first-person-perspective game would be anything more than a headache) Three sleepless nights later I was a gaming convert.
Bioshck was not only my first serious game (No insult intended to Age of Empires 2, I still love you) but over time it has become my favourite narrative work in any medium. I've played through it 10 times at least. I know more about the contents of Rapture than my own bedroom. And I Also loved Bioshock Infinite, what I played through 4 times.

So of course I was obsessed with being able to play System shock 2. How could I not what to play the game that inspired Bioshock? It got to the point where I had dreams about being able to play it. So why didn't I play it as soon as it came to GOG? Well I wanted to wait till the time was perfect. No distractions. No interruptions. And that time came up just last week.

Maybe I shouldn't have waited so long. It's hard not to hang around GOG and the PC-cenrtiic side of Youtube without reading a hundred comment that basicly say "Bioshock is crap. SS2 is infinity better". Apart hearing my favourite work of fiction stinging a little they all have a Duke Nukem Forever effect of hyping the game to an unreal standard to were if it wasn't perfect beyond description it would be a disappointment........
System Shock 2 isn't perfect beyond description.

I could go on a Spoonyone style rant about everything wrong with this clunky, awkward, indecisive, unbalanced, underwritten, mess of a game! But I wont. I'd be trolling if I did because even with every one of this game's many flaws leaping out at me like warts on a supermodel I can't say it's a bad game.
But please le me give a a few reasons why System Shock 2 in no way makes me feel stupid for preferring Bioshock.

1: Combat
One, slightly baffling complante people make against Bioshock is that it's combat sucks. I've always felt the combat in it was great, but what I really don't see is why SS2 gets a free pass? Combat consists of one type. Shoot at enemy in corridor with correct ammunition till they fall over. Not exactly ground-breaking. It's slow and samey and feels more like an inconvenience than anything else. I've had so much fun finding creative ways to kill things in Bioshock. In SS2 creativeity seems limited to using the anti-personnel rounds on organic life and Armour- piercing rounds on robots (For the record I played as a marine. Maybe all the fun stuff is in the psi-skills, I don't now).
For those who'd say it's unfair to compare a 1999 game's combat with a 2008 here is a list of pre 1999 games that I felt had better combat that System Shock 2
Half-fife, Unreal, Blood, Shadow Warrior, Doom, Quake 2, Dark Forces Shogo Mobile Armour Division, Heretic, Crusader No Remorse, Gunstar Heroes. Jedi Knight, and Rise of the Triad.
In other words I can't believe SS2's combat seemed good, even at the time,

2: Balance and inconsistent mood
Obviously I'm still new round here and have been mostly sticking to the classics but I feel I can safely say that System Shock 2 is the most poorly balanced game I've ever completed (Did the whole ting on the normal setting). What I mean by this is that difficultly seems to only come in to verities. Insultingly easy and hard as fuck. neither of which help its case as a horror game. It's impossible to feel scared when you are dying and reloading every 5 seconds (although it can get very frustrating) It takes me out of the game somewhat. And when it's easy the enemies inspire laughter rather than fear. All the best horror moments were story driven. I will be seeing Shodan in my nightmares.

Also any game where the measly little wrench you get at the start of the game is more of a threat to most enemies than the grenade launcher feels like it's having a laugh at my expense. It kinda kills the horror mood when getting close to enemies is usually your best option. Speaking of things that kill the horror mood, The Force field gun might just be the funniest gun in any FPS game I've played. But I don't think that's what they were going for.

It feel like half the team wanted to make a hardcore, old-school dungeon crawler like Ultima Underworld and the other half wanted to make a narrative, driven horror experience and no-one stopped to wonder if these togoals might be slightly at odds with each other.

Finally. I hate boss fights. 90% of the ones I've played felt to me like irritating filler. If you were to ask me "What is the worse kind of boss fight" I'd say. "The kind where the boss is like a puzzle but you can't focus on the puzzle because there are 40 other enemies try to kill you and even though you want to kill them there's no point because the game is always spawning in more"...... The penultimate boss fight made me want to cry. It seemed tailor made to make me want to rage-quit. The final boss fight was a cakewalk by comparison.

