• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

Konradleijon

Banned
Jun 7, 2020
310
At first it shows a accurate portrait of Turn of the century America, AKA a racist, classist, Ableist shithole where only a small degree of rich white men have any power.

But like the first Bioshock it turns into a critique of video games. Not it's more infinitely more interesting and less done critique of history, and society, just video games.

But then it becomes about the Multiverse, and Video games and the entire thing is just Misdirection about the story of Booker Dewit and the story of a White dude and fighting himself from a timeline where he fucked up and became Comstock.

Not to mention what the game director said

Maybe people wanted me to write about a hero who rose above that. Elizabeth is the character I invented who does sacrifice herself to break the cycle. But I think most people are destroyed by oppression. I could tell a fairy tale about people who are ennobled by it. But in my experience, as a student of history, that's rare.
If you pretend there are a lot of happy endings for those stories, in some ways it elevates the oppression to something it's not.
Says the Haitian revolution. Which while a clusterfuck of bullshit and oppression ended much better then the brutal,Slave economy that it replaces.

It wasn't really that hard being better then pre-revolution Haiti but still.

A white dude talking about oppression is just rich. Their is a story to tell about how revolutionizes become just as bad as the regime they Overthrew, see Animal Farm for that but that's not what Bioshock infinite is about.

And as movie bob says it all turns into another story about a white mans self destructive tendencies a really good story about a White mans self destructive tendencies but stories like that are a dime a dozen.


I like the stuff about the Multiverse and different realities. But as moviebob says it's just a smoke screen for Bookers story. And I don't care how good the metaphorical elephant is I am more interested in the Dog.


I'm disappointed that Both Bioshock and Bioshock Infinite start with Interesting and in my opinion Needed Tearing Down of American Myths,

In the first Objectivism and in Infinite the Idea The idea of American Exceptionalism.

But both But especially Infinite Have twists where it is instead Deconstructions of the nature of VIHDIO GAYMES.

In Infinite case it really makes my upset that a mainstream game Tearing down the foundational Myth of America might Reach Young Adults and reconsider Their Worldview and politics.

But the Nature of VIHDIA GAYMES is much more important and Interesting./S/

Uhg Undertale and Stanley Parable do the whole Video game Destruction thing Better mostly because it doesn't tease us with a Marxist view of Sikh Religious Customs and Pride and Prejudice only to by instead be about Achievements.

Bioshock Infinite could have been the Embodiment of this Quote.

The time has come to admit the ugly reality. Come to your sense >US citizens. Donald Trump is not un-American. He is the embodiment of Americanism. We shudder and cringe as he calls for keeping Muslims out of the United States and we despair as he speaks of building a fence to keep out Mexicans. Or we continue to support him as he does this, his poll numbers rising, his competitors dropping to the wayside. And for those who decry his incivility, his racism, his phobia about everything, please do not fall into the simplistic trap of saying that Donald is un-American. Do not claim that he misrepresents or abuses American freedom. The American values you claim he shreds apart simply never existed. They were the wet dream of an Americanist mindset – one peddled by liberals and conservatives alike. The wet dream of those who fought the threat of communism and who search for that picket fence of Chevrolet and prosperity.
 

Lowrys

Member
Oct 25, 2017
12,341
London
The part I hated was the incredibly clumsy "both sides" narrative that peaked with Daisy Fitzroy needlessly almost killing a child. I'm pretty sure at one point Booker even comments that "both sides are as bad as each other".

Maybe I'm ignorant of history, but I doubt oppressed minorities go around murdering innocent children to make their point.
 

sn00zer

Member
Feb 28, 2018
6,060
I think this was a case of "What we meant to say was" and then everyone played and said "Yeah, but you actually said this"
 

Kinthey

Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
22,274
The part I hated was the incredibly clumsy "both sides" narrative that peaked with Daisy Fitzroy needlessly almost killing a child. I'm pretty sure at one point Booker even comments that "both sides are as bad as each other".

