Only just started playing Bioshock Infinite and i have mixed reactions.. especially for Elizabeth..
- Thread starter crazygameguy4ever
- Start date
i dunno i really enjoyed it, scripted events arent a bad thing at all in shooters, half-life basically invented scripted events and the game is good, well the second gameDiesel- said:
i wouldnt claim the shooting is bad either, but its definitively not great, only "serviceable" the 2 weapon limit is dumb, the gun selection isnt very impressive, basically the whole thing is saved by the fact the battle arenas are great
She's kind of been locked up for her entire life and just discovered her entire existence from infancy has been a part of a huge science experiment. Yeah, she's gonna have some issues and do some stupid things. Once you get further on in the story you'll learn how significant she is. I realize "it gets better later" is no excuse for boredom at the beginning, but honestly I had no problem with her. The way I played I didn't rely on her to give me things in battle, it was just a nice surprise every now and then, so she didn't feel so much like a vending machine to me. She felt like a curiosity and I was intrigued by her story, the parts she does and doesn't know about it.crazygameguy4ever said:
Also I hope you are scavenging around through all the nooks and crannies, especially if you've already seen Chen Lin getting tortured. Finding those hidden voxophones will really flesh out the world for you and explain a few things which might remain unexplained fully by the end of the game.
It's not the most difficult of games, but Elizabeth is much more useful on harder difficulties. On normal or hard mode you can pretty much forget about her ability to warp things for you and just shoot your way through everything, and yes she does basically become a vending machine. On the harder modes (1987 is it called?) her ability to bring you cover and various ways to traverse the map are vital - and her character benefits from that so much more.
Like the others have said, the game isn't racist; it has racism as a subject matter. I really wish that the game focused on that as the main story line instead of rushing it, then going in to the mess that the actual story is.
Like the others have said, the game isn't racist; it has racism as a subject matter. I really wish that the game focused on that as the main story line instead of rushing it, then going in to the mess that the actual story is.
I'm starting to suppose people are too lazy to look up for what do words mean. Racist currently is supposed to mean "being full of prejudice towards and actively discriminating people of different races". Now, Bioshock Infinite depicts a racist society and actively shows that this society is not a good type of society. This obviously contradicts the definition of "racist". If the game would intentionally be made offensive towards people of any race, then yes, this would be racist. If it would clearly show that one race definitely should serve another - it would be racist. But the game actually shows that both oppressors and oppressed may be equally wrong in their actions, and that act of oppression is 'evil' by itself. Moreso, the game is set in the beginning of XX century, when US of A were for white people and blacks weren't even allowed to use same transport as whites. This makes the game more or less adequate to time period as well. Thus I cannot see the way to interpret Bioshock Infinite as racist.
I think most of Infinite's problems are explained with: "Bioshock Infinite was BADLY RUSHED."
Elizabeth was supposed to have all sorts of contextual powers. Those got dumbed down to "hey lady, make me a thing to stand behind," because doing stuff like the jump to future France was taking too long. So we get dispenser Elizabeth. Similarly there were supposed to be more parts of the game that began as passive exploration and finding neat stuff that THEN went to hell (remember stealing rifles from the dude giving a stump speech in the trailer?) but just turning the game into a nonstop run-and-gun with mindless goons was easier.
I'm sure BI would have been a great game with the investment of more time, instead of the pretty-looking disappointment we got.
Elizabeth was supposed to have all sorts of contextual powers. Those got dumbed down to "hey lady, make me a thing to stand behind," because doing stuff like the jump to future France was taking too long. So we get dispenser Elizabeth. Similarly there were supposed to be more parts of the game that began as passive exploration and finding neat stuff that THEN went to hell (remember stealing rifles from the dude giving a stump speech in the trailer?) but just turning the game into a nonstop run-and-gun with mindless goons was easier.
I'm sure BI would have been a great game with the investment of more time, instead of the pretty-looking disappointment we got.
I was a big fan of the original Bioshock, but I honestly didn't care for Bioshock: Infinite at all. Elizabeth's character depth begins and ends with "she's a magician" because something-something-quantum mechanics. And honestly, I felt like Columbia was not nearly as interesting a place as Rapture. Rapture had a chilling atmosphere that made it really feel like an experiment gone wrong. Columbia was just filled with clumsy conservative stereotypes that were too cartoonish to take seriously. It felt like it was trying too hard to be "topical" just because the first one was.
