Final Thoughts: BioShock
(Note: there are NO MAJOR SPOILERS in this review)
What is BioShock? Those who have played it know what it is. But those who haven't played it probably only know a few things: it takes place underwater, has something to do with Ayn Rand, and features guys in big diving suits protecting creepy little girls. Going in, that's pretty much all I really knew about it, too. And that's all sort of correct... sort of.
Some of the major ideas and backdrops of BioShock are indeed based on the writings of Ayn Rand (her novel Atlas Shrugged, in particular), but that's a fairly generalized broad-brush-stroke sort of way of looking at it. Rand's novel popularized her philosophy of Objectivism (which I would like to describe succinctly, but am struggling to do so easily... especially if my goal is to keep this short). OK, hold on... Let me check "teh Interwebz"... well, look at that! It seems Rand has already done so for us. In her own words: "My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute". Of course, this doesn't really tell you everything (or anything for that matter, if you haven't read the book), but hopefully it's enough to give you a general idea. So there ya go...
Anyways, one of the main characters in the novel is a man named "John Galt", who founds a secret secluded community called Galt's Gulch in a remote mountain location in Colorado. Galt's Gulch is built on the ideals of its founder (namely, Objectivism) and the members of this community are what Galt deems the productive members of society. Dagny Taggart, another main character, eventually finds Galt's Gulch when her airplane crashes in the mountains nearby.
Playing the part of "Galt's Gulch" in BioShock is "Rapture", a secret secluded undersea metropolis built on the ideals of its founder, Walt Disney, err, Andrew Ryan (a thinly veiled pseudo-anagram of "Ayn Rand"), who is, in turn, playing the part of "John Galt". Rapture, like Galt's Gulch, is discovered when the game's protagonist crashes nearby - you guessed it - in an airplane. Said protagonist is then guided throughout the story by a mysterious man named Atlas (yeah... I said Atlas). John Galt's "looters" are akin to Andrew Ryan's "parasites", the question "who is John Galt?" becomes "who is Atlas?", and so on... *exhales*... phew... Got all that??? OK, good... because, really... that's where all the similarities end. These things are simply window dressing: the setting, ideas and references from which the game's world is built... the things to which the plot is anchored. The game isn't so much about Objectivism, but rather the inevitable failings of humanity, regardless of the ideals or location a community is built upon. But when you add these ideas to the mix, the game's world becomes more than a series of 3D levels. It becomes more believable, more real... it lives and breathes. This is but one small part of what makes BioShock so successful.
Literary references, great gameplay, and an interesting plot will take you a long way, but in my opinion, BioShock's greatest triumph is none of these things... but rather, Rapture itself. While the absurd improbability of building a metropolis on the bottom of the ocean can't be argued, you also can't deny that the setting is stunningly beautiful and - more importantly - unique, from a gaming standpoint. From the very moment of your arrival proper (via a beautiful cinematic), you know you're in for something special. The game takes place in the late 50's or early 60's, but Rapture was built at least a decade or more before that - the architecture and sensibilities are all pure 40's era Art Deco. The city was a beautiful place in its heyday, but at the time the main character arrives, it has fallen into shambles and disrepair due to a war between Ryan and his rival, Frank Fontaine. This version of Rapture - dark, leaking, empty - is a sight to behold. The artists and level designers who worked on this game truly outdid themselves. The atmosphere and setting relay beauty, sorrow, and fear all at the same time. Let's put it this way: even if the game had no goals whatsoever and the only available option was to simply walk around the empty city, it would still be worth playing. This creepy and desolate setting is the very thing that initially drew me to BioShock, and it most definitely did not disappoint. I was, quite literally, on the edge of my seat throughout my entire journey through Rapture. The dark corridors; the leaking ceilings; never knowing what might be around the next corner... these things instilled real fear in me. Any game that can draw a player in so completely and convey such emotion is truly successful.