Maybe I'm ignorant of history, but I doubt oppressed minorities go around murdering innocent children to make their point.
The OP brings up the haitian revolution and that did have a pretty brutal massacre of the french population, including children


I think the game's politics do end up being kind of confusing because there's such a heavy focus on white supremacy in the first quarter of the game which then ends up getting dropped almost completely by the time Fitzroy's revolution comes around. Then it seems to be more about workers rights than minorities.
 
Last edited:
Oct 25, 2017
3,065
I think this was a case of "What we meant to say was" and then everyone played and said "Yeah, but you actually said this"

I think it's more a case of "what we wanted to say was" versus "what management told us we could say".

There was clearly an intended commentary that was neutered because the publishers were afraid of alienating a conservative subsection of their audience.

Hopefully TLoU2 is a lesson for publishers going forward that they don't need to pander to their more repugnant fans.
 

Rei no Otaku

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
3,339
Cranston RI
The part I hated was the incredibly clumsy "both sides" narrative that peaked with Daisy Fitzroy needlessly almost killing a child. I'm pretty sure at one point Booker even comments that "both sides are as bad as each other".

Maybe I'm ignorant of history, but I doubt oppressed minorities go around murdering innocent children to make their point.
They tried to fix this with the DLC. Having the Lutece twins be the ones who told her to threaten the child even though Daisy didn't want to all to make Elizabeth strong enough to go against Comstock.

It's still the worst part about that game's story.
 

N.47H.4N

Member
Oct 27, 2017
8,095
The OP brings up the haitian revolution and that did have a pretty brutal massacre of the french population, including children


I think the game's politics do end up being kind of confusing because there's such a heavy focus on white supremacy in the first quarter of the game which then ends up getting dropped almost completely by the time Fitzroy's revolution comes around. Then it seems to be more about workers rights than minorities.
Yeah,you should be really delusional to think anyone is spared in most of the cases,in this game the child is not a random,is The Child.
 

mindsale

Member
Oct 29, 2017
5,911
The game doesn't excuse its racism and classism and it only loses focus on those elements toward the game's finale because of narrative climax and the metaphysical aspects. You take issue with Booker as a white male private eye trope, but he's Sioux.
 

Dark Knight

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
19,270
Then it seems to be more about workers rights than minorities.
Been awhile since I played it but if I recall correctly the underclass of Columbia does seem to contain more minorities(maybe all of them?) than the upper echelons which clearly represent the racial oppression of white power and propaganda. So it's kind of both? As if the systems of oppression in Columbia are designed to keep the minorities that do live there confined to the bottom rungs, slums, and working classes.

It does get a bit messy at the end, but that could be more about the effects of the multiverse and how different outcomes get explored in rapid succession. Not sure how I feel about Daisy but I think it's correct that a sharper point could have been made if she was a bit more altruistic and pragmatic of a character. Maybe they were only trying to make a point about the cycles of oppression and the violence they cause. Tbh if I was part of the oppressed class in Columbia I'd want to burn that shit down as well. About Booker's "both sides" comment, maaaaybe there could be some nuance there since Booker is a piece of shit himself who literally becomes the villain who is the symbol of racial oppression. As if we shouldn't be taking his opinion as the game's message since he originates from and ends at a place of bias and privilege.
Booker is part-Native American.
Wow, I totally forgot about that.
 

Jimnymebob

Member
Oct 26, 2017
19,597
My problem with Infinite's politics is that from what I remember, it seemed to be very surface level, and ultimately didn't result in anything other than "these people are bad but also these other people have the potential to be just as bad".
Like, Ryan's opening speech at the start of the original had a way more effective political message than the entirety of Infinite.
 
OP
OP

Konradleijon

Banned
Jun 7, 2020
310
The game doesn't excuse its racism and classism and it only loses focus on those elements toward the game's finale because of narrative climax and the metaphysical aspects. You take issue with Booker as a white male private eye trope, but he's Sioux.

