The game's references and foreshadowing have always been slightly on the nose, so I'm not surprised he's picking up so much. But I think there is important context to the fact that this was a big hyped up AAA first person shooter game from 2007. I know at the time I had no notion that this game would have an interesting story or lore or big twists. My guard was down when playing this game for the first time. All of the narrative twists and revelations blindsided me because I thought I was just playing a shooty mcshooty game.
I'm sure you guys have heard this a hundred times but it would be such a treat to hear you guys go through Dark Souls. Love your channel and the way you analyze these games - your series on FF8 is one of my favorite series I've everseen. (And YES this is my real name, haha).
DS would be difficult as it requires multiple plays to get all the story, plus 2 separate playthroughs can be quite different could be fun, but could also be messy for this podcast ...
Note on Pay Toilets - In the US, they use to be much more common in the 50's and 60's (the art nouveau era). There was a fight against them by women's groups and others (such as CEPTIA) as they were seen by many as a form of gender discrimination. It is after all much easier for those with the certain equipment to use a urinal. As a result of this fight, there are some states and many cities with laws on the books that make pay toilets illegal. You likely live in one of these.
I’m impressed you were able to find time to play this game AND read Atlas Shrugged. That’s about a 1000-page novel. I still haven’t even finished The Fountainhead. I struggle to focus on and finish reading longer books. I tend to get distracted because I have so many different activities and projects. I would love to hear some time management tips from Mike and Casen, or advice on how you guys manage to take on so much.
One tip that helps me read whenever I’m on E is: just read 1 sentence and see where it goes. When it gets stale, get up and walk around. Then repeat from the beginning.
I am stuck in a 50 mins bus ride, this video will keep me good company. 1:08:00 I always thought that BioShock should have had a hard mode in which you save the little sisters and you get nothing in exchange, along side a bunch of other difficulty balances.
1:24:43 - 1:24:53 Seeing all the recent podcasts I obviously know he is saying this from an alchemical perspective…. But it’s also funny because it looks like he’s calling out Casen for his racism when taken out of context and I laughed hard.
Regarding the discussion around how different ideologies assume that humans are fundamentally either good or bad, what Casen described (i.e., that Levine seems to think that people are bad) struck me as a very Hobbesian view. That view assumes that, without a strong state to control people, the "state-of-nature" for humans is a "war of all against all". Hobbes' view is typically contrasted with Rousseau's view on the matter, which assumed that humans were essentially egalitarian until the onset of agriculture, property rights, and other structures that drive societies toward inequality. I expect it's no surprise that archaeological and anthropological evidence suggests that neither is a true "default" for humans. Anyway, I hope you guys continue to take your time with this series! Really enjoying the depth of analysis here.
28:00 Mike the term you're probably looking for is "embedded narrative", which is the use of a game world as a space for distributed information...heavily used in cases like Bloodborne, Metroid Prime, Horizon, etc. A lot of what you guys talked about for the next few minutes relate to Henry Jenkins's early-2000s publication "Game Design as Narrative Architecture", which I highly recommend reading (it's easily searchable, & even references Disney theme park attractions). The article basically outlines game spatial storytelling via the 4 "E"s: Evocative Space - the broader vibe evoked based on our pre-existing experiences (i.e. Red Dead vs Metroid) Enacting Stories - staging for narrative events to happen, perform (boss fight), and/or simply watch (cutscenes) Embedded Narratives - contextual decor within mise-en-scene (audio logs, graffiti, diaries, corpses, etc.) Emergent Narratives - resources that provide fuel for emotional imagination (heavy in Sims, Animal Crossing, even Pokemon!)
I think he's going for the term 'environmental storytelling'. One way to describe that genre is 'immersive sims'. Games like BioShock, Prey and Dishonored are these types of games.
First time commenter here! Been a big fan of the in depth analyses you guys do and I really appreciate your work. I have a few points about the medical pavilion and Dr Steinman. The mere concept of having a 'great' or 'the best' doctor in rapture fundamentally contradicts the idea of Rapture and the philosophy behind it. Many people's idea of a great doctor is one who can cure ailments and allow that person to lead the best quality of life possible. However, for that to happen a doctor must follow some form of moral code, which is more commonly known as the Hippocratic oath (do no harm and do the best for the patient). Oftentimes the morality of what is the right decision for a patient is grey and blurry, but in order for doctors to not take things into their own hands and follow their own personal beliefs there needs to be a governing body. In the UK (where I'm from) this is the general medical council. Should there be an Eutopia without government, such as Rapture doctors would not be required to do what is best for the patient. Instead they may want to explore the bounds of what is possible. Instead of doing the safe, and correct operation they may want to try a completely new technique and throw away the normal way of doing things; not only in pursuit of greatness but also to whet their appetite and prevent the boredom that could be found. I find it especially interesting that once Adam is introduced that essentially removes the requirement of a doctor full stop. The issue that arose was secondary to having highly trained, highly intelligent and highly skilled workers who had no work. This drove them to the extremes and they likely pushed for societal Norms to change so that they could prevent boredom (and poverty as they needed to create a job so they could thrive in the society that punished the poor and weak). That's my 2 cents anyhow. I love medical ethics and find the whole subject fascinating. It's never black or white. Just FYI I'm currently a surgical trainee in the UK, hence the interest!
listening it's almost shocking how much of this game hinges on Andrew Ryan's naivety. Grandiose and sinister and cunning and hapless as he goes through the story, you really get a sense that despite it all he really thought this would all be for the betterment of humanity
I just finished Bioshock for the 1st time the other day for this podcast. It was pretty darn good. I gotta say, though, I'm glad I didn't look at the airplane intro sequence when you asked, "Did you read the note?" I watched the intro after beating the game and was like "ooooh booii."
I’m loving this format of this podcast. I have seen videos that talk about bioshock and the characters and why they are good or why they suck. This podcast goes way beyond that and talks about ideas and themes that I never even thought of while playing the games. Like the references to the Bible and Greek mythology as well as Ayn Rands books and philosophy. Great work guys. Keep it up
While the theming on the save vs harvest choice might not be as strong, I think it makes for a better lesson. You can either take the reward in front of you, or you can choose to trust this unknown woman who promises you an unknown reward at a later date. You have to weigh your savage desire for instant gratification against taking a slower, more civilized route that relies on earning the good will of another person. It's a much better message than what boils down to "crime pays and altruism gets you nothing."
For some of us, being as nice is possible is our power fantasy. I mean, if I wasn't in a my own survival is in a constant threat type of scenario, I would do so much more for others. I can't and must be more selfish to get by myself. In most games, you can grind back that gold or whatever so it feels nice to be able to do.
I think this is also true for players when they were talking about how some people would have been angry if they didn't get a reward for being nice. If I could still beat the game I would be fine with the choice but if I got stuck because I didn't have the extra ADAM then I would be angry and regret it.
In Europe - Finland we have many public bathrooms which are coin-operated or you have to pay in order to access it. For example in gas stations it is quite ordinary nowadays sadly... and we don't have a problem with homeless people
Fun fact about pay toilets in the US: they're illegal on a federal level. This is due to a highly organized political effort in the 70s which had the sole goal and purpose of outlawing pay toilets. Once their goal was secured, they disbanded. While many establishments attempt to claim otherwise, any business that serves food is federally obligated to provide restrooms on request
One take I had on the chain tattoos around Jack's wrists: he is captive to the player's inputs. He HAS to do what the player says, like a programmed automaton, and thus does not have the freedom that, in theory, the people of Rapture have.
On the discussion of altruism and if it truly exists: I've always believed that altruism/selflessness only exists in split second decisions made without conscious thought (Throwing yourself in front of a car to save a bystander being an extreme example) or in situations where you will remain anonymous (like giving a homeless person you'll never see again money without stopping to consider if you should).
Also, a game with true altruistic choices that punishes you for being kind-hearted is Pathologic. I would love to know if Mike or Casen have played it.
I thought Frank Fontain's name was a connection with Fountainhead, just like Atlas and Andrew Ryan's names derived from Atlas Shrugged. Plus, I don't know if anyone else has suggested it or you've done so already, but I strongly recommend reading Rapture by John Shirley. It's such a comfortable read and give a lot of interesting info about Rapture, it's construction and the civil war. Keep it up guys! Just came across your podcasts and I just can't get enough!