3: Cheapness.
Enemy spawns. I get why this game has respawning enemies, I do. But it can be very cheap with them. I actually spotted enemies spawning in once or twice. Shameful. Quite often enemies will spawn right behind you like some kind of joke.
I had a lot of fun hacking stuff in Bioshock. I understand that most people didn't like the hacking minigame, but atleast it required player input. Hacking in SS2 is pure luck from all I saw. The only player input s whether you want to blow your modules on upgrades that wait the dice in you favour. Or you can save-scum till you get the results you want, that works too.
If there if one key difference between BIo and System Shock it's that Bioshock is like an indulgent grandfather who gives you all your toys at once and SS2 is like a strict aunt who ill only let you have a few toys at a time. The ame seems to say "You mean you want guns and hacking and psychic powers? Do you think you're here to have fun or something?" People say this give the game great replayability and maybe they're right. But so far I can't agree that SS2 has greater depth than Bioshock. Bioshock had all the fiddly perks and upgrades too it just let you have way more of them.
Also First person platforming in the game sucks. I know apart from Portal it sucks generally. But it sucks even more here thanks to the game's weird physics.

4: Narative.
You'll be pleased to hear I don't have many gripes with the narrative. Only that compared to Bioshock and Bioshock Infinite it feels kind of thin and undercooked (ironic as I'm used to reading about how Bioshock is a watered-down SS2) Every inch of rapture was steeped in narrative. The characters from those games feel like old friends to me now (psychotic and racist friends I'd never show to my mother, but still....) SS2 feel kind of barebones my comparison. But may that will change. With the other games I found the narrative got stronger with repeat playthroughs and maybe it will be the same here.
My only other problem was with The Many's repeated whining of "Why do serve the machine mother?" By the end I want to yell at them "Because she's the only thing on this space ship that hasn't tried to kill me on site, that's why! Maybe if we had a man to gelatinous blob talk you could sell me on this joining The Many thing". It's like a bully whining about being hit back. Hypocritical.
For an "RPG" there really doesn't seem to be any role-play in this game. That Seems to be the case with most RPG I've played (Fallout, Plainscape and Mass Effect are in my backlog. I'll get round to Playing them someday, I swear!!!"

So with all that out the way what do I think of System Shock 2? It's pretty good. If you can think yourself back to 1999 it's a huge step up in terms First-person, in-game narrative from say Half-life. I will never forget Shodan and the the soundtrack is great. I don't see it as a classic that wipes the floor with it's successors. But It's like I say. Being first doesn't matter. Being seen first is often what matters.
But maybe this game will grow on me.

Thanks for reading :)


PS sorry for the wall of text. I hope his isn't too long. Also I still haven't played Bioshock 2

Having played System Shock when it was released, I think (at least based on my feelings, having played the Bioshocks AND SS2) that the major "PLUSES" in System Shock's are that it took 10+ years to catch up to the atmospheric tension that SS2 provided, that Bioshock attempted to replicate this tension with limited ammo alone (SS2 built it both with scarce resourses AND a survival horror type gameplay mechanic that really wouldn't even exist for another 5 years after its release - I compare it to Silent Hill, which wasn't even a glimmer in a devs eye when SS2 was created)

And as an original lover of the gameplay, RPG aspects and research present in SS2, I have to say that type of balancing hasn't existed in a game since. It's all been dumbed down and never quite present in an FPS RPG game. There are just so many aspects of gameplay that have to be balanced, tweaked and sacrificed in SS2. Hmm want to sling a Rifle with a fair chance of making a shot? Well, you're not going to be able to hack that door which might hide a few key components to research your next level of tech. Want to toss out some nasty spells? Damn you just aren't going to be as effective with your weapon of choice or able to explore that derelict portion of the cruiser.

Bioshock on the other hand - well heck you could pick any old 3 plasmids and beat the game, with no change in play other than freezing a guy verses burning him. Again, I'm biased in that I have a soft spot for SS2 in thinking of it as one of the last great RPG hybrids, but the choice / reward / sacrifice mechanics in SS2, to me anyway, are tops.

I've never thought of "choice" as being USE X or USE Y to get same result Z...