I know but the whole racism thing is a side plot the Whole twist thing with the multiverse, is unrelated to the wholeClassism thing, the game doesn't end with you killing Comstock and ending racism in Columbia. It ends with the Baptism.
 
OP
OP

Konradleijon

Banned
Jun 7, 2020
310
Yeah,you should be really delusional to think anyone is spared in most of the cases,in this game the child is not a random,is The Child.

yes even then what happened on Haiti was far worse, it was literally cheaper to buy new slaves after you worked the last batch to death then it was to not work them to death.
 

mindsale

Member
Oct 29, 2017
5,911
User Banned (1 Month): Posting an ethnic slur
I haven't played Infinite in ages but I don't remember this, where was it said?

Booker speaks fluent Sioux. His mixed heritage is a cause of internal struggle and alcoholism for him for much of the pre-game. He scalps his enemies on the battlefield and when accused of indigenous ancestry he burns entire villages of Mod Edit: Removed ethnic slur and children.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Chairman Yang

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
2,587
The part I hated was the incredibly clumsy "both sides" narrative that peaked with Daisy Fitzroy needlessly almost killing a child. I'm pretty sure at one point Booker even comments that "both sides are as bad as each other".

Maybe I'm ignorant of history, but I doubt oppressed minorities go around murdering innocent children to make their point.
They definitely have. I don't know why people object to this point when it's happened again and again throughout history.

The game did it in a clumsy way, agreed. But then, it did a lot in a clumsy way. Ken Levine squandered his vast resources and extremely talented team.
 

ClickyCal'

Member
Oct 25, 2017
59,510
Levine handled politics a lot better in the first game. And the story as a whole. And gameplay.
 

Necronomicon

Banned
Dec 11, 2017
374
I think they wanted the player to think they were actually saying something more than what it's in the game. I didn't find so much deep reasoning while shooting in the game, it was more a set, like the one of old movie where you go in the back of the building and you see it's all fake and there is only the front.
 

LegendofLex

Member
Nov 20, 2017
5,463
I definitely don't think the multiverse thing is about video games. It's about cognitive dissonance and being forced to confront a reality that's different than the one you constructed for yourself. See: what happens to dead people when their reality merges with one where they're alive.

It's why the closing line of the game is when Booker is able to accept that "I'm both." He's still the "same person" that became the racist fascist Comstock, just a version of that person that faced different circumstances that led him to make different choices. And the player is supposed to be left wondering whether it's the circumstance or the choice that matters, or if there's even a difference.

this is reinforced a million times throughout the game with the appearance of the Luteces and their games about tracking constants (coin flips) and variables (cage or bird). The game's theme song is "Will the Circle Be Unbroken." The writers knew what they were doing here.

Underneath, it's a dramatic depiction of the more insidious component of racism: we're all influenced by it in ways we might not ever understand.
 
Last edited:

mindsale

Member
Oct 29, 2017
5,911
I definitely don't think the multiverse thing is about video games. It's about cognitive dissonance and being forced to confront a reality that's different than the one you constructed for yourself. See: what happens to dead people when their reality merges with one where they're alive.

It's why the closing line of the game is when Booker is able to accept that "I'm both." He's still the "same person" that became the racist fascist Comstock, just a version of that person that faced different circumstances that led him to make different choices. And the player is supposed to be left wondering whether it's the circumstance or the choice that matters, or if there's even a difference.

Underneath, it's a dramatic depiction of the more insidious component of racism: we're all influenced by it in ways we might not ever understand.

It may even be simpler still. Levine's favorite comic book character is Scarlet Witch. That's who he modeled Liz after.
 

Commodore64

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,264
Lets just face the fact that Ken Levine has a hard time writing a good second half to his games. Bioshock became way less interesting after the mid game reveal and infinite became a mess. The rebels turning on Booker was barely explained, Elizabeth's ghost mom was never explained at all, and the entire racism plot was tossed out the window.
 

