The dramatic changes of Bioshock infinite over development.

#1 Edited by jmic75 (265 posts) -

I went back and looked at old demos for Bioshock Infinite and I can see why the game was delayed a few times, they radically changed it.

http://www.gametrailers.com/videos/fuusn2/bioshock-infinite-ten-minute-demo-gameplay

Almost nothing in this 2010 demo is in the game in any form (other than the weapons, handyman and the crow and electric powers)

http://www.gametrailers.com/videos/69ftqs/bioshock-infinite-e3-2011--full-15-minute-demo

This is much closer with segments that actually occur in the game, however the story must have changed late in development as it appears to focus more heavily on patriotism as the theme of the game (which does still exist in the final product) but religion, which is the driving force in the final game city does not exist anywhere (no posters of the prophet etc). The Lincoln mask is the most indicative of this, he is celebrated here with a mask, but is vilified in the final product. The celebration of the US and the founding fathers is a bit odd to have remained prominent in the final game as Columbia separates from the states, as the city rejects what it has become.

I was a bit disappointed by the lack of dynamic social situations, factions and impactful choices that were promised throughout development (eg you could save a man from an execution but he may turn out to be a terrible person later on).

Do you like the changes that happened from the first shown media about the game?

#2 Posted by wario2295 (37 posts) -

Personally I almost wish a dlc would be an 'alternate reality' of some sort where Comstock is how he was originally intended, a young politician-y type, or someone else mentioned a museum of sorts in-game where it had examples of what was cut...while the game almost assuredly is better as a whole without the cut or changed material it would be interesting to see where the story originally intended to go.

#3 Edited by TheMasterDS (2137 posts) -

Huh, that's really interesting. It's interesting to see what her powers originally were but also interesting to note that the reality bending stuff was still in there from that point - see the weird people unaware what timeline they're in and the changing painting. They spend a lot of time working on those games and I suppose it's clear looking at the early stuff why. A lot of things change.

#4 Posted by jmic75 (265 posts) -

Something I missed was the way the city is suspended in the original trailers, it clearly uses hot air instead of the method that is used in the final game that combined with (as TheMasterDS said) the huge difference in Elizabeth's powers is it possible that the dimensionality that is prominent in the final game was not a huge story point in the original?

#5 Edited by golguin (4045 posts) -

@jmic75 said:

Something I missed was the way the city is suspended in the original trailers, it clearly uses hot air instead of the method that is used in the final game that combined with (as TheMasterDS said) the huge difference in Elizabeth's powers is it possible that the dimensionality that is prominent in the final game was not a huge story point in the original?

The dimension stuff was always there. They originally wanted to call the game "Infinite" and we now know the significance of the name.

#6 Edited by thebunnyhunter (1482 posts) -

I really want to know why they had to cut down on those ideas in the demos and why they changed some things the way they did. Here's to hoping for a good post release interview on the game or some kind of commentary by the developers.

#7 Edited by Ghostiet (5321 posts) -

I'd really like to see a post-mortem on the game. Especially since the details of the plot feel like they were written on the spot - which, I think, actually worked out even better than if it was meticulously planned 5 years back. I mean, come on: the fact that the entire story is an adaptation of BioShock 2, Comstock changing into a religious radical and the entire American exceptionalism angle getting downplayed right after that, the entirety of Elizabeth, the fact that Booker's daughter shares a name with the cosplayer who appeared in promotional material due to looking 99% like Elizabeth... It almost seems as if there were so many ideas that they couldn't decide. Not to mention the fact that they engage in some mild metacommentary on the game's development and its multiple iterations (the original Elizabeth design appearing in the ending).

#8 Posted by TheManWithNoPlan (5985 posts) -

I would love to watch some post mortum interviews about the games development over the last five years.

#9 Posted by TheMasterDS (2137 posts) -

I think a lot of it wasn't because they had to but more because it wasn't actually fun. They wanted to make the changes to make the game better.