I know a lot of people like Infinite, but I played through it almost to the end before realizing that I didn't care about any of these people or what happened to them.
I know a lot of people like Infinite, but I played through it almost to the end before realizing that I didn't care about any of these people or what happened to them.
mmm, so I take it you saw the wedding sequence and and the different bathrooms and what not. Did it give you a sick feeling inside? Because that was the intent.crazygameguy4ever said:
The game it self isn't racist, this isn't KluKluxKlan propaganda here. You're not suppose to have the feeling you side with the racist hordes.
The racism and the like is suppose to be a juxtaposition, you arrive in Columbia and it's bright and colorful... It's pretty much Disney Land's mainstreet, and everything about this society seems perfect and incredible... Until you get to that point of the wedding. The mask slips and you see Columbia then and there for what it really is, a messy old can of worms. And it's brilliant!
It also does a great job later on of not painting either of those sides (Columbia or Vox Populi) as clear cut good and evil, which is the reality of war.
but I digress.
I enjoyed the fuck out Infinite, but to me it's not still not as good as the first Bioshock where we got most of the story passively through audiotapes. Plus the story gets so fucking complicated and convuluted at the end.
I didn't have any problem with how they used Elizabeth, never felt like a burden and the character herself is just a delight to be around.
How does it ever portray Columbia as anything other than evil? From the very beginning, Columbia is established as "the absolute worst caricatures of conservatism". Columbians are openly racist. They follow a version of religion which is obviously crazy and wrong. They're jingoistic to the point of xenophobia. Their business owners oppress the lower classes out of malice and greed. (At least Andrew Ryan thought he was the good guy!) There is absolutely nothing good about Columbia.SaneAmongInsane said:
Now, the Vox Populi are *also* unsympathetic, since they think the ends justify the means. But there's nothing ambiguous about how we're supposed to view Columbia.
Having just finished my 6th playthrough of the game, I still quite enjoy it.
You can tell that Ken Levine directed the game to be heavily narrative focused. While it has many elements similar to the original bioshock games, I don't consider it to be, or even expect it to be, the same. Rapture was a dark, scary place with drugged up monsters climbing on the ceiling. Bioshock infinite to me seems more action packed with the rail system, the bigger guns, and help from Elizabeth. I like how it manages to be both different, yet the same. I still think it has scary elements, just more about the craziness of the people around Booker and less about it being dark and hearing noises everywhere.
The violence I can kinda understand, because the people are always shooting at you first, and frankly, I think it wouldn't be as fun of a game if I had to just run away from everyone that tried to shoot me. Elizabeth is definitely there to help the narrative, but I think they did a good job showing how she can be useful without having to kill enemies directly.
Most of all, though, I enjoyed the game. Some of the characters you meet are just about as interesting as Sander Cohen! (and that's saying a lot)
You can tell that Ken Levine directed the game to be heavily narrative focused. While it has many elements similar to the original bioshock games, I don't consider it to be, or even expect it to be, the same. Rapture was a dark, scary place with drugged up monsters climbing on the ceiling. Bioshock infinite to me seems more action packed with the rail system, the bigger guns, and help from Elizabeth. I like how it manages to be both different, yet the same. I still think it has scary elements, just more about the craziness of the people around Booker and less about it being dark and hearing noises everywhere.
The violence I can kinda understand, because the people are always shooting at you first, and frankly, I think it wouldn't be as fun of a game if I had to just run away from everyone that tried to shoot me. Elizabeth is definitely there to help the narrative, but I think they did a good job showing how she can be useful without having to kill enemies directly.
Most of all, though, I enjoyed the game. Some of the characters you meet are just about as interesting as Sander Cohen! (and that's saying a lot)
If "this" has been talked about a lot, then surely "this" has been sorely misunderstood by anyone who played it and came away with those notions.zen5887 said:
I don't think Infinite works as a game to play, as its core design is actually quite awful - so I'd want less shooting for that reason. But the notion that violence is somehow contrary to its message or theme? Y'mean the ideas of 'perfect' societies being suppressive, repressive timebombs waiting to go off and show the world their true, vicious barbarity? Ludonarrative
Columbia and Rapture are what happens when mankind determines it can impose order and ideas. If Serenity's Reavers showed up in Columbia near the end, they would've fitted right it...
edit
Oh, and no, I don't think it's racist, either. As has been pointed out; it is a racist, exclusive, insular society. Does the game really 'do' anything with the social commentary regarding race? I don't think so, no, but I felt - just as with the violence - it absolutely suited such a vile society.