TinTuba47

Member
Nov 14, 2017
3,794
I really disliked the story for this game.

The intro was cool, but all the multiverse stuff was a bloated mess
 

Atolm

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,826
The part I hated was the incredibly clumsy "both sides" narrative that peaked with Daisy Fitzroy needlessly almost killing a child. I'm pretty sure at one point Booker even comments that "both sides are as bad as each other".

Maybe I'm ignorant of history, but I doubt oppressed minorities go around murdering innocent children to make their point.

The point the game is trying to make, I think, is that in the grand scheme of things, revolutions are just a power dynamic in
which the oppressed become the oppressors and end up repeating the cycle. In other word, mankind goes in circles.

History shows us this constantly. The Cromwell decade? A massacre. American Revolution? White dudes free themselves from a monarch only to found a nation based on slavery. French Revolution? The reign of terror. Russian Revolution? Endless butchery and brutality. Mao's Cultural Revolution? The intellectual elite and many others are decimated. And I could go on an on with the Khmers, what happened in Rwanda, Sunni Muslims taking revenge after decades of oppression by Shia regimes...

Of course it's a game in which you burn alive people left and right. It has little relevance.
 

Siggy-P

Avenger
Mar 18, 2018
11,865
I replayed the collection earleir this year.

I figured maybe propels memories hadn't been kind to Bioshock Infinite but no. The characters straight up say "When it comes down to it, Daisy Fitzroy and Comstock are two sides of the same coin."

They even refer to needing to eliminate Booker because he "just complicates the narrative.".


As a side point I'm coming to the realisation in general (not just infinite btw, other games do it) that the idea of a cycle of violence is inherently a "both sides are just as bad" argument. The idea that they don't wanna rise up agaisnt their captors but rather take over and do the same thing.
 

Jombie

Member
Oct 27, 2017
10,392
Its biggest problem is that all of its early themes are thrown out the window towards the last quarter of the game, and there's no resolution or acknowledgment of Comstock's ideology. Its politics might as well not even exist.

They backtracked on Daisy's character in the DLC, after they received blowback for how she and the Vox Populi were portrayed. So Levine couldn't commit to what he was originally trying to say, anyway.
 

beansontoast

One Winged Slayer
Member
Jan 5, 2020
949
I definitely don't think the multiverse thing is about video games. It's about cognitive dissonance and being forced to confront a reality that's different than the one you constructed for yourself. See: what happens to dead people when their reality merges with one where they're alive.

It's why the closing line of the game is when Booker is able to accept that "I'm both." He's still the "same person" that became the racist fascist Comstock, just a version of that person that faced different circumstances that led him to make different choices. And the player is supposed to be left wondering whether it's the circumstance or the choice that matters, or if there's even a difference.

this is reinforced a million times throughout the game with the appearance of the Luteces and their games about tracking constants (coin flips) and variables (cage or bird). The game's theme song is "Will the Circle Be Unbroken." The writers knew what they were doing here.

Underneath, it's a dramatic depiction of the more insidious component of racism: we're all influenced by it in ways we might not ever understand.
It's definitely (at least partly) about video games. That's why they keep banging on about the 'constants and variables' (the constants being the scenarios/levels etc which the designers present to you, the variables being how you play them) and going all self referential with the 'there's always a lighthouse' schtick. The first Bioshock was about video games as well, so it's not exactly a big leap to notice they are doing a similar thing.

I really don't think the game is the grand critique and depiction of racism it thinks it is. Tbh I personally think it's a very shallow narrative that is good at seeming like it's making a point, but deep down is just a bit empty.

I also think it plays a bit on the desperation of gamers to have examples of things they can point to and go 'look I told you games were high art'. That's why it gets treated by many as if it's some pinnacle of gaming.
 