Interesting thing to note, the initial idea for the enemies was to have them go insane from time space bending. It's really interesting that they veered away from that and just made the enemies all true believers and making those impacted negatively from space bending just entirely out of sorts. It's also interesting how in the original forms Columbia didn't differentiate itself from America and used the American flag and... well, I think it's interesting anyway. Also the decision to not portray Columbia as falling apart due to structural integrity which, hey, is perfectly fine if you consider the city has to still be around in 1984 to kill New York. Quantum Mechanics I guess are a more stable way to lift a city than helium.

#10 Edited by George_Hukas (1317 posts) -

"Ken Levine and his team notoriously continue to work on story right up until the end (rather than working from a locked-in-stone script before production begins), and this allows the design team much more flexibility in creating the right environment."

If you have never been to IrrationalGames.com I highly recommend you do so. They have a podcast they created during the development of Infinite called Irrational Behavior with interviews from artists talk ingabout specific things like design and creating gameplay trailers. Also, their From The Vault feature talks about even older games.

http://irrationalgames.com/insider/irrational-behavior/introducing-irrational-behavior/

http://irrationalgames.com/insider/from-the-vault/

Old ass Bioshock 1 screenshot
..and Little Sisters USED TO BE FROGS!

#11 Edited by Veektarius (5019 posts) -

I was really expecting the game to hit me harder on the patriotism front. I'm a patriot myself and had steeled myself to receive some criticism. But then they made Columbia basically completely alien to American values .. .though maybe they would seem realistic to someone in 1912, I don't know. Either way, I felt that Rapture was a harder-hitting setting because it spoke to values that people actually still have today.

Also, Elizabeth's boobs are too small now.

#12 Posted by Ghostiet (5321 posts) -

@veektarius: But that was the point - it's completely alien to American values because America is no longer American enough for Comstock and his subjects.

#13 Posted by Veektarius (5019 posts) -

@ghostiet said:

@veektarius: But that was the point - it's completely alien to American values because America is no longer American enough for Comstock and his subjects.

That might be the point. Anything can be the point if you design it to be. The point is that the setting is alien to *me*, which makes it less interesting than Rapture, which was not. Ayn Rand's ideals are still alive and well in this country.

#14 Edited by ThePickle (4167 posts) -

There were plans to have a level that was an underwater zoo, filled with animals, but it was deemed too potentially awesome/development destroying so it was cut.

#15 Posted by Ghostiet (5321 posts) -

@veektarius said:

@ghostiet said:

@veektarius: But that was the point - it's completely alien to American values because America is no longer American enough for Comstock and his subjects.

That might be the point. Anything can be the point if you design it to be. The point is that the setting is alien to *me*, which makes it less interesting than Rapture, which was not. Ayn Rand's ideals are still alive and well in this country.

Still, the translation of objectivism in BioShock also is extremistic. Andrew Ryan creates the ideal objectivistic paradise, but solely for himself, taking the idea of anti-altruism and belief in the superiority of the exceptional unit to its logical conclusion.

Personally, I'm glad that they distanced themselves from the American Exceptionalism and civil war angles - while it's kind of a wasted opportunity, I feel that BioShock as a series mostly designed to take on different political/philosophical views (Objectivism! Collectivism! Patriotism!) and pushes them to their logical extremes would really cheapen it in the big picture.

#16 Posted by JazGalaxy (1576 posts) -

Ken Lavine keeps making saying during interviews that he is big into "rewriting". He even says to Jeff that "writing is rewriting".

I think he just didn't know what story he wanted to tell until late in development. I don't think there WAS a Bioshock inifinite when those demos came out. Just a few concepts about what he wanted to talk about.

Personally I'm pretty pissed that those prerelease trailers have NOTHING to do with the game. It's not that I dislike the way the game turned out, it's just that nobody ever said those things did not influence the game. As a result, I was playing the game with, in the back of my head, this idea that somewhere, at some point in time, a mask is going to be ripped off Columbia and nothing is going to be as it seems to be. That never happens.

