So how good is Bioshock:Infinite really ?(Spoiler free)

[Soundwave]

Spoiler

The Vox Populi by comparison are trying to not starve to death, have access to medicine, and live on the mercy of the white elite of Columbia.

Yes, that was the GENESIS of the revolution, which is why the Vox Populi are initially shown as extremely sympathetic. As the revolution advances and matures, as the fighting becomes more bitter, and as the balance of power shifts, the revolutionaries become monsters in and of themselves.

This is not a new narrative device, nor is it divorced from historical precedent. The Vox Populi reach a point where they are no longer interested in simply making things better for the underprivileged, but rather in visiting savage retribution on their oppressors. This is not the proletariat rising up and seizing the means of production, they are rising up and washing the streets with the blood of the bourgeois.

Now, perhaps your are in a "Lol they totes had it coming!" camp. That would be "Ends justify the means". As in, the ONLY important thing is that the balance of power is inverted, and if a bunch of people need to be brutalized, murdered or raped for that to happen then so be it. It's "morally correct" because the people doing it were once subjected to the same treatment, albeit probably not from their victims but simply from people who looked like them and shared a class with them. The Vox Populi is experiencing Mission Drift, which is perfectly understandable given the simmering class/racial tension that has (apparently) been building for years. That doesn't make their eventual actions any less heinous, or the more active terrorists any less violent and dangerous, but their actions are understandably *human*.

And why are they like that? Because they were written that way. Because it was an easy way to explain them as antagonists for the second half of the game. That's the problem. It would be like a world war 2 game, where after you beat the nazis, you'd have to go after the jews in the concentration camps "Because they're uppity!".

Do you not see why that is a morally questionable thing to include in a game?

That's the problem I have with it. It's a point that doesn't need to be made. The backlash in Columbia was perfectly understandable based on the conditions of it. Move on, think of something better.

Don't turn me, the player, into super-nazi-warcriminal-man because that's not something I want to be. I don't think that many people would want to be that.

That's really all I have to say on the matter. Lazy writing, this is my evidence, this is why I think that, good day to you sir.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Spoiler

And why are they like that? Because they were written that way. Because it was an easy way to explain them as antagonists for the second half of the game. That's the problem. It would be like a world war 2 game, where after you beat the nazis, you'd have to go after the jews in the concentration camps "Because they're uppity!".

It's not like that at all. Again you're back to this bizarre "starving families" thing, only with a Godwin's Law twist. You spend exactly 0% of the game beating on starving, helpless, downtrodden people. The Vox Populi you fight are armed, violent revolutionaries who are presently engaged in acts of EXTREME brutality in the name of retribution. Why are they written that way? Because that is not an unrealistic end result of a violent revolutionary uprising.

Do you not see why that is a morally questionable thing to include in a game?

No. I don't. I didn't see it then, and I don't see it now. Most particularly because it wasn't written anything like you keep insisting it was.

Don't turn me, the player, into super-nazi-warcriminal-man because that's not something I want to be. I don't think that many people would want to be that.

Booker is already pretty close to being that when the story begins. Hence his back story as a Pinkerton, and his horrific acts at Wounded Knee that lead to his eventual need for "rebirth" and transformation into Zachary Comstock.

Booker is a violent, morally grey (at best) anti-hero. You may not enjoy anti-heroes, but their inclusion in narratives is not "vile and disgusting" nor is it "morally questionable". This is a work of fiction.

 

[Soundwave]

Spoiler

And why are they like that? Because they were written that way. Because it was an easy way to explain them as antagonists for the second half of the game. That's the problem. It would be like a world war 2 game, where after you beat the nazis, you'd have to go after the jews in the concentration camps "Because they're uppity!".

It's not like that at all. Again you're back to this bizarre "starving families" thing, only with a Godwin's Law twist. You spend exactly 0% of the game beating on starving, helpless, downtrodden people. The Vox Populi you fight are armed, violent revolutionaries who are presently engaged in acts of EXTREME brutality in the name of retribution. Why are they written that way? Because that is not an unrealistic end result of a violent revolutionary uprising.

It's not an unreasonable end result, but it IS a justified one. The antagonists are just, the main character is not. I don't like being 'forced' to do disgusting immoral acts to progress (I didn't like doing it in SpecOps either, but at least that game was a work of art). A lot of people don't like that, when the concept is put to them that way. There clearly are people who would be fine with it, I won't dispute that, or their right to have a game catered to their interests. Additionally you spend about half the game beating on starving helpless(bad AI, inferior equipment, no real usage of tonics, or hey, lets not forget the fact that your character has infinite lives, lets face it, you (in the game) are the equivalent of superman murdering toddlers)

Do you not see why that is a morally questionable thing to include in a game?