BeaconofTruth

Member
Dec 30, 2017
3,417
It's devoid of teeth all around. The racism, the jabs at religious peeps, all of it is lacking in any sort of bite, all so the game can both sides a power dynamic and drop all that shit for a really stupid multiverse plot line that actually doesn't hold up the more you think about the game.

It's a pretty game, at times even a fun one because of how strong they make the player, but it's such a shallow experience all around.

Tbh this also could be said about the first game, a lot of its themes break apart when held under any scrutiny. But it was way less offensive with the first, and the gameplay had more interesting options even with the suspect shooting.
 

LegendofLex

Member
Nov 20, 2017
5,463
It's definitely (at least partly) about video games. That's why they keep banging on about the 'constants and variables' (the constants being the scenarios/levels etc which the designers present to you, the variables being how you play them) and going all self referential with the 'there's always a lighthouse' schtick. The first Bioshock was about video games as well, so it's not exactly a big leap to notice they are doing a similar thing.

I guess a more accurate way to say what I mean is "the multiverse thing is part of the story about racism and isn't a hard veer to being about something else entirely."

And you're right, it's not incredibly sophisticated or even particularly genius. The Vox/Fitzroy plot line is proof of that. But there's a coherent theme here and the multiverse thing is part of it.
 

Asbsand

Banned
Oct 30, 2017
9,901
Denmark
I didn't even get to scrutinize its "universal truths" because character continuity and motivation and dialogue writing was already really fallible. You tell Elizabeth you're not going to Paris a second and a third time and only then she starts crying as if she hadn't heard you previously. The game feels so broken off and siloed off from itself and its own story. Only the intro and ending felt like they were made in the same headspace to me. And other emotionally "chilling" moments just fell completely flat to me. It seemed to explicily proclaim its political themes as well. None of it was exposited and reaffirmed before the game just slaps your face with a piece of paper that says "THEME" in big wide letters.
 

Huey

Member
Oct 27, 2017
13,181
I still really love BI but can definitely agree the daisy fitzroy plot line is totally mishandled to a problematic degree. If Levine is trying to say that oppressed people are ruined by their oppressors, then daisy and her people are still the victims and that should be emphasized. Id suspect ken would handle it differently in 2020 vs 2013 given his messaging in the rest of the game is the broken heart of America but art gets judged in new contexts as it moves forward in time, just the way it is.
 
OP
OP

Konradleijon

Banned
Jun 7, 2020
310
Yeah their might be actually merit in exploring in how a revolution ends up being just as bad as the establishment, like animal farm, but Bioshock infinite doesn't show how Daisy went from a Brave revolutionary to just as bad as Comstock.

it never shows the journey.
 
Oct 27, 2017
5,835
I think a lot of the game's story flaws can be attributed to them just needing to get the game out the door.
They brought in Rob Ferguson to get it finished. Development had spiralled out of control and it was heading in the direction of being one of the most expensive games ever made.

I'd need to go back and look through articles but my recollection is they scrapped so much during the game's 5+ year development. I'm not sure if it's accurate but the inconsistent pacing of the various stories suggests that things didn't go smoothly. I wonder how close it got to their original vision.

It's hard to analyse an incomplete thought and that's kind of where I end up with Bioshock Infinite's politics. They had lofty ambitions and it felt like they had something to say and then they just didn't. It feels like a game of moments strung together rather than a coherent message or narrative.
 