Let's talk gameplay. Beneath the unique backdrop and all the philosophical mumbo jumbo is a pretty straightforward FPS. Or is it? Well, yes and no. Yes, all the usual suspects are firmly in place (hand gun, machine gun, etc), but BioShock also contains a second set of unique armaments called Plasmids. Plasmids are genetic modifiers that grant special powers like telekinesis, the ability to generate electricity or fire, etc. These superhuman abilities are definitely unique, but it's no secret we've seen this sort of thing before (masquerading as "magic", or "psionic abilities" in Irrational's very own System Shock 2, for example). So while the concept of these fantastic abilities is nothing new, what they actually provide in BioShock is: an unbelievable amount of player freedom. Between all of the weapons and their myriad ammunition options and the dozens of unique Plasmid abilities, players have a wealth of options as to how they wish to go about playing the game. Straight-up shooter fans could play the game with nearly exclusive use of weapons alone. Likewise, creative players could play nearly the whole game without ever using a traditional weapon. There are so many ways to take down enemies, it‘s actually a little daunting. Heck, it's probably even worth playing through the game multiple times to experiment with different Plasmid and weapon combinations that you never used the first time. All in all, while the fighting/weapon design was nothing truly new, the implementation and multitude of options more than make up for it.
As for the enemies themselves, I have mixed feelings (more on that in a second). The most common adversaries are called Splicers. Splicers are humans that have abused Plasmids to the point that they have become insane genetic freak versions of their former selves (to put it mildly). I felt the AI for the Splicers was more or less impressive, so I don't have too many complaints about that. What I did find slightly disappointing was the small variety of Splicer-types, as well as the (apparently) short supply of unique voice samples. For a game that is pushing every other limit of game-to-player immersion, they kind of dropped the ball on this one. It tends to take you out of the game when so many enemies look exactly the same and spout the same exact lines of dialogue. I know it seems like a small thing, but one must pick these nits when the rest of the game design is so brilliant. That said, the Splicers are still well-designed, smart, and truly frightening.
Random Splicer anecdote time: One of my most memorable experiences in the game occurred in a dank water-filled basement. Upon an initial search of the room, all seemed to be clear. I searched a crate for some supplies and turned around to leave... only to see a statue right behind me. "Wait a second. That wasn't there a second ago, was it?" is what I said to myself as the "statue" came alive and attacked me. In that moment, not only did I just about crap my pants, but I also realized BioShock had truly succeeded in bringing me into its world.
Aside from Splicers, there is really only one other type of enemy in the game: the Big Daddies. These are the hulking behemoths in diving suits that have become the game's standard icon. My only disappointment with these enemies is (once again) the lack of different types. Unless I'm mistaken, there are only two different types of Big Daddy. It just seemed like there should be more. But again, this is an extremely minor complaint, especially considering how cool these enemies are. The first time I saw one in the game, my heart started pounding. The second time I saw one, I was scared as hell. The third time I saw one... I had to FIGHT it. I will never forget that first Big Daddy fight. The rush, the fear, the excitement of it all adds up to one of the most memorable gaming experiences in my recent memory. The fights got a lot easier and more routine after that, but man, I'll never forget that first fight. While the visual design is probably the most memorable aspect of the Big Daddies (to most people), what actually stays with me the most is the sound design. The slow deliberate sound of their footsteps echoing through dark deserted corridors is scary enough, but the pièce de résistance is the otherworldly guttural vocalization. Just thinking about it gives me chills. Kudos to the designers, audio engineers, and voice actor... you really outdid yourselves with the Big Daddy characters.
Big Daddies, as it turns out, are actually not quite as bad as they seem. They're definitely bad-ass, but somewhere deep inside lurks a heart of gold... sort of. You see, the job of a Big Daddy is to protect the "Little Sisters". Little Sisters are young girls who have been transformed into creepy brainwashed shells of their former selves and are used as factories for "ADAM", the genetic material used in the creation of Plasmids. ADAM is pretty much the most important thing in all of Rapture. Indeed, it's the real reason everything has gone to hell. You see, the fall of Rapture had less to do with Objectivism than it did the abuse of genetic engineering and the pride and greed of its two biggest players - founder Andrew Ryan and mobster Frank Fontaine. Objectivism isn't fully without blame, of course (as Fontaine at one point puts it: "someone has to clean the toilets"), but the majority of the plot revolves around ADAM and the results of genetic engineering gone wrong.