#17 Posted by MildMolasses (3229 posts) -


Personally I'm pretty pissed that those prerelease trailers have NOTHING to do with the game. It's not that I dislike the way the game turned out, it's just that nobody ever said those things did not influence the game. As a result, I was playing the game with, in the back of my head, this idea that somewhere, at some point in time, a mask is going to be ripped off Columbia and nothing is going to be as it seems to be. That never happens.

That was the beauty of it. All the pre-release stuff was a distraction about what is really happening. It was misdirection for his sleight of hand trick. You were focused entirely on the what of the situation when the real question is 'why is this all so familiar.' This game was never about nationalism or racism, and that's why the marketing worked so well. You were never looking for the answer that you were going to get

#18 Edited by SomeDeliCook (2341 posts) -

I really miss the feeling of the original gameplay trailer where that one guy was talking to a huge crowd even though no one was there. It was creepy and really great, I never got that feeling when I played the game.

#19 Posted by JazGalaxy (1576 posts) -

@jazgalaxy said:

Personally I'm pretty pissed that those prerelease trailers have NOTHING to do with the game. It's not that I dislike the way the game turned out, it's just that nobody ever said those things did not influence the game. As a result, I was playing the game with, in the back of my head, this idea that somewhere, at some point in time, a mask is going to be ripped off Columbia and nothing is going to be as it seems to be. That never happens.

That was the beauty of it. All the pre-release stuff was a distraction about what is really happening. It was misdirection for his sleight of hand trick. You were focused entirely on the what of the situation when the real question is 'why is this all so familiar.' This game was never about nationalism or racism, and that's why the marketing worked so well. You were never looking for the answer that you were going to get

noooo, that was the thing that made me enjoy the game FARRR less than I should have.

I don't know if you watched that video lately, but the whole thing is constructed to make it seem like Columbia is hiding a dark hearted secret beneath it's veneer of candy coated americana. The barker yelling about the political candidate he believes in, when booker takes a gun, suddenly transforms into something of a creature with gleaming yellow eyes and then leaps around like a man possessed by the devil.

That was WAY more interesting than anything Bioshock actually does. Bioshock does great stuff, but that sets the game up to be a mystery where it isn't one. And because of htat, even the title screen, with it's signs that fritz out and warp into optinon screens made me think there was a mystery afoot. By the time I realized there wasn't one, and everything was pretty much just hwat it looked like, there was nothing to feel but disappointment.

#20 Posted by MildMolasses (3229 posts) -

@jazgalaxy: The problem with that early stuff is that it was entirely conceptual. They really shouldn't have shown any of that off because so much of that game was still up in the air (no pun intended) that you couldn't rely on any of it to be truly representative of the final product. I understand why you are disappointed with it, but its for the exact same reason why I think its so brilliant.

I hate to say this because I think requiring prior knowledge about seemingly unrelated topics prior to engaging a piece of media with ridiculous, but I think reading The Devil in the White City provides a bit of context on the political climate of the time, as well as a lot of the technological advances being introduced through the Chicago World's Fair that you could make up many of those missing details yourself in a satisfying way. The fact is that most of what you see in Columbia initially you can take at face value. It's just people who have a perverted view of what America should be and how they go about enforcing it

#21 Posted by JazGalaxy (1576 posts) -

@jazgalaxy: The problem with that early stuff is that it was entirely conceptual. They really shouldn't have shown any of that off because so much of that game was still up in the air (no pun intended) that you couldn't rely on any of it to be truly representative of the final product. I understand why you are disappointed with it, but its for the exact same reason why I think its so brilliant.

Oridinarily I would agree with that. But it wasn't just screenshots or work in progress shots they showed. It was ten minutes of what was said to be gameplay. I mean, even if Ken Lavine had come out and said "we've changed the game since hten. Forget about all that." I would have been cool with it.

As it stands though, I honestly feel like I was tricked. Not cheated, because the acutal game is fantastic, but all the time I spent being excited and not watching trailers because I didn't want to spoil it was for a game that does not exist.

#22 Posted by golguin (4045 posts) -

@mildmolasses said:

@jazgalaxy: The problem with that early stuff is that it was entirely conceptual. They really shouldn't have shown any of that off because so much of that game was still up in the air (no pun intended) that you couldn't rely on any of it to be truly representative of the final product. I understand why you are disappointed with it, but its for the exact same reason why I think its so brilliant.