As a sort of an extension to the paid restrooms being indicative of the game’s dystopian themes before turning out to be something in real life, the idea that standards of beauty creating a “moral imperative” to be beautiful could be seen as satire on how society imposes warped standards on how people look but there are more on-the-nose (pun unintended) parallels to be found. I don’t know how the history lines up with the game but cosmetic surgery has become incredibly common in South Korea; I’ve heard that anywhere from 1/3 to 1/2 of women aged 19-29 there have work done. This is because adhering to specific standards of beauty is seen as just too advantageous from a societal perspective (job opportunities, relationship prospects, etc.) to the point where parents encourage their children to get cosmetic surgery and even pay for it as graduation presents. And of course, cosmetic surgery is a very lucrative business. There’s also an additional element that was not discussed. Steinman’s initial recording of the possibilities they have to alter appearance almost sound noble in how it gives people the choice of how they appear and present themselves but then also mention changing one’s race as well. It’s a very minor thing that is not elaborated on in this game but when considering the idea of people being pressured to adhere to societal beauty standards it adds an additional (and forgive the phrase) darker element to how Rapture really was not a society that divorced itself from the ills of the “surface world.” This is a bit of world building that is picked up on in the DLC of Bioshock 2, where there is a black character who recounts being recommended he splice himself to appear white to “get ahead” in Rapture despite the fact that he was *already* a brilliant engineer who proved his ability. Appropriately, he refuses in disgust and protest.
Hopefully if you guys ever get around to Infinite you’re not as dismissive or narrow minded about it as people seem to be now. I think despite it mechanically streamlining a lot-it still has plenty to offer. Every Bioshock game is doing something interesting and excels at different things.
Another behind the scenes note. During development the harvesters were going to be little rat creatures but nobody felt sympathy for them so the development changed that to little girls. They thought that swong the pendulum to far in the other direction but it made the game better.
I remember when I 1st played bioshock. And when I was given The Choice to kill or save the little sister. My 1st instinct was to save her immediately. It felt really good to show the little sister that kindness can reach even the darkest depths of the ocean, as well as watching the relief spread across her body as she fully relaxes in your hand. The developers did an amazing job with the animations and lighting of the save choice. However, after this every little sister is protected by the Big Daddy. If I recall every level has three little sisters all protected by Big Daddy's. Making them completely optional. And at early stages, this would drain all of your resources purchasing bombs and turrets to defeat them. At this point I looked up many guides and spoke to friends about whether it was worth saving them or just leaving them alone. To be honest, if everyone said no, there is no reward at all for saving them, I don't know if I would have bothered to save any of them. I couldn't bring myself to ever kill them, so at the very worst I would just leave them alone; or, At the very least, I would wait to get really powerful and return back later on to save them. Honestly, at the very least I think it would be good for the developers to make a end game cutscene we're all the little sisters would either say goodbye or you would leave with them to escape rapture. Maybe even allowing you to skip the final boss as a reward.
The Dune series has a great part about Leto's Peace, 3500 years of enforced tranquility, leading to the Scattering, mankind pushing to the limits of the universe.
After learning a laymen level information on business its hilarious how juvenile Rand's view of what bargaining power CEO's hold. The reality is if every CEO went on strike all of the shareholders would elect new CEOs. CEOs serve one and only one function, the fiduciary duty to maximize shareholder value.
44:50 this reminds me of something I read ages ago where the advent of technology has made it so that women, and their babies, who further back in history would have died in childbirth due to having small pelvises are increasing in number now due to their survival rate. Kind of wild to think, especially as someone who had a natural birth, that there could (not saying it's definite) be a time where child birth means certain death without medical intervention.
I always enjoy your podcast and you seem to enjoy making it, but in this episode it was something more, it seems like this is the most thrilled I have seen you two during an episode, is it the topic at hand or what made this so special to you? I enjoyed it alot more then usual for it too. PS - I had to save them too. Could not bring myself to harvest them.
Had to save the girls. I think would have done so even if there was absolutely no reward for doing so. Had a daughter a year ago and that had a big effect on me. Now the whole game is just a mission to help and protect all the sisters :)
Ryan had succeeded in an industrial age and his philosophy reflects that. His disdain for Frank Fontaine is Ryan being upset at his own failures and afraid of losing his grip on his "little kingdom". Despite claims of wanting the best to succeed in the end Ryan is guilty of wanting to maintain control. This is his sandbox and no one is going to take it from him.
Your final thoughts on Andrew Ryan in this video, bringing in ideas from outside of his “paradise” and thus tainting it further reminds me of Dostoyevski’s short called “story of a ridiculous man”. As you’ve referenced him before I’m guessing you would have read this one if not, I highly recommend it (it is very short and accessible to all). Loving your takes on many of the games so far, though I felt your experience with Kojima-san’s Metal Gear series to miss some very fundamental points, I’ll try add my opinions to those videos directly though so they are relevant 😊 I always felt this game was to be celebrated but was never able to articulate why until the efforts of you both so thank you, you do a credit to this art form.
2 thoughts on little sisters and Tenebaum (no story spoilers) 1) Tenebaum offering you a reward for rescuing the little sisters makes perfect sense narratively. She lives in a city full of psychos that actively try to kill little sisters for their Adam. It only makes sense for her to appeal to your self interest to not harvest the girls. 2) It's been a long time since I played but I seem to remember that you get more actual Adam for the vending machines when you harvest, but you get unique rewards from rescuing that you can't buy.
You get more immediate adam for killing the girls. But you get discount and bonus abilities from saving them so you actually end up with more adam from playing the good guy.
I saved them because I love playing games as a protector or at least a hero in the shadows. I also love playing on hard mode so I wouldn't have cared if I didn't get a reward. My first playthrough was so tense because I didn't have all that power so I wouldn't have done otherwise.
In regards to the rescue/harvest the little sister thing: ultimately I believe that if there was ZERO incentive to rescue the girls, be it new dialogue, power ups, or a different ending I don't think many people would have gone the purely altruistic route. Look at a game like Undertale, where pursuing the pacifist route leads to arguably the best ending. I think the biggest issue with the system now is that the penalty to the rewards you are given for going with rescue is barely significant. If they tweaked it so rescuing the girls had a more noticeable effect on the overall resources you gain it would have made for a more impactful choice. That's my two cents at least.
I wonder if the Doctor "Tannenbaum" is named like this because he invented all those crazy things and they were received like the gifts under a Christmas tree.
About the choice of the little sisters. I would have thought it would be interesting if tennanbaum doesn't tell you that there's a reward for it but giving you one anyways after rescuing three little sisters as per usual. You still have the same problem of is it really an altruistic choice, however it doesn't take away from the choice you make in the beginning. The conversation only gets delayed once you get the first reward. Interested in hearing your guys take on this.
about the discussion on harvesting versus saving: If it is your playthrough AND you are not following a guide, The choice was always: Harvest and get a confirmed immediate reward versus rescue with the promise of a future mystery box. I saw a moral dichotomy on a blind playthrough. (edit: since Casen like Christianity references, take the above as another one)
I recently turned into becoming a completionist 😅 However, I'll always play blind on my first playthrough. I make choices based on my moral ground, then evaluate if I enjoy the game enough to go for 100%
I have never been comfortable doing the "renegade" option in any game. I just don't enjoy doing it. I always thought that the "you get more rewarded for saving the little sisters than you do for harvesting them" dynamic was a missed opportunity. It absolutely should have been like it was presented - you harvest them for more resources, or rescue them for less resources.
If you're looking for a game with moral choices where you are offered a gameplay incentive to take the evil choice and receive no reward (other than which story path and ending you end up at) for being good, like you discussed in today's Bioshock episode, Valkyrie Profile: Covenant of the Plume fits the bill pretty well.