With ADAM being so important and Ryan being so powerful, your helpful guide Atlas tells you that the only way to get yourself out of Rapture is to become powerful by harvesting as much ADAM as possible. The only problem is you have to collect ADAM from the Little Sisters, who are protected by the Big Daddies... and so the main goal of the game becomes clear. But it's not quite that simple. Upon your first encounter with a Little Sister, one of the only remaining sane survivors of Rapture, Dr. Tenenbaum, gives you a choice: do you kill the Little Sister and harvest all of her ADAM or do you simply take some of her ADAM and let the girl go? This becomes one of the other mechanics of the game which affects not only your chances of survival, but also your ending.
As compelling as that type of dramatic choice sounds, it actually becomes the game's biggest misstep. Let's put aside the absurd notion that 1940s scientists have mastered genetic engineering (it has something to do with a magical sea slug... no, seriously). I can let that stuff slide... what doesn't make sense are the plot repercussions of this choice. If a game is going to give you a choice like this and then give you an ending based upon this choice, it should at least give some kind of indication of that. I actually had no idea there was a "good" and a "bad" ending while I played the game. Luckily for me, I'm the type of guy who thought it would be best to save all of the girls instead of kill them (which is what is required for the good ending). But what about other people who, even just once, decided to kill a Little Sister? Yup, they get the bad ending... which sucks (from my point of view, at least). There even comes a point later in the game in which it would actually make sense for the player to have a change of heart, if he/she so desires. The developers should have allowed this second chance to receive the good ending, but they chose not to implement it (or didn't even think of it). The Little Sister decision also makes no sense from a general plot standpoint. During the latter half of the game, Tenenbaum becomes a major ally to the player character. However, this very probably would not be the case if the player has decided to continually kill her children up to that point. For a game that takes its story so seriously, it's hard to forgive this lapse in logic. Ending and story consequences aside, the "decision" factor also fails in the area of game mechanics. Players are led to believe that killing the Little Sisters for all of their ADAM will make them much stronger and make the game easier. Actually, unless I missed something, that is completely untrue. I played the whole game, saving every Little Sister, and still ended up with enough ADAM to purchase every possible upgrade/plasmid that was available (except one, I think). In the end, the decision to harvest or kill had no real bearing on anything other than the ending. I would be OK with this if these ending-related consequences were actually presented to the player in some way. But they're not, and I really feel the game failed miserably here.
Most of the other basic elements of gameplay fare much better. Unlike games like Half-Life 2, levels (loads) are broken up in a way that makes sense. Rapture consists of a bunch of different "levels", connected by airlocks or bathysphere routes. There is no mid-level loading and everything makes sense in the way it's broken up, which is appreciated. The goals in each level are varied and usually fairly interesting. Even though you're always pretty much either on a "fetch quest" or following a standard "find x to get to y" path, the goals are cleverly disguised by bits of narrative and logic that actually make sense. And more importantly, there ARE reasons for why the character does what he does, which I can't reveal without spoiling plot details. All in all, the effort to explain the motivations and tasks are appreciated.
In between all the fetching and killing, BioShock also offers a somewhat unique diversion in the form of a hacking mini-game. Essentially just a modern day version of "Pipe Dream", this mini-game pops up any time the player attempts to "hack" a security system, vending machine, etc. Successfully hacking a machine rewards the player with a variety of possible benefits. While interesting at first, hacking quickly becomes tiresome and interrupts the flow of the game (especially to anal people like me who feel compelled to hack every damn thing they see). But by the mid-point of the game, even *I* had lost my patience and I didn't bother hacking stuff any more. Plus, those damn vending machines freak me the f#@$ out ("Fill your CRAVINGS at the CIRCUS of VALUUUUUUUES! HA HA HA HA!"... yikes), so I tended to stay as far away from them as possible anyways. While hacking is a cool idea in theory, I don't think it really added much to the game. What DID add to the game, however, is a unique mechanic involving "research". By taking pictures of enemies with a camera, the game rewards players with various attribute bonuses, and sometimes even rare Plasmids. While optional (like hacking), researching enemies succeeds where hacking fails because it is not monotonous, the rewards are greater, and it does not break up the flow of the game at all. I really enjoyed this aspect and felt it added an extra layer of complexity, usefulness and fun.
