- Joined
- Feb 24, 2019
- Messages
- 3
- Trophies
- 0
Both are great games. But they're great for different reasons.
Bioshock tells a fantastic story in a clever way and it's very, very immersive. It looks great and, while it certainly isn't revolutionary in gameplay, it's not lacking there either. It's short, yes, but that shouldn't be a factor in judging how "good" a game is.
Half Life 2 was revolutionary in gameplay and it added more cohesiveness than previous FPS's. The problem is that it was revolutionary. Most of the ways it was groundbreaking and have been subsumed into future games. It doesn't make any less of a great game, but it does make the experience less for someone playing it today for the first time because it won't feel quite so revolutionary anymore.
What are your thoughts?
Bioshock tells a fantastic story in a clever way and it's very, very immersive. It looks great and, while it certainly isn't revolutionary in gameplay, it's not lacking there either. It's short, yes, but that shouldn't be a factor in judging how "good" a game is.
Half Life 2 was revolutionary in gameplay and it added more cohesiveness than previous FPS's. The problem is that it was revolutionary. Most of the ways it was groundbreaking and have been subsumed into future games. It doesn't make any less of a great game, but it does make the experience less for someone playing it today for the first time because it won't feel quite so revolutionary anymore.
What are your thoughts?