Playing thorugh the game in Easy (because I suck) for the first time. I'm saving all the little sisters so far, and even then I don't feel too hindered but not having enough Adam to move on. I'm just sticking to 1-2 plasmids (Electrobolt and the one which "stuns" machines) and weapons (Pistol and Shotgun) anyway because I can't find good uses for the rest of them (unless enviromental puzzles like: ice blocking the path > melt with fire). So not having all the powers doesn't feel like a problem to me, at worst it looks like I'm going to have to swap more at Gene Banks (btw I hate that they tell you how to swap plasmids/genes so late, I spent like 30 minutes in the menus trying to figure out if I was maybe missing a button or option but nope, I just had to move on with the game just a little bit more). Also, it seems from my experience that while the Splicers attack me on sight, the "Big Daddys" and Little sister don't seem aggressive at all until I attack them. So after killing the "Big Daddys", the least I can do is save the Little Sisters. I feel like harvesting them would be like adding insult to injury or something like that. I don't know if I'm explaining myself well enough.
Little food for thought on getting rewarded for the good playthrough. In Dishonored if you play the good guy you lose most of your powers and a people complained that it made the game boring, to the point that they changed it in Dishonored 2. A similar thing happened with Star Wars games where playing the light side felt weak compared to dark side.
Automata is a fantastic game that would be a great breakdown. But sometimes you have to wait. They still have 2 episodes of Xenosaga and the fact Blood Omen: Legacy of Kain lost to Bioshock in their last poll. It is how it is, but when the podcast is this insightful, I dare not complain.
Nier Automata is an option in the Sequels podcast poll that’s coming up, against XSII, MGSII, and Mass Effect 2. I’ll be voting for that game when it’s an option!
I think we've thankfully moved past the "gamification" of moral good and moral bad choices in videogames. We've kinda accepted linear games as linear and morality shouldn't be on a meter (visible nor invisible). Hopefully the higher-ups at large AAA studios realize that too and can let designers design protagonists as morally grey depending on circumstances
I would have saved the kids even without the reward. I would have liked to see the outcomes of how many people in the community would have gone that route.
Really liked your take on Nietzsche, sadly not as widespread as it should be among Nietzschean community (at least in those more influenced by the old French-German way of doing philosophy). My wife is now an ex-Nietzschean scholar and has since then written works showing how most if not all of them his "fundamental" ideas lead to problematic consequences, especially if you try to use his tools to do social and political analysis without "updating" it to contemporary scientific and sociological studies -- even then, it would not be without its risks. There are some great critiques coming from contemporary philosophy of emotions. Really like Bioshock, but regret that it made my brother read Ayn Rand and agree with it somehow (thankfully he is very much changed now).
I usually play the evil chioces. I shot Morden in the back in Mass Effect 3 (and felt bad for doing it) and I could not bring myself to kill a little sister.
I actually did harvest the Little Sisters on my second playthrough, because I felt like Bioshock's narrative was still a bit more rigid than, say, Mass Effect's, in the "grand scheme" and it wouldn't matter all that much. But I also just wanted to see the other ending without looking it up online. My first playthrough is my own personal "canon" though, where I saved them. I also would have saved them no matter what, because it was just the right thing to do. I generally always do the right thing in video games, because... it's the right thing. So I will choose the Light Side, or be a Paragon, or save the Little Sisters, just because it's right. The only exception in a video game where I think going darker is the option that is more fun is in KOTOR 2. Obsidian made it fun to be dark in that game. Otherwise, I might be a jerk and choose a dialog option that's darker (I remember punching the reporter in Mass Effect 2 or 3 because I was just so fed up with her sensationalism), but overall that's just not how I will play. My own morality will never let me roleplay as someone who wouldn't share my own ideals.
Personally I would not care if there was no additional reward for the choice to rescue rather than harvest. Much like Mike, I tend to paragon in any game that gives me the RP option. That said, I believe that even with the additional rewards for rescuing, you in fact get less total adam period. The rewards are just enough of a hit to make you think that you are keeping up but much like a gambler's fallacy, you are never ahead and end the game behind where you would otherwise be.
The other significant thing about Fontaine's name of course is it is a reference to the Fountainhead. Meaning there is now a trio of characters with very thinly veiled references to Ayn Rand and her works -- and they are the three characters most implicated in the power struggle for Rapture. Also surprised you didn't touch on the fact that the main thing being smuggled at Port Neptune seems to be Bibles, and that the first thing that greets you is a crucified smuggler. The irony of this supposedly libertarian paradise having to forcefully suppress religion -- Ironically no better than the Soviet system Ryan so forcefully rejects.
A couple of good Indie games that also tell stories with the same post-events techniques are Soma and Stray. Soma is … I really don’t want to say anything that wouls spoil that experience. Seriously, go play Soma. It’s definitely State of the Arc podcast-worthy material.
I’ve always found the whole symbiotic relationship between The Little Sisters and Big Daddies to be really interesting. But it got me thinking if this is what happened to all the little girls in rapture, what happened to the boys? So I asked that question to the Bioshock subreddit, turns out in supplemental material the male children were hunted, experimented on and all killed. God that’s disturbing.
I'm a person who can't play renegade, so to speak. Tried to create a Sith in SW:ToR . Didn't end well - I played a few levels and then abandoned the character. I just can't. Personally, I wouldn't care if I got an "award" for making the so called good choice. Also, who cares? It's the end of the game anyway. Understand the completionists though - some people want to 100% a game. Envy them a bit, too. I too would like to be able to play assholes. In the Mass Effect series - there are some characters that just deserves a simple punch to the face. At least. Looking at you, Gavin Archer...
In my initial play through of the game, if I had not received anything for sparing a little sister I would have been fine with it, but really only if I could still comfortably beat the game without the extra Adam. Which I think is how most people approach being altruism, if I can be altruistic without negativity affecting myself I will (doesn't even have to be a positive outcome it can be neutral), but if acting altruistic will have a negative affect on myself I will be completely selfish.
I can’t do the evil/renegade thing in games. Personally I would feel slighted if you don’t get that 2nd ending because to me that’s the trade off making the morally good choice and being less powerful but rewarded with a different ending because of your choice to do that. Otherwise I essentially restrained myself and made the game harder for no payoff and maybe the sense that at least I didn’t kill those kids for power. That’s rewarding but without that confirmation your choice mattered all I would be able to do is speculate and hope they lived.
For my part, as a little bit of a completionist, and someone who wants to "do the right thing" in video games, saving the Little Sisters has to mean something. If the reward was only what I experience in myself, I would dislike it. If the reward is a different, better story, I could like that, but I would want some stronger foreshadowing that the story is the only reward I would get, and of course the story has to be executed well through it's ending for that to work. Otherwise, yes, I would feel disappointed that I did not get the powers, abilities, and upgrades that I could have.
Your comments on Utopia made me reflect on why I could never get into Star Trek. Yes, the show(s) are all about conflict, with modern Trek seemingly all about why there needs to be a Starfleet and what not, but I could never get accept Roddenberry's vision. Not because there's not beauty there. Rather I see all the ways it could, and would, go horribly wrong
In games with moral choices I play good the first time through then bad the second. Then comparing the two I find the bad play through boring as theres no tension in the choice
The discussion around altruism, or "true" altruism always baffled me. If you get off on saving children from poverty, more power to you as far as I am concerned.
1:10:43 even if they offered no in-game reward, there likely would have still been an achievement, which is a reward in itself. I think the only way to make it truly selfless is if the game gave you no other reward than a thank you from Tenenbaum.
I think when it comes to morality in games I very much prefer the option of missing out on a good thing because I didn't do the bad thing over whatever the hell they were trying to do in The Last of Us pt 2. That seems to be "Look! The opponents are human too! They have lives!! They have pets!! Look how bad we ARE FORCING YOU TO BE!!" Seriously, don't make me be an arsehole making hilariously bad choices and then lecture me. I always tend towards the diplomatic or the helpful if given a choice in games. Seriously, I even wasted a fair amount of money on Red Dead Redemption 2 because I couldn't get past the things it wanted you to do and so stopped playing relatively early on.