The setting is awesome. The gameplay rocks. Does BioShock pull the trifecta and have killer story elements to boot? You bet it does. BioShock's intricate, well-planned and twisting story is probably its most-lauded feature. As I've said before, you pretty much have to turn your logic units off and completely accept all of the ridiculous science aspects of the story (building an entire city underwater and unlocking every secret of the human genome... in the 1940s). But if your brain can accept this, you're in for a pretty interesting ride. As far as I can remember, there are only two "conventional" cutscenes in the entire game. One of the scenes is necessary from a plot standpoint (and very much makes sense). The other cutscene takes place the first time you encounter a Little Sister, and was probably implemented to make sure the player fully understands the situation, as the choice you make has great importance later on. Aside from these two moments, the player experiences the entire game from their own point of view with the freedom to do as they wish (similar to the Half-Life series). It's a technique of immersion that is proven and works very well.
What doesn't fully work for me is the method of conveying the entire story. Almost all of the important plot points are addressed within the main structure of the game (i.e. parts that the player must experience), which is great. The problem is I said "almost all of the important plot points". The remainder of the story can only be pieced together by listening to audio diaries that various characters have left behind. Again, you will need to shut your brain off and not ask why people would leave audio diaries containing their innermost thoughts scattered around randomly. That's not my problem. Nor is my problem the actual mechanic of using the diaries to fill in missing information (a convention which also works brilliantly in games like the Metroid Prime trilogy). My problem is that many of these so-called optional diaries are of vital importance to the greater story. As I've said before, I am an anal completist, so naturally I made it a personal goal to find every single audio diary in the game. Because of this, when some of the major story events unfolded, I had a greater understanding of what was happening. I was even able to guess some of the major twists (as I'm sure the developers intended). It all worked brilliantly. But at the same time, I couldn't help but wonder how absolutely lost someone who did NOT find all of the audio diaries would be. Maybe the developers didn't care. I have no idea. If I were them, my preference would be for every player to fully understand the story I so carefully laid out. Hell, the story is confusing enough as it is, even having listened to all the diaries... I can't even imagine how confusing it might be to people who may have missed key plot points. I honestly don't know if there was any better way to work the rest of the story into the game, but I do know it feels like a missed opportunity as it is now. Why take the time to construct such an intricate story only to allow half of it to possibly go unnoticed?
Finally, I need to talk about some problems I had with the ending (don't worry, there are NO SPOILERS here). As I said before, I'm not really into games that have multiple endings, especially when the game doesn't even warn you about it. But beyond that, something just felt "off" about the ending. It comes about way too abruptly and is way too short. It seems like such a small payoff for such an epic adventure (touching as it is). I am referring to the "good" ending, by the way. The way the ending was handled just seemed out of place in a story that was otherwise executed so brilliantly. For the record, I did eventually look up the "bad" ending on youtube to see what I missed. All in all, it was interesting, but it also raises more issues... the same issues that always come about in games with multiple endings. Which ending is considered the true ending? They're so vastly different; it's hard to believe it's even the same game. It's all rather annoying... I just really hate the "multiple endings" convention and wish it would die a painful death.
With all this said, I want to reiterate that my criticisms are mostly superficial and nit-picky. BioShock, without a doubt, is a game produced with a great deal of love and care by masters of their craft. It should be on any self-respecting gamer's "must-play" list. Even a "non-hardcore" player (whatever that is) could probably finish BioShock. It's a game that begs to be beaten - you quite literally can NOT die, AND it offers an "easy" difficulty level as well. There's no excuse not to play it, other than not owning an Xbox360 or a capable PC. But if, like me, one of those two things ever changes, don't hesitate to give BioShock a try. It's one of the high-water marks of the craft today, and much like a timeless piece of art, or a classic piece of literature (like, say, Atlas Shrugged), should be experienced at least once in a lifetime.
