• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Bioshock Infinite is completely unfocused *Major spoilers for the Bioshock franchise*

Fury451

Banned
Incoming wall of text:

I've seen the word pretentious used in describing Infinite, and after just replaying it again, it's a fitting descriptor.

It's faux-deep. Hollow. What are it's themes? Destiny? Violence? Forgiveness? Racism? Classism? Religion? Critiquing American Exceptionalism? Father/Child drama? Quantum physics? The game has all these things but does nothing with them, and they serve a plot that doesn't really go anywhere.

Comstock and Columbia are basically cartoons. There's no depth to anything, because there's no real story to be had here; no nuance in the portrayals. Unless you are a complete monster, you won't sympathize with Comstock, but Ryan and Sophia Lamb both sounded reasonable at times, despite knowing that they were also true monsters in very different ways. That's the hallmark of a good villain- when you catch yourself saying "yeah, that's a good point", before realizing that you're siding with something you don't really believe.

And then Columbia itself really doesn't go anywhere with it's concept, and the whole purpose of it being a flying city is novel rather than rooted in any narrative need. Rapture felt real, alive; it existed to escape the world and build a utopia, but it was ultimately a city that collapsed under the weight of it's own hubris.

The game is full of plots and characters that go nowhere- a prime one I never really noticed until recently was how meaningless Fink is. He's the first major character Booker meets, has his own section of the city, and seems like he'll be a big part of the game; ultimately wants Booker to be his head of security, and sets about a "test". It's a pale imitation of Sander Cohen to me, and then it comes to a halt without resolution when you switch dimensions. He's basically pointless. Then you have other rather meaningless characters and plots like Fitzroy and the Vox being nothing more than equally shitty people to fight, Chen Lin, Lady Comstock, the future attack on 1984 New York, the Boys of Silence, the ending itself, the Siphon, Booker's history, etc. Some get half-resolutions, others just drop.

What's the deal with the Handymen? Songbird? What are they? How were they created? Why do Vigors exist? The Big Daddies and Little Sisters of Rapture could be seen as silly, yes, but they had an explicit purpose that was thoroughly explained. They were integral to the ecosystem of the game. Plasmids also, were thoroughly explained as a sort of gene-splicing arms race within Rapture. Vigors just are there in Columbia for reasons.

Everything in Columbia feels like pieces and parts that don't go together. Then it has the misguided idea to tie everything into the Bioshock universe with Rapture, not to mention the colossal narrative misfire that was Burial at Sea (which also retconned Fitzroy in a weak way when they probably realized they made the strong black female character a villain). While it makes for some narratively interesting DLC, it also doesn't fit at all with the established Rapture world. Rapture seemed like it could be a real place, despite it's obvious fantastical elements, wheras Columbia never feels real- it's straight fantasy bordering on magic.

Also the combat is pretty garbage, especially compared to 2. And no visual changes to the weapons is lazy- I loved getting upgrades in the other games because the upgrades changed the appearance, but the rarity of them also forced you to be tactful of how you would maximize your playstyle. Here, everything is money focused, and while you will have enough to upgrade most of what you need by game's end, it limits you by simultaneously giving you too many options and not enough resources.

It's got some crowd-pleasing stuff, but as a whole it feels jumbled and kind of rushed. The game really feels like it was a bunch of different concepts smashed together, and upon reflection it just doesn't gel at all. It would've been better being it's own thing with the Bioshock name than trying to cram it into the whole universe.

What am I missing Gaf?



TL;DR

Infinite has a lot of ideas that really go nowhere.
 
its not pretentious. its just incomplete.

edit: if you don't know... the game was mired in difficulties. especially with getting a finished product out the door. A person named Rob Ferguson (ex gears of war) came in to the team as the 'finisher'. from what i understand he shaped what the team had completed into the shipped game. things were unfinished. the story was cut and pasted to fit with what they had. its really surprising that the game turned out as well as it did considering how it was made/completed, and i dont think its a good game in really any way besides production values.
 

frontovik

Banned
The finer details of the narrative was certainly lost on me. I just kinda mindlessly blitzed my way through Columbia until the ending.
 

Tygamr

Member
Eh, some stuff is fleshed out in audio logs IIRC. Handy Men are basically people that were sick and going to die, who have been placed into life support suits by Fink (and forced to work for him or something like that).

Song Bird is literally just a flying Big Daddy. They got the idea through a tear to rapture.

