toblix

BioShock Infinite

Recommended Posts

I don't think you get to exhibit intense depictions of racism, bigotry and social struggle and then pretend your game is a lighthearted fantasy game.

Why not? Billions of fantasy novels do it every day. Why do video games have to suffer so much more scrutiny?

 

It's a step in the right direction. Let it happen over time (because it will), instead of trying to force it. Or, at least, that's my stance on this whole subject. Probably going to 

 

STEP

 

OUT

 

of this now, because I ain't about to get invested in another argument like this. Never ends well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wholeheartedly agree that its a step in the right direction. (Just look for google query history for Battle of Wounded Knee) Is it a 10/10 step? No. And if you call it a 10/10 step you're saying there's nothing left to be done, and that's what honestly concerns me. The bar has been set so low that anything that isn't about shooting terrorists in a fake iraq is heralded as unquestionable brilliance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright, just finished the game.

 

I think the ending was a fun ride.

The end of Bioshock 1 was a really fun jigsaw to piece together, and maybe had something profoundly interesting to say behind that? Bioshock Infinite feels like they put all their chips on making an even bigger fun jigsaw- which from a certain perspective is kind of a shame. I was expecting they would've been inspired by the reception to Bioshock 1, and would've deliberately made something worth writing giant essays about.

 

My exact reaction when I hit the credits was that there were SO MANY unanswered questions, maybe it's all just clutter that I'm supposed to ignore. Maybe if I hit the forums, it will have sparked all sorts of complex notions that I only barely noticed! but no it turns out the forums were just piecing the jigsaw together and Irrational had made Back to the Future 2- so I guess games aren't art after all.

 

but it was a very cool game nonetheless! As a sci-fi fantasy action-packed romp: it is one of the greatest of all!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd love to see a Walking Dead style "99% of the players threw the ball at the MC". I really want to know how many people initially threw the ball at the couple on their first play through. Everyone I've spoken to both IRL and online threw the ball at the MC.

Yeah I threw it at the couple.

I'm there on a fucking mission. Standing up for your beliefs is one thing, but there are posters in this town that LABEL ME AS THE DEVIL. I'm not about to start a revolution by myself at a fucking raffle, get your head in the game. If I cause a stir here I'll get thrown off into the clouds as soon as they see my hand.

 

Of course what happens next is you get caught either way, so I guess my attempts to stay incognito were for naught.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the discussion arising about the quality of the game is interesting. There's a lot of blow back about dissonance of the violence of the combat (which I gotta guess is intentional) and the amount of combat in the game (which I gotta agree does wear it's welcome). I think a lot of us that love games the most (most people here) are currently VERY locked up in proving that games can be more then they are and really serve as common experiential ground that doesn't necessarily involve a trillion murders. However I don't think we often realize we're in a minority. Ultimately Bioshock Infinite is a revenue generating product released by Take Two. It's not an art house independent game. To justify the amount of money spent building out that gorgeous world they need to sell lots of video games.

 

I said it earlier in this post I've played this game with a few friends to completion. They where much more enamored with ripping people apart in this amazing world then actually exploring it. Excess death just sold 2 copies of that game. I can't imagine that's an uncommon experience.  

 

smell, what happens later on in the bathrooms at the beach area? Is the couple just not there or are they there are PISSED at you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just finished the game. Overall, I liked it. I do have a question/comment/problem with the ending.

 

So in the end, Elizabeth kills Booker/helps booker die. This ends both his life and Comstock's in all the possible timelines. You see all the versions of Elizabeth blink out, except for one. But if Booker dies in every timeline, shouldn't Elizabeth blink out too, given that she's his daughter, and if he dies, she never exists in the first place? We know that she was born after Booker/Comstock timelines split, because otherwise Comstock wouldn't have needed to steal her from Booker. So I wonder if she's not Booker's daughter after all? 

I also don't understand why Elizabeth has special powers. Maybe that's explained in a journal entry that I missed or something.

 

I guess the above is pretty nit-picky. But I feel like when an author chooses to do a time-travel/multiple universe mind-fuck, they should do it right and make sure the grand reveal actually makes sense. If the game seemed more allegoric than it does, then plot points wouldn't bother me at all. 