Oridinarily I would agree with that. But it wasn't just screenshots or work in progress shots they showed. It was ten minutes of what was said to be gameplay. I mean, even if Ken Lavine had come out and said "we've changed the game since hten. Forget about all that." I would have been cool with it.

As it stands though, I honestly feel like I was tricked. Not cheated, because the acutal game is fantastic, but all the time I spent being excited and not watching trailers because I didn't want to spoil it was for a game that does not exist.

What part from the trailers were you disappointed to not see in the final game?

#23 Edited by MildMolasses (3229 posts) -
#24 Posted by JazGalaxy (1576 posts) -

@golguin said:

@jazgalaxy said:

@mildmolasses said:

@jazgalaxy: The problem with that early stuff is that it was entirely conceptual. They really shouldn't have shown any of that off because so much of that game was still up in the air (no pun intended) that you couldn't rely on any of it to be truly representative of the final product. I understand why you are disappointed with it, but its for the exact same reason why I think its so brilliant.

Oridinarily I would agree with that. But it wasn't just screenshots or work in progress shots they showed. It was ten minutes of what was said to be gameplay. I mean, even if Ken Lavine had come out and said "we've changed the game since hten. Forget about all that." I would have been cool with it.

As it stands though, I honestly feel like I was tricked. Not cheated, because the acutal game is fantastic, but all the time I spent being excited and not watching trailers because I didn't want to spoil it was for a game that does not exist.

What part from the trailers were you disappointed to not see in the final game?

Specifically it all starts with that scene with the barker suddenly yelling at Dewitt and his eyes turning yellow and starting to fritz out. Then his jumping twenty feet into the air and gliding away on a skyhook. That kind of imagery along with the lady calmly sweeping the floor of the building that is currently on fire (which is in the game in a totally different place and context) really created a sense that Columbia was hiding a dark secret and that nobody there was what they appeared to be.

I still want to play THAT game. A more Twin Peaks version of Infinite.

#25 Edited by golguin (4045 posts) -

I didn't get that sense from that scene at all. Reality shifted for that dude from being all American to being all Russian (didn't his pin change?) and that reality shifting still exists in the game.

#26 Posted by JazGalaxy (1576 posts) -

@golguin said:

I didn't get that sense from that scene at all. Reality shifted for that dude from being all American to being all Russian (didn't his pin change?) and that reality shifting still exists in the game.

I'm not sure how you couldn't get that vibe.

First, a woman is calmly sweeping while a fire is buring her entire house down.

Next a man is calming feeding a ton of crows. (you feed pidgeons, not crows. Crows eat carrion, which means he's feeding them flesh)

Next a guy is all american and jingoistic and then he's suddenly a monster and attacking you.

There was a duality that was present between what appears to be and what truly is.

#27 Edited by Mrsignerman44 (1100 posts) -

You know, if you really think about it...

(SPOILERS)

All of the footage from the trailers that didn't make it into the game/was slightly altered could be from the 122 alternate dimensional loops where Booker is still trying to rescue Elizabeth...no? Okay, I'll go to bed now :<

#28 Posted by JazGalaxy (1576 posts) -

You know, if you really think about it...

(SPOILERS)

All of the footage from the trailers that didn't make it into the game/was slightly altered could be from the 122 alternate dimensional loops where Booker is still trying to rescue Elizabeth...no? Okay, I'll go to bed now :<

I honestly think that's the case.

There's a scene in the game where Elizabeth opens a tear to a veranda that's filled with rose bushes.

It looks an awful lot like the veranda that the original Elizabeth (who makes an apperance alongside the other elizabeth's at the end of the game) was in when she saved booker from falling to the earth in the very first infinite trailer that was ever released.

#29 Edited by OurSin_360 (947 posts) -

Seems like it's why a bunch of people quit, ken levine kept rewriting and changing everything lol.