Vigors are literally just plasmids (but Fink changed them up a bit), and they also discovered them from a tear to rapture.

I definitely agree that there are characters and plot threads that end up fairly worthless once everything is said and done. I still enjoyed it a lot though—replaying it on PC made me enjoy it more.
 

Toxi

Banned
The obvious padding in the Lady Comstock section is horrendous.

Forcing the player to backtrack the same area again and again with no real difference so they can fight the same terrible bullet sponge boss three times, ugh. And on higher difficulties it's a complete mess because everything takes so long to kill and each death means you have less ammo.
 

Meffer

Member
What's "cringe-inducing" about it? I see this word thrown around so much these days that it kind of has different meanings depending on the person saying it.

When you think about how alternate realities work compared to how the game perceives it, it's a mess.
 

pa22word

Member
What's "cringe-inducing" about it? I see this word thrown around so much these days that it kind of has different meanings depending on the person saying it.
Spoiler alert: "both sides are equally bad" is the definition of cringe worthy writing. At best it's groan inducing, childish nihilism and at worst a way of marketing a game about "complex issues" while making an out for yourself in a way that doesn't offend anyone.
 
What's "cringe-inducing" about it? I see this word thrown around so much these days that it kind of has different meanings depending on the person saying it.

Actually, it doesn't mean much and we've had threads deconstructing how meaningless common use of it is.
 
The way they handled Elizabeth in the DLC was nothing short of cruel. I dont think Ive seen a character get that kind of treatment in while. It was downright insulting to a character you spent playing hours through the main game along with.
It was also pointless.
 

gfxtwin

Member
Yeah, that game made me uncomfortable at times but maybe not always for the reasons they intended. It's probably the most ambitious story in a game though, so props there.

But Ryan was a monster? I remember the plot twist being that he was more ethically gray and Fontaine was the true villain of the story, but that's me.

Also some of the characters who seemed sweet, like Tenenbaum, were given backstories that later revealed them to be as villainous as anyone in the game (Levine confirmed that Tenenbaum was jewish but started working on the nazis and committed crimes against humanity, and then brought her style of science ethics to Rapture to creature the little sisters, plasmids, etc).

The takeaway I get from the games is that, like in Game of Thrones or something, humans are complex and aside from true extremists tend to be morally/ethically gray. Neutral good, neutral evil, chaotic good, chaotic evil, etc.

EDIT: note: I haven't played Burial at Sea
 

EmiPrime

Member
It's faux-deep. Hollow. What are it's themes? Destiny? Violence? Forgiveness? Racism? Classism? Religion? Critiquing American Exceptionalism? Father/Child drama? Quantum physics? The game has all these things but does nothing with them, and they serve a plot that doesn't really go anywhere.

Spoiler alert: "both sides are equally bad" is the definition of cringe worthy writing. At best it's groan inducing, childish nihilism and at worst a way of marketing a game about "complex issues" while making an out for yourself in a way that doesn't offend anyone.

This is in a nutshell why Bioshock Infinite is terrible.

It's a bad FPS inside a racism theme park with a narrative that crumbles under the most rudimentary scrutiny.
 

Toxi

Banned
But Ryan was a monster? I remember the plot twist being that he was more ethically gray and Fontaine was the true villain of the story, but that's me.
Ryan was an asshole through and through. You can't even say he stuck to his ideals because he completely betrayed them by using mind-control pheromones.

The twist was that Atlas was Fontaine and was playing you.

EDIT: Removed spoiler.
 

BlizzKrut

Banned
Do you remember the part with the guitar? I cringed my face inside out.

How would you change it then to be less "cringy"?

To me, something cringy is for example a comedian saying a joke on a stage in front of say, 100 people, expecting them to react in a funny way, and no one laughing, but english isn't my first language so it probably can be used to describe something bad?
 

RPGam3r

Member
Infinite is amazing. Loved the game and its story, setting, and gameplay. Better than the first by a long shot.
 

Fury451

Banned
Eh, some stuff is fleshed out in audio logs IIRC. Handy Men are basically people that were sick and going to die, who have been placed into life support suits by Fink (and forced to work for him or something like that).

Song Bird is literally just a flying Big Daddy. They got the idea through a tear to rapture.

Vigors are literally just plasmids (but Fink changed them up a bit), and they also discovered them from a tear to rapture.

I definitely agree that there are characters and plot threads that end up fairly worthless once everything is said and done. I still enjoyed it a lot though—replaying it on PC made me enjoy it more.