What is BioShock? Those who have played it know what it is. But those who haven't played it probably only know a few things: it takes place underwater, has something to do with Ayn Rand, and features guys in big diving suits protecting creepy little girls. Going in, that's pretty much all I really knew about it, too. And that's all sort of correct... sort of.
Some of the major ideas and backdrops of BioShock are indeed based on the writings of Ayn Rand (her novel Atlas Shrugged, in particular), but that's a fairly generalized broad-brush-stroke sort of way of looking at it. Rand's novel popularized her philosophy of Objectivism (which I would like to describe succinctly, but am struggling to do so easily... especially if my goal is to keep this short). OK, hold on... Let me check "teh Interwebz"... well, look at that! It seems Rand has already done so for us. In her own words: "My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute". Of course, this doesn't really tell you everything (or anything for that matter, if you haven't read the book), but hopefully it's enough to give you a general idea. So there ya go...
Anyways, one of the main characters in the novel is a man named "John Galt", who founds a secret secluded community called Galt's Gulch in a remote mountain location in Colorado. Galt's Gulch is built on the ideals of its founder (namely, Objectivism) and the members of this community are what Galt deems the productive members of society. Dagny Taggart, another main character, eventually finds Galt's Gulch when her airplane crashes in the mountains nearby.
Playing the part of "Galt's Gulch" in BioShock is "Rapture", a secret secluded undersea metropolis built on the ideals of its founder, Walt Disney, err, Andrew Ryan (a thinly veiled pseudo-anagram of "Ayn Rand"), who is, in turn, playing the part of "John Galt". Rapture, like Galt's Gulch, is discovered when the game's protagonist crashes nearby - you guessed it - in an airplane. Said protagonist is then guided throughout the story by a mysterious man named Atlas (yeah... I said Atlas). John Galt's "looters" are akin to Andrew Ryan's "parasites", the question "who is John Galt?" becomes "who is Atlas?", and so on... *exhales*... phew... Got all that??? OK, good... because, really... that's where all the similarities end. These things are simply window dressing: the setting, ideas and references from which the game's world is built... the things to which the plot is anchored. The game isn't so much about Objectivism, but rather the inevitable failings of humanity, regardless of the ideals or location a community is built upon. But when you add these ideas to the mix, the game's world becomes more than a series of 3D levels. It becomes more believable, more real... it lives and breathes. This is but one small part of what makes BioShock so successful.
Literary references, great gameplay, and an interesting plot will take you a long way, but in my opinion, BioShock's greatest triumph is none of these things... but rather, Rapture itself. While the absurd improbability of building a metropolis on the bottom of the ocean can't be argued, you also can't deny that the setting is stunningly beautiful and - more importantly - unique, from a gaming standpoint. From the very moment of your arrival proper (via a beautiful cinematic), you know you're in for something special. The game takes place in the late 50's or early 60's, but Rapture was built at least a decade or more before that - the architecture and sensibilities are all pure 40's era Art Deco. The city was a beautiful place in its heyday, but at the time the main character arrives, it has fallen into shambles and disrepair due to a war between Ryan and his rival, Frank Fontaine. This version of Rapture - dark, leaking, empty - is a sight to behold. The artists and level designers who worked on this game truly outdid themselves. The atmosphere and setting relay beauty, sorrow, and fear all at the same time. Let's put it this way: even if the game had no goals whatsoever and the only available option was to simply walk around the empty city, it would still be worth playing. This creepy and desolate setting is the very thing that initially drew me to BioShock, and it most definitely did not disappoint. I was, quite literally, on the edge of my seat throughout my entire journey through Rapture. The dark corridors; the leaking ceilings; never knowing what might be around the next corner... these things instilled real fear in me. Any game that can draw a player in so completely and convey such emotion is truly successful.