I think the power combinations is the only disappointing thing omitted and it looks like the skylines were more prevalent and open world. Also would have liked more of the songbird

#30 Posted by CrossTheAtlantic (1146 posts) -

@mrsignerman44 said:

You know, if you really think about it...

(SPOILERS)

All of the footage from the trailers that didn't make it into the game/was slightly altered could be from the 122 alternate dimensional loops where Booker is still trying to rescue Elizabeth...no? Okay, I'll go to bed now :<

I honestly think that's the case.

There's a scene in the game where Elizabeth opens a tear to a veranda that's filled with rose bushes.

It looks an awful lot like the veranda that the original Elizabeth (who makes an apperance alongside the other elizabeth's at the end of the game) was in when she saved booker from falling to the earth in the very first infinite trailer that was ever released.

Yup. I'm pretty sure the ending folds the other "universes" of the demos into it.

#31 Posted by Mrsignerman44 (1100 posts) -

@jazgalaxy said:
@mrsignerman44 said:

You know, if you really think about it...

(SPOILERS)

All of the footage from the trailers that didn't make it into the game/was slightly altered could be from the 122 alternate dimensional loops where Booker is still trying to rescue Elizabeth...no? Okay, I'll go to bed now :<

I honestly think that's the case.

There's a scene in the game where Elizabeth opens a tear to a veranda that's filled with rose bushes.

It looks an awful lot like the veranda that the original Elizabeth (who makes an apperance alongside the other elizabeth's at the end of the game) was in when she saved booker from falling to the earth in the very first infinite trailer that was ever released.

Yup. I'm pretty sure the ending folds the other "universes" of the demos into it.

Blows my mind just thinking about it still.

#32 Posted by Veektarius (5019 posts) -

@ghostiet said:

Still, the translation of objectivism in BioShock also is extremistic. Andrew Ryan creates the ideal objectivistic paradise, but solely for himself, taking the idea of anti-altruism and belief in the superiority of the exceptional unit to its logical conclusion.

Personally, I'm glad that they distanced themselves from the American Exceptionalism and civil war angles - while it's kind of a wasted opportunity, I feel that BioShock as a series mostly designed to take on different political/philosophical views (Objectivism! Collectivism! Patriotism!) and pushes them to their logical extremes would really cheapen it in the big picture.

My picture of Ryan wasn't as unsympathetic as that. After all, according to Rand, what is best for the individual is what is best for society - and Ryan was applying that rule. The game suggests that things were actually quite successful (for some, especially for technological development) until opportunists disguising self-interest for socialism (two concepts that aren't compatible) took advantage of the plight of the losers in this society, and Ryan's inability to compromise his vision led to his downfall. Personally, my view of Rapture was that it could have been something great, and almost was. Columbia, on the other hand, has almost no redeeming value. Its inception represented nothing more than a monument to the early 20th century American ego, an even more extravagant analogue to the Great White Fleet, and the ideology under which it operates is an aggregation of the least appealing aspects of that society with none of its virtues. Even its great industrialist, Fink, is revealed to be a fraud, stealing all his inventions from the future. I did not feel much sorrow for the loss of Columbia, though I did regret sacrificing the idyllic life of some of its citizens to further my own aims.

#33 Posted by Ghostiet (5321 posts) -

@veektarius said:

My picture of Ryan wasn't as unsympathetic as that. After all, according to Rand, what is best for the individual is what is best for society - and Ryan was applying that rule. The game suggests that things were actually quite successful (for some, especially for technological development) until opportunists disguising self-interest for socialism (two concepts that aren't compatible) took advantage of the plight of the losers in this society, and Ryan's inability to compromise his vision led to his downfall.

Sure, it's just that Ryan is taking it to its most selfish extreme. There's a recording where he's talking in an elated voice that there's no longer a Fontaine or a Lamb, it's just him. There's also the fact that he goes directly against his principles with the entire Fontaine business - initially, he says that he won't do anything about Fontaine because the man is simply very good at playing the game and that his actions deserve admiration. Until he begins to lose and it turns out that for a capitalist he doesn't seem to understand that contraband in Rapture only exists because he is so afraid of the surface-world influence, so he's keeping the city in secret. He becomes the big government.

