-
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 |OT| No Gods, Kings, or Irrational Games
- Thread starter Cystm
- Start date
The Librarian
Banned
Skyrails are something I've never seen in an FPS, so I don't know how it can feel "samey." As for it being predictable, I disagree.
Can't wait until I finish this game and eventually do a run where it's all combat.
He's somehow missed his own point. Just like he "cringed" from his "intellectual wankery" in his days on Consolevania, he's cringing again from the prospect of non-violent "artsy" games. Telling an intensely violent story about an intensely violent history doesn't require actual violent acts. The game's most engaging moments are in the first couple of hours before you fire a single shot. But the instant you start shooting, the game begins a long process of historical irresponsibility and cultural "forgetting." The game's violence encourages the kind of oversight that Rab himself makes. And, no, I don't think that's intentional on Irrational's part, and even if it was, it doesn't excuse the kind of deliberate intellectual dishonesty it (not just its characters) engages in.
The Librarian
Banned
No it doesn't.
Throughout the entire intro sequence I thought how fantastic it would be to explore the world with Occulus Rift.
Care to elaborate?
Irrational can't have it both ways. Either the violence is fun and is part of the game's "puzzle," or it's part of its broader cultural indictment. And if it's the latter, then that puts players in the position of playing out a detestable role. In other words, if the game is successful in communicating its message, you won't want to play it. In other words, you would have to "forget" what the game is about in order to continue playing and enjoy the experience. That's some serious cognitive dissonance there.
And if that "cognitive dissonance" is what the game is "about"
and what is Booker if not the extreme embodiment of cognitive dissonance?
The Librarian
Banned
There's a difference between the game world and the story world. I don't know what you meant exactly be "historical revisionism," but the only thing I've seen that even remotely comes close to that is propaganda in Heroe's Hall.
Part but the design but still overdone. Early spoilers:
The crow killing the Chinese man
It's about MOTIVE and METHOD more than it is about gratuitous gore and overdone animations.
I would say
the John Wilkes Booth stuff
I'm not sure what you mean by drawing a distinction between "game world" and "story world," since if the game is well designed, there shouldn't be any difference.
(Spoilers below are from the first few hours of the game.)
But the core premise of the game is historical revisionism. Columbia is built upon and dedicated to rewriting national
and personal
forget about
forget
I think that's the common thread among those of us who responded negatively to the story and its messiness. We're players who didn't play along with
Booker's willful forgetting. I get that the baptism was meant to reflect a sort of absolution for us gamers, as well.
In other words, the game asks us to share in Booker's own
cognitive dissonance
The Librarian
Banned
I haven't finished the game so I can't highlight that.
Audioboxer
Member
AMAZING game.
I am soo incredibly happy with the ending, a safe played ending to an experience like this would of been very dull and boring.
Definitely a game that will be able to remain in my mind for years to come.
I am soo incredibly happy with the ending, a safe played ending to an experience like this would of been very dull and boring.
Definitely a game that will be able to remain in my mind for years to come.
It's earlier on.
It's not spoilery, but folks get touchy about what is and isn't a spoiler in this thread. If you're a few hours in and paying attention, it's fine.
Elaborate. We can help you.
What part are you on? There are a few strategies that can make any encounter a breeze.
edit: Oh, saw your last post... that sucks.
Audioboxer
Member
Wouldn't surprise me if it were Graveyard on hard/1999. I got SLAUGHTERED there for quite a while.
The Librarian
Banned
That's propaganda.
I have no idea what you're getting at, I just took issue with your "historical revision" statement when, as far as I've seen, there isn't any. Just propaganda. And it seems, from what I'm reading, is that you're having trouble separating the gameplay portions of Infinite from the story it's trying to tell. It's not that hard.
Not necessarily. Halo has fabulous game worlds like Forerunner, Covenant (High Charity), and New Mombasa, but the combat/gameplay is completely at odds with the seriousness of its story. No invading, menacing alien force is going to wear gold, red, or green armor. It's for gameplay purposes.
I'm not sure you understand what historical revisionism is. It's everywhere in the game. Hell, it essentially is the game. I didn't think this was even a question.
Not at all. In recent interviews and in the Rab Florence piece I was responding to, the violence of the gameplay is supposedly justified because--as they claim--it is integral to the game's setting, story, and thematics. I'm not just pulling that out of thin air. Similar to Bioshock 1 and similar "high concept" shooters from the past few years, Bioshock Infinite asks you to think about the relationship between the violence you perform and the violence built into the fictional world you play in.
But my point in my above posts is that that relationship is fundamentally flawed.
PumpkinPie
Banned
Apart from the very first fight I never used the skyhooks in battles again. They're too fast, can't aim for shit, can't dismount unless I slow down to the lowest speed. How are people doing it? Most of the time I had to wait until I crashed into a carriage to stop me before looking where to go next.
I've found that using scopes and sights steadies your aim. There's also at least one piece of equipment that can help, but after I discovered how much aiming helps, I didn't need the equipment boost.
The Librarian
Banned
But it's all for the purposes of propaganda. The two are intertwined. It's not just there for the sake to be there. It's not anything like George Washington and the cherry tree.
And even if you are right and that all is historical revisionism, I don't see what the problem is. It's there for a reason.
They're a very violent people, and the game takes place in the midst of an
uprising.
PumpkinPie
Banned
Are you shooting while actually moving along the rails though? I can't even imagine doing it, they're too helter skeltery.
Again, I don't think you understand what historical revisionism is. Sure, some of it is propoganda, but most of it is the stories being told in and by the game itself. One could even go so far as to claim that all historical narrative is a revision of history (and a type of propaganda). I think the writers of Infinite would agree with that statement. My problem with Infinite's treatment of history is that they've made a game about the manipulation of history, but they've also manipulated history themselves in order to tell that story. It is both about revisionism and an enactment of it.
I'd suggest going back and reading Rab's piece and my three posts on the prior page.
The Librarian
Banned
There's nothing quite like riding skyrails and blasting away enemies with your RPG.
I don't think you know what it is either.
I'm really not in the mood.
Yup. I regularly used the sniper rifle while on the rails. Didn't take long to get the headshot achievement even. Aiming through the scope seems to steady your aim. It may even slow the speed of travel (but there's no easy way for me to check that).
AnonymousTipster
Neo Member
So I finished the game on 1999 mode last night and in terms of combat I was more or less on autopilot for the last third of the game. Found this load out to be pretty broken:
Rising Bloodlust (or Devil's Kiss before that)
Blood to Salt
Overkill
Last Man Standing
Upgraded Undertow
Upgraded Shotgun
All you gotta do is pull enemies towards you with undertow, zap em, and then unload with the shotgun. Even on 1999 nothing short of a Handyman can even really touch you.
Rising Bloodlust (or Devil's Kiss before that)
Blood to Salt
Overkill
Last Man Standing
Upgraded Undertow
Upgraded Shotgun
All you gotta do is pull enemies towards you with undertow, zap em, and then unload with the shotgun. Even on 1999 nothing short of a Handyman can even really touch you.
You make it seem like that's mutually exclusive.
The Librarian
Banned
Yeah, well, so is he. Either way, I don't see a problem with it.
Nothing like getting a glitch at the end of the game and now I can't finish it..awesome !!! Tried previous checkpoints and still a glitch at engineering deck. That's supposed to be a room...
Did you mess with the level streaming stuff in the config? If so, reset to default.
Fine Ham Abounds
Member
Avoiding reading the entirety of your post, sorry
Personally I agree that the time period adopted for the story is fertile ground for a discussion the narrative seems to completely avoid, and that bothers the hell out of me, but the violence in general doesn't. I don't see any particular problem with the level of violence in the game considering the violence of the story they are telling. Of course from a ludic standpoint it's perfectly valid to criticize why the game is what it is or why they chose to go with what they did, but I don't have a particular issue with the violence beyond the usual poor way mass killing is treated by game narratives.
Could the game have been better if it wasn't a shooter? Tough to say, for me. Since the combat works for me in a way which a lot of the game honestly doesn't, I really can't say I'd prefer that part of the game not be what it is.
I have to wait until I'm done to really speak for my issues with the overall narrative, but in general I'd have to say that on a fundamental level, considering what kind of game they chose to make and what kind of story they chose to tell, the violence feels far more necessary and far better justified being present than either Elizabeth or the racially charged setting.
Byronic Hero
Member
Quick question: I finished Bioshock 1, do I need to play Bioshock 2 or will I not miss anything by skipping it and heading straight on to Infinite?
The Librarian
Banned
You don't need to play BioShock 2, and in truth, it's probably better that way so you don't suffer from franchise fatigue in the middle of Infinite. But you should play BioShock 2 (and Minerva's Den). It's a lot of fun.
Yeah, no need to play 2. It's a decent return to Rapture though, if you ever feel like going back.
I agree, but in a qualified way. The game wouldn't have been made, nor would it be what it is, without all of the shooting.
But as a designer, once you set out to draw a strong correlation between the core gameplay loop (shoot, loot, explore) and the story/theme (the violence of historical revision), then there's going to be some jarring dissonance. And for me, it disengaged me from Booker almost right away because he starts doing the thing (committing selfish violence) that the game itself is interested in on a grander scale. In order to enjoy the mechanics (the shooting) you have to disengage from the game's thematics (ideological and historical violence), or vice versa. And if you do neither, you're left in a really strange position. Games regularly put you in a position of separating out story, character, and theme from mechanics, but Bioshock Infinite seems interested in how problematic that relationship is. Unfortunately, their "solution" is just to ask you to forget about it, just as Booker does.
At first, I was happy to play along because it seemed like Irrational was going somewhere with it. I expected there to be some grand reckoning of Booker's behavior with the large-scale historical violence surrounding him. But the big thematic stuff drops out of the picture, and we're just left with Booker's rampant shooting.
I think that's why I both loved the game and was deeply disappointed by it at the same time.
Bought the BioShock double pack recently. Bought it for BioShock 2 and Minerva's Den, but I couldn't resist starting BS1 again. Playing on survivor difficulty with no vita chambers. It's brutal, but I like it. Getting to Neptune's Bounty took me like an entire evening.
The Librarian
Banned
Because it's really not that hard to decouple the two, dude.
Wait, wait, wait.
Were you trying to defend the ending without actually having reached the ending?
I thought your reactions to criticism of the game were a bit knee jerk, but damn.
Were you trying to defend the ending without actually having reached the ending?
I thought your reactions to criticism of the game were a bit knee jerk, but damn.
Apophenia Overload
Member
Oh cool, a musical interlude from the upcoming Castleshock.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D38LdpvNRrg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D38LdpvNRrg
The Librarian
Banned
I know! Damn! It's almost like I can't draw from the experience of having to link plot threads on my own from other stories/games.
I agree. And we do it all the time when we play games, especially violent ones.
But the folks at Irrational are taking players and designers to task for doing so. In Infinite, they ask a big question: what is it we are willfully ignoring, overlooking, or forgetting when we just "shut up and shoot"? They're indicting us as players and game designers for wanting to just "wash away our sins" and open fire without thinking about the larger historical forces that lead to those violent acts. Like I said, those opening few hours are brilliant.
But then they fall victim to their own critique, forgetting about the relationship between mechanics (acts of violence) and thematics (the history of violence/the violence of history), just as Booker does. And we as players are expected to "wash away our sins," as well. It's so close to being an absolutely brilliant game, but it falls short by falling victim to its own critique.
Definitely doable. I've switched between kb/m and the controller a few times and I prefer the controller for this game
It feels incredibly polished in its mechanics and visuals. But it's not scary or creepy in the slightest, nor does it try to be (with one memorable exception). If Bioshock 1 is a game of darkness, Bioshock Infinite is a game of light. In terms of tone, it feels more like a Halo game or a military shooter. Not a lot of tension or scares.
The Librarian
Banned
Hm. I guess I'll just wait until the end to really say, but so far that's not the impression I'm getting from the game.