This has been a super exciting project to follow. iVRy has been documenting all the steps they have taken a long the way to get to this point. It seemed really hopeless at some points but has gotten quite far! I hope the tracking will work eventually, but I am impressed with the work done so far
For me it was how scary the game got a few levels in. The probe droids with the deserted homes where you get ambushed, oof. Had to have my dad play through those levels while I watched, but he didn’t know where to go so I eventually had to gather the courage to do it myself!
So I have a lot of thoughts on this that I have repeatedly failed to word in a way that I am happy with, so I am going to sideline a lot of those to focus on some more high-level thoughts:
As many have noted, there would probably be significantly better discussion happening if the ideas in the post were framed in a less antagonistic way. While I don’t think the post should be removed, it has been reported multiple times as “obvious rage-bait”, and I have a hard time disagreeing with that view. It is hard to take criticisms of things you like when the tone of that criticism is condescending and antagonistic. This isn’t helped by all the “reasons” given are very subjective and vague, with no concrete examples given to give a reader any context for what you think falls in these categories. In my experience, this type of “conversation” (I hesitate to call it a “conversation” because I think the structure makes having an actual conversation nearly impossible) is really prevalent amongst men who studied STEM and Redditors. Rather than a discussion about preferences in games and strengths/weaknesses of different storytelling styles, it encourages “I’m right, you’re wrong” argumentation, which just won’t be as fruitful and serves mostly to build tension within the community. For me personally, while I do think the ideas in the post make for interesting discussions/conversations, I don’t believe it is possible when this is the initial framing. I hope we can avoid this discussion/argumentation style on beehaw.
As for a more general thoughts on the contents of the post: this feels like it could be condensed down to “I only like a very specific and limited type of storytelling and view anything outside of that as lesser and flawed.” It is also comes off as a very simplistic and “rationalist” analysis of storytelling. It is focused only on tropes and structure and ignores how those tropes might be used to emphasize a theme, or the emotional impact of those stories.
I agree with you fully! Only thing I did not really like is the part about this sort of communication being “really prevalent amongst men who studied STEM and Redditors”. I know you prefaced it with “in my experience”, but it still feels a bit generalizing and not really relevant to the rest of the post. I think the behaviour should be called out, but pinning it on a group always feels a bit “us vs them”. Feel free to reply and discuss further, unlike OP I am looking for connection and mutual understanding :)
I also feel similar to many other commenting folks: that if you have avoided the “hahaha look at me, i don’t like things, that makes me so intellectually superior to you normies who enjoy anything” tone this could have been a good discussion. Also, we have tropes beacuse us humans share a couple of things in common, that we want to express and connect with. It’s the human that shines through these tropes, and at the end of the day, they’re tools that could be used well or poorly, but narration has tropes, just like wood is made of trees
i think there’s probably some good points in here. however, the presentation you’ve chosen here makes it difficult understand what those points are (i thought these critiques were about the same game / genre of games at first, but i’m thinking they’re now probably separate critiques about different styles of storytelling); especially since each point probably deserves its own post, along with named examples of games where you’ve encountered this
but i think there are some critiques in here worth mentioning, things like “it’s difficult to find games where your actions have a lasting impact and don’t just resolve the obstacle in front of you; while still having compelling gameplay”. or “sequels commonly don’t understand what made the original popular”. these are good, compelling critiques of things that happen in video games. this also allow people to recommend games that maybe address those complaints or maybe don’t
unfortunately, it’s hard to have that discussion right now because it currently boils down to “stories in games are dogshit”. and i mean, i can empathize, even if i don’t necessarily agree. maybe you just needed to get it off your chest, which is cool. hopefully this feedback helps you if you want to have a more in-depth, nuanced discussion about this later
I could never get into Bioshock for some reason. I started playing it twice, but just never felt super engaged or intrigued. Which seems really weird to me because I love a compelling story and that game has a reputation for being a great story. Maybe I just haven’t been in the right mood and need to give it another shot.
Depending on how many hours you played, you might not have reached the point that gave it that reputation. I absolutely loved the story already, including the characters and the environment of Rapture, but there’s a certain point in the story where it gets taken to a new level.
If we are talking about the original Bioshock I can provide a competing perspective. I found the story to be extremely mid at its peak, and actually mind numbingly poor at the great moment of reveal. I literally fell asleep multiple times trying to get through the game. So if you are not vibing with it in the first 1/3 of the game I think there’s a good chance you just won’t.
I’m really glad that so many people loved this game. There are many different kinds of stories that work for many different kinds of people and this one works for a LOT of people. It has an amazing aesthetic. But it didn’t work for me.
Appreciate the perspective. Maybe it’s just not for me. But I may also give it another shot at some point since I’m not inclined to spend a lot of money on games these days and that one’s already in my Steam library.
The villain would have won, if he’d just had the good sense to NOT BE OBVIOUSLY EVIL FOR LIKE HALF AN HOUR. You could have just celebrated your victory over the first bad guy while you let the hero meander back to the surface and fuck off forever. But NO, you have to be like “HAHAHA I’M EVIL SO FUCK YOU!” and now the hero has literally no choice but to stay and kill you. It was so lazy, and so stupid. Up to that point, it was good, and I loved the twist, and then he had to go completely ruin it with a boneheaded move that made 0 sense except to show how evil he was.
Then Bioshock 2 fucking did the same thing again. Let these meddling interlopers get on the submarine and go away, and you’ve won, all your goals are complete, Rapture is yours. BUT NO, we have to show the reader how EVIL the bad guy is again.
Then Bioshock Infinite did it fuckingagain. Great, we’ve won, the revolution is a success, the good guys are triumphant, oh, shit, did we make these people too sympathetic? Better have them suddenly become bloodthirsty child-killers for no reason so you feel ok fighting them instead of fucking off back home! By that point, though, it was kind of a Dead Dove: Do Not Eat situation; I don’t know why I expected anything different after the previous two times.
To be honest, I don’t remember 90% of that story. The opening is great (but that’s more the setting than story) and the final twist is amazing, but everything else is a blur.
People who don’t like anything are incredibly boring, in my humble opinion. Imagine putting all of this effort into an essay about why other people shouldn’t like the things that they like. I think a lot of people mistake being a contrarion for being an intellectual.
gaming
Newest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.