I always thought it was hilarious that Rand believed these capitalist captains of industry to be "producers". Andrew Ryan was a brilliant engineer and a genius. Ok, he's a producer. His plans were the backbone of Rapture. But how many CEOs and board members are really like this? I'd say less than 5%. Most of the producers are the engineers, developers, laborers, etc. who need the "parasite" social programs because they can't afford to pay for things with the meager scraps that fall from the table of those who own the capital. Most of the Teslas of the world die without wealth and power, and the Edisons that know how to exploit the brilliance of others rise instead. I do agree with her that "from each according to their ability, to each according to their need" is unfair because Rand is correct, that will push people to increase their need and decrease their ability. This would create the dreaded "welfare cheat" the capitalists whine about. However wealth has no inherent ability or need. The second a person has wealth, they have power with no qualifier whatsoever. If a person earned it by crime or inheritance, or even by skill it is irrelevant to the absolute power it grants. I know it's old news that Rand is wrong. However, I don't think that all her musings were incorrect. She is wise to view creators as powerful. They should be. Communism and Capitalism cannot survive human nature because neither put creation at the core of the philosophy. They are both philosophies of exploitation. One creates dictators who take advantage of a lack of strong leaders and the other creates false idols out of people who can only exploit and plunder. Pure ideologies are brittle. Good societies have to be a push and pull between progress and caution, competition and compassion. There has yet to be a philosopher to create this system, because by trying to complete rules and axioms, you destroy the flexibility and adaptability that is the underpinning of human strength. The real answer is that for humanity to improve, ALL of humanity must improve. There are no gods or kings, only human beings. But it can't just be a shining few. ALL have to learn. ALL have to produce and do what they can. ALL have to take responsibility.
Great comment. It's easy for us today to critique Rand's ideology for it's flaws (which there are many), but we have the benefit of another 70+ years of living under a Capitalist/Meritocratic system that she didn't. The issues that we have now with a Capitalist system existed back then as well, but were much, much less apparent. In the mid-1900's, when Rand wrote her well known works and developed her philosophy, the world had just finished the 2nd industrial revolution. In the 1920's - 1940's, Capitalists like Henry Ford were doing exciting things like doubling their workers wages so they could afford to buy the car that they produce every day in the assembly line. Ford also reduced the workweek to 5 days/40 hours per week. Prior to that, full-time factory workers generally had to work 6 days and 48 hours. And then after the 2nd industrial Revolution, capitalism and manufacturing fueled America's war machine to win 2 world wars in Europe and Asia. This all happened in the decades leading up to Rand writing The Fountainhead. People are a product of their environment, and back then Capitalism was clearly shown to be "working" much better than any other economic system in human history. If you just look at the historical context, it's easy to see how people like Rand were high on the momentum of that era's accomplishments and overlooked the flaws that are more obvious to people today. If she lived today to see the current era of Capitalism, her "Objectivism" would probably look very different. The Capitalist CEO's of the 2000's, who cut jobs or try to suppress wages so the company can buy back their own stock are a far cry from the Capitalists like Henry Ford in the early 1900's.
Because workers don't know how to manage a business, much less a company, they just work and the higher ups manage deals, customs, partnerships and so on. You turn a worker into the head of a company, either they aren't qualified for the task and ends up ruining the business or are educated enough that they cease to be workers, they are in the same position as the "parasite" at the eyes of commies. That's the main issue with any leftists economic school of thought: for them, an owner of a small company that's very involved with his/her business is a producer, a worker, and for the next generation of leftists that same owner that went successful and now enjoys the fruits of the his/her labor is a parasite that's exploiting their workers.
Rand’s stories (and the ideas they espoused) were contingent on characters being idealized ubermeschs or caricatures. I remember attending a course in college about the operation of architecture firms and one of the exercises we had was critiquing the Fountainhead; just about *everyone* in the class quickly came to the conclusion “yeah, this isn’t how things work or people are in real life at all.” I’d also argue that Rand’s ideas aren’t quite discounted, at least in the realm of socioeconomic discourse; they tend to have resurgence in times of economic uncertainty but who espouses them tend to be predictably pro-business/corporate. They also tend to dance around/gloss over the less politically convenient aspects of Rand’s beliefs like her staunch atheism.
@@xiiir838 That's entirely untrue. I have personally been promoted up from the front desk to middle management with no actual training, and I've had friends in the finance world that rise from desk jobs to UPPER management after a strong year of sales or production. CEOs and upper management types aren't particularly good at generating a good product and good service, they are good at exploiting and expanding. That's the only actual goal of businesses under capitalism. So if you're telling me that a worker won't be able to produce as much wealth as a slimy CEO. Sure, yes, you're right. However, if you're saying a worker can't run an amazing business that benefits both the consumer and the workers by making an excellent product, you are dead wrong. I'm not a pure commie in that I don't believe that everyone should make the same amount of money, I just believe that the workers should have a say in the generation and distribution of wealth in their own company. Your CEO should not be making 80% of the labor cost of the business. I've worked for both non-profit (credit unions) and for profit (big bank) jobs and they both provide the same services for the most part and the non-profits have the same pay and benes for the little guys with much less for the people up top. The only change is that people tend to get better service from a credit union and the workers tend to like their job a bit more. So I guess the big advantage of capitalism is a few people at the top make more money? f@#$ them. If that makes me a "leftist" fine, but why should the vast majority care about the 1%. What benefit does it have for us? Why shouldn't we just...I dunno. Kill you all? :) (Edit) I'm only halfway joking about murdering the rich. Like any opportunist they are just doing the things they do because they are allowed to. Tearing them down from their gilded throne is enough for me.
I think Rapture being a haven for 'objectivists' would mean that all the people there would be kinda shitty, all I care about is myself types. Ken probably isn't making a comment on all of humanity just followers of that ideologue
It’s proven with Frank Fontaine. When you’re free to do anything, people who are willing to get a leg up by standing on top of the bodies of others will rise to the top.
coin slots for public toilets hah..hah... +cries in German+ I have never seen one of these which are free to use (you're better off going into shops or restaurants and ask if you can use their toilets if you want to use it for free... and even there you often see some cleaning person with a small table and a dish to put money on lol)
![CAMPปลิ้น | รวม Highlight 2024! PART [1/2]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/6hnvNnvYloU/mqdefault.jpg)
"This whole thing is like a Baptism" ~ Caeson
- Laughs in Bioshock Infinite- 😂
Terrible ending to a terrible sequel.
Lol what an utterly incorrect opinion.
@@thejawgz6719 No opinion. Fact. Comparing Infinite to Bioshock is like comparing Last Jedi to ESB. One is art and the other is a pathetic imitation.
Cason is nailing so much on this one it's crazy. I hope we can revisit some of these points after he beats the game.
The game's references and foreshadowing have always been slightly on the nose, so I'm not surprised he's picking up so much. But I think there is important context to the fact that this was a big hyped up AAA first person shooter game from 2007. I know at the time I had no notion that this game would have an interesting story or lore or big twists. My guard was down when playing this game for the first time. All of the narrative twists and revelations blindsided me because I thought I was just playing a shooty mcshooty game.
I'm sure you guys have heard this a hundred times but it would be such a treat to hear you guys go through Dark Souls. Love your channel and the way you analyze these games - your series on FF8 is one of my favorite series I've everseen. (And YES this is my real name, haha).
DS would be difficult as it requires multiple plays to get all the story, plus 2 separate playthroughs can be quite different
could be fun, but could also be messy for this podcast ...
When you play the game, and he mentioned "We are slaves". On point.
I love Cason's mafioso impression.
Note on Pay Toilets - In the US, they use to be much more common in the 50's and 60's (the art nouveau era). There was a fight against them by women's groups and others (such as CEPTIA) as they were seen by many as a form of gender discrimination. It is after all much easier for those with the certain equipment to use a urinal.
As a result of this fight, there are some states and many cities with laws on the books that make pay toilets illegal. You likely live in one of these.
I’m impressed you were able to find time to play this game AND read Atlas Shrugged. That’s about a 1000-page novel. I still haven’t even finished The Fountainhead. I struggle to focus on and finish reading longer books. I tend to get distracted because I have so many different activities and projects. I would love to hear some time management tips from Mike and Casen, or advice on how you guys manage to take on so much.