No. I don't. I didn't see it then, and I don't see it now. Most particularly because it wasn't written anything like you keep insisting it was.

Please tell me "the correct interpretation" of the events I'm referring to. I'd really like to hear it.

Don't turn me, the player, into super-nazi-warcriminal-man because that's not something I want to be. I don't think that many people would want to be that.

Booker is already pretty close to being that when the story begins. Hence his back story as a Pinkerton, and his horrific acts at Wounded Knee that lead to his eventual need for "rebirth" and transformation into Zachary Comstock.

You make a game with a moral choice system, so why force the character to murder innocent revolutionaries. Yes, they are innocent, because their cause IS just. Just like a child stealing a loaf of bread to feed his starving family is innocent. Just like any victim is to resist crimes perpetrated on their persons.

As an aside, I'm really enjoying the bolding and italicization (I've only just learned how to use them). I likens to a sense of poking you in the ribs. Also the spoiler tags make this feel like we're having a heated argument while whispering into each other's ears.

 

[Soundwave]

Spoiler

Okay, so I'm going to just spin a little narrative out of thin air, to illustrate my point.

Scene: A park bench in Columbia, it's the early evening, of Revolution Day. Two Vox Populi are enjoying a celebratory smoke, and honoring the memory of the many lives lost that day in the name of Freedom.

Vox Populi Ainhales deeply from a child-marketed candy flavored cigarette). So, how about that guy, uh, Booker, wasn't it?

Vox Populi Bsquints in the sunlight) Oh yeah, the guy that died fighting for our freedom. He handed me this shotgun(gestures at the firearm leaning against the bench), gonna display it on my mantlepiece, so I can show my grandkids that their Grandpa walked with giants.

Vox Populi Aalso squints) Isn't that him over there? I thought you said he was dead!

Vox Populi Bspots Booker, expresses a look of surprise) Well I'll be! So it is. Never heard of the dead rising up before, least, not other than that other Savior a fella hears about.

Vox Populi A: What about the ghost of Father Comstock's wife? I heard she up and raised a ruckus over by the bank just this mornin'? (edit:I'm not 100% sure when that happened chronologically, it's been awhile since I played)

Vox Populi B: (ignores the last statement) It must be an impostor! I'm pretty sure I heard something about somebody 'pretendin' to be him!

Vox Populi A: Well, okay, so if he's an impostor, what's he doin' draggin' Comstock's daughter, Elizabeth, with him?

Vox Populi B: Oh, well, I guess she's an impostor too.

Vox Populi A: But look at her face! It's just like the one on all those statues I used to have to clean every day!

Vox Populi Bignores the last statement, as he's listening intently to a conveniently nearby radio) Daisy says 'the impostor is headin' our way!' And that we better go shoot 'em.

Vox Populi A: Well okay, if Daisy says so.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Spoiler

It's not an unreasonable end result, but it IS a justified one. The antagonists are just, the main character is not. I don't like being 'forced' to do disgusting immoral acts to progress (I didn't like doing it in SpecOps either, but at least that game was a work of art). A lot of people don't like that, when the concept is put to them that way. There clearly are people who would be fine with it, I won't dispute that, or their right to have a game catered to their interests. Additionally you spend about half the game beating on starving helpless(bad AI, inferior equipment, no real usage of tonics, or hey, lets not forget the fact that your character has infinite lives, lets face it, you (in the game) are the equivalent of superman murdering toddlers)

UGH. I responded to this, and now my response is gone. Speed response incoming.

Please tell me "the correct interpretation" of the events I'm referring to. I'd really like to hear it.

You are mischaracterizing violent revolutionaries who are engaged in heinous acts as "starving children" or "concentration camp victims". This is an extremely bizarre reading of events.

You make a game with a moral choice system, so why force the character to murder innocent revolutionaries.

There is no moral choice system in Bioshock Infinite. Not even a basic binary one like in the original Bioshock.

Yes, they are innocent, because their cause IS just. Just like a child stealing a loaf of bread to feed his starving family is innocent. Just like any victim is to resist crimes perpetrated on their persons.

Again, they are not starving children, and a just cause does not excuse brutal, savage retribution against people simply because they share a class or skin color with your oppressor.

You have a very, very different definition of "innocent" than I do.

Also the spoiler tags make this feel like we're having a heated argument while whispering into each other's ears.