I've thought of it as If you do X... well Y and Z MAY be possible
but if you do A... well then you'd never even know about Y and Z and all of a sudden pathes B and C open - and that's how I felt playing SS2. Whereas Bioshock always felt like the path was the same no matter what I did, it's just that the graphic display of what I was doing might be blue instead of red

My 2cents

Laddy, you have some balls posting this here.

I played both games on release date and I will agree Bioshock is a far better game. However I still love System shock 2... it will always be a classic.

I like your opinions, well thought out and quite to the point. Just be prepared for some hate mail! ;)

(Also Bioshock 2 has a better story than the original, I would highly recommend playing it.)

And just to add - I read my copy of Game Informer recently and a certain writer had a great comment that I had never really considered, in regard to a reader who had played Half Life and found it a bit uninspired.

And that comment was something to the effect that everything we take for granted now, was original and ground breaking at the time. That is to say, 10 - 15 years later, games that have made marginal improvements might make the original creativity seem like not a big deal... until you consider that here we are, almost two decades later, and the games are still chasing and imitating what made those originals great but not really pushing games forward aside from some shiny new graphics. At the time of their release, games like SS2 and Half Life blew peoples' minds (Holy crap, a scary FPS with RPG aspects, set in a Sci Fi world??? Or Half Life - OMG an FPS where I don't fire a shot for the first hour of gameplay, and the story is more involved than "See Bad Guy, Shoot"???)

Think how far the mainstream video game genres / gameplay have "advanced" in the last decade and you'll start to see why SS2 was such a leap forward, and why Bioshock was only sort of a nod to what was, and not really an evolutionary jump forward to what will be. System Shock (in my mind) advanced and blended genres while Bioshock sort of mashed in and distilled them. To me, while I really enjoyed Bioshock 1 + 2 (I burned out on them by Infinity) they were no more evolutionary RPGS than Call of Duty was for adding in Perks, Killstreaks and more guns.

EDIT *of course I'm also a guy who, after having beat Bioshock the first time around, sort of shrugged my shoulders and said to myself "Damn, these guys ran a bit of a shameless marketing campaign, comparing their game to System Shock" - when it had very little in common with SS2. Honestly, Bioshock, as much as I enjoyed it, was as much a "successor" to the "gameplay" of System Shock as FEAR or Dead Space.

Well said. :)

Umm...... Silent hill came out the same year as SS2

As for limited ammo, by the time I got up to the forth level I was swimming in spare ammo.

research just felt like busywork to me. long but easy busy work and possible waste of upgrades.

And as for your idea of choice, I don't see what your getting at. Maybe it's because I chose the Marine path but I wasn't left feeling I'd missed intriguing other paths. Only that the game refused to let me have psychic powers. Whether I had used guns or psy amps I'd have gotten the same results. The game's story wouldn't have changed. I explored every inch of the Von burgon and Richenbacker. I doubt that wasting points on modifying would have changed the lay out The Body The Many or make Shodan turn nice at the end.
SS2 seems to bee victim to the exact lack of change you claim it rails against. I don't get you.

Interesting perspective. I enjoyed reading it.
I fell in love with Bioshock in 2009, and had become pretty familiar with Rapture.
I had only played a demo of SS2 a couple of years after it was released, and wanted to play the full version, so I bought it here on day one. I loved it instantly and played the whole game in one sitting.

While I definitely enjoyed the narrative and atmosphere of Bioshock more, SS2 had beaten Bioshock in an important area for me - player customization.
I felt like in Bioshock, it was easy to become a master at everything. Eventually, all weapons and ammo are upgraded, and you can easily master hacking and looting. I didn't like being able to master so much. (I had the same problem with DX:HR vs the original Deus Ex. Still loved it, though.)
I preferred the system in SS2, where you mostly have to stick with just a few specialties to be effective. You can't use all of the weapons and psi powers effectively. I like the large number of traits, weapon specialties, psi specialties, and tech specialties, and had a lot of fun creating unique and specific builds. I ended up replaying SS2 more than Bioshock because of this.

I could spend hours comparing the two, but I don't think anyone would want to read that... and my typing "skills" are really going downhill tonight.