Let's talk gameplay. Beneath the unique backdrop and all the philosophical mumbo jumbo is a pretty straightforward FPS. Or is it? Well, yes and no. Yes, all the usual suspects are firmly in place (hand gun, machine gun, etc), but BioShock also contains a second set of unique armaments called Plasmids. Plasmids are genetic modifiers that grant special powers like telekinesis, the ability to generate electricity or fire, etc. These superhuman abilities are definitely unique, but it's no secret we've seen this sort of thing before (masquerading as "magic", or "psionic abilities" in Irrational's very own System Shock 2, for example). So while the concept of these fantastic abilities is nothing new, what they actually provide in BioShock is: an unbelievable amount of player freedom. Between all of the weapons and their myriad ammunition options and the dozens of unique Plasmid abilities, players have a wealth of options as to how they wish to go about playing the game. Straight-up shooter fans could play the game with nearly exclusive use of weapons alone. Likewise, creative players could play nearly the whole game without ever using a traditional weapon. There are so many ways to take down enemies, it‘s actually a little daunting. Heck, it's probably even worth playing through the game multiple times to experiment with different Plasmid and weapon combinations that you never used the first time. All in all, while the fighting/weapon design was nothing truly new, the implementation and multitude of options more than make up for it.
As for the enemies themselves, I have mixed feelings (more on that in a second). The most common adversaries are called Splicers. Splicers are humans that have abused Plasmids to the point that they have become insane genetic freak versions of their former selves (to put it mildly). I felt the AI for the Splicers was more or less impressive, so I don't have too many complaints about that. What I did find slightly disappointing was the small variety of Splicer-types, as well as the (apparently) short supply of unique voice samples. For a game that is pushing every other limit of game-to-player immersion, they kind of dropped the ball on this one. It tends to take you out of the game when so many enemies look exactly the same and spout the same exact lines of dialogue. I know it seems like a small thing, but one must pick these nits when the rest of the game design is so brilliant. That said, the Splicers are still well-designed, smart, and truly frightening.
Random Splicer anecdote time: One of my most memorable experiences in the game occurred in a dank water-filled basement. Upon an initial search of the room, all seemed to be clear. I searched a crate for some supplies and turned around to leave... only to see a statue right behind me. "Wait a second. That wasn't there a second ago, was it?" is what I said to myself as the "statue" came alive and attacked me. In that moment, not only did I just about crap my pants, but I also realized BioShock had truly succeeded in bringing me into its world.
Aside from Splicers, there is really only one other type of enemy in the game: the Big Daddies. These are the hulking behemoths in diving suits that have become the game's standard icon. My only disappointment with these enemies is (once again) the lack of different types. Unless I'm mistaken, there are only two different types of Big Daddy. It just seemed like there should be more. But again, this is an extremely minor complaint, especially considering how cool these enemies are. The first time I saw one in the game, my heart started pounding. The second time I saw one, I was scared as hell. The third time I saw one... I had to FIGHT it. I will never forget that first Big Daddy fight. The rush, the fear, the excitement of it all adds up to one of the most memorable gaming experiences in my recent memory. The fights got a lot easier and more routine after that, but man, I'll never forget that first fight. While the visual design is probably the most memorable aspect of the Big Daddies (to most people), what actually stays with me the most is the sound design. The slow deliberate sound of their footsteps echoing through dark deserted corridors is scary enough, but the pièce de résistance is the otherworldly guttural vocalization. Just thinking about it gives me chills. Kudos to the designers, audio engineers, and voice actor... you really outdid yourselves with the Big Daddy characters.
Big Daddies, as it turns out, are actually not quite as bad as they seem. They're definitely bad-ass, but somewhere deep inside lurks a heart of gold... sort of. You see, the job of a Big Daddy is to protect the "Little Sisters". Little Sisters are young girls who have been transformed into creepy brainwashed shells of their former selves and are used as factories for "ADAM", the genetic material used in the creation of Plasmids. ADAM is pretty much the most important thing in all of Rapture. Indeed, it's the real reason everything has gone to hell. You see, the fall of Rapture had less to do with Objectivism than it did the abuse of genetic engineering and the pride and greed of its two biggest players - founder Andrew Ryan and mobster Frank Fontaine. Objectivism isn't fully without blame, of course (as Fontaine at one point puts it: "someone has to clean the toilets"), but the majority of the plot revolves around ADAM and the results of genetic engineering gone wrong.