You are correct, I collected almost all of the audio logs this time, and it does flesh out some aspects of it, but again my issue is that it doesn't really feel like any of it is necessary to the world. Based on how to game works, Songbird should be able to end the plot within a couple of minutes, but he only shows up conveniently.

The Handymen similarly are just there for tough enemies.

I enjoyed it immensely the first time I played it, but it's amazing to me that it just comes across is very shallow now. Especially the introductory scene with the baseball at the fair.

It's a story about violence and how it self-perpetuates. Ballsy ending too even if maybe not completely well executed

I can definitely see this being the case, but it's lost in the shuffle. I think it's the world of Columbia itself, it really comes across as some sort of racist themepark; The racism seems like it will be the focus of the game with the war between the upper class and the oppressed. That it drops all that become some sort of pseudoscience quantum mechanics garbage that doesn't really make sense is far too distracting from any kind of personal character story for me.
 

Neiteio

Member
I don't have time to respond to this point by point right now (going to see a friend in a bit), but Fitzroy being an oppressor is kind of the point. The idea is the oppressed become oppressors, something real-world history has shown happening time and time again.

It's not romantic like a Hollywood depiction of the struggling minority rising above those who wronged them. It's a cautionary tale for why we must treat each other with respect. Those you fill with enmity today could have the upper hand tomorrow.

Hate breeds hate, in other words. But also, love breeds love. It's the whole concept of "will the circle go unbroken" — can anything break the chain of retaliation, one side overthrowing the other, only to become the oppressor and be overthrown again.
 

Inuhanyou

Believes Dragon Quest is a franchise managed by Sony
TL;DR

Infinite has a lot of ideas that really go nowhere.

Yeah. Basically. But if one was following the game as close as i was prior to release, it would be obvious to everyone but those who just didn't want to see it, like me for a long time.

For example, there were mulitple entirely different trailers for all of the enemies that were supposed to be in the game. the handymen, the sirens ect, and were actually said by Ken levine before the game was released to be natural enemies in the game world that you had to fight that were a tier above the normal human characters.

They ended up mostly all being one offs thrown in at random predetermined points in the game. One of those villians was hastily thrown together as Elizabeth's random ghost mom that you had to fight 3 times ect.

It was just a shitshow of undercooked concepts and development hell all thrown together, and it showed everywhere, from its narrative, to its game design and pretty much unfortunately everything else.
 

jimmyd

Member
How would you change it then to be less "cringy"?

To me, something cringy is for example a comedian saying a joke on a stage in front of say, 100 people, expecting them to react in a funny way, and no one laughing, but english isn't my first language so it probably can be used to describe something bad?

I'm not just throwing the term 'cringe' around, it was at times an actual physical reaction when playing this game. Often caused by a complete failure to invoke any intended emotional response from the player with story and set-pieces.
 

gfxtwin

Member
Ryan was an asshole through and through. You can't even say he stuck to his ideals because he completely betrayed them by using mind-control pheromones.

I took his more fucked up actions (gassing Julie, turning the splicers from junkies into hostile zombies via mind control, etc) as a desperate attempt to prevent Fontaine from taking over Rapture. Before that he was basically just a crooked, elitist, morally flawed capitalist, not much better or worse than most politicians, Ayn Rand, etc.

EDIT: correct, Fontaine using jack/the player via mind control plasmids as a mole to kill Andrew Ryan was the plot twist. That was when I looked at Ryan in more sympathetic light. Not saing he was not a bad guy, but he wasn't the most villainous character in the story.

second edit: Aw, c'mon man, easy with the spoilers, I've never played System Shock and was gonna give them a go when the remakes come out
 
I don't get the constant search for themes that people do on Infinite, everyone seem to expect it to talk about racism and politics. I mean, the game touches on those things, but in a nihilistic way, because Infinite just isn't about that. It's the story of Booker, a father that doesn't want to leave his daugther, at ALL costs. And the game actually made me feel that, because everything else becomes meaningless, the people, the vox, the revolution, only Elizabeth remains. It's also the story of a girl that becomes a woman the moment she sees her father as a person with all his faults.
This is what I felt when I finished it, and on a personal level I loved it. I played it without watching trailers or reading about theories, maybe that's the reason.
 