One tip that helps me read whenever I’m on E is: just read 1 sentence and see where it goes. When it gets stale, get up and walk around. Then repeat from the beginning.
The only reason I was able to finish fountainhead in a year was taking multiple 2 hour train commutes while vacationing in japan.
The audiobook reading is on youtube. Might just listen to it if you struggle reading through it?
Fountain Head is a tough read. Atlas Shrugged flowed much better. Both are great though.
I cannot believe this show is free.
This is on another level, guys.
I am stuck in a 50 mins bus ride, this video will keep me good company.
1:08:00 I always thought that BioShock should have had a hard mode in which you save the little sisters and you get nothing in exchange, along side a bunch of other difficulty balances.
1:24:43 - 1:24:53
Seeing all the recent podcasts I obviously know he is saying this from an alchemical perspective….
But it’s also funny because it looks like he’s calling out Casen for his racism when taken out of context and I laughed hard.
Haha, I thought of that while editing it!
Regarding the discussion around how different ideologies assume that humans are fundamentally either good or bad, what Casen described (i.e., that Levine seems to think that people are bad) struck me as a very Hobbesian view. That view assumes that, without a strong state to control people, the "state-of-nature" for humans is a "war of all against all". Hobbes' view is typically contrasted with Rousseau's view on the matter, which assumed that humans were essentially egalitarian until the onset of agriculture, property rights, and other structures that drive societies toward inequality. I expect it's no surprise that archaeological and anthropological evidence suggests that neither is a true "default" for humans.
Anyway, I hope you guys continue to take your time with this series! Really enjoying the depth of analysis here.
28:00 Mike the term you're probably looking for is "embedded narrative", which is the use of a game world as a space for distributed information...heavily used in cases like Bloodborne, Metroid Prime, Horizon, etc. A lot of what you guys talked about for the next few minutes relate to Henry Jenkins's early-2000s publication "Game Design as Narrative Architecture", which I highly recommend reading (it's easily searchable, & even references Disney theme park attractions). The article basically outlines game spatial storytelling via the 4 "E"s:
Evocative Space - the broader vibe evoked based on our pre-existing experiences (i.e. Red Dead vs Metroid)
Enacting Stories - staging for narrative events to happen, perform (boss fight), and/or simply watch (cutscenes)
Embedded Narratives - contextual decor within mise-en-scene (audio logs, graffiti, diaries, corpses, etc.)
Emergent Narratives - resources that provide fuel for emotional imagination (heavy in Sims, Animal Crossing, even Pokemon!)
I think he's going for the term 'environmental storytelling'. One way to describe that genre is 'immersive sims'. Games like BioShock, Prey and Dishonored are these types of games.
YEAHHHHHH BUDDY WAITING EVERY WEEK FOR THESE GUYS ❤
Caeson's knowledge of literature, symbolism and theming is driving straight at the very heart of the game's core narrative
28:00 in the souls community it is called "Archeological narrative", you basically are digging up events through notes, scenarios and so on.
In game design academia the term is environmental narrative
Media scholar Henry Jenkins calls it Embedded Narrative and I think that's the best term.
Sounds like no one can agree on what it should be called lol
Mikes face while Casen gets the story right off the bat.
Grinning every time Casen gives his predictions.
First time commenter here! Been a big fan of the in depth analyses you guys do and I really appreciate your work.
I have a few points about the medical pavilion and Dr Steinman. The mere concept of having a 'great' or 'the best' doctor in rapture fundamentally contradicts the idea of Rapture and the philosophy behind it. Many people's idea of a great doctor is one who can cure ailments and allow that person to lead the best quality of life possible. However, for that to happen a doctor must follow some form of moral code, which is more commonly known as the Hippocratic oath (do no harm and do the best for the patient).
Oftentimes the morality of what is the right decision for a patient is grey and blurry, but in order for doctors to not take things into their own hands and follow their own personal beliefs there needs to be a governing body. In the UK (where I'm from) this is the general medical council.
Should there be an Eutopia without government, such as Rapture doctors would not be required to do what is best for the patient. Instead they may want to explore the bounds of what is possible. Instead of doing the safe, and correct operation they may want to try a completely new technique and throw away the normal way of doing things; not only in pursuit of greatness but also to whet their appetite and prevent the boredom that could be found.
I find it especially interesting that once Adam is introduced that essentially removes the requirement of a doctor full stop. The issue that arose was secondary to having highly trained, highly intelligent and highly skilled workers who had no work. This drove them to the extremes and they likely pushed for societal Norms to change so that they could prevent boredom (and poverty as they needed to create a job so they could thrive in the society that punished the poor and weak).
That's my 2 cents anyhow. I love medical ethics and find the whole subject fascinating. It's never black or white.
Just FYI I'm currently a surgical trainee in the UK, hence the interest!
Favorite part of the week! Loved that the music seemed to crescendo as Casen was talking about the *gulp "Final Solution"-type thing.
listening it's almost shocking how much of this game hinges on Andrew Ryan's naivety. Grandiose and sinister and cunning and hapless as he goes through the story, you really get a sense that despite it all he really thought this would all be for the betterment of humanity
I just finished Bioshock for the 1st time the other day for this podcast. It was pretty darn good. I gotta say, though, I'm glad I didn't look at the airplane intro sequence when you asked, "Did you read the note?" I watched the intro after beating the game and was like "ooooh booii."
I’m loving this format of this podcast. I have seen videos that talk about bioshock and the characters and why they are good or why they suck. This podcast goes way beyond that and talks about ideas and themes that I never even thought of while playing the games. Like the references to the Bible and Greek mythology as well as Ayn Rands books and philosophy. Great work guys. Keep it up
Really enjoying this! Hope y'all will consider covering Bioshock Infinite.
While the theming on the save vs harvest choice might not be as strong, I think it makes for a better lesson. You can either take the reward in front of you, or you can choose to trust this unknown woman who promises you an unknown reward at a later date.
You have to weigh your savage desire for instant gratification against taking a slower, more civilized route that relies on earning the good will of another person.
It's a much better message than what boils down to "crime pays and altruism gets you nothing."
For some of us, being as nice is possible is our power fantasy. I mean, if I wasn't in a my own survival is in a constant threat type of scenario, I would do so much more for others. I can't and must be more selfish to get by myself. In most games, you can grind back that gold or whatever so it feels nice to be able to do.
Kindness as a power fantasy, but it's true haha
Great comment
I think this is also true for players when they were talking about how some people would have been angry if they didn't get a reward for being nice. If I could still beat the game I would be fine with the choice but if I got stuck because I didn't have the extra ADAM then I would be angry and regret it.
The problem with the reward system is that the mystery box reward is psychologically attractive on its own.
In Europe - Finland we have many public bathrooms which are coin-operated or you have to pay in order to access it. For example in gas stations it is quite ordinary nowadays sadly... and we don't have a problem with homeless people
Fun fact about pay toilets in the US: they're illegal on a federal level. This is due to a highly organized political effort in the 70s which had the sole goal and purpose of outlawing pay toilets. Once their goal was secured, they disbanded.
While many establishments attempt to claim otherwise, any business that serves food is federally obligated to provide restrooms on request
One take I had on the chain tattoos around Jack's wrists: he is captive to the player's inputs. He HAS to do what the player says, like a programmed automaton, and thus does not have the freedom that, in theory, the people of Rapture have.
On the discussion of altruism and if it truly exists: I've always believed that altruism/selflessness only exists in split second decisions made without conscious thought (Throwing yourself in front of a car to save a bystander being an extreme example) or in situations where you will remain anonymous (like giving a homeless person you'll never see again money without stopping to consider if you should).
Also, a game with true altruistic choices that punishes you for being kind-hearted is Pathologic. I would love to know if Mike or Casen have played it.
I thought Frank Fontain's name was a connection with Fountainhead, just like Atlas and Andrew Ryan's names derived from Atlas Shrugged.
Plus, I don't know if anyone else has suggested it or you've done so already, but I strongly recommend reading Rapture by John Shirley. It's such a comfortable read and give a lot of interesting info about Rapture, it's construction and the civil war.
Keep it up guys! Just came across your podcasts and I just can't get enough!