But yeah, you're right about Columbia. I just wanted to point that one thing about BioShock.

#34 Posted by OurSin_360 (947 posts) -

I really miss the feeling of the original gameplay trailer where that one guy was talking to a huge crowd even though no one was there. It was creepy and really great, I never got that feeling when I played the game.

i'm glad they took all the insane citizen stuff out, made the world much more grounded and believable (as far as a game like this can be anyway lol). If they didn't it would basically be rapture all over again. I loved walking around with realistic people moving around talking, showing their bigotry in a nonchalant realistic way.

I'm sure the gameplay stuff was taken out because of engine limitations.

#35 Edited by SomeDeliCook (2341 posts) -

@somedelicook said:

I really miss the feeling of the original gameplay trailer where that one guy was talking to a huge crowd even though no one was there. It was creepy and really great, I never got that feeling when I played the game.

i'm glad they took all the insane citizen stuff out, made the world much more grounded and believable (as far as a game like this can be anyway lol). If they didn't it would basically be rapture all over again. I loved walking around with realistic people moving around talking, showing their bigotry in a nonchalant realistic way.

I'm sure the gameplay stuff was taken out because of engine limitations.

The people were creepy. They would say a line of dialogue then stay in the same pose staring blankly either at you or at nothing while staying compeltely quiet. To me it made it feel like the world wasn't real at all

#36 Posted by SlashDance (1843 posts) -

Live, from twitter ! (no idea how to embed tweets)

Ken Levine @IGLevine

RT @tpmcleod: @IGLevine Trying to keep my Q spoiler free - was the direction you took the plot at the end your plan from day 1? --no

So yes, the whole storyline probably changed quite a bit since that first reveal trailer.

#37 Edited by TheMasterDS (2137 posts) -

The crazy people are still there, only now they're shuffling figures to say "Oh god, what have I done" at instead of horrible monsters to kill without any empathy. Works better I think, I bet they'd agree.

Seems like it's why a bunch of people quit, ken levine kept rewriting and changing everything lol.

I think the power combinations is the only disappointing thing omitted and it looks like the skylines were more prevalent and open world. Also would have liked more of the songbird

One, that's how Irrational makes games. That's why it takes 6 years. And it's for the best. As mentioned earlier the original Little Sister was a frog. It's good that they figured out little girls would work better.

Two the power combinations thing probably didn't make for good gameplay. I mean think about it, if all Elizabeth did was randomly allow you to kill a dozen enemies at once what use would that be? Those dozen enemies far as you know would've been added for you to take out plus during any hard fight she doesn't automatically win for you you could blame her for not being on the spot. Additionally the fact that any one of those combinations would probably have to be highly scripted or assume a lot about what the player is doing. That's good for a scripted gameplay demo but not for 12 hours of gameplay. Her keeping you topped off and opening up tears placed around the battlefield was a much better ability for her mechanically and it fit the story they ended up telling immaculately.

#38 Edited by Bourbon_Warrior (4523 posts) -

I dunno everything in that demo is pretty much the same as the game.

#39 Posted by rebgav (1429 posts) -

One, that's how Irrational makes games. That's why it takes 6 years. And it's for the best. As mentioned earlier the original Little Sister was a frog. It's good that they figured out little girls would work better.

The Little Sisters were never going to be frogs. That is one of the concepts presented by the art team when the decision was made to change the Gatherers from ugly sea slugs to something more sympathetic. Just like the environment picture in the same post was never, ever representative of the final art, it was just a wireframe with generic textures. Context!

#40 Edited by OurSin_360 (947 posts) -

@somedelicook said:

@oursin_360 said:

@somedelicook said:

I really miss the feeling of the original gameplay trailer where that one guy was talking to a huge crowd even though no one was there. It was creepy and really great, I never got that feeling when I played the game.

i'm glad they took all the insane citizen stuff out, made the world much more grounded and believable (as far as a game like this can be anyway lol). If they didn't it would basically be rapture all over again. I loved walking around with realistic people moving around talking, showing their bigotry in a nonchalant realistic way.