1) Bullet-sponge enemies: Yeah there isn't really a decent explanation for that other than the game would be too easy if all enemies died in a one or two hits. But it's a similar story in a lot of FPS's so I wouldn't hold it against it.
2) Elizabeth: Keep playing. It's a bit unfair to judge a whole character on first impressions alone. She already does more than a lot of other FPS sidekicks, but it addresses her ideas on fighting and her character does grow in that regard as well as others. And yes she does become exceptionally important later.
3) Racism: The game isn't racist, it just features racism. It is a story about a racist society. Accusing this game of being racist is like accusing The Colour Purple for being racist.
2) Elizabeth: Keep playing. It's a bit unfair to judge a whole character on first impressions alone. She already does more than a lot of other FPS sidekicks, but it addresses her ideas on fighting and her character does grow in that regard as well as others. And yes she does become exceptionally important later.
3) Racism: The game isn't racist, it just features racism. It is a story about a racist society. Accusing this game of being racist is like accusing The Colour Purple for being racist.
OP should play ZOG's Nightmare to learn what a racist game is.
As for enemy difficulty, yeah, I agree it could be ridiculous. When I fought certain boss (and I think we all know who it was) at the end of the game I turned the difficulty all the way from Hard to Easy I was so frustrated.
As for enemy difficulty, yeah, I agree it could be ridiculous. When I fought certain boss (and I think we all know who it was) at the end of the game I turned the difficulty all the way from Hard to Easy I was so frustrated.
I personally agree that thematically the violence is appropriate, however I feel like it doesn't make a lot of sense in the context of what Booker is trying to achieve. In a city full of hostile soldiers that you're trying to escape with a girl who's essentially your hostage (and you need to keep her alive) you'd think you'd want to keep a low profile. I get it, Booker is a violent guy, but running in guns blazing is just plain stupid.Darth Rosenberg said:
But then again I guess he gets the last laugh since he succeeds (to a certain extent).
Except that in that time period black people were treated way worse. I didn't play the entire game, but from what I did all I saw was black people scrubbing the floor and posing as butlers, that one interracial couple tied up on stage, and some propaganda about segregation. For something that's supposed to be a realistic setting the racism is incredibly tame.inu-kun said:
You can tell the developers wanted to show a racist community, but didn't want to spark any controversy by doing so.
It's not just about him being a violent guy, though, is it? Ultimately, Columbia is the product of violence. On a kind of abstract, symbolic level I think it's just about fine (especially towards the second half).SmallHatLogan said:
But my previous post was a rejection of the discobiscuits accusation specifically, i.e. that the violence and gameplay somehow contradicted a 'message' - when in fact, violence is integral to just why Columbia's so fucked up.
Booker runs in guns blazing because it's - I believe - a very poorly designed and deeply unambitious FPS (with character narrative I completely adore, btw), so I'm by no means defending or supporting the frequency and staging of the action/violence.
The racism is there to make a point, not to inspire YOU to be more racist. I don't know if that counts as inspiring, but you know what I mean, I think.
And Elizabeth is central to the narrative. Keep playing. She is the whole point.
And Elizabeth is central to the narrative. Keep playing. She is the whole point.
No, we don't discover the racism and crap until the wedding at the start, up until that point theres all this magical whimsy about the fair being in town and what not.WickedLordJasper said:
Exactly: the mixed couple is at the very beginning of the game. But even before that, it's obvious the fair is supposed to be sinister and jingoistic. They have carnival games based on shooting enemies of the state, for instance. Their silent films establish them as secessionists. Father Comstock is established in such a way that screams "THIS IS THE BAD GUY" to anybody familiar with video games. By the time you actually start playing the real game (that is, the shooting part) there are no aspects of Columbia that look good anymore.SaneAmongInsane said: