BioShock was it good?

Recommended Videos

blankedboy

New member
Feb 7, 2009
5,234
0
0
No, BioShock is fairly innovative, but like my brother says, (exception obviously being all Valve games) "What's good isn't original, and what's original isn't good". It's extremely dark (mood and lighting), it's boring, it's difficult, it's laggy, it's got bad graphics, there's no weapons we haven't seen before, it's unneccesarily violent. Three words: DO NOT BUY.
 

Dys

New member
Sep 10, 2008
2,343
0
0
It is completely subjective, a lot of people here liked it, some, like myself didn't.
It really just depends on you're taste. If you are looking for a first person shooter don't play bioshock, the guns are barely worth touching compared to the plasmids. The atmosphere is well set and the story is fantastic (assuming you haven't played ss2 recently) but the gameplay just didn't do it for me.
 

Logan Westbrook

Transform, Roll Out, Etc
Feb 21, 2008
17,672
0
0
Kukul said:
nilcypher said:
Kukul said:
harhol said:
Kukul said:
harhol said:
Anything which openly mocks Ayn Rand & her disciples is OK in my book.
If you think this game mocks objectivism, you clearly didn't get it.
How so?
Well, Andrew Ryan created a paradise based on objectivism, then it all went to hell Ikar-style. It was kind of a warning for mankind to not get too proud, feel like gods etc. but if it weren't for the plasmids, Rapture would be an awsome place to live, therefore objectivism works.
So you're assuming that without Adam, Fontaine wouldn't have made a grab for power?
I don't know, but anyway you can't say a philosophy is being mocked, because someone is shown ruining it's achievements. Just like teaching about Hitler is not mocking democracy.
Mocking its achievements? I'm not sure that was the goal. I think Bioshock is supposed to show that objectivism is unworkable in real life, because human nature will inevitably get in the way.
 

Ultress

Volcano Girl
Feb 5, 2009
3,377
0
0
My first game for the 360,I loved and the Ayn Rand inspired world is great. Though on subsequent play throughs some times thing can get annoying but definitly worth a purchase
 

Logan Westbrook

Transform, Roll Out, Etc
Feb 21, 2008
17,672
0
0
Kukul said:
nilcypher said:
Kukul said:
nilcypher said:
Kukul said:
harhol said:
Kukul said:
harhol said:
Anything which openly mocks Ayn Rand & her disciples is OK in my book.
If you think this game mocks objectivism, you clearly didn't get it.
How so?
Well, Andrew Ryan created a paradise based on objectivism, then it all went to hell Ikar-style. It was kind of a warning for mankind to not get too proud, feel like gods etc. but if it weren't for the plasmids, Rapture would be an awsome place to live, therefore objectivism works.
So you're assuming that without Adam, Fontaine wouldn't have made a grab for power?
I don't know, but anyway you can't say a philosophy is being mocked, because someone is shown ruining it's achievements. Just like teaching about Hitler is not mocking democracy.
Mocking its achievements? (? I didn't say that) I'm not sure that was the goal. I think Bioshock is supposed to show that objectivism is unworkable in real life, because human nature will inevitably get in the way.
No, Bioshock only shows that objectivism at the bottom of the ocean can be risky if widepread genetic modifications and criminal masterminds are around. I really think that Bioshock was pro-objectivistic in general. After all just listening to Andrew Ryan or watching that slideshow in the elevator made you (me) think "Damn, that guy is right, even if he's the evil last boss" and then it turned out he wasn' the bad guy, so I think the messege is pretty clear.
I think that our interpretations of the game differ because our view of objectivism as a philosophy does. In my view, objectivism is selfishness and oppression dressed up in some fancy language, while you seem quite taken with it.
 

PersianLlama

New member
Aug 31, 2008
1,103
0
0
It's a pretty good game, and now it's really cheap. Though if your short on money, just rent it because it's really short. If you like it, try System Shock 2, or just get that instead.
 

Vorpals

New member
Oct 13, 2008
363
0
0
Yes, simply.

It's worth a buy, especially with how cheap it is on Steam and possibly other places.
 

Maet

The Altoid Duke
Jul 31, 2008
1,247
0
0
Actually, Bioshock is not very objectivist at all outside the whole "worship human achievement, not god or government" theme. I'm actually considering doing a really detailed plot analysis because I personally hold Bioshock as one of my favourite narratives in any form of media (but this isn't the discussion at hand).

Rapture was built out of rational self interest, that is, do what benefits you at your own leisure without intruding on the space of your fellow citizen. Rapture is a city housing a citizenry where every man and woman operate in their own personal bubble. Look out for #1, so to speak. Facilities like the orphanage, the poorhouse, the metro, the police, etc, directly undermine this philosophy. Then you have to wonder how Fontaine ever managed to be accepted into Rapture society since his mobster persona was known on the surface.

Then there's the puzzling notion that Ryan authorizes Fontaine's business interests such as the orphanage, the poorhouse, the power to the people stations, etc. Although really, this could either be explained by Ryan respecting Fontaine's bubble, or operating with the city in mind.