I love Bioshock Infinite and Burial at Sea but it indeed has major failings in it. I remember I couldn't help but roll my eyes when they made Daisy Fitzroy in her actions look worse than Comstock by reducing her to an attempted child killer and after Elizabeth kills her; Booker saying matter of factly, '"When it comes down to it, the only difference between Comstock and Fitzroy is how you spell the name"

Which perfectly explains the false equivalencies rife within so many white people's arguments about racism and the lack of context or history involved, or even the basic understanding of the differences between the oppressor enacting racism on a large scale systematic basis resulting in societal norms and the people that suffer under it, and the oppressed fighting back, revolting against this system which can oftentimes be violent.

It's like saying, "The only difference between Nat Turner, and "insert any Slave Master's name" is how you spell the name". Seriously? SMH
 
I can definitely see this being the case, but it's lost in the shuffle. I think it's the world of Columbia itself, it really comes across as some sort of racist themepark; The racism seems like it will be the focus of the game with the war between the upper class and the oppressed. That it drops all that become some sort of pseudoscience quantum mechanics garbage that doesn't really make sense is far too distracting from any kind of personal character story for me.
It's not about racism itself; but uses it to display how violence interplays with a morally defunct context. The game is not very nuanced, sure, but that's another matter.
 
I'm not just throwing the term 'cringe' around, it was at times an actual physical reaction when playing this game. Often caused by a complete failure to invoke any intended emotional response from the player with story and set-pieces.

Yeah, I'm so sure guy.
 

pa22word

Member
I don't have time to respond to this point by point right now (going to see a friend in a bit), but Fitzroy being an oppressor is kind of the point. The idea is the oppressed become oppressors, something real-world history has shown happening time and time again.

It's not romantic like a Hollywood depiction of the struggling minority rising above those who wronged them. It's a cautionary tale for why we must treat each other with respect. Those you fill with enmity today could have the upper hand tomorrow.

Hate breeds hate, in other words. But also, love breeds love. It's the whole concept of "will the circle go unbroken" — can anything break the chain of retaliation, one side overthrowing the other, only to become the oppressor and be overthrown again.

Even if you want to take Levine's supposed nihilism at its face, the game still fails at presenting even this very well. Because the game decided it was done talking about politics, it swerves left fast and changed Fitzroy from aspiring revolutionary into some kind of bastard child of Robespierre and Stalin (while conveniently ignoring the point of /why/ their respective ideological revolutions ended as bloody as they did) all in the space of about 5 mins for no other reason than plot convenience. You see no build up for it, you see no character development. It leaves the game's opposite sides with no buffer room, turning them into caricatures that are more like cardboard cutouts of people at a themepark rather than actual people with real motivations. The game then throws its hands in the air and asks you to pick your ideology somewhere left of genocidal revolutionary and right of fascist dictator.
 

Blobbers

Member
I like Bioshock Infinite, even though it's the worst of the 3.

Bio 2 > Bio 1 > Bio: I

All 3 games are also fun replays
 

Neiteio

Member
I don't get the constant search for themes that people do on Infinite, everyone seem to expect it to talk about racism and politics. I mean, the game touches on those things, but in a nihilistic way, because Infinite just isn't about that. It's the story of Booker, a father that doesn't want to leave his daugther, at ALL costs. And the game actually made me feel that, because everything else becomes meaningless, the people, the vox, the revolution, only Elizabeth remains. It's also the story of a girl that becomes a woman the moment she sees her father as a person with all his faults.
This is what I felt when I finished it, and on a personal level I loved it. I played it without watching trailers or reading about theories, maybe that's the reason.
I feel like the racism, politics, etc, are there more as a way to illustrate the two sides of Booker. The Booker you play (the one "left behind in the waters of baptism") is the Booker that spiraled into depression since he couldn't handle the horrible hate crimes of his past. The Booker you fight, meanwhile, is Comstock, who embraced those hate crimes, using religion as an excuse to justify them. The city of Columbia, its oppressive culture and cycle of violence all result from this.
 

Jawmuncher

Member
I actually liked the gameplay of infinite. It just needed a way better story. Would have worked as it's own thing that didn't try so hard to have a twist.
 

Fury451

Banned
I don't have time to respond to this point by point right now (going to see a friend in a bit), but Fitzroy being an oppressor is kind of the point. The idea is the oppressed become oppressors, something real-world history has shown happening time and time again.

It's not romantic like a Hollywood depiction of the struggling minority rising above those who wronged them. It's a cautionary tale for why we must treat each other with respect. Those you fill with enmity today could have the upper hand tomorrow.