 

The story has four major problems as far as I'm concerned. My apologies in advance for going all SUPER-PICKY-WRITER on it.

CAUSALITY DOESN'T WORK LIKE THAT.

I dig that giving your life to prevent Comstock from ever being is a touching narrative end, but it simply doesn't make sense in any version of the world they made. Even if Liz did take the player to some root reality where they could kill that version of Booker at the baptism, it wouldn't hurt Player-Booker, because he's from a branch of timelines where Booker rejected the baptism in the first place.

THE INFINITE ENTERPRISES PROBLEM:

As anyone who has seen Mr. Plinkett's review of Star Trek ('09) knows, the moment you posit the idea of infinite parallel realities for a setting, you must immediately answer a very difficult question for the reader: "If there are infinite alternatives to what you're showing me now, including a version that's just like this but everyone has funny facial hair and more stylish clothing, then Why Is This One So Important?" If every choice also results in another reality where they made a different choice, why care about the choices they're making?

WHO'S THE MOST INTERESTING:

Some of the voxophones of Lutece say that the reason Elizabeth can open tears is because she's from a different reality. And we later learn that the way she came here from another reality is because Dr. Lutece opened a portal there (because applied interdimensional quantum mechanics is easier than going through the adoption process). So why aren't we spending more time exploring Dr. Lutece and her backstory? Her reasoning for being in Columbia is mysterious, she's got quirky interdimensional sorta-family, and her dialogue and schticks are largely stolen from Tom Stoppard plays (which, if you're looking to steal ideas, is definitely a good source). So why are we spending all our time finding out about the more mundane folks around her? It's like playing Portal 2 and ignoring GLaDOS in favor of more time with the sentry pods.

AND THEN, IT NEVER HAPPENED:

Oh, and when you finish the game, you entirely invalidate everything you just did. It's like the opposite of agency!

Sure, I'm over-analyzing the story. But if you're going to get praised on your brilliant story, it ought to stand up to analysis.

That said, the game really was astoundingly beautiful. Nothing but sincere praise for everyone involved in the art, sound, and level-design.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

smell, what happens later on in the bathrooms at the beach area? Is the couple just not there or are they there are PISSED at you?

I never met them again!

And yes I know exactly which bathrooms you are talking about. Nobody was there. Oh and by the way I had NO IDEA that you could sneak passed the Boys of Silence. I walked into a room, saw the guy, instantly said NOW'S MY CHANCE YOU SON OF A BITCH!! and shot rockets at him.

 

Also yes to the post above me, the game is plot-hole central.

When you enter the reality where Booker is a martyr for the Vox Populi... where is the Elizabeth in that reality?

and how the fuck do you build Columbia in under 20 years, by the way?

Which is why my first reaction was to just ignore it all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also tried to shoot all those boys of silence dudes. I was not aware stealth was an option either. That would be basically the only section of the entire game that sneaking would be viable and they do nothing to encourage it other then limit weapons. I just thought they where making a melee/vigor area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Similar note: Y'know the final part with Songbird and the blimps?

Did anyone else notice you could BOARD the blimps and sabotage them from the inside, then skydive off? They showed that in the pre-release gameplay trailers and I remembered it. If you skyline all the way up, and hop from one ship to the next, you can totally do it.

 

For such an awesome (and I'm sure it's a masterpiece feat of Video game coding) feature, it wasn't used very much!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also tried to shoot all those boys of silence dudes. I was not aware stealth was an option either. That would be basically the only section of the entire game that sneaking would be viable and they do nothing to encourage it other then limit weapons. I just thought they where making a melee/vigor area.

I figured it out after the first one. To be honest, I thought it was blatantly obvious, what with the search light, the transition from yellow to red, and the fact that none of the crazies go crazy until the siren guy sirens. Of course, I've missed my fair share of Things in Video Games that other people found obvious, so it's not like I can blame anyone for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Much of it's an excellent game, and I'm at about the end.