With ADAM being so important and Ryan being so powerful, your helpful guide Atlas tells you that the only way to get yourself out of Rapture is to become powerful by harvesting as much ADAM as possible. The only problem is you have to collect ADAM from the Little Sisters, who are protected by the Big Daddies... and so the main goal of the game becomes clear. But it's not quite that simple. Upon your first encounter with a Little Sister, one of the only remaining sane survivors of Rapture, Dr. Tenenbaum, gives you a choice: do you kill the Little Sister and harvest all of her ADAM or do you simply take some of her ADAM and let the girl go? This becomes one of the other mechanics of the game which affects not only your chances of survival, but also your ending.
As compelling as that type of dramatic choice sounds, it actually becomes the game's biggest misstep. Let's put aside the absurd notion that 1940s scientists have mastered genetic engineering (it has something to do with a magical sea slug... no, seriously). I can let that stuff slide... what doesn't make sense are the plot repercussions of this choice. If a game is going to give you a choice like this and then give you an ending based upon this choice, it should at least give some kind of indication of that. I actually had no idea there was a "good" and a "bad" ending while I played the game. Luckily for me, I'm the type of guy who thought it would be best to save all of the girls instead of kill them (which is what is required for the good ending). But what about other people who, even just once, decided to kill a Little Sister? Yup, they get the bad ending... which sucks (from my point of view, at least). There even comes a point later in the game in which it would actually make sense for the player to have a change of heart, if he/she so desires. The developers should have allowed this second chance to receive the good ending, but they chose not to implement it (or didn't even think of it). The Little Sister decision also makes no sense from a general plot standpoint. During the latter half of the game, Tenenbaum becomes a major ally to the player character. However, this very probably would not be the case if the player has decided to continually kill her children up to that point. For a game that takes its story so seriously, it's hard to forgive this lapse in logic. Ending and story consequences aside, the "decision" factor also fails in the area of game mechanics. Players are led to believe that killing the Little Sisters for all of their ADAM will make them much stronger and make the game easier. Actually, unless I missed something, that is completely untrue. I played the whole game, saving every Little Sister, and still ended up with enough ADAM to purchase every possible upgrade/plasmid that was available (except one, I think). In the end, the decision to harvest or kill had no real bearing on anything other than the ending. I would be OK with this if these ending-related consequences were actually presented to the player in some way. But they're not, and I really feel the game failed miserably here.
Most of the other basic elements of gameplay fare much better. Unlike games like Half-Life 2, levels (loads) are broken up in a way that makes sense. Rapture consists of a bunch of different "levels", connected by airlocks or bathysphere routes. There is no mid-level loading and everything makes sense in the way it's broken up, which is appreciated. The goals in each level are varied and usually fairly interesting. Even though you're always pretty much either on a "fetch quest" or following a standard "find x to get to y" path, the goals are cleverly disguised by bits of narrative and logic that actually make sense. And more importantly, there ARE reasons for why the character does what he does, which I can't reveal without spoiling plot details. All in all, the effort to explain the motivations and tasks are appreciated.
In between all the fetching and killing, BioShock also offers a somewhat unique diversion in the form of a hacking mini-game. Essentially just a modern day version of "Pipe Dream", this mini-game pops up any time the player attempts to "hack" a security system, vending machine, etc. Successfully hacking a machine rewards the player with a variety of possible benefits. While interesting at first, hacking quickly becomes tiresome and interrupts the flow of the game (especially to anal people like me who feel compelled to hack every damn thing they see). But by the mid-point of the game, even *I* had lost my patience and I didn't bother hacking stuff any more. Plus, those damn vending machines freak me the f#@$ out ("Fill your CRAVINGS at the CIRCUS of VALUUUUUUUES! HA HA HA HA!"... yikes), so I tended to stay as far away from them as possible anyways. While hacking is a cool idea in theory, I don't think it really added much to the game. What DID add to the game, however, is a unique mechanic involving "research". By taking pictures of enemies with a camera, the game rewards players with various attribute bonuses, and sometimes even rare Plasmids. While optional (like hacking), researching enemies succeeds where hacking fails because it is not monotonous, the rewards are greater, and it does not break up the flow of the game at all. I really enjoyed this aspect and felt it added an extra layer of complexity, usefulness and fun.