Two final thoughts:
a) When did plasmids become weaponized?
b) Why do they allow high explosives and rifles and turrets everywhere? You'd think a utopian society of the best and brightest would move beyond firearms for protection.

Then I realize that building an underwater city is simply impossible for two reasons:
a) You can't mobilize the forces necessary to build your own city without somebody catching on.
b) Water pressure at the bottom of the ocean is so immense that no building material is stable.

So the whole thing becomes irrelevant.

Still, I fucking love Bioshock. I'm going for all the trophies right now.

Edit: These are just simple points scribbled in a submission window and therefore not very well thought out. Just keep that in mind if you're responding to this.
 

KaZZaP

New member
Aug 7, 2008
868
0
0
I really really hated the demo of it but after a few months passed I bought cheap for the PC and loved it. I've met a lot of other people who think the same thing so don't let the demo turn you off of it.
 

|Strick|

New member
Jan 21, 2009
23
0
0
I'm actually in the middle of playing it now, and I'm really enjoying it. The atmosphere is creepy, and the storyline and plot is very interesting. Maybe its because I've never played this system shock game it keeps getting compared to, but I really enjoy the concept. I mean, I can shoot bees out of my arm, how awesome is that!

Yes the weapons we have seen before, but does it matter? I mean, killing that flashlight wielding splicer with a crossbow bolt to the chest is still fun, isn't it?

I also don't understand all the people that "hate" this game. When considering buying this game, my friend strongly recommend that I get something better, like Halo. He said that its a mediocre fps, and isn't fun. Its an average fps, nothing too groundbreaking, but its still worth playing through for the story.

I'd definitely recommend it.
 

Maet

The Altoid Duke
Jul 31, 2008
1,247
0
0
harhol said:
But don't you see that it is Rapture itself which encourages the emergence of "widespread genetic modifications"? The absence of regulation is what allows for such experiments to take place (sorry to repeat it but "the scientist is not bound by petty morality"). Under normal circumstances you wouldn't be allowed to experiment on children & people's genes, but because of the freedom offered by Rapture, the perceived "elite" can do whatever they want. At first it seems fantastic & exciting, hence the cheerful design of the place, but the darker side soon emerges. ADAM was voluntarily introduced to a supposedly free & powerful society and ended up facilitating its downfall. My interpretation of events is that without any form of government, even the most "elite" of societies is highly vulnerable.

To say Ryan isn't "the bad guy" is also debatable. First he presides over all the terrible things that happen before you get there (e.g. Tennenbaum making the little sisters, Cohen doing whatever the fuck he was doing), then he makes you kill him to prove his (genetic?) superiority. His idealized society has failed and he has nothing to live for, so his premature death is not symbolic (i.e. it's not meant to suggest he's innocent). Fontaine is just a downtrodden, drug-addled schmuck hungry for power, like most people in Rapture I would imagine. The real villains are Ryan's inner circle - Tennenbaum, Suchong, Steinman & Cohen - along with the man himself.
Being unregulated does not mean encouraged. Ryan says in his audio diaries that free enterprise is the foundation of rapture, and acknowledges that careless splicing has destroyed some lives. But he believes it's not for him to intervene (although undermined by his populace control through pheromones).

Rapture was not built on the heels of ADAM. Tenenbaum discovered ADAM and it's properties under Fontaine's financial backing some time later.

Ryan didn't preside over anyone. Suchong and Tenenbaum both worked for Fontaine's genetic company. Tenenbaum developed a conscience, and when Fontaine "died", Suchong went to Ryan's side to help him pick up the pieces.

Cohen did not operate under his current "philosophy" during the civilized days of Rapture, no one would allow that. Plus, his rival Culpepper would never let him hear the end of it.

Ryan has no inner circle to speak of when the player arrives. Ryan's inner circle might've been Sullivan (who handed in his badge) and McDonough (who is now impaled on a spike in Ryan's trophy room). That's about it. Tenenbaum and Suchong both worked for Fontaine first, Steinmen and Cohen are merely level bosses operating in their own bubbles.

Rapture failed because Ryan is not a very good governor, and because he isn't objectivist enough (see my other post in this thread).

Clearly, there's a lot of interpretation.
 

dooner11

New member
Aug 14, 2008
57
0
0
I dont think the developers would have picked one particular philosophy to be featured in their game if they were against it. Maybe if you are saying the game's message is against greed, or a lack of government intervention, than they would make a game against it. But Rapture is CLEARLY objectivist. They probably wouldnt choose to make a game condembing a philosophy that most gamers dont know about. They have shown a great understanding of the philosophy and that means they are probably not against it.

I think the reason Rapture all fell apart was because Andrew Ryan gradually abandoned everything the city was founded on in order to win the war against Fontaine. He regrets becoming a "parasite" in order to beat Fontaine, and that makes him hate himself enough to help the narrator in the way he does when you first meet him

And, OP, i hope seeing this game sprout a deep philosophical debate is enough to let you know how great it is.
 

GreenDevilJF

New member
Dec 9, 2008
182
0
0
The FPS and RPG elements were dull, the enemies for the most part are just bullet sponges, it isn't particualry scary, and the end imo completely killed any replayability.

I would suggest renting it, to see if you would actually want to buy it.