As a sort of an extension to the paid restrooms being indicative of the game’s dystopian themes before turning out to be something in real life, the idea that standards of beauty creating a “moral imperative” to be beautiful could be seen as satire on how society imposes warped standards on how people look but there are more on-the-nose (pun unintended) parallels to be found.
I don’t know how the history lines up with the game but cosmetic surgery has become incredibly common in South Korea; I’ve heard that anywhere from 1/3 to 1/2 of women aged 19-29 there have work done. This is because adhering to specific standards of beauty is seen as just too advantageous from a societal perspective (job opportunities, relationship prospects, etc.) to the point where parents encourage their children to get cosmetic surgery and even pay for it as graduation presents. And of course, cosmetic surgery is a very lucrative business.
There’s also an additional element that was not discussed. Steinman’s initial recording of the possibilities they have to alter appearance almost sound noble in how it gives people the choice of how they appear and present themselves but then also mention changing one’s race as well. It’s a very minor thing that is not elaborated on in this game but when considering the idea of people being pressured to adhere to societal beauty standards it adds an additional (and forgive the phrase) darker element to how Rapture really was not a society that divorced itself from the ills of the “surface world.”
This is a bit of world building that is picked up on in the DLC of Bioshock 2, where there is a black character who recounts being recommended he splice himself to appear white to “get ahead” in Rapture despite the fact that he was *already* a brilliant engineer who proved his ability. Appropriately, he refuses in disgust and protest.
Hopefully if you guys ever get around to Infinite you’re not as dismissive or narrow minded about it as people seem to be now. I think despite it mechanically streamlining a lot-it still has plenty to offer. Every Bioshock game is doing something interesting and excels at different things.
Another behind the scenes note. During development the harvesters were going to be little rat creatures but nobody felt sympathy for them so the development changed that to little girls. They thought that swong the pendulum to far in the other direction but it made the game better.
28:05 I believe the literary technique to which he's referring is In medias res.
Woah a Look Around You reference 🤌🏼
I remember when I 1st played bioshock. And when I was given The Choice to kill or save the little sister. My 1st instinct was to save her immediately. It felt really good to show the little sister that kindness can reach even the darkest depths of the ocean, as well as watching the relief spread across her body as she fully relaxes in your hand. The developers did an amazing job with the animations and lighting of the save choice.
However, after this every little sister is protected by the Big Daddy. If I recall every level has three little sisters all protected by Big Daddy's. Making them completely optional. And at early stages, this would drain all of your resources purchasing bombs and turrets to defeat them. At this point I looked up many guides and spoke to friends about whether it was worth saving them or just leaving them alone. To be honest, if everyone said no, there is no reward at all for saving them, I don't know if I would have bothered to save any of them. I couldn't bring myself to ever kill them, so at the very worst I would just leave them alone; or, At the very least, I would wait to get really powerful and return back later on to save them.
Honestly, at the very least I think it would be good for the developers to make a end game cutscene we're all the little sisters would either say goodbye or you would leave with them to escape rapture. Maybe even allowing you to skip the final boss as a reward.
The Dune series has a great part about Leto's Peace, 3500 years of enforced tranquility, leading to the Scattering, mankind pushing to the limits of the universe.
After learning a laymen level information on business its hilarious how juvenile Rand's view of what bargaining power CEO's hold. The reality is if every CEO went on strike all of the shareholders would elect new CEOs. CEOs serve one and only one function, the fiduciary duty to maximize shareholder value.
I've encountered one pay toilet in Los Angeles around Chinatown so they exist in the US for sure
44:50 this reminds me of something I read ages ago where the advent of technology has made it so that women, and their babies, who further back in history would have died in childbirth due to having small pelvises are increasing in number now due to their survival rate.
Kind of wild to think, especially as someone who had a natural birth, that there could (not saying it's definite) be a time where child birth means certain death without medical intervention.
I always enjoy your podcast and you seem to enjoy making it, but in this episode it was something more, it seems like this is the most thrilled I have seen you two during an episode, is it the topic at hand or what made this so special to you? I enjoyed it alot more then usual for it too. PS - I had to save them too. Could not bring myself to harvest them.
There is also the symbology of the 3 crosses when you get into the boss battle with steadmen.
Had to save the girls. I think would have done so even if there was absolutely no reward for doing so. Had a daughter a year ago and that had a big effect on me. Now the whole game is just a mission to help and protect all the sisters :)
Bioshock 2 hits even harder than 1. Especially after having a daughter.
Ryan had succeeded in an industrial age and his philosophy reflects that. His disdain for Frank Fontaine is Ryan being upset at his own failures and afraid of losing his grip on his "little kingdom". Despite claims of wanting the best to succeed in the end Ryan is guilty of wanting to maintain control. This is his sandbox and no one is going to take it from him.
Your final thoughts on Andrew Ryan in this video, bringing in ideas from outside of his “paradise” and thus tainting it further reminds me of Dostoyevski’s short called “story of a ridiculous man”.
As you’ve referenced him before I’m guessing you would have read this one if not, I highly recommend it (it is very short and accessible to all).
Loving your takes on many of the games so far, though I felt your experience with Kojima-san’s Metal Gear series to miss some very fundamental points, I’ll try add my opinions to those videos directly though so they are relevant 😊
I always felt this game was to be celebrated but was never able to articulate why until the efforts of you both so thank you, you do a credit to this art form.
I look forward to these every week ❤️🤙
You guys are beasts.
2 thoughts on little sisters and Tenebaum (no story spoilers)
1) Tenebaum offering you a reward for rescuing the little sisters makes perfect sense narratively. She lives in a city full of psychos that actively try to kill little sisters for their Adam. It only makes sense for her to appeal to your self interest to not harvest the girls.
2) It's been a long time since I played but I seem to remember that you get more actual Adam for the vending machines when you harvest, but you get unique rewards from rescuing that you can't buy.
You get more immediate adam for killing the girls. But you get discount and bonus abilities from saving them so you actually end up with more adam from playing the good guy.
I saved them because I love playing games as a protector or at least a hero in the shadows. I also love playing on hard mode so I wouldn't have cared if I didn't get a reward. My first playthrough was so tense because I didn't have all that power so I wouldn't have done otherwise.
In regards to the rescue/harvest the little sister thing: ultimately I believe that if there was ZERO incentive to rescue the girls, be it new dialogue, power ups, or a different ending I don't think many people would have gone the purely altruistic route. Look at a game like Undertale, where pursuing the pacifist route leads to arguably the best ending. I think the biggest issue with the system now is that the penalty to the rewards you are given for going with rescue is barely significant. If they tweaked it so rescuing the girls had a more noticeable effect on the overall resources you gain it would have made for a more impactful choice. That's my two cents at least.
Caeson really needs to play Infinite immediately after this with his game description
I wonder if the Doctor "Tannenbaum" is named like this because he invented all those crazy things and they were received like the gifts under a Christmas tree.
About the choice of the little sisters. I would have thought it would be interesting if tennanbaum doesn't tell you that there's a reward for it but giving you one anyways after rescuing three little sisters as per usual. You still have the same problem of is it really an altruistic choice, however it doesn't take away from the choice you make in the beginning. The conversation only gets delayed once you get the first reward. Interested in hearing your guys take on this.
I love the closing them! Is this from something! Or is it custom music for the podcast?
Custom arrangement by Mike inspired by a leitmotif from Xenogears.
about the discussion on harvesting versus saving: If it is your playthrough AND you are not following a guide, The choice was always: Harvest and get a confirmed immediate reward versus rescue with the promise of a future mystery box. I saw a moral dichotomy on a blind playthrough.
(edit: since Casen like Christianity references, take the above as another one)
I recently turned into becoming a completionist 😅
However, I'll always play blind on my first playthrough. I make choices based on my moral ground, then evaluate if I enjoy the game enough to go for 100%
Its kinda hard to go through the evil route. Better just to youtube the endings
I have never been comfortable doing the "renegade" option in any game. I just don't enjoy doing it.
I always thought that the "you get more rewarded for saving the little sisters than you do for harvesting them" dynamic was a missed opportunity. It absolutely should have been like it was presented - you harvest them for more resources, or rescue them for less resources.