OP
OP

Konradleijon

Banned
Jun 7, 2020
310
See that's a reason you should plan a game out in most detail before you have been coding for 5 years. E
 

skeezx

Member
Oct 27, 2017
20,131
Yeah their might be actually merit in exploring in how a revolution ends up being just as bad as the establishment, like animal farm, but Bioshock infinite doesn't show how Daisy went from a Brave revolutionary to just as bad as Comstock.

it never shows the journey.

for better or worse none of the secondary characters are particularly fleshed out (slate, fink, leuteces...)

game does have some stuff to "unpack" philosophically but 1912 floating trumplandia is just a backdrop to booker, liz and comstock's story as much as the mushroom kingdom is mario. it was touchy then and super touchy in 2020 but the game was what it was
 

beansontoast

One Winged Slayer
Member
Jan 5, 2020
949
Yeah their might be actually merit in exploring in how a revolution ends up being just as bad as the establishment, like animal farm, but Bioshock infinite doesn't show how Daisy went from a Brave revolutionary to just as bad as Comstock.

it never shows the journey.
I think the universe jumping aspect to the narrative is a big part of that issue. After jumping through the tear for the first time (to get weapons or whatever it was) the narrative absolutely falls apart. There's no need for actually well written characterisation if you can go 'welp we're in a different universe and she's evil now', it's lazy writing imo because it actually skips all the legwork of showing the characters flaws.

It reminds me a bit of like how that last season of Game of Thrones
really expedites Danaerys's descent into villainy at a breakneck pace without doing enough of the legwork
to the point were it feels implausible, rushed and really unsatisfying.
 
Dec 20, 2017
523
The OP brings up the haitian revolution and that did have a pretty brutal massacre of the french population, including children

Thanks. I hadn't realised that, time to do some reading. I still think it was ham-fisted execution, tho.
Yeah,you should be really delusional to think anyone is spared in most of the cases,in this game the child is not a random,is The Child.

To be clear with the Haitian revolution, the massacre of the French occurred after the Black population of Haiti had exhausted every attempt for peace. Haiti under Toussaint L'Ouverture had pursued a policy that was immensely amendable to the white population, and had attempted to bring white migration to the island (largely for technical skills). One would argue that L'Ouverture went too far in placating whites, since he actually coerced former slaves into working for said whites (he ensured they received a wage, but they had no option not to work for them). L'Ouverture famously escorted his *former master's family* to safety before joining the revolution. All evidence suggests L'Ouverture saw himself as a Black Frenchman, as he declared and remained loyal to France from the moment revolutionary France declared abolition (abandoning Spain, who he had been aligned with do to their then willingness to support abolition), and he enjoyed the company of white Frenchman in Haiti. In return for his service and hospitality, the French under Napoleon kidnapped him, sent him to die in a dungeon (which he did within months), and sent an army to re-enslave Haiti (an army that the island's white Frenchmen, after everything L'Ouverture had done for them, supported). It was only then that Dessalines was able to come to power and ultimately massacred the white French population.

The problem with Infinite is its apparent thesis that a revolution just can't control itself; that it inevitably descends into crazed, unthinking destruction. That is not what happened in Haiti. Once in power, the revolution erred, arguably, in being too deferential to the whites. The revolution resorted to mass violence only once it became clear that the only thing that France wanted was mass violence (i.e. the reinstitution of slavery). Should the revolution have shown 'restraint' at this point? Should they have shown 'mercy'? Maybe, maybe not. But it's absurd to act as if the problem was the revolution, and not the conditions that forced the revolution to mass violence (the French planters and Napoleon). That's the problem with Infinite. It wants you to believe that Daisy Fitzroy and Comstock are equally responsible for the violence that's happening- and it tells you that Fitzroy deserves to be just as punished for it.

Like I genuinely can't believe that game has a white girl stab a Black woman revolutionary in the back and that white girl is supposed to be the 'hero,' the most morally pure character in the game. The point here isn't that it was fine for Fitzroy to kill a child (and even then, Elizabeth probably could have done a dozen things to resolve that situation without killing Fitzroy), it's that the game went out of its way to contrive a situation that could justify a white girl stabbing a Black woman revolutionary in the back. It's the most ethically bankrupt moment in that entire game- it literally says "sometimes the innocent white girl has to betray and kill Black woman because they can't be trusted to be sensible revolutionaries." (And then Burial at Sea tries to 'fix' the moment by revealing that, actually, Fitzroy was playacting and literally let herself get killed to further Elizabeth's character development. Ignoring, of course, the basic issue that the game is still trying to justify a white girl stabbing a Black woman revolutionary in the back).
 