I'm sure the gameplay stuff was taken out because of engine limitations.

The people were creepy. They would say a line of dialogue then stay in the same pose staring blankly either at you or at nothing while staying compeltely quiet. To me it made it feel like the world wasn't real at all

maybe i'm used to bethesda games, but that just felt like video game limitations, i probably just ignore stuff like that lol. I felt the people were creepy more so because of their views and how normal it felt to them.

@themasterds In the trailer it felt like Elizabeth had a limit to how many times she could use her powers, and i'm pretty sure the mechanic could easily have been set up in the same vein as the traps were where you have to hold a button in order for her to initiate. Even if it was mroe in the lines of setting traps for boss fights it would have been pretty amazing and only added to the gameplay IMO. It could even have been something like a meter to build up by doing an in game action, something to reward the player for doing well in combat or something else. etc

#41 Posted by Spongetwan (202 posts) -

Great read! This game is soooo great

#42 Posted by TheMasterDS (2137 posts) -

@themasterds In the trailer it felt like Elizabeth had a limit to how many times she could use her powers, and i'm pretty sure the mechanic could easily have been set up in the same vein as the traps were where you have to hold a button in order for her to initiate. Even if it was mroe in the lines of setting traps for boss fights it would have been pretty amazing and only added to the gameplay IMO. It could even have been something like a meter to build up by doing an in game action, something to reward the player for doing well in combat or something else. etc

That sounds like an overly complex and not at all intuitive way to do what tears ultimately accomplished with no meters, a simple explanation and a form that complemented the story extremely well.

#43 Posted by JazGalaxy (1576 posts) -

@ghostiet said:

Still, the translation of objectivism in BioShock also is extremistic. Andrew Ryan creates the ideal objectivistic paradise, but solely for himself, taking the idea of anti-altruism and belief in the superiority of the exceptional unit to its logical conclusion.

Personally, I'm glad that they distanced themselves from the American Exceptionalism and civil war angles - while it's kind of a wasted opportunity, I feel that BioShock as a series mostly designed to take on different political/philosophical views (Objectivism! Collectivism! Patriotism!) and pushes them to their logical extremes would really cheapen it in the big picture.

My picture of Ryan wasn't as unsympathetic as that. After all, according to Rand, what is best for the individual is what is best for society - and Ryan was applying that rule. The game suggests that things were actually quite successful (for some, especially for technological development) until opportunists disguising self-interest for socialism (two concepts that aren't compatible) took advantage of the plight of the losers in this society, and Ryan's inability to compromise his vision led to his downfall. Personally, my view of Rapture was that it could have been something great, and almost was. Columbia, on the other hand, has almost no redeeming value. Its inception represented nothing more than a monument to the early 20th century American ego, an even more extravagant analogue to the Great White Fleet, and the ideology under which it operates is an aggregation of the least appealing aspects of that society with none of its virtues. Even its great industrialist, Fink, is revealed to be a fraud, stealing all his inventions from the future. I did not feel much sorrow for the loss of Columbia, though I did regret sacrificing the idyllic life of some of its citizens to further my own aims.

I think you're interpreting rapture a little bit wrong. I think the point the game is trying to convey is that the seeds of rapture's downfall were there from the very beginning, it just took a few years to actually run its course and meet it's inevitable conclusion. There's an audiolog in the market section of the game where a guy is complaining that Fontaine's prices prices are just too low to compete with and that he suspects Fontaine is a criminal because it's the only way he could be in business with the prices he has. Another audiolog has Ryan answering back that the market dictates what should be done, and that if he can't compete with Fontaine, he should find a way to make better services, a better product, or get out of the market. A later audiolog has Ryan lamenting that Fontaine has become too powerful to stop and that he should have done something about it when he had the chance. It was Ryan's hubris in thinking that he understood people and that he was in control of them via the markets that led to his loss of control in Rapture.