Hate breeds hate, in other words. But also, love breeds love. It's the whole concept of "will the circle go unbroken" — can anything break the chain of retaliation, one side overthrowing the other, only to become the oppressor and be overthrown again.

I would greatly enjoy reading more of your take on it when you get a chance. Again, I can definitely see the point that you are making as one of the potential themes, but it feels like it went through a paper shredder and we just got bits and pieces of it that really don't work well enough to contribute to a cohesive whole story.

Yeah, that game made me uncomfortable at times but maybe not always for the reasons they intended. It's probably the most ambitious story in a game though, so props there.

But Ryan was a monster? I remember the plot twist being that he was more ethically gray and Fontaine was the true villain of the story, but that's me.

Also some of the characters who seemed sweet, like Tenenbaum, were given backstories that later revealed them to be as villainous as anyone in the game (Levine confirmed that Tenenbaum was jewish but started working on the nazis and committed crimes against humanity, and then brought her style of science ethics to Rapture to creature the little sisters, plasmids, etc).

The takeaway I get from the games is that, like in Game of Thrones or something, humans are complex and aside from true extremists tend to be morally/ethically gray. Neutral good, neutral evil, chaotic good, chaotic evil, etc.

EDIT: note: I haven't played Burial at Sea

You are technically correct, that is definitely a recurring theme of the series. I think the way the characters are fleshed out in the second game makes it much more gray, while still clearly the finding some people in the wrong. It's hard to explain how it works, but it does. You can sympathize more with some of the villains, because they genuinely believe and what they are doing.

With this game, I really had no idea what Comstock was doing, and he was so cartoonishly evil that I never sympathized or understood him at all, and while you think the Vox Populi might be people that you side with, they become cartoonishly evil and nearly impossible to sympathize with also.

It's weird considering how Bio 1/2 handled subtlety.

Infinite is amazing. Loved the game and its story, setting, and gameplay. Better than the first by a long shot.

I don't disagree with you on some of those points; as much as I like the first game a lot of that has not aged particularly well, even the story. I was considering making a thread about how BioShock 2 is actually the secret best game in the series.

It's not about racism itself; but uses it to display how violence interplays with a morally defunct context. The game is not very nuanced, sure, but that's another matter.

Interesting, I had not considered that.
 

Toxi

Banned
I don't have time to respond to this point by point right now (going to see a friend in a bit), but Fitzroy being an oppressor is kind of the point. The idea is the oppressed become oppressors, something real-world history has shown happening time and time again.

It's not romantic like a Hollywood depiction of the struggling minority rising above those who wronged them. It's a cautionary tale for why we must treat each other with respect. Those you fill with enmity today could have the upper hand tomorrow.

Hate breeds hate, in other words. But also, love breeds love. It's the whole concept of "will the circle go unbroken" — can anything break the chain of retaliation, one side overthrowing the other, only to become the oppressor and be overthrown again.
We know it's the point. It's just an extremely badly handled point.

There is no development for Fitzroy shown that makes the alternate dimension Fitzroy we see make sense from a narrative standpoint. You can't just say "She's evil because she obtained power", because that's absurdly lazy storytelling. Fitzroy is motivated by completely different things than Comstock, so why does her revolution somehow end up just the same as Comstock's forces?

Booker and Elizabeth are the mouthpieces for the story's criticism of Fitzroy, yet Booker has killed far more people with Elizabeth's help with far less reason than Fitzroy is ever shown doing. The pair looks like ludicrous hypocrites.

It's not like we don't understand what Bioshock Infinite was trying to do with the Vox Populi plotline, they just did a fucking bad job of it.
 
The more time passes, the more polarizing the Bioshock franchise becomes.

I like all 3, imperfections and all. Infinite resonates most strongly, but to each his own.
 

gfxtwin

Member
The OG Bioshock and right after that Bio2 are the true classics. Rapture feels so much more legit as a completely realized place, and its gameplay is more fun than Infinite's with how the AI creatures are part of an ecosystem and react in unpredictable ways sometimes. I love being a sick bastard by manipulating various characters and creatures into attacking each other, turrets, cameras, drones, using plasmids, objects in the environment, physics, etc. The only thing that would have made the OG Bioshock better is more varied enemy types (some of the mutants that were cut from the game shouldn't have been) to add depth to the ecosystem.
 
Top Bottom