The setting is awesome. The gameplay rocks. Does BioShock pull the trifecta and have killer story elements to boot? You bet it does. BioShock's intricate, well-planned and twisting story is probably its most-lauded feature. As I've said before, you pretty much have to turn your logic units off and completely accept all of the ridiculous science aspects of the story (building an entire city underwater and unlocking every secret of the human genome... in the 1940s). But if your brain can accept this, you're in for a pretty interesting ride. As far as I can remember, there are only two "conventional" cutscenes in the entire game. One of the scenes is necessary from a plot standpoint (and very much makes sense). The other cutscene takes place the first time you encounter a Little Sister, and was probably implemented to make sure the player fully understands the situation, as the choice you make has great importance later on. Aside from these two moments, the player experiences the entire game from their own point of view with the freedom to do as they wish (similar to the Half-Life series). It's a technique of immersion that is proven and works very well.
What doesn't fully work for me is the method of conveying the entire story. Almost all of the important plot points are addressed within the main structure of the game (i.e. parts that the player must experience), which is great. The problem is I said "almost all of the important plot points". The remainder of the story can only be pieced together by listening to audio diaries that various characters have left behind. Again, you will need to shut your brain off and not ask why people would leave audio diaries containing their innermost thoughts scattered around randomly. That's not my problem. Nor is my problem the actual mechanic of using the diaries to fill in missing information (a convention which also works brilliantly in games like the Metroid Prime trilogy). My problem is that many of these so-called optional diaries are of vital importance to the greater story. As I've said before, I am an anal completist, so naturally I made it a personal goal to find every single audio diary in the game. Because of this, when some of the major story events unfolded, I had a greater understanding of what was happening. I was even able to guess some of the major twists (as I'm sure the developers intended). It all worked brilliantly. But at the same time, I couldn't help but wonder how absolutely lost someone who did NOT find all of the audio diaries would be. Maybe the developers didn't care. I have no idea. If I were them, my preference would be for every player to fully understand the story I so carefully laid out. Hell, the story is confusing enough as it is, even having listened to all the diaries... I can't even imagine how confusing it might be to people who may have missed key plot points. I honestly don't know if there was any better way to work the rest of the story into the game, but I do know it feels like a missed opportunity as it is now. Why take the time to construct such an intricate story only to allow half of it to possibly go unnoticed?
Finally, I need to talk about some problems I had with the ending (don't worry, there are NO SPOILERS here). As I said before, I'm not really into games that have multiple endings, especially when the game doesn't even warn you about it. But beyond that, something just felt "off" about the ending. It comes about way too abruptly and is way too short. It seems like such a small payoff for such an epic adventure (touching as it is). I am referring to the "good" ending, by the way. The way the ending was handled just seemed out of place in a story that was otherwise executed so brilliantly. For the record, I did eventually look up the "bad" ending on youtube to see what I missed. All in all, it was interesting, but it also raises more issues... the same issues that always come about in games with multiple endings. Which ending is considered the true ending? They're so vastly different; it's hard to believe it's even the same game. It's all rather annoying... I just really hate the "multiple endings" convention and wish it would die a painful death.
With all this said, I want to reiterate that my criticisms are mostly superficial and nit-picky. BioShock, without a doubt, is a game produced with a great deal of love and care by masters of their craft. It should be on any self-respecting gamer's "must-play" list. Even a "non-hardcore" player (whatever that is) could probably finish BioShock. It's a game that begs to be beaten - you quite literally can NOT die, AND it offers an "easy" difficulty level as well. There's no excuse not to play it, other than not owning an Xbox360 or a capable PC. But if, like me, one of those two things ever changes, don't hesitate to give BioShock a try. It's one of the high-water marks of the craft today, and much like a timeless piece of art, or a classic piece of literature (like, say, Atlas Shrugged), should be experienced at least once in a lifetime.