As stated in my earlier, mysteriously gone forever reply, this was cute, and made me lol. =)

 

[Soundwave]

Spoiler

You are mischaracterizing violent revolutionaries who are engaged in heinous acts as "starving children" or "concentration camp victims". This is an extremely bizarre reading of events.

Parents of starving children. The reference to concentration camp victims was another(admittedly) hyperbolic example. The key point is that they were inhumanely oppressed and justified in their violent resistance.

There is no moral choice system in Bioshock Infinite. Not even a basic binary one like in the original Bioshock.

Actually there is, you are at several points given the option to behave in an immoral fashion, by being willing to throw a baseball at an interracial couple, or granting an old soldier a swift death.

Again, they are not starving children, and a just cause does not excuse brutal, savage retribution against people simply because they share a class or skin color with your oppressor.

You have a very, very different definition of "innocent" than I do.

Their children are starving, sick and dying because of the abuses they suffer. These conditions didn't "go away" the moment they picked up guns and became armed combatants. They took up arms to right these wrongs.

Additionally, beyond Daisy's attempted murder of a child, do you actually see the Vox Populi raping and pillaging? Or just helping fight the corrupt military/police/cyborg forces?

As stated in my earlier, mysteriously gone forever reply, this was cute, and made me lol. =)

I am here, to endear.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Spoiler

The key point is that they were inhumanely oppressed and justified in their violent resistance.

Violent resistance, yes. Abuse of unarmed citizenry out of a desire for violent *retribution*, no.

Actually there is, you are at several points given the option to behave in an immoral fashion, by being willing to throw a baseball at an interracial couple, or granting an old soldier a swift death.

That's pretty thin. It happens maybe once or twice, and has no reflection whatsoever on who Booker was, what he eventually does, or what needs to happen to him to stop the circle of violence he has create through "infinite" worlds. Booker is not a red/blue Tabula Rasa like Commander Shepard. He is all red, all the time.

Their children are starving, sick and dying because of the abuses they suffer. These conditions didn't "go away" the moment they picked up guns and became armed combatants. They took up arms to right these wrongs.

Starving, sick, dying children do not justify murder for sport.

Additionally, beyond Daisy's attempted murder of a child, do you actually see the Vox Populi raping and pillaging?

Yes, you do. Several times, actually. You also have to cope with the fact they are actively engaged in trying to kill you.

 

[Soundwave]

Spoiler

Starving, sick, dying children do not justify murder for sport.

What sport? And distasteful though it may be, it's unreasonable to think that there wouldn't be collateral damage during a violent revolution. And lets not forget who's fault the violent revolution was. Those people didn't *have* to mistreat the people that became the Vox Populi, but they did. And a violent uprising was their reward.

I honestly don't remember seeing the rape and pillage on behalf of the Vox Populi. I'm not about to play the game again, so I'll take your word for it. I will say, at that point I was already disgusted with the game, and may have overlooked it as I angrily thought to myself "I can't believe I just spent sixty dollars for this shit".

We can keep going back and forth like this for hours. But rather than do that, I just want to ask you,

"Do you really not see where I'm coming from on this? Why I didn't enjoy the game?"

Or do you feel like my perceptions are "wrong" and that I have no right to not like the game? I assure you, when I bought it, when it came out, for full retail price, I really wanted to enjoy it. And for awhile I did, until the parts that we've so painstakingly gone over. After that point, I was overcome with a sense of buyer's remorse. I really expected more from Irrational Games.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Spoiler

"Do you really not see where I'm coming from on this? Why I didn't enjoy the game?"

Or do you feel like my perceptions are "wrong" and that I have no right to not like the game? I assure you, when I bought it, when it came out, for full retail price, I really wanted to enjoy it. And for awhile I did, until the parts that we've so painstakingly gone over. After that point, I was overcome with a sense of buyer's remorse. I really expected more from Irrational Games.

I think I made it pretty clear in either my first or second reply to you that it's fine if you don't like a story, or don't like a game. There's a fair distance between "I don't like X" and "I don't like X, because X is vile and disgusting". The first is a statement of preference and needs no supporting. The second is a (hyperbolic) critical argument and should be supported. As you can tell by the subsequent (and fairly hilarious to look at given it's all in spoiler tags) back and forth, I do not feel you've adequately supported that AT ALL, beyond demonstrating vague discomfort at viewing a pretty acceptable depiction of a violent revolution spun out of control.

You can dislike whatever you want. I have no stake in trying to bully you into liking something you hated.