If you're looking for a game with moral choices where you are offered a gameplay incentive to take the evil choice and receive no reward (other than which story path and ending you end up at) for being good, like you discussed in today's Bioshock episode, Valkyrie Profile: Covenant of the Plume fits the bill pretty well.
Hurray!
Playing thorugh the game in Easy (because I suck) for the first time. I'm saving all the little sisters so far, and even then I don't feel too hindered but not having enough Adam to move on.
I'm just sticking to 1-2 plasmids (Electrobolt and the one which "stuns" machines) and weapons (Pistol and Shotgun) anyway because I can't find good uses for the rest of them (unless enviromental puzzles like: ice blocking the path > melt with fire).
So not having all the powers doesn't feel like a problem to me, at worst it looks like I'm going to have to swap more at Gene Banks (btw I hate that they tell you how to swap plasmids/genes so late, I spent like 30 minutes in the menus trying to figure out if I was maybe missing a button or option but nope, I just had to move on with the game just a little bit more).
Also, it seems from my experience that while the Splicers attack me on sight, the "Big Daddys" and Little sister don't seem aggressive at all until I attack them.
So after killing the "Big Daddys", the least I can do is save the Little Sisters. I feel like harvesting them would be like adding insult to injury or something like that. I don't know if I'm explaining myself well enough.
Little food for thought on getting rewarded for the good playthrough. In Dishonored if you play the good guy you lose most of your powers and a people complained that it made the game boring, to the point that they changed it in Dishonored 2. A similar thing happened with Star Wars games where playing the light side felt weak compared to dark side.
I know you guys did Nier Replicant but I'm amazed you did not do Nier Automata already. I'm positive Casen would simply love it.
Can it be next thing?
Sadly, it'd up to the patreons to decide which game comes next 😁
Automata is a fantastic game that would be a great breakdown. But sometimes you have to wait. They still have 2 episodes of Xenosaga and the fact Blood Omen: Legacy of Kain lost to Bioshock in their last poll. It is how it is, but when the podcast is this insightful, I dare not complain.
Nier Automata is an option in the Sequels podcast poll that’s coming up, against XSII, MGSII, and Mass Effect 2. I’ll be voting for that game when it’s an option!
YAY!! It's that time again. I love Wednesdays ❤️
I think we've thankfully moved past the "gamification" of moral good and moral bad choices in videogames. We've kinda accepted linear games as linear and morality shouldn't be on a meter (visible nor invisible). Hopefully the higher-ups at large AAA studios realize that too and can let designers design protagonists as morally grey depending on circumstances
I would have saved the kids even without the reward. I would have liked to see the outcomes of how many people in the community would have gone that route.
Tannenbaum doesn't mean christmas tree, it is just means fir tree. A christmas tree is called Christbaum (christian tree).
If I have the skill to hack a vending machine or in some way gain the system, am I still a parasite or the next step in evolution?
Really liked your take on Nietzsche, sadly not as widespread as it should be among Nietzschean community (at least in those more influenced by the old French-German way of doing philosophy). My wife is now an ex-Nietzschean scholar and has since then written works showing how most if not all of them his "fundamental" ideas lead to problematic consequences, especially if you try to use his tools to do social and political analysis without "updating" it to contemporary scientific and sociological studies -- even then, it would not be without its risks. There are some great critiques coming from contemporary philosophy of emotions.
Really like Bioshock, but regret that it made my brother read Ayn Rand and agree with it somehow (thankfully he is very much changed now).
Yes.
On this human nature discussion... I highly recommend the book "A Paradise Built In Hell" by Rebecca Solnit
I usually play the evil chioces. I shot Morden in the back in Mass Effect 3 (and felt bad for doing it) and I could not bring myself to kill a little sister.
I actually did harvest the Little Sisters on my second playthrough, because I felt like Bioshock's narrative was still a bit more rigid than, say, Mass Effect's, in the "grand scheme" and it wouldn't matter all that much. But I also just wanted to see the other ending without looking it up online. My first playthrough is my own personal "canon" though, where I saved them. I also would have saved them no matter what, because it was just the right thing to do. I generally always do the right thing in video games, because... it's the right thing. So I will choose the Light Side, or be a Paragon, or save the Little Sisters, just because it's right. The only exception in a video game where I think going darker is the option that is more fun is in KOTOR 2. Obsidian made it fun to be dark in that game. Otherwise, I might be a jerk and choose a dialog option that's darker (I remember punching the reporter in Mass Effect 2 or 3 because I was just so fed up with her sensationalism), but overall that's just not how I will play. My own morality will never let me roleplay as someone who wouldn't share my own ideals.
Personally I would not care if there was no additional reward for the choice to rescue rather than harvest. Much like Mike, I tend to paragon in any game that gives me the RP option.
That said, I believe that even with the additional rewards for rescuing, you in fact get less total adam period. The rewards are just enough of a hit to make you think that you are keeping up but much like a gambler's fallacy, you are never ahead and end the game behind where you would otherwise be.
I'm reading through Atlas Shrugged as I go through the game with you guys
Hadn't gotten there yet, lol
The other significant thing about Fontaine's name of course is it is a reference to the Fountainhead. Meaning there is now a trio of characters with very thinly veiled references to Ayn Rand and her works -- and they are the three characters most implicated in the power struggle for Rapture.
Also surprised you didn't touch on the fact that the main thing being smuggled at Port Neptune seems to be Bibles, and that the first thing that greets you is a crucified smuggler. The irony of this supposedly libertarian paradise having to forcefully suppress religion -- Ironically no better than the Soviet system Ryan so forcefully rejects.
bump this comment please.
I was going to bring this up, but something told me to go through the comments first. Good catch my friend. Good catch.
A couple of good Indie games that also tell stories with the same post-events techniques are Soma and Stray. Soma is … I really don’t want to say anything that wouls spoil that experience. Seriously, go play Soma. It’s definitely State of the Arc podcast-worthy material.
Casen would have a ball with Bioshock Infinite
I’ve always found the whole symbiotic relationship between The Little Sisters and Big Daddies to be really interesting. But it got me thinking if this is what happened to all the little girls in rapture, what happened to the boys? So I asked that question to the Bioshock subreddit, turns out in supplemental material the male children were hunted, experimented on and all killed. God that’s disturbing.
I'm a person who can't play renegade, so to speak. Tried to create a Sith in SW:ToR . Didn't end well - I played a few levels and then abandoned the character. I just can't. Personally, I wouldn't care if I got an "award" for making the so called good choice.
Also, who cares? It's the end of the game anyway. Understand the completionists though - some people want to 100% a game. Envy them a bit, too. I too would like to be able to play assholes.
In the Mass Effect series - there are some characters that just deserves a simple punch to the face. At least. Looking at you, Gavin Archer...
I'm really curious what places have agreed at a societal level that it's okay to charge people to use a public toilet.
I'd just go outside I guess
In my initial play through of the game, if I had not received anything for sparing a little sister I would have been fine with it, but really only if I could still comfortably beat the game without the extra Adam. Which I think is how most people approach being altruism, if I can be altruistic without negativity affecting myself I will (doesn't even have to be a positive outcome it can be neutral), but if acting altruistic will have a negative affect on myself I will be completely selfish.
I can’t do the evil/renegade thing in games. Personally I would feel slighted if you don’t get that 2nd ending because to me that’s the trade off making the morally good choice and being less powerful but rewarded with a different ending because of your choice to do that.
Otherwise I essentially restrained myself and made the game harder for no payoff and maybe the sense that at least I didn’t kill those kids for power. That’s rewarding but without that confirmation your choice mattered all I would be able to do is speculate and hope they lived.
For my part, as a little bit of a completionist, and someone who wants to "do the right thing" in video games, saving the Little Sisters has to mean something. If the reward was only what I experience in myself, I would dislike it. If the reward is a different, better story, I could like that, but I would want some stronger foreshadowing that the story is the only reward I would get, and of course the story has to be executed well through it's ending for that to work. Otherwise, yes, I would feel disappointed that I did not get the powers, abilities, and upgrades that I could have.
28:00 I hereby declare this genre of storytelling as...