 

And while I would easily nominate Comstock for being among the most evil of video game villains, where other villains wimp out on getting "too evil" he steps up. Even his taunts are just "I'm going to win lol!" which is a nice. But details are missing on his whole "evil plan" like what it is, or a motivation. An interview would go something like X: "What's your evil plan?" Comstock: "Kill as many people as possible!" X: "Ok... just, in general?" Comstock: "Yeah, whatever, as long as they die." X: "Alright, so what's your motivation then, for mass murder?" Comstock: "I've got all this backstory, you know? God and patriotism and such. But really, I just sort of hate people. In general I mean. No me, I love me. I just don't like anyone else." X: "Oh... k. Any, uhhh, maniacal rants while you kill people? Watch cities burn and such?" Comstock: "No, I'll be dead. But, you know, as long as they're dead too it's all good." X: "Welp, great interview."

 

The game's pacing and combat also feel, wonky. Definitely wouldn't call it a GREAT or even very good shooter.

 

The Handymen have to be the worst mini bosses in a shooter ever. You can lose by running out of ammo on them and they've no particular weakness. I mean, everything in this game is far too much of a bullet sponge. But the Handymen take it there. The specific weapon upgrades feel useless as there's so many and you don't really get a choice as too what you're carrying at any one time unless you spend money on ammo, which feels weird as you want to save it up for upgrade. It would have felt better to be able to purchase more as well, infusions and gear and the like.

 

I also thought the games areas kinda peeked with Soldier's Field. It's the second area sure, but it had the most going on in terms of just being able to wander around and see things, had some of the most interesting shooting areas, the best story pacing. More civilian areas in this kind of game need to be exist, because they worked really well in Soldier's Field. Even if it ended a bit too actiony it was still the most varied of the areas.

 

Was a good game overall, a shooter I enjoyed when so many other recent ones have failed. But if any Bioshock: The Third Subtitle happens I'd love to see even more of an advance away from a pure shooter. More RPG mechanics, more calm areas, more puzzles, etc. These almost always felt more interesting in Infinite than just the straight up shooting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In responding to these posts I'm going to tell you about my expectations. I think this will do a lot to clear up my arguments.

 

To me, Infinite is very clearly a comic book-like experience. I had this expectation from the reveal trailer, from the first Bioshock, and from the two personalities I know of who worked on the game, comic book fans Shawn Elliott and Ken Levine. It is story about three main characters and one strong theme, that arguably are all in service of the genre fiction favorite, the plot twist. In essence, the literary elements are secondary to the visual ones. This is not To Kill A Mockingbird, it's Preacher.

 

I don't think you get to exhibit intense depictions of racism, bigotry and social struggle and then pretend your game is a lighthearted fantasy game. Clearly, they were going somewhere with the first act, and I don't think it's a stretch to say it wasn't developed to the point that an interesting or coherent statement was made.

 

It was not clear to me that they were going anywhere in the first act other than establishing the setting. If there was something more to it, then I would expect that a minority character would have been introduced in the first act. The absence of any such character was a clear message. There were many such hints, such as the lack of insightful dialogue from either character. Once the plot literally stepped through a portal to another dimension the deal was sealed.

 

The themes you're listed are developed to the degree that I expected them to be; they were introduced as more one-dimensional than not, and that's how they ended. They are there so we can see the posters, the museum exhibits, the city covered in red; all images that to me are nothing short of breath taking, like incredible two-page spreads in a comic book.

 

Agreed as well. On the one hand, I appreciate that the game is trying to say something (a low bar, but one that surprisingly few games really reach), but I wish it had done a better job of it all:

* The moral equivalence is forced and unfair - yes, the revolutionaries are also violent and extreme, but their uprising against slavery was morally justified
* The racism it depicts is the caricature racism that white guys (like myself) can look at and comfortably say, "You never see that in society nowadays - sure is nice that racism is over forever!"

* The game talks about infinite potential and choices and variety and then goes out of its way to force you into making only one choice (because Video games)

 

It bugs me that the expectations are so low for storytelling and serious thought in games that it has been and will continue to get a pass on all of this.

 

By comparing Infinite to a work of genre fiction I am not giving it a pass. I am judging the game on what I believe is reasonable, as well as calibrating my expectations to be realistic. My expectations for storytelling and serious thought are not low, they are in line with the standards set out by works such as the original Bioshock.