I really need to get the hell off the forums. I'm drowsy and dizzy as eff. Summing up -
They are both great, but SS2 comes out on top for me.
I enjoyed reading your thoughts.
Anyone who says you are stupid for liking or disliking something is just a straight-up asshole.

Wow I would have NEVER guessed Silent Hill came out in '99! I could have sworn it was '01 or so!

And as far as "choice" I didn't mean so far as "results" I meant in approach. To me, Bioshock was always "Do I freeze this guy with Blue or Do I burn him with Red?"

In System Shock it was "Should I drop a psi wall to delay him and flank?" or "Do I hack a turrent and never even engage him myself?" or "Do I simply manhandle the creature with my advanced weapon skill?" or "Do I use security codes I found earlier to simply bypass this entire encounter?" I could be exaggerating based on my memory of faaaaar too long ago, but I just felt like SS2 offered more of a variety in how to approach each encounter.

I did cover that SS2 was probably a huge leap forward for the time. But to me It's like comparing the Jazz Singer to Singin' in the Rain. Both were made before my parents my born so what the represent is more of a concept that a realty.
And Like Bioshock Singin' in the Rain added nothing new to musicals it was just head-and-shoulders better than everything else.
You don't have to be innovative to be great. Ah, I see what You mean. Strange to say that's exactly what I got out of Bioshock when you talk about approach. Will SS2 I found brute force always worked but maybe I'll get a more fulfilling experience Using a psy or navy route (I'd have thought you'd have to be suicidal to try to hack the SS2 turrets. They can tear your heath the ribbons but die so easiy ;) ). Thanks man. I guess I just prefer being able to do everything. I always did prefer Age of empires to StarCraft :)

I haven't played SS2 yet, but I never found anything to complain about in Bioshock games. For BS2, for example, combat was one of the best parts, especially on high difficulty because it was intense; the ability to fight enemies in a plethora of varying ways made the game. Actually, it was the atmosphere too, which made the game, like you would feel paranoid walking down a hallway, or you'd avoid a fight to conserve ammo. So much fun.

Whatever the case, my expectations of SS2 aren't that great; people can seriously overvalue older games because of rose-coloured glasses. Still, from the few gameplay videos I've seen, SS2 seems like an interesting game, so I am looking forward to playing it.

I started playing SS2 a few days ago for the first time. According to my save I am about 3 hours in (which means I have been playing for about 6 hours, dying many times, and reloading).

I have never played Bioshock.

I am really enjoying the game. I agree that the combat is clunky, but I very much enjoy the storytelling (first game I played with audiologs although I know they are old hat for most people), the RPG-ish ness, customisation (I don't like spending my points, but I recently spent a huge amount so I can use a light sabre... not sure that was the right call).

I like the atmosphere, I like that I am not completely lost and have a decent idea what I have to do next, thanks to Dr Polito and the notes.

I'm still fairly early on in the game, no boss fights yet (also hate boss fights), but am enjoying things so far. One of the benefits of not having played any modern AAA games is you really don't know when there is something better out there.

Thanks

I'd still recommend SS2 despite all I've said. Just be sure to search everything and save often.

Highest difficulty is defiantly the best way to play Bioshock. I love it when an FPS give you a huge tool kit them makes you use every tool. finishing Bioshock infinite on 1999 mode was one of my most gratifying gaming moments.

silent hill 2 was released in 2001 ;)

I hope you give Bioshock a try someday my good man :)

Yeah the light sabre. I did the exact same thing. I used it once or twice and It seemed to be no more useful then the vanilla wrench.

You'll be glad to hear the boss fights only turn up near the end. I wish you good luck. But Remember, the machine mother is always watching..... Thanks man. That means a lot to me.

I'm looking forward to playing Bioshock 2. I refused to buy it back when it had Games for Windows Live but it is now long gone and I plan to play it someday in the future.

I literally just trained myself to use the light sabre. Is it worth it or should I reload a save from 2 minutes ago and train myself to do more useful things?

Edit: And I probably will never play Bioshock, as I am pretty sure it has DRM and DRM is against my religion.