#44 Posted by OurSin_360 (947 posts) -

@oursin_360 said:

@themasterds In the trailer it felt like Elizabeth had a limit to how many times she could use her powers, and i'm pretty sure the mechanic could easily have been set up in the same vein as the traps were where you have to hold a button in order for her to initiate. Even if it was mroe in the lines of setting traps for boss fights it would have been pretty amazing and only added to the gameplay IMO. It could even have been something like a meter to build up by doing an in game action, something to reward the player for doing well in combat or something else. etc

That sounds like an overly complex and not at all intuitive way to do what tears ultimately accomplished with no meters, a simple explanation and a form that complemented the story extremely well.

I found the tears didn't really add anything, i would have much rather had something like in the demo vids. Especially towards the end and some encounters where you don't even get any tears or anything behind health pack tears etc. And i don't mean it had to be a meter, it could have been exactly like the tears just something more devastating and visually pleasing like the storm combination.

#45 Posted by crusader8463 (14428 posts) -

It's a shame they went the direction they did as that first trailer in the OP looked a lot more fun/interesting than what we got. The thing I'm interested the most in, that we will never really know, finding the answer to is what they ended up changing about the game to appease that religious guy who threw a temper tantrum and threatened to quit unless they changed how the game was originally going to end because he thought it was offensive.

Online
#46 Posted by TheMasterDS (2137 posts) -

@oursin_360: I very much doubt they could've kept that up for in entire game. Besides, having an AI partners abilities depend on you busting out specific powers at specific times is silly when in the Bioshock games everyone approaches things in different ways. Having to hover over a thing, hit X to open a thunder storm (Would that work like Tears? How would you communicate what way the storm would blow and such?), switching to Shock Jockey, unleashing your power into the storm is a lot more of a unintuitive bother than the way they ended up doing it, just holding down X.

#47 Posted by BeachThunder (12411 posts) -

I find this screenshot (it's still displayed on the Season Pass page on Steam) pretty interesting:

Online
#48 Edited by OurSin_360 (947 posts) -

@oursin_360: I very much doubt they could've kept that up for in entire game. Besides, having an AI partners abilities depend on you busting out specific powers at specific times is silly when in the Bioshock games everyone approaches things in different ways. Having to hover over a thing, hit X to open a thunder storm (Would that work like Tears? How would you communicate what way the storm would blow and such?), switching to Shock Jockey, unleashing your power into the storm is a lot more of a unintuitive bother than the way they ended up doing it, just holding down X.

Why couldn't you just hold down X? lol. Plenty of ways they could have implemented it, give a prompt simliar to the tears and devise a combo based on whatever power you are using, or just give a choice as to what combo to use while initiating, or give a choice to hold down different buttons, maybe even the D-Pad etc. It could be done, they probably just ran out of time. The engine could handle it as shown in the demo's, don't know what the sacrifice would be but it was possible

#49 Edited by TheMasterDS (2137 posts) -

@themasterds said:

@oursin_360: I very much doubt they could've kept that up for in entire game. Besides, having an AI partners abilities depend on you busting out specific powers at specific times is silly when in the Bioshock games everyone approaches things in different ways. Having to hover over a thing, hit X to open a thunder storm (Would that work like Tears? How would you communicate what way the storm would blow and such?), switching to Shock Jockey, unleashing your power into the storm is a lot more of a unintuitive bother than the way they ended up doing it, just holding down X.

Why couldn't you just hold down X? lol. Plenty of ways they could have implemented it, give a prompt simliar to the tears and devise a combo based on whatever power you are using, or just give a choice as to what combo to use while initiating, or give a choice to hold down different buttons, maybe even the D-Pad etc. It could be done, they probably just ran out of time. The engine could handle it as shown in the demo's, don't know what the sacrifice would be but it was possible

Don't be silly, they had 6 years and could've had more if they really wanted. They must've had different reasons for not doing that such as it's really complicated, really unintuitive and, unless it were to automatically switch to and use a specific power for you, requires 8 different combos for each type of trap Elizabeth could open. You'd never be able to make an informed decision about them until you used one of them well over 8 times which is a bit much honestly.

There's a difference between what's possible and what's desirable and what's valuable. The combination idea must've just been a dead end.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.