 

Now, to shift from Infinite as comic book to Infinite as a game: speaking of realistic expectations, if they were to implement those points it would extend the game's length and development cost quite significantly. Furthermore,

 

 

Completely agree. I don't think there's anything wrong with criticizing a game for introducing some really weighty topics and then failing to do or say anything meaningful  with them.

 

It's frustrating that people want to give this game a completely free pass because it's better than a 'typical shooter.' Looking at it that way shuts off any possibility of ever critically examining games, which is a huge shame disservice to the medium in general.

 

I never felt that the game was introducing these topics so much as it used them to flesh out the setting, but even if I did the fact that this is a first person shooter would lead my expectations to a realistic place. Where is the precedent for "meaningful" or "interesting" discussion of these themes in first person shooters? I am not saying "typical shooter", I am saying any shooter ever. There are very real limitations to the stories you can tell in the genre. It is not a trivial task to tell a literary story in an FPS, in fact it has never been done before.

 

The major theme I felt was being introduced was one of how people deal with their personal histories; how some people define themselves by their histories, whether earned through deeds or inherited by birth, and when that history is nullified they fall apart (Slate and the whites of Columbia). How those born without strong histories will devote their lives to crafting the narrative they feel they need to be human, sometimes ironically at the cost of their humanity (Lady Comstock and Fitzroy). How people rarely achieve redemption, and in denying their wrongdoings, destroy themselves and the ones they love in their constant pursuits to craft a perfect narrative, or escape a detestable one (Booker and Comstock).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Similar note: Y'know the final part with Songbird and the blimps?

Did anyone else notice you could BOARD the blimps and sabotage them from the inside, then skydive off? They showed that in the pre-release gameplay trailers and I remembered it. If you skyline all the way up, and hop from one ship to the next, you can totally do it.

 

For such an awesome (and I'm sure it's a masterpiece feat of Video game coding) feature, it wasn't used very much!

I actually thought that was a bug, because when I did it, the game responded by restarting the map and I lost all my progress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"It's a shooter" means nothing to me in terms of the standard to which the game's material should be held. It's a deliberate work created by human beings; the fact that it happens to be in a genre we call "first-person shooter" is essentially meaningless from a critical standpoint as far as I'm concerned. It's a game. It has creative choices that were made and those should be judged on their own merits, not given some kind of arbitrary pass because they happen to be part of a genre.

 

If you choose to use major historical tragedies as window-dressing for your games--or your movie, or your book, or your opera, or your comic strip, or whatever--you better well earn it. I'm not going to hold your work accountable to presenting a nuanced accounting of the history of race in America if you don't put that shit there in the first place. But if you do, I will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this would have more weight if the game was trying to make a larger commentary on the history of American racism, but since it isn't, the connection between the FPS gratuitous violence and the violence in American history is tenuous.

 

Pretty early on, the game has two big fights in rooms explicitly representing the Boxer Rebellion and Wounded Knee, which you have only gone into because the game has told you you have to kill some expendable enemies to advance.

 

I don't think it's avoiding the commentary as much as you think it is.

 

I also think it's going to take some time for people to get used to the idea of reading narrative into mechanical choices without the game being really obvious about them. (People still think Braid's about nuclear bombs.) I know I'm assuming they're there and I haven't worked them out yet, but I might well be wrong!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't feel like we were engaging in a discussion about criticism so much as a discussion about expectations; I have been reading, "I was let down" and, "I felt the game promised me X and didn't deliver." If I read wrong then I apologize. My issue is with the tendency for people to put too much on one game's shoulders, get disappointed, and then making sweeping statements about the people who write about the medium (who, I'll add, write reviews, not critiques).

 

If we are critiquing Infinite, well, to puke out some thoughts: the dialogue is inane, the characters are razor thin -- how the hell is Elizabeth not feral? Time travel stories are stupid and inherently childish. The whole thing is just fantasy-fulfillment of being a super-powered sociopath!

 

These are all things I feel about Infinite, but I don't hold the game accountable to them, the same way I don't expect it to deliver a thoughtful treatment on American history, because that's not the bill of goods I was sold, literally and figuratively.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ending

 

You ARE TYLER DURDEN! Really, really? The amazing presentation and everything, multiple worlds physics interpretation, and that's the best that could be come up with? Ugh. I liked the game otherwise, but that was a big letdown from Bioshock's "Would you kindly?"

 

Now Anathem, that's how you fuckin end a multiverse sci fi thing. A super multi verse powered monk that's also a.... damn it there's a term for this, a type of computer that can calculate the answer to any question instantaneously. Basically all possible answers are known at once and the correct one is selected, and Stephenson made it work using interacting multi verse theory! That was BADASS.

 

But this? All the multi verse stuff and memories and etc. just lead up to being purposefully vague and contradictory as all shit. Too which I say, why would I be impressed? A giant pile of meh made all the worse by the big lead up too it.

 

Edit- also, Turbo there's actual conversations about time travel being possible among physicists, as well as multiple worlds interpretations, both of which this included. Not very well, but it was based on actual discussion. Of course time travel stuff usually just spins off into madness anyway. Novikov self consistency and world lines and bleh. But as far as most sci fi today goes, it actually did better than most do, spreading worldlines and etc.

 

I also don't get the discussion on racism. Why does the game have to be anything more than "People were racist as all fuck a hundred years ago, and your character feels bad about that?" It doesn't need to be American History X or Lincoln to have period accurate backstory being given to a character. If someone in any other story was a holocaust survivor, would you be pissed if the story wasn't primarily about the holocaust? Sure it wasn't done really WELL, not as coherent as Bioshock's commentary on objectivism and etc. But it's not like it's insulting anybody by trying to use these things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Infinite clearly is not meant on a commentary on racism in America, and if it is, it only presents a very shallow commentary at best. That's never more apparent than in how the Vox Populi thread of the game is handled, where Comstock and the people who are rebelling against him because he's a huge racist are both painted with the same 'their terrible, power corrupts' brush. If Irrational was afraid of making too much of a political statement with their treatment of the Vox Populi, that's fine -- a video game, book, movie doesn't have to be directly political for it to be intelligent or meaningful, but if the point of the white supremacy/minority rebellion didn't serve a larger commentary on anything, why was it even in the game? That's what frustrates me: the game sets up these really interesting, complicated aspects of American history and then fails to do anything with it.

 

I completely believe that any video game is capable of smartly handling huge topics like this, I just don't feel that Infinite was successful. And it is kind of insulting, because these events really did happen, they really were horrible, and they continue to have real, painful affects on American culture to this day. Chris is absolutely correct -- you can't include something as huge as 'racism in America' as nothing more than a set piece in your game and not expect people to criticize you for it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My fear with all these things is that the lesson taken will not be "we should totally do these themes properly next time" but instead will be "let's just do mechanics and not do themes". I would be sad if people gave up on trying to make games be about something specific rather than just "you're a dude in the wilderness and you can do these things, go" all the time.

 

It does not excuse dropping the ball on themes, but it tempers my criticism somewhat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can understand that, but I still think its dishonest to withhold criticism just because Infinite made an attempt to try and handle a complex topic. This game has a lot of really interesting, great ideas that are sadly not executed very well and I don't see what the problem is with pointing that out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My fear with all these things is that the lesson taken will not be "we should totally do these themes properly next time" but instead will be "let's just do mechanics and not do themes". I would be sad if people gave up on trying to make games be about something specific rather than just "you're a dude in the wilderness and you can do these things, go" all the time.

 

It does not excuse dropping the ball on themes, but it tempers my criticism somewhat.

 

It would also be sad if all video games could do would be name dropping historical events while asking you to kill a thousand mans and looting their bodies for cakes and 3 dollars (while being hailed as the greatest achievement of the medium).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 That's never more apparent than in how the Vox Populi thread of the game is handled, where Comstock and the people who are rebelling against him because he's a huge racist are both painted with the same 'their terrible, power corrupts' brush. 

That really was badly done. I didn't understand Fitzroy's motivations at all, and I felt like the portrayal of the Vox as mindless violent thugs came out of nowhere. I think there's an alternative universe B:I where that aspect of the game is more developed. The Vox seems intended as a stand-in for Jacobin-style revolutionary cabals, which really did kill a lot of people in the most bloodthirsty ways (I think Elizabeth even comments that the Vox is right out of "Les Miserables"). But that part of the game is so under cooked that you have to squint just to see what they were trying to get at. So I'm OK with a game wanting to critique violent revolutionaries, it should just do a better job of it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

And while I would easily nominate Comstock for being among the most evil of video game villains, where other villains wimp out on getting "too evil" he steps up. Even his taunts are just "I'm going to win lol!" which is a nice. But details are missing on his whole "evil plan" like what it is, or a motivation. An interview would go something like X: "What's your evil plan?" Comstock: "Kill as many people as possible!" X: "Ok... just, in general?" Comstock: "Yeah, whatever, as long as they die." X: "Alright, so what's your motivation then, for mass murder?" Comstock: "I've got all this backstory, you know? God and patriotism and such. But really, I just sort of hate people. In general I mean. No me, I love me. I just don't like anyone else." X: "Oh... k. Any, uhhh, maniacal rants while you kill people? Watch cities burn and such?" Comstock: "No, I'll be dead. But, you know, as long as they're dead too it's all good." X: "Welp, great interview." 

 

If I wanted to be charitable, my interpretation of Comstock's motivation would go as follows:

 

1) Booker-PreStory does horrible things at Wounded Knee and as a Pinkerton and internalizes some pretty bad attitudes about racism/classism

2) Booker-PreStory feels remorse about them but isn't sure how to handle it

3) Booker-PreStory tries to wipe them away by being born again, literally choosing a new name and identity: Comstock

4) Comstock, now thinks he's all clean and knows what's best. With the zeal of the newly converted, he forms a new society.

5) BUT! Comstock is heavily in denial about the attitudes he's still internalized, and those attitudes get incorporated into this new society.

6) Comstock still has some very unresolved anger issues about what he did, but he's so heavily disassociated himself from his actions that he puts the blame for them on the society that left behind.

7) SOLUTION: Get vengeance on that society! Surely that will absolve him of his own misdeeds - and justify his creation of a new, EVEN WORSE society based on those same principles!

 

3a) ALTERNATE REALITY: Rather than taking an easy out of baptism and pretending everything's better, Booker-PrePlayer is tormented by what he's become, turns to drinking/gambling/etc and eventually-sorta faces his past and tries to do something tangible to make up for them (as the game would like us to feel Booker-Player does over the course of the game, even though it kinda doesn't work at all like that).

 

Now, that's reading a lot into what's presented in the text, but it does make for an interesting study of a character and of the cycle of societal bigotry, internalization, shame, and perpetuation of those same evils. If the game had delved deeper into that, it could have been a satisfying treatment of a Big Issue, while also presenting a realistic villain (ie "one that doesn't think they're evil").

 

"It's a shooter" means nothing to me in terms of the standard to which the game's material should be held. It's a deliberate work created by human beings; the fact that it happens to be in a genre we call "first-person shooter" is essentially meaningless from a critical standpoint as far as I'm concerned. It's a game. It has creative choices that were made and those should be judged on their own merits, not given some kind of arbitrary pass because they happen to be part of a genre.

 

If you choose to use major historical tragedies as window-dressing for your games--or your movie, or your book, or your opera, or your comic strip, or whatever--you better well earn it. I'm not going to hold your work accountable to presenting a nuanced accounting of the history of race in America if you don't put that shit there in the first place. But if you do, I will.

 

It's like writing a story that ends with a character's death: you have to earn that sh*t or else it's just a cheap emotional ploy that doesn't respect the gravity of the actual subject. Don't use it if you're not ready to get your hands dirty and earn it.

 

I have to wonder how much of that was a result of the messiness of game production -- Levine said they cut "5 games worth of content", which may explain how the story made some leaps all over the place and rarely seems to deal with any of the issues it calls out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now, that's reading a lot into what's presented in the text

I don't think it is. That's exactly what I got out of the Comstock/Booker story, and I haven't really bothered to think too deeply about the game. (Mostly because the game doesn't invite me (personally) to do so.) Only things I've got are what immediately jumped into my brain while/immediately-after playing the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just went back to this stuff and really remembered that Columbia is a great, original, weird, fun city and the first half of the game is actually amazing.

 

 

It's a shame they didn't "blow you away" with where the game eventually goes, but all credit to em; where it starts off totally did, and is one of the best game settings around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now