Idle Thumbs 100: King Chromin' For A Day

[melmer]

And next week will almost all be end game spoilers

 

you better hurry up yo

[tegan]

Bioshock is one of the few franchises that make me wish that I could play first-person games at all without hurting myself. Hearing that this one is really easy makes it a bit tempting, but I've also heard that there's at least one very crucial story moment that hinges on the player

having played a previous Bioshock

sooooo...

 

 

Also: congrats Jake, fuck Jake.

[Sno]

Bioshock is one of the few franchises that make me wish that I could play first-person games at all without hurting myself. Hearing that this one is really easy makes it a bit tempting, but I've also heard that there's at least one very crucial story moment that hinges on the player

having played a previous Bioshock

sooooo...

That really isn't true, you shouldn't let it keep you from playing Infinite.

It doesn't really serve any complex or crucial narrative or thematic purpose, it's a bit of a "throw it in" moment. As long as you are aware that BioShock was a thing that existed, you will understand what it's getting at.

As for lock picks, I always had more than enough throughout the entire game other than the very beginning when it's first introduced and you really have to make a choice, there's a 5 picks door and a 5 picks safe and you only have enough for one of them. (Which included a ton of back tracking)

Pre order bonus included 5 lock picks

Cunning

My first time through that stretch of the game, i got through with a single pick left over and every door/safe unlocked. (There's like five doors and two safes in that whole area.)

Second time through, i did the same with seven lockpicks left over.

There's no forced choice, the picks are just really well hidden.

[Nijhazer]

"Get Ready for This" by 2 Unlimited

[Gormongous]

I'm totally used to hearing Dragon Age II denigrated, but I'm surprised Chris didn't have good things to say about it in the context of the reader question. Both games handle an ensemble cast reacting to binary player decisions really well, but while in Dragon Age: Origins you only really reap what you sow in the final act, the nature of scale and setting in Dragon Age II means that you're constantly confronted with the consequences of your choices, often in surprising ways. The magistrate whose serial-killer son you killed in act one becomes a political enemy of your family in act two; a party member's promotion through the guard can either be boon or bane, based on your relationship score. In a lot of ways, it's like the Citadel parts of the first Mass Effect stretched into an entire game. Even the way the NPC influence system works, with different bonuses based on love and hate, helps with more granular verisimilitude in player decisions, as opposed to Dragon Age: Origins, where I just left Morrigan in camp and fed her spellbooks because otherwise she'd hate everything I did and that was bad.

 

But maybe these are among the "interesting reasons" Chris mentioned for others liking it. Certainly Dragon Age II is not always a very good game, the recycled levels and stupid ending in particular. But I like it so much replaying it a year or so later, save for the DLC weapons that totally break the game. If I ever manage a third playthrough, those are getting sold to the lowest bidder day one.

[Chris]

I could be wrong, but as I recall, my comments about Dragon Age II were, I think, specifically in response to Sean asking which one is generally better, presumably because he has played neither and wanted to know which would be more worth his time. It's not that I don't think there's anything good about Dragon Age II, just that if I were going to compare it to the first game, it suffers enormously in comparison for me.

[Gormongous]

Okay, that's fair enough. I understood your comments -- "I think they did a lot better job with Dragon Age 1 than Dragon Age 2 with that" and "Dragon Age 1 was such a more interesting exploration of a lot of those things" -- specifically in reference to how the game handles in-world reactivity to player decision-making, which I think Dragon Age II does do more interestingly than Dragon Age: Origins. I'd agree that the former is probably an inferior game to the latter because it does even more stuff less interestingly, of course.

[Patrick R]

It pleased me that on this, the one-hundredth episode, Jake was the one best prepared to discuss BioShock Infinity. He truly has earned his moniker 'Video Games.' 

For real! 

[nevers]

Hi thumbs and Congrats!

I just started listening to Idle thumbs not too long ago. I just caught up today with this episode.

 

Since you guys might be done with the game soon, I though I would try to join a bit of discussion.

 

For me I thought the first hour of the game was the best. I beat BSI in a few sittings so clearly I was enjoying myself. By the time I got to the end I found myself conflicted. My thoughts on the game are best summed up as:

 

Bioshock Infinite is a very polished and visually striking experience, but under close inspection a  lot of that shine really fades.

 

I guess I'll try to explain myself poorly. Narrative wise there were places that I couldn't help but think of as plot holes. I also found myself becoming tired of the waves of enemies. This might be due to the fact that you can only have 2 weapons. It feels like alot of the weapons are very similar. I found the plasmids felt a bit out of place in this world, especially compared to Bioshock 1.

 

I probably sound like an idiot but it feels like BSI is kinda the epitome of modern FPS and that its not to its benefit. But it's wrapped in a fresh coat of(not brown) paint that makes it appealing and perfect for a large audience

 

 

Oh, also CONGRATS JAKE

[I_smell]

Huh, I could've sworn there was a choice. Obviously mixing it up with the pendant choice.

How strange that they would ask you to flip a coin and not make a choice, they've done that on purpose. When have you ever been asked to flip a coin and not choose the outcome.

Maybe it's just meant to communicate that you're not playing as a nameless cipher, you are playing as an independant character. Who decided heads himself.

 

...bah that's almost definately not it.

 

I did not throw the baseball at all. You have the option to let it time out.

HAhahaha that's a good point. I didn't want to throw it at anyone, but with the timer there I panicked and chose to throw it at the tied-up couple so I wouldn't attract suspicion.

Never even crossed my mind that I could've just stood there!

[Chris]

Maybe it's just meant to communicate that you're not playing as a nameless cipher, you are playing as an independant character. Who decided heads himself.

 

...bah that's almost definately not it.

 

HAhahaha that's a good point. I didn't want to throw it at anyone, but with the timer there I panicked and chose to throw it at the tied-up couple so I wouldn't attract suspicion.

Never even crossed my mind that I could've just stood there!

It's possible that in playtesting they determined people were overwhelming making one choice rather than the other and they wanted to make that impossible. That is a total guess; I have absolutely no idea what the motivation was, it's just the kind of thing that sometimes happens in testing. But those scenes weren't in the game when I was at IG so I don't know for sure.

[I_smell]

Oh, like they didn't want people re-loading a hundred times to see what happens if you pick tails?

Seems like a small thing to test for on such a huge game, but yeah I get why it'd be a good idea to iron that out.

 

Related to this, I remember Elizabeth talking up the freedom of choice at one point when you're in the Hall of Heroes and now I wonder if that's supposed to be a big theme for the game or something. I remember it turned out to be a big theme for Bioshock 1, after people really started reading into everything. Oh well, I'm only halfway through it so I'll think about that later.

 

edit- Why does nothing in the name or description of this episode say "GET YOUR BOOTY READY" ?

Also the gift experiment is hilarious.

[Chris]

Oh, like they didn't want people re-loading a hundred times to see what happens if you pick tails?

Seems like a small thing to test for on such a huge game, but yeah I get why it'd be a good idea to iron that out.

That isn't quite what I meant--I just mean, if they noticed that everyone was always picking heads, or if players ended up picking it significantly more than have the time, they might have wanted to force more variety for the sake of player discussion or something like that.

 

Also, I very much doubt they did specific testing "for" that moment; that isn't what I mean. But I'm sure they tested the opening Columbia level a LOT, and that moment is part of it. Whether or not they were explicitly testing that coin toss, the moment still occurs every time you play through that part of the game. 

 

Again, this is all speculative.

[Flynn]

Booo... you spoiled dieing in bioshock infinite for me. I haven't died yet, I did come very close a couple of times though. But now I know what might happen if I die. In 1999 mode you get perma death right, or can you simply respawn from the last checkpoint. I would rather have savegames and normal dieing (i.e. lose all progress since your last save), that's 1999 for me.

 

There is no permadeath in 1999 either, it works the same as other difficulties.  However the monetary penalty is so much harsher that the game is easier if you cheat-it by choosing to restart from checkpoint rather than accepting the save from Elizabeth when you die.  The first time I tried 1999 I ended up wiping out 1000 dollars of banked currency a few times -- and basically never being able to afford an upgrade. 

 

The most 'ironman' run of 1999 Bioshock is the one where you never restart from checkpoint and always pay the money when you die.  

[darthbator]

I don't want to crawl to far up into the games own fiction but I would guess that it's presented in that way in order to communicate something for players on the second run through. Kinda nodding at the "variable" concept from the ending of the game by not allowing the player to set that decision as a sort of "personal constant". Coupled with the characters driving the interaction I just sort of assumed it was something there to hint or show that on repeat play throughs you are not playing the same Booker.

[Flynn]

I don't want to crawl to far up into the games own fiction but I would guess that it's presented in that way in order to communicate something for players on the second run through. Kinda nodding at the "variable" concept from the ending of the game by not allowing the player to set that decision as a sort of "personal constant". Coupled with the characters driving the interaction I just sort of assumed it was something there to hint or show that on repeat play throughs you are not playing the same Booker.

Whether Book picks heads or tails depends on whether the player has seen that section of the game before?

[melmer]

If they gave the player a choice of heads or tails, the only interesting thing about the coin toss would be that is it always lands on heads which gets explained away by the games story.

By removing the players choice we still get the narratively interesting point of that it always lands on heads, but then we also get to theories why they removed the player's choice, maybe..

it's just meant to communicate that you're not playing as a nameless cipher, you are playing as an independant character.

Or maybe as one of the games themes is the illusion of choice. Perhaps the coin toss for the player is an actual illusion of choice, seems that a lot of people including myself think they made a choice at the coin toss. There's so many weird things going on in that scene that people may just assume they made a choice as they're to busy trying to figure out what the hell is going on.

I'd love it if they play tested it and found that 90% of people thought they made a choice

Or maybe Aliens!?

[soggybagel]

ON the note of the Occulus rift and 3D in movies and other gimmicks. I loathe 3D in films and go out of my way to avoid seeing them. I will admit though that Prometheus was beautiful in 3D as it really didn't overwhelm. Obviously a film made from the ground up knowing its going to be in 3D helps as scenes simply get more depth...but again its not needed.

 

The only film I thought was completely perfect for 3D and I'm not joking was Jackass 3D. They knew 3D was a gimmick so they simply embraced it. It's a parlour trick that they exploited.

[thestalkinghead]

i always choose heads in a coin toss because that is my name, it is impossible for developers to know why people make the decisions they make no matter how much testing and data analysis they do  

[Chris]

i always choose heads in a coin toss because that is my name, it is impossible for developers to know why people make the decisions they make no matter how much testing and data analysis they do  

They don't always need to know why exactly the choice was made by each individual player, merely that a trend exists. And it is often the case that by examining that trend, a design decision can be made that alters it in a direction that is perceived by the developers as improving the game.

[darthbator]

Whether Book picks heads or tails depends on whether the player has seen that section of the game before?

No my thought is they are forcing it into a "variable" decision the user has no impact on. It's kinda showing in that one choice the kind of subtle variation that can occur. Basically I am saying they put in the random choice to make the chance greater that Booker will not make ALL the same meaningless small choices in the game the second time it's played. That's why it's so early in the game that it does that IMO. Just a theory

[Jake]

Re: the coin toss being automatic, I'd read that as the game wanting to tell you that Booker is his own person, he's not 100% you, but who knows. I'm not quite done with the game yet either.

[Merus]

I thought it was because it was obvious it was going to land on heads given then they hadn't had a single toss that landed on tails. The point of the scene is not to ask you to choose heads or tails, and I imagine they thought people were reading too much into the choice.

[darthbator]

I imagine they thought people were reading too much into the choice.

 

This is clearly still the case 

[thestalkinghead]

They don't always need to know why exactly the choice was made by each individual player, merely that a trend exists. And it is often the case that by examining that trend, a design decision can be made that alters it in a direction that is perceived by the developers as improving the game.

 

yeah, i think there are a lot of things that can be predicted by trends, but any time a game has any kind of freedom of choice (including basic things like where you are looking) you can't rely on a trend to predict what people are going to do, you either have to accommodate for everything or force the player to do something, which i guess is why the coin toss isn't the players choice