Tuesday 24 December 2013

Runner Up: Bioshock Infinite

I guess you could say that when I played this game I found it quite... shocking LOL

No, but really this was a tremendous game. One of my friends actually brought his Xbox 360 and a copy of Bioshock Infinite to my house, put the controller in my hand saying, "You have to play this game." And he was right. After the opening 30 minutes I was captivated. I didn't even know FPSs where allowed to be this good. After all, I had had an over exposure to the yearly Call of Duty multiplayer map packs for years and here was a game that was not only offering me a twenty to thirty hour gameplay time, but also tackling head on themes of Christianity and American Idealism but also let me shoot MURDEROUS CROWS FROM MY FINGERTIPS. Of course I played this game before The Last of Us so I didn't have the trouble of having to compare the two as I played. Ken Levine's latest offering from his Shocking Series (seriously they should call these games that) renewed my hope for the first person shooter and made me realise that games were becoming smarter. And like I mentioned in yesterday’s blog, the ending of this game blew me away. You play Booker Dewitt, tasked by a curious, mysterious couple to go to the floating city of Columbia and rescue a girl named Elizabeth to wipe away a gambling debt. Elizabeth is the main star of this game and it is because of her you start to realise that what is happening around you is closely linked to her. Travelling dimensions and to both sides of a civil war that leads to an ultimate ending that makes you wonder what was real and what was not.

The first point I would like to make about this game is its cover. Levine has gone on record stating that just having Booker Dewitt on the front cover was done because games with men on the cover sell better. It's sad that that's true. However, those who bought the game should discover that the cover is reversible, with an orange background and the quote from the beginning of the game. "The mind of the subject will desperately struggle to create memories where none exist" - Barries to Trans-Dimesional Travel. This quote defines this game and should always be on the players mind. Not only is it a warning stating that perhaps nothing you see is real, but also putting into perspective the themes of class, racism and religion. It's beautifully simple in its design and inspires thoughts in the way that true art should.

So I've gone on a bit about how great I think this game is but I haven't explained why it's in second place. Well make no mistakes: This game is fantastic and well worth your time. Imagine playing Call of Duty or Battlefield except instead of grenades you get "plasmids" that range from the aforementioned crows to fireballs and even the excellent "Possession" where enemies commit suicide after fighting for you. Add in the "Skyhook" a means of travelling the "Skyline" system that doubles as your melee attack in gleefully violent fashion. This all fits perfectly into your swash-buckling adventure. But again, why isn't it number one?

Well, I'm going to be the first to say that I'm bias against FPSs, though that’s not my only explanation. To explain, I find that since the market is currently so oversaturated with the things that I find it hard to see where the innovation is. I would say that Infinite is probably one of the finest examples you'll find in the genre after the Half-Life series. The way you never break from your perspective gives a fantastic flow to gameplay that other genres can't offer in the same way. Nevertheless the only reason I gave top spot to The Last of Us is for its originality. Bioshock Infinite offers plenty of great gameplay elements and tactics but sometimes it does feel like when you've looked down the iron sights to one gun, you've looked down the iron sights of them all.

Ok, that last paragraph was frankly painful to write, so I'm going to clarify again. Play this game. The reason I've dedicated two whole blogs to both games is because I feel they are the most important games of the year. Yes, even more important than Papers, Please. If you haven't played this game, play it, especially if the only first person shooters you play are about wanking off to military hardware. Fantastic clean steampunk design and, again, the ability to shoot murderous crows from your hands should be more than enough to sway you.

But ok, now that explanations are out of the way the other thing I'd like to talk about is my interpretation of the game so here it comes... MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS.

Actually this will most definitely contain spoilers so seriously this section is only for people that finished the game. Stopped reading yet? Good.

Alright let's work backwards from the ending. In the closing scene of the game, multiple Elizabeth's convince Booker Dewitt to go back in time and drown himself, therefore erasing himself and Father Comstock from existence. But how did we end up here? Was it inevitable? Think about it. When you fight Lady Comstock, Elizabeth says that her powers can influence reality and the only reason the ghost of Lady Comstock is evil is because Elizabeth believes she is evil. This is important, because what else is Elizabeth influencing, even without her own knowledge. Shortly after breaking Elizabeth free you have your first confrontation against the baddies with her and afterwards she responds that she can't believe you (Booker) killed all those people. Booker responds by saying that "If you don't shoot first, you don't get to shoot at all." How does Elizabeth react to this? Sure, she says she'll help Booker, but I believe in her mind she is starting to see Dewitt as a hero. I feel like this is backed up when you jump realities where Booker is part of the Vox Populi, the underclass that is fighting back against the white upper class. Is this an alternate reality, or is this Elizabeth's thoughts creating a world where Booker is the hero? Of course, the Booker that is the player is different from the new world Booker and the leader can tell as much. This Booker just wants to get out of Columbia. Next comes the revelation that Comstock and Booker are the same person from alternate timelines. Was this Elizabeth realising that even though they are different men, the amount of control they wish to have over her is the same? And now we're back at the ending. I feel that Booker was doomed from the start just because he could never give Elizabeth the freedom she wanted and even without realising it Elizabeth doomed him to this fate. I find this interpretation beautiful because of what it says about women's roles, partly in society but mostly in videogames. Women in games would be better off without men. It's a kind of deep reading into the text that maybe you could only notice subconsciously and might not even still make sense to you. But this is why I think both this game and The Last of Us are important games, partly because of what they have to say about gender roles in videogames.

(END SPOILERS)

Both games are open to interpretation. Hell, any game is. A famous interpretation of Tetris is that it represents the struggles of middle class Americans. Maybe I am reading too much into it, but what can I do? I'm psykotic (with a K)

But I am just a gamer with a personality disorder. What do you think of my choice of runner up? Was I right? What was your interpretation of the ending to either game? Leave a comment below!

Follow Me!
www.facebook.com/psykoticgamer
Twitter: @PsykoticGamer


No comments:

Post a Comment