"Aftermath narrative"!
#copyright 🤣
Your comments on Utopia made me reflect on why I could never get into Star Trek. Yes, the show(s) are all about conflict, with modern Trek seemingly all about why there needs to be a Starfleet and what not, but I could never get accept Roddenberry's vision. Not because there's not beauty there. Rather I see all the ways it could, and would, go horribly wrong
Interestingly enough, in Bioshock Infinite, the main character literally gets baptized in the beginning of the game.
ideologies aside, do you think ayn rand is a good writer?
I'm beginning to realize I'm evil
do mgs2 please! the ultimate subversive game!
great stuff as always 🙏
Wait until bioshock infinite
In games with moral choices I play good the first time through then bad the second. Then comparing the two I find the bad play through boring as theres no tension in the choice
The discussion around altruism, or "true" altruism always baffled me. If you get off on saving children from poverty, more power to you as far as I am concerned.
1:10:43 even if they offered no in-game reward, there likely would have still been an achievement, which is a reward in itself.
I think the only way to make it truly selfless is if the game gave you no other reward than a thank you from Tenenbaum.
Niiiiiiiiiice
I think when it comes to morality in games I very much prefer the option of missing out on a good thing because I didn't do the bad thing over whatever the hell they were trying to do in The Last of Us pt 2. That seems to be "Look! The opponents are human too! They have lives!! They have pets!! Look how bad we ARE FORCING YOU TO BE!!" Seriously, don't make me be an arsehole making hilariously bad choices and then lecture me.
I always tend towards the diplomatic or the helpful if given a choice in games. Seriously, I even wasted a fair amount of money on Red Dead Redemption 2 because I couldn't get past the things it wanted you to do and so stopped playing relatively early on.
49:30
I always thought it was hilarious that Rand believed these capitalist captains of industry to be "producers". Andrew Ryan was a brilliant engineer and a genius. Ok, he's a producer. His plans were the backbone of Rapture. But how many CEOs and board members are really like this? I'd say less than 5%. Most of the producers are the engineers, developers, laborers, etc. who need the "parasite" social programs because they can't afford to pay for things with the meager scraps that fall from the table of those who own the capital. Most of the Teslas of the world die without wealth and power, and the Edisons that know how to exploit the brilliance of others rise instead.
I do agree with her that "from each according to their ability, to each according to their need" is unfair because Rand is correct, that will push people to increase their need and decrease their ability. This would create the dreaded "welfare cheat" the capitalists whine about. However wealth has no inherent ability or need. The second a person has wealth, they have power with no qualifier whatsoever. If a person earned it by crime or inheritance, or even by skill it is irrelevant to the absolute power it grants.
I know it's old news that Rand is wrong. However, I don't think that all her musings were incorrect. She is wise to view creators as powerful. They should be. Communism and Capitalism cannot survive human nature because neither put creation at the core of the philosophy. They are both philosophies of exploitation. One creates dictators who take advantage of a lack of strong leaders and the other creates false idols out of people who can only exploit and plunder. Pure ideologies are brittle. Good societies have to be a push and pull between progress and caution, competition and compassion. There has yet to be a philosopher to create this system, because by trying to complete rules and axioms, you destroy the flexibility and adaptability that is the underpinning of human strength.
The real answer is that for humanity to improve, ALL of humanity must improve. There are no gods or kings, only human beings. But it can't just be a shining few. ALL have to learn. ALL have to produce and do what they can. ALL have to take responsibility.
Great comment. It's easy for us today to critique Rand's ideology for it's flaws (which there are many), but we have the benefit of another 70+ years of living under a Capitalist/Meritocratic system that she didn't. The issues that we have now with a Capitalist system existed back then as well, but were much, much less apparent.
In the mid-1900's, when Rand wrote her well known works and developed her philosophy, the world had just finished the 2nd industrial revolution. In the 1920's - 1940's, Capitalists like Henry Ford were doing exciting things like doubling their workers wages so they could afford to buy the car that they produce every day in the assembly line. Ford also reduced the workweek to 5 days/40 hours per week. Prior to that, full-time factory workers generally had to work 6 days and 48 hours. And then after the 2nd industrial Revolution, capitalism and manufacturing fueled America's war machine to win 2 world wars in Europe and Asia. This all happened in the decades leading up to Rand writing The Fountainhead.
People are a product of their environment, and back then Capitalism was clearly shown to be "working" much better than any other economic system in human history. If you just look at the historical context, it's easy to see how people like Rand were high on the momentum of that era's accomplishments and overlooked the flaws that are more obvious to people today. If she lived today to see the current era of Capitalism, her "Objectivism" would probably look very different. The Capitalist CEO's of the 2000's, who cut jobs or try to suppress wages so the company can buy back their own stock are a far cry from the Capitalists like Henry Ford in the early 1900's.
Because workers don't know how to manage a business, much less a company, they just work and the higher ups manage deals, customs, partnerships and so on. You turn a worker into the head of a company, either they aren't qualified for the task and ends up ruining the business or are educated enough that they cease to be workers, they are in the same position as the "parasite" at the eyes of commies.
That's the main issue with any leftists economic school of thought: for them, an owner of a small company that's very involved with his/her business is a producer, a worker, and for the next generation of leftists that same owner that went successful and now enjoys the fruits of the his/her labor is a parasite that's exploiting their workers.
Rand’s stories (and the ideas they espoused) were contingent on characters being idealized ubermeschs or caricatures. I remember attending a course in college about the operation of architecture firms and one of the exercises we had was critiquing the Fountainhead; just about *everyone* in the class quickly came to the conclusion “yeah, this isn’t how things work or people are in real life at all.”
I’d also argue that Rand’s ideas aren’t quite discounted, at least in the realm of socioeconomic discourse; they tend to have resurgence in times of economic uncertainty but who espouses them tend to be predictably pro-business/corporate. They also tend to dance around/gloss over the less politically convenient aspects of Rand’s beliefs like her staunch atheism.
@@xiiir838 That's entirely untrue. I have personally been promoted up from the front desk to middle management with no actual training, and I've had friends in the finance world that rise from desk jobs to UPPER management after a strong year of sales or production. CEOs and upper management types aren't particularly good at generating a good product and good service, they are good at exploiting and expanding. That's the only actual goal of businesses under capitalism.
So if you're telling me that a worker won't be able to produce as much wealth as a slimy CEO. Sure, yes, you're right. However, if you're saying a worker can't run an amazing business that benefits both the consumer and the workers by making an excellent product, you are dead wrong.
I'm not a pure commie in that I don't believe that everyone should make the same amount of money, I just believe that the workers should have a say in the generation and distribution of wealth in their own company. Your CEO should not be making 80% of the labor cost of the business. I've worked for both non-profit (credit unions) and for profit (big bank) jobs and they both provide the same services for the most part and the non-profits have the same pay and benes for the little guys with much less for the people up top. The only change is that people tend to get better service from a credit union and the workers tend to like their job a bit more. So I guess the big advantage of capitalism is a few people at the top make more money? f@#$ them. If that makes me a "leftist" fine, but why should the vast majority care about the 1%. What benefit does it have for us? Why shouldn't we just...I dunno. Kill you all? :)
(Edit) I'm only halfway joking about murdering the rich. Like any opportunist they are just doing the things they do because they are allowed to. Tearing them down from their gilded throne is enough for me.
I think Rapture being a haven for 'objectivists' would mean that all the people there would be kinda shitty, all I care about is myself types. Ken probably isn't making a comment on all of humanity just followers of that ideologue
It’s proven with Frank Fontaine. When you’re free to do anything, people who are willing to get a leg up by standing on top of the bodies of others will rise to the top.
In the first episode they show a quote from levine that refutes your position entirely.
@@jeffpalaganas7404 I'mma take your word for it, bc I'm not going through an hour of video for a single quote 😅
coin slots for public toilets hah..hah... +cries in German+
I have never seen one of these which are free to use
(you're better off going into shops or restaurants and ask if you can use their toilets if you want to use it for free... and even there you often see some cleaning person with a small table and a dish to put money on lol)
Not in the USA unless it's a super fancy restaurant