OP
OP

Konradleijon

Banned
Jun 7, 2020
310
The problem with Infinite is its apparent thesis that a revolution just can't control itself; that it inevitably descends into crazed, unthinking destruction. That is not what happened in Haiti. Once in power, the revolution erred, arguably, in being too deferential to the whites. The revolution resorted to mass violence only once it became clear that the only thing that France wanted was mass violence (i.e. the reinstitution of slavery). Should the revolution have shown 'restraint' at this point? Should they have shown 'mercy'? Maybe, maybe not. But it's absurd to act as if the problem was the revolution, and not the conditions that forced the revolution to mass violence (the French planters and Napoleon). That's the problem with Infinite. It wants you to believe that Daisy Fitzroy and Comstock are equally responsible for the violence that's happening- and it tells you that Fitzroy deserves to be just as punished for it.

that's my opinion to.
 

cabelhigh

Member
Nov 2, 2017
1,722
Lets just face the fact that Ken Levine has a hard time writing a good second half to his games. Bioshock became way less interesting after the mid game reveal and infinite became a mess. The rebels turning on Booker was barely explained, Elizabeth's ghost mom was never explained at all, and the entire racism plot was tossed out the window.

He's stated before that he wanted to end the game at the end of the first half and the publisher mandates that they have a third act, so they wrote one. Definitely shows.

And I think Infinites muddled story is more a victim of the extreme amounts of cutting they had to do to get the game out the door. Can't imagine how much they abandoned that didn't make it into the final game.
 

FFNB

Associate Game Designer
Verified
Oct 25, 2017
6,090
Los Angeles, CA
I remember enjoying the first half or so if Bioshock Infinite, because I'm always up for games that aren't afraid to highlight America's ugly racist history (and present), in some way, but then just had to "both sides" the narrative, then go off into the multiverse stuff and drop the plot from the first half of the game.

It's like the video game equivalent of the movie Hancock, where it felt like they took a superhero comedy, and a superhero drama, chopped off the latter half of the former, and the first half of the latter, and duct taped them together, and it ended up not satisfying anyone.

Bioshock Infinite felt that way to me. Like, the two concepts could have been their own separate Bioshock games in and of themselves, but Ken Levine and the team couldn't decide which one they were jazzed about making first, so tried to do both, and it was just a solid game with some really good art direction.

I know I wouldn't have complained if there was a Bioshock game about racism in a sky city, and a Bioshock game about trippy multiverses and meta-commentary on video games.

I don't actually hate Bioshock Infinite, I just think it was a game that could have done so much with both of its halves, but was a disservice to both ultimately.
 
OP
OP

Konradleijon

Banned
Jun 7, 2020
310
I know this is why you have to plan things carefully in any large media project. Like animation or a video game.
 

Tali'Zorah

Member
Oct 27, 2017
636
Norfolk, UK
I dont want to delve too deeply into this topic (it's only a forum post and not an essay after all) but I will throw in my two cents on at least one aspect of this game's politics.

While I do think the "both sides" bullshit was poorly done, I've always interpreted it as them trying to draw an allegory with the Russian Revolution (given it took place just 5 years after when Infinite is set), to show that overthrowing one authoritarian government often just leads to a different authoritarian government. It would've been more effective if they hadn't spent the first half of the game playing up the racism in the society and thus making it look like anti-racists are just as bad as racists. A cool idea and an allegory that could've worked, but the execution was just so poor meaning it came across really badly
 
OP
OP

Konradleijon

Banned
Jun 7, 2020
310
Yeah and actually show the revolution being corrupted and turning. Infinite never shows how Vox Populi turned into something just as bad as Comstock